Joe Biden

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Killing the middle class’: millions in US brace for student loan payments after Covid pause

      by

      ‘Killing the middle class’: millions in US brace for student loan payments after Covid pauseStudent debt in America has become a crisis for millions of citizens that often feels like it will last for people’s whole lives Jennifer Rae Wilson, a social worker and single mother of three children in Richland, Washington, has struggled with student loan debt since she went back to school and graduated in 2000 – more than two decades ago.Struggling to raise three boys with very little child support, Wilson decided to attend college 10 years after graduating high school to improve her career prospects. She was eventually able to move out of low-income assistance housing and off government assistance programs.“But then the school loans hit,” said Wilson. “I couldn’t afford the payments on top of rent and all of the other things, there was no way that I could make those payments.”She is not alone, as student debt in America has become a crisis for millions of citizens that often feels like it will last for people’s whole lives, or at least blight them for many years to come after graduation. Around 44.7 million Americans have outstanding student loan debt totaling over $1.86tn, with 42.3 million Americans holding federal student loan debt.The US Department of Education paused repayment, collections and interest on federal student loans in response to the Covid-19 pandemic under Trump, with the final extension on the pause set to expire on 31 January 2022.But now millions of Americans are bracing for resuming payments on federal student loans after nearly two years of relief – and the crisis is set to roll on again.Between rent, bills and daycare costs, Wilson went into default after not being able to keep up with student loan payments. Then her paychecks started being garnished in 2010 to pay off the student loans of around $1,000 per month, which was just paying off the interest on her principal.The pause on student loan repayments during the pandemic allowed Wilson to catch up on other bills and purchase a home, but she worries about the payments restarting.“It kind of concerns me a little bit with it coming back with what they’re going to be able to offer us in terms of payment plans,” added Wilson. “I’ve been making payments for 20 years and my balance has only gone up. That doesn’t make any sense. If I made a $1,000 per month payment on my car, or on my house, I would be paid off and I would not have a home loan or would not have a car loan. But with this, it doesn’t seem to make a difference.”A recent survey of more than 33,000 student loan borrowers conducted by the Student Debt Crisis Center found 89% of borrowers are not financially secure enough to resume payments on 1 February. Prior to the pandemic, over half of all student loan borrowers were either in default, forbearance, deferment, or otherwise not currently making payments on their student debt.PJ Rivera of Texas is one of the borrowers not prepared to resume student loan payments. His initial student debt was around $80,000, but has increased with interest to $110,000, despite making payments of $1,000 a month.“Student loans have crippled my ability to have personal savings but the inability to help my family who are struggling with hospital bills and other medical bills,” said Rivera. “The system doesn’t work. It’s not the students’ fault because you need money to pay for your career. Maybe tuition shouldn’t be so high to start with. Everyone should be able to study and learn about whatever they are passionate about without going broke or living to pay and nothing else.”The average student loan debt for new college graduates is around $30,000. Joe Biden campaigned on cancelling $10,000 in student loan debt per person and cancelling student debt for Americans who attended Historically Black Colleges and Universities and public colleges, but the Biden Administration has yet to cancel debt for these AmericansBeverly Dunker Brown of New York City completed her undergraduate and graduate degrees in the 1980s and 90’s, but with high interest rates and taking on parent plus loans for her son, her student loan debt has increased from around $43,000 in loans to over $150,000.“I will be in my late 80s paying student loans off of social security income,” said Dunker Brown. “I have Federal Family Education Loan Program loans which were not paused. I can’t afford to pay them and continue to request forbearances on them.”Despite making a six-figure salary in business administration, she is unable to properly save for retirement, save for home, and cares for her disabled husband who is a cancer survivor and regularly requires dialysis. Her own student loans are $862 monthly and the parent plus loans for her son will add another $362 a month when the federal student loan pause ends.“The interest and penalties are just crazy. My student loan balance increases each month. Black and Brown people can’t get ahead,” added Dunker Brown. “I have no generational wealth, retirement savings or savings for an emergency, yet I have an MBA that I earned in 1996. Having a fancy degree wasn’t the answer it was supposed to be.”Black college graduates owe an average of $7,400 more in student loans than white college graduates, and that gap more than triples to nearly $25,000 after four years from graduation.Sabrina Elliott of Charlotte, North Carolina, couldn’t afford to make payments toward her student loans for the first eight years after graduating law school. By the time she could afford to start making payments, with the debt ballooned from over $72,000 to more than $166,000.For the past seven years, Elliott has made monthly minimum payments of nearly $1,400 a month, but still owes more than the original loans despite paying over $90,000 toward the debt in that time.“Student loans should not impair a person from being a homeowner, starting a family or a badge of shame,” said Elliott. “I have made payment for over seven years and the balance is the same. As you can see, I have repaid the original loan. The minimum payment is a mortgage payment but not high enough to reduce the debt.”Kaida Flowers, a family and child therapist in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, has struggled to try to pay her student loans from her undergraduate and master’s degree, and only makes around $50,000 a year working a job she pursued to try to help people and emphasized student debt is causing her and others who pursued similar career paths to struggle to get by.She has struggled to try to pay her student loans from her undergraduate and master’s degree, and only makes around $50,000 a year working a job she pursued to try to help people and emphasized student debt is causing her and others who pursued similar career paths to struggle to get by.When the payments resume, she will be forced to pay $300 a month again toward her student debt, most of which goes toward interest.“They’re killing the middle class,” added Flowers. “Part of the American dream is you go to school, you try to do something to have a better life, but it’s just not what it is.”TopicsBiden administrationUS student financeUS student debtJoe BidenUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden signs order for government to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050

      by

      Biden signs order for government to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050US will ‘lead by example in tackling the climate crisis,’ says White House, by eliminating greenhouse gases from its activities The US government will be a net zero contributor to the climate crisis by 2050 by slashing the planet-heating emissions from its operations and transitioning to an all-electric fleet of cars and trucks, according to a new executive order signed by Joe Biden.The federal government is the largest land owner, energy consumer and employer in the US and it will “lead by example in tackling the climate crisis”, the White House said, by eliminating greenhouse gases from its activities.Under the order signed by Biden on Wednesday, the government will cut its emissions by 65% by the end of this decade, before reaching carbon neutrality by 2050.The government’s fleet of 600,000 cars and trucks will be transformed, with all acquisitions of vehicles from 2035 being zero emission versions. For light duty vehicles, this deadline will come earlier, starting in six years’ time.The order also demands that the 300,000 federally-owned buildings produce no net emissions by 2045, with a 50% cut in emissions by 2032. All electricity procured by the government will be from clean sources such as solar and wind by 2030, while all procurement decisions made by the hefty government bureaucracy will be net zero emissions by 2050.“Through a whole-of-government approach, we will demonstrate how innovation and environmental stewardship can protect our planet, safeguard federal investments against the effects of climate change, respond to the needs of all of America’s communities, and expand American technologies, industries, and jobs,” the president’s order reads.The executive order will tackle around 15% of all carbon emissions in the US, according to RMI, a non-profit clean energy organization.“Decarbonizing buildings, ensuring federal investments for infrastructure are targeted for clean, sustainable projects, and driving and informing private investment for clean technology to slash greenhouse gas emissions showcase this administration’s climate priorities,” said Sarah Ladislaw, managing director of RMI’s US program.“This series of investments takes much-needed steps to capitalize on what we already know: the clean energy transition is critical in tackling climate change and stimulating our economy.”The commitment is the biggest yet by Biden towards his goal of cutting the US’s overall emissions to net zero by 2050. The president has set other related goals, such as making America’s electricity grid entirely run on renewable energy by 2035 and for half of all car sales in the country to be electric by 2030.Biden has set out the most ambitious climate agenda of any US president to date, although he has come under criticism from environmental groups recently for calling for an increase in oil production to lower gasoline prices and for offering up vast tracts of land and ocean to oil and gas producers.Much of the president’s climate agenda rests upon an enormous spending bill that faces a tricky path through the senate.The Build Back Better Act has around half a trillion dollars in climate change measures, such as incentives for electric cars, tax credits for renewable energy production and funding to make vulnerable communities more resilient to climate change impacts such as flooding. Analysts have said it will become much harder to avoid disastrous global heating without the sweeping legislation.TopicsBiden administrationJoe BidenGreenhouse gas emissionsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 63 Shares169 Views

      in World Politics

      Biden’s New Culture of Brinkmanship

      by

      Taiwan is a problem. Historically separate from but linked to China, Taiwan was colonized by the Dutch and partially by the Spanish in the 17th century. Through a series of conflicts between aboriginal forces allied with the Ming dynasty and European colonial forces who also fought amongst themselves, by 1683, Taiwan became integrated into the Qing Empire. For two centuries, it evolved to become increasingly an integral part of China. In 1895, due to its strategic position on the eastern coast of China at the entry of the South China Sea, it became one of the spoils of the Sino-Japanese war and for half a century was ruled by the Japanese.

      Japan used Taiwan during the Second World War as the launching pad for its aggressive operations in Southeast Asia. At the end of the war, with the Japanese defeated and Mao Zedong’s communists in control of mainland China, Mao’s rival, Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the Kuomintang, fled to Taiwan. This put the dissident government out of Mao’s reach. Chiang declared his government the Republic of China (ROC) in opposition to Mao’s People’s Republic of China (PRC). For forty years a single-party regime ruled Taiwan following Chiang Kai-shek’s initial declaration of martial law in 1949.

      Macron Promotes Fraternity in the Middle East

      READ MORE

      Because the United States had defined its post-war identity as anti-communist, Taiwan held the status of the preferred national government in what was then referred to as “the free world.” The fate of Taiwan — still referred to by its Portuguese name, Formosa — figured as a major foreign policy issue in the 1960 US presidential campaign that pitted John F. Kennedy against Richard Nixon. The debate turned around whether the US should commit to defending against the People’s Republic two smaller islands situated between continental China and Taiwan.

      In short, Taiwan’s history and geopolitical status over the past 150 years have become extremely complex. There are political, economic and geographical considerations as well as ideological and geopolitical factors that make it even more complex. These have been aggravated by a visible decline in the supposed capacity of the United States to impose and enforce solutions in different parts of the globe and the rise of China’s influence in the global economy.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Complexity, when applied to politics, generally signifies ambiguity. In the aftermath of the Korean War, the Eisenhower administration established a policy based on the idea of backing Taiwan while seriously hedging their bets. Writing for The Diplomat, Dennis Hickey explains that in 1954, the US “deliberately sought to ‘fuzz up’ the security pact [with Taiwan] in such a way that the territories covered by the document were unclear.”

      Following President Nixon’s historic overture in 1971, the US established diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China. This led to the transfer of China’s seat at the United Nations from the ROC to Mao’s PRC. The status of Taiwan was now inextricably ambiguous. US administrations, already accustomed to “fuzzy” thinking, described their policy approach as “strategic ambiguity.” It allowed them to treat Taiwan as an ally without recognizing it as an independent state. The point of such an attitude is what R. Nicolas Burns — President Joe Biden’s still unconfirmed pick for the post of US ambassador to China — calls “the smartest and most effective way” to avoid war.

      Recent events indicate that we may be observing a calculated shift in that policy. In other words, the ambiguity is becoming more ambiguous. Or, depending on one’s point of view, less ambiguous. There is a discernible trend toward the old Cold War principle of brinkmanship. A not quite prepared President Biden recently embarrassed himself in a CNN Town Hall for stating that the US had a “commitment” to defend Taiwan. The White House quickly walked back that commitment, reaffirming the position of strategic ambiguity.

      This week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken appeared to be pushing back in the other direction, threatening the Chinese with “terrible consequences” if they make any move to invade Taiwan. Blinken added, the Taipei Times reports, that the US has “been very clear and consistently clear” in its commitment to Taiwan. 

      Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

      Consistently clear:

      In normal use, unambiguous. In diplomatic use, obviously muddied and murky, but capable of being transformed by an act of assertive rhetoric into the expression of a bold-sounding intention that eliminates nuance, even when nuance remains necessary for balance and survival.

      Contextual note

      If Donald Trump’s administration projected a foreign policy based on fundamentally theatrical melodrama that consisted of calling the leader of a nuclear state “rocket man” and dismissing most of the countries of the Global South as “shitholes,” while accusing allies of taking advantage of the US, the defining characteristic of the now ten-months-old Biden administration’s foreign policy appears to be the commitment to the old 1950s Cold War stance known as brinkmanship.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      In November, the CIA director, William Burns, comically threatened Russia with “consequences” if it turned out — despite a total lack of evidence — that Vladimir Putin’s people were the perpetrators of a series of imaginary attacks popularly called the Havana syndrome. This week, backing up Biden’s warning “of a ‘strong’ Western economic response” to a Russian invasion of Ukraine, Security Adviser Jake Sullivan was more specific. “One target,” France 24 reports, “could be Russia’s mammoth Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline to Germany. Sullivan said the pipeline’s future was at ‘risk’ if Russia does invade Ukraine.” This may have been meant more to cow the Europeans, whose economy depends on Russian gas, than the Russians themselves.

      These various examples have made observers wonder what is going on, what the dreaded “consequences” repeatedly evoked may look like and what other further consequences they may provoke. The US administration seems to be recycling the nostalgia of members of Biden’s own generation, hankering after what their memory fuzzily associates with the prosperous years of the original Cold War.

      Historical Note

      Britannica defines brinkmanship as the “foreign policy practice in which one or both parties force the interaction between them to the threshold of confrontation in order to gain an advantageous negotiation position over the other. The technique is characterized by aggressive risk-taking policy choices that court potential disaster.”

      The term brinkmanship was coined by Dwight Eisenhower’s Democratic opponent in both of his elections, Adlai Stevenson, who dared to mock Secretary of State John Foster Dulles when he celebrated the principle of pushing things to the brink. “The ability to get to the verge,” Dulles explained, “without getting into the war is the necessary art…if you are scared to go to the brink, you are lost.” Eisenhower’s successor, John F. Kennedy, inherited the consequences of Dulles’ brinkmanship over Cuba, the nation that John Foster’s brother, CIA Director Alan Dulles, insisted on invading only months after Kennedy’s inauguration. This fiasco was a prelude to the truly frightening Cuban missile crisis in October 1962, when Kennedy’s generals, led by Curtis Lemay, sought to bring the world to the absolute brink.

      When, two years later, Lyndon Johnson set a hot war going in Vietnam, or when, decades later, George W. Bush triggered a long period of American military aggression targeting multiple countries in the Muslim world, the policy of brinkmanship was no longer in play. These proxy wars were calculated as bets that fell far short of the brink. The risk was limited to what, unfortunately, it historically turned out to be: a slow deterioration of the capacities and the image of a nation that was ready to abuse its power in the name of abstract principles — democracy, liberation, stifling terrorism, promoting women’s rights — that none of the perpetrators took seriously. Threats and sanctions were features of the daily rhetoric, but the idea at the core of brinkmanship — that some major, uncontrollable conflagration might occur — was never part of the equation.

      Embed from Getty Images

      The Biden administration may have serious reasons for returning to the policy of brinkmanship. The position of the United States on the world stage has manifestly suffered. Some hope it can be restored and believe it would require strong medicine. But there are also more trivial reasons: notably the fear of the administration being mocked by Republicans for being weak in the face of powerful enemies. 

      Both motivations signal danger. We may once again be returning to the devastating brinkman’s game logic illustrated in Stanley Kubrick’s “Dr. Strangelove.”

      *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Why doesn’t Biden mail free Covid tests to all Americans? | Ross Barkan

      by

      Why doesn’t Biden mail free Covid tests to all Americans? Ross BarkanIn the United States, testing varies widely by city, county and state. In the UK, tests are free and sent to your home, as it should be On Monday, Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, boasted about the Biden administration’s coronavirus testing apparatus. “We’ve quadrupled the size of our testing plan. We’ve cut the cost significantly over the last few months,” Psaki told reporters, noting Americans will now be able to get the costs of tests reimbursed by their private insurers.“Why not make them free and give them out everywhere?” a reporter asked.“Should we just send one to every American?” Psaki asked, beginning to smile. When the reporter answered “maybe”, the press secretary dug in. “What happens if every American has one test? How much does that cost and what happens after that?”Psaki was straining to make the question seem absurd. There are more than 300 million Americans. How can the United States government just mail a test to every person?Her sarcasm revealed a dismal truth: if America is no longer unique in struggling through the pandemic, adequate testing remains in woefully short supply. The Biden administration has failed, like the Trump administration, to make free tests available everywhere. And in that failure, America has fallen behind the rest of the world.In Boris Johnson’s United Kingdom, free packs of Covid-19 rapid lateral tests are available to order daily. Germany has reintroduced free testing as cases continue to surge. South Korea, long a global leader when it comes to aggressively testing for coronavirus, even has free tests for pets.Meanwhile, in the United States, testing varies widely by city, county and state. New York City, battered by the original wave of coronavirus, now has free and easily accessible testing sites in most neighborhoods, where results can be learned within the hour. Other localities are still charging money and taking days to return tests. In rural areas, it can be especially difficult to get tested quickly for Covid-19.At-home tests are now available in most large pharmacies like CVS and Walgreens. A package can cost more than $20. For many Americans, wrangling with a test that can outstrip the cost of dinner is just not worth it.The new Biden plan is convoluted. Instead of subsidizing the cost of tests so they are freely available in stores or following the New York model of paying for testing sites in underserved areas, the Biden administration will compel private health insurers to reimburse people who buy over the counter, at-home rapid tests. Ultimately, this puts the onus on the individual to wade through paperwork or battle with an insurance company to receive a proper reimbursement. There will be Americans who won’t even bother.For those who lack health insurance, Biden’s initiative offers little. The federal government will buy another 25m tests to give to community health centers and rural clinics, a decent gesture that doesn’t account for those who either don’t live close enough to such places or may be passed over if the tests don’t happen to reach their facilities.The plan, ultimately, is frustratingly piecemeal and reflects the byzantine approach to healthcare the American government continues to take. Instead of a universal provider akin to the United Kingdom’s National Health Service or Canada’s single-payer system, America’s healthcare regime remains a predatory patchwork.Private insurance is expensive and inefficient. Comprehensive public insurance is open only to those who are very poor, old, or work for the government. The ailing American healthcare system has been on full display during the pandemic, with those who survive hospital stays sometimes returning home with enormous medical bills. Other Americans, fearing costs, avoid medical visits altogether.A well-funded rapid testing regime could help, along with vaccination and anti-viral treatments, restore normalcy. Coronavirus, as we now know, can still spread among the vaccinated, and the Omicron variant might increase the number of breakthrough cases. This new reality will require a much greater degree of testing than we now have and force the Biden administration, Psaki included, to take it all a lot more seriously. Rapid, accurate testing can make indoor gatherings safer and ensure those with Covid don’t readily infect others. The misery we all have lived through may begin to subside if the federal government does what it should do and guarantees every American a right to a free, available test.TopicsCoronavirusOpinionJoe BidenBiden administrationUS politicsInfectious diseasescommentReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden voices ‘deep concerns’ over Ukraine escalation in call with Putin – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      3.48pm EST

      15:48

      Capitol attack committee warns Meadows of potential contempt charge

      3.09pm EST

      15:09

      White House urges Putin to embrace ‘de-escalation and diplomacy’ toward Ukraine

      1.35pm EST

      13:35

      White House: Biden confronted Putin over Ukraine troop escalation

      1.30pm EST

      13:30

      Today so far

      1.03pm EST

      13:03

      One of suspected killers of Jamal Khashoggi held in Paris

      12.36pm EST

      12:36

      Biden-Putin summit ends after two hours

      12.10pm EST

      12:10

      Biden to speak with European leaders after Putin summit

      Live feed

      Show

      Show key events only

      4.38pm EST

      16:38

      The White House has released a readout of Joe Biden’s afternoon call with French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
      “President Biden briefed leaders on his call with President Putin, in which he discussed the serious consequences of Russian military action in Ukraine and the need to de-escalate and return to diplomacy,” the White House said.
      “The leaders underscored their support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as the need for Russia to reduce tensions and engage in diplomacy. They agreed their teams will stay in close touch, including in consultation with NATO allies and EU partners, on a coordinated and comprehensive approach.”

      4.18pm EST

      16:18

      The Guardian’s Martin Pengelly and David Smith report:
      Mark Meadows’ attorney, George Terwilliger, wrote in a letter on Tuesday that a deposition would be “untenable” because the 6 January select committee “has no intention of respecting boundaries” concerning questions that Donald Trump has claimed are off-limits because of executive privilege.
      Executive privilege covers the confidentiality or otherwise of communications between a president and his aides. The Biden administration has waived it in the investigation of 6 January. Trump and key allies entwined in events leading up to the storming of the Capitol, around which five people died, have invoked it.
      Terwilliger also said he learned over the weekend that the committee had issued a subpoena to a third-party communications provider that he said would include “intensely personal” information.
      In an interview on the conservative Fox News network, the attorney added: “We have made efforts over many weeks to reach an accommodation with the committee.”
      But he said the committee’s approach to negotiations and to other witnesses meant Meadows would withdraw cooperation.

      3.48pm EST

      15:48

      Capitol attack committee warns Meadows of potential contempt charge

      The House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection has warned Mark Meadows that lawmakers will move forward with holding him in criminal contempt if he does not appear for his scheduled deposition tomorrow.
      Meadows, who previously served as Donald Trump’s chief of staff, indicated earlier today that he would no longer cooperate with the committee’s investigation.
      The chair and vice-chair of the select committee, Democrat Bennie Thompson and Republican Liz Cheney, warned Meadows of the potential contempt charge in a new statement.

      January 6th Committee
      (@January6thCmte)
      Mark Meadows has informed the Select Committee that he does not intend to cooperate further despite his apparent willingness to provide details about the January 6th attack, including conversations with President Trump, in the book he is now promoting and selling.

      December 7, 2021

      “Mark Meadows has informed the Select Committee that he does not intend to cooperate further with our investigation despite his apparent willingness to provide details about the facts and circumstances surrounding the January 6th attack, including conversations with President Trump, in the book he is now promoting and selling,” Thompson and Cheney said.
      The two lawmakers noted investigators have many questions and requests for Meadows that do not fall under potential executive privilege claims, including “voluminous official records stored in his personal phone and email accounts”.
      “Tomorrow’s deposition, which was scheduled at Mr. Meadows’s request, will go forward as planned,” Thompson and Cheney said.
      “If indeed Mr. Meadows refuses to appear, the Select Committee will be left no choice but to advance contempt proceedings and recommend that the body in which Mr. Meadows once served refer him for criminal prosecution.”

      3.30pm EST

      15:30

      National security adviser Jake Sullivan described the summit between Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin as a “useful meeting,” although he declined to characterize the Russian leader’s remarks during the discussion.
      “He can speak for himself,” Sullivan said of Putin, noting that the Russian president was “direct and straightforward” in his conversation with Biden.
      “This was a real discussion. It was give and take. It was not speeches,” Sullivan said. “It was back and forth. President Putin was deeply engaged.”

      3.16pm EST

      15:16

      National security adviser Jake Sullivan said Joe Biden will speak with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Thursday, after the US president held a virtual summit with Vladimir Putin today.
      Sullivan said the White House does not believe that Putin has yet made a decision about whether to approve an invasion of Ukraine, as Russia builds up its troop presence along the border.
      “What President Biden did today was lay out very clearly the consequences if he chooses to move,” Sullivan said of the summit.
      “I will look you in the eye and tell you, as President Biden looked President Putin in the eye and told him today, that things we did not do in 2014, we are prepared to do now,” Sullivan added, referring to the US response to the Russian annexation of Crimea.

      3.09pm EST

      15:09

      White House urges Putin to embrace ‘de-escalation and diplomacy’ toward Ukraine

      The White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, is now holding her daily briefing with reporters, and she is joined by national security adviser Jake Sullivan.
      Sullivan provided more details on Joe Biden’s virtual summit with Vladimir Putin this morning, saying the US president was “direct and straightforward” with the Russian leader.
      The president warned Putin that the US would respond with “strong economic measures” if Russia invaded Ukraine, Sullivan said.
      The national security adviser added that Biden urged his Russian counterpart to embrace “de-escalation and diplomacy” toward Ukraine rather than continuing to build up a military presence along the border.

      2.47pm EST

      14:47

      The Republican National Committee criticized Joe Biden’s foreign policy agenda after the US president’s virtual summit with Vladimir Putin this morning.
      “Biden’s weak leadership on the international stage has emboldened our enemies and shaken our allies’ trust,” RNC chair Ronna McDaniel said in a statement.
      “While claiming to be tough on Russia, Biden gifted Putin the Russian Nord Stream 2 pipeline while simultaneously embarking on a job-killing crusade against the U.S. energy industry. Today’s meeting underscores how Biden’s weak global leadership, Afghanistan disaster, and failure at our border is emblematic of his America last agenda.”
      In its readout of the summit, the White House said Biden “voiced the deep concerns of the United States and our European Allies about Russia’s escalation of forces surrounding Ukraine and made clear that the U.S. and our Allies would respond with strong economic and other measures in the event of military escalation”.

      2.16pm EST

      14:16

      Edward Helmore

      Donald Trump’s plan to launch “Truth Social”, a special purpose acquisitions backed social media company, early next year may have hit a roadblock after US regulators issued a request for information on the deal on Monday.
      The request from the SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority for information from Digital World Acquisition Corp (DWAC), a blank-check SPAC that is set to merge with Trump Media & Technology Group, comes as a powerful Republican congressman, Devin Nunes, announced he was stepping out of politics to join the Trump media venture as CEO.
      The twin developments set the stage for a major political battle over Truth Social, a platform that purportedly plans to challenge Twitter and Facebook, social platforms that have banned or curbed the former president over his involvement in stoking the 6 January Capitol riot.

      1.51pm EST

      13:51

      About 200 officers have left the US Capitol police since the 6 January insurrection, according to the force’s inspector general.
      Giving testimony before a Senate committee hearing, Michael Bolton also said the Capitol police had not done enough to improve its practices in the 11 months since the attack.

      CSPAN
      (@cspan)
      Sen. @RoyBlunt: “How many officers have left the department since January the 6th?”U.S. Capitol Police IG Bolton: “I believe it’s around 200 or so.” pic.twitter.com/IvTBDRsLrv

      December 7, 2021

      Bolton also said that out of “200 security enhancements” the department told him it would make, “only 61 of those items have supporting documentation to support that those enhancements have occurred”.
      The Senate Rules Committee hearing was also notable for a suggestion from Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican senator for West Virginia, that Congress should conduct large-scale drills, in the same way many US schools are forced to, in case of an active shooter.

      Updated
      at 1.58pm EST

      1.35pm EST

      13:35

      White House: Biden confronted Putin over Ukraine troop escalation

      Joe Biden voiced “deep concerns” about the escalation of Russian forces surrounding Ukraine during his call with Vladimir Putin today, according to a summary of the conversation published by the White House.
      The call took in a “range of issues”, the White House said, including the Ukraine situation and ransomware.
      From the White House:

      President Biden voiced the deep concerns of the United States and our European allies about Russia’s escalation of forces surrounding Ukraine and made clear that the US and our allies would respond with strong economic and other measures in the event of military escalation.
      President Biden reiterated his support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and called for de-escalation and a return to diplomacy. The two presidents tasked their teams to follow up and the US will do so in close coordination with allies and partners.
      The presidents also discussed the US-Russia dialogue on strategic stability, a separate dialogue on ransomware, as well as joint work on regional issues such as Iran.

      This is Adam Gabbatt, taking over from Joan for a little while.

      Updated
      at 1.45pm EST

      1.30pm EST

      13:30

      Today so far

      Here’s where the day stands so far:

      Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a virtual summit that lasted roughly two hours. The meeting comes as Putin has built up Russia’s troop presence along the country’s border with Ukraine, raising concerns of a potential invasion.
      Biden is speaking with several European leaders this afternoon to provide an update on his conversation with Putin. The White House said Biden will speak with French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
      Mark Meadows, the former chief of staff to Donald Trump, is no longer cooperating with the House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection. Meadows’ attorney said the panel wanted the former official to discuss matters over which Donald Trump has claimed executive privilege, although lawmakers have rejected the legitimacy of the former president’s claims.

      The blog will have more coming up, so stay tuned.

      1.16pm EST

      13:16

      The White House has shared a photo of Joe Biden’s virtual summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin this morning, which wrapped up about an hour ago.
      The photo shows the US president, accompanied by secretary of state Antony Blinken and national security adviser Jake Sullivan, in the Situation Room.
      “.@POTUS held a secure video call with President Putin of Russia today to discuss a range of topics in the US-Russia relationship, including our concerns about Russian military activities on the border with Ukraine, cyber and regional issues,” the White House said on Twitter. More

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Congressman Jamie Raskin: ‘I’ll never forget the terrible sound of them trying to barrel into the chamber’

      by

      InterviewCongressman Jamie Raskin: ‘I’ll never forget the terrible sound of them trying to barrel into the chamber’David Smith in Washington The congressman was in the Capitol the day it was stormed by Trump supporters, and led the impeachment prosecution. The fight, he says, is far from over

      Chris Bryant: ‘Nearly everyone I meet says: “I wouldn’t want your job”’
      See more of the Observer’s faces behind the 2021 headlines
      He spent 5 January at a graveside service for his son, Tommy, who had taken his own life after years shadowed by depression. He spent 6 January under siege at the US Capitol as a mob of Donald Trump supporters staged a deadly insurrection. Nearly a year on, Jamie Raskin wonders whether he could have prevented either tragedy.“Just as I have blamed myself for missing cues that I might have picked up with Tommy, I blame myself for cues I missed relating to the violence as well,” says Raskin, carefully measuring each word. “I spent many, many sleepless nights in self-blame and self-prosecution over everything that had happened with Tommy and with the insurrection.”Raskin, a Democratic congressman from Maryland, took office in January 2017. Four years later, and a day after burying his 25-year-old son, he was at the US Capitol under coronavirus restrictions to help certify Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election. He witnessed the citadel of American democracy come under attack from a frenzied mob convinced by Trump’s “big lie” about vote rigging.“I heard this terrible sound that I’ll never forget of some people trying to barrel into the House chamber,” the 58-year-old recalls in a phone interview from his home in Takoma Park, Maryland. “I don’t know to this day exactly what kind of physical objects they were carrying, but they kept slamming up against the central door to the House of Representatives and so lots of people began to move over there to try to reinforce it.“But then Capitol police officers came running in with their guns drawn, telling all of us to get back, and they went up and guarded that door. There were people screaming and it was very chaotic. You could hear people yelling, ‘We want Trump!’ and ‘Hang Mike Pence!’” – a reference to the vice-president who ignored Trump’s pleas to overturn the election.Members of Congress were evacuated through the speaker’s lobby, tunnels and stairwells. “We would see members of the mob running by in different directions. It was like a zombie movie. Whenever we saw them, everybody would accelerate efforts to get away. An insurrection is a pretty intimate thing. These people were all over the place. It’s remarkable more people did not die.”Finally, they reached the safety of a committee room in a House office building. But Raskin’s daughter Tabitha, 23, and son-in-law, Hank, who had accompanied him to the Capitol that day, were trapped in the office of Steny Hoyer, the House majority leader. They barricaded themselves in with furniture and hid under Hoyer’s desk.“I was obviously very concerned,” says Raskin. “I was an emotional wreck anyway but I felt now intensely responsible for having brought them with me and put them in harm’s way. It had never occurred to me that the Capitol of the United States would not be secure.”Eventually the building was cleared by security forces and the family was reunited. “I hugged them and kissed them and I told Tabitha how sorry I was and I said it would not be like this the next time she came to the Capitol. That’s when she said, ‘I don’t want to come back to the Capitol again’. The immensity of these events just hit me at that point. They had fundamentally changed everything by unleashing this violence to support their political coup.”That night Congress returned to the building to complete the electoral college counts and confirm Biden as the next president. In a stunned nation, there were demands for Trump to face a reckoning over his role in inciting the riot. Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, asked Raskin to become lead prosecutor.He says: “For me the trial was a kind of salvation because I was so deeply in shock and trauma about Tommy and what had just taken place in the Capitol. It was a time of great confusion.“If you remember back to 9/11 and what that was like, everyone walking around buffeted and dumbfounded, there was that feeling. But by becoming the lead impeachment manager, I quickly had to develop a focus on what needed to be done.”Previously a constitutional law professor, Raskin made a compelling case and was not afraid to display his anger, grief and vulnerability. A majority of senators voted to convict Trump but fell 10 votes short of the two-thirds majority required by the constitution. The ex-president was acquitted. But Raskin was not done.He is now a member of the House of Representatives select committee investigating the events of that day. It has been gathering documents and phone records and subpoenaing witnesses in an effort to produce the definitive account of an event that Raskin says was “as close to fascism as any of us wants to come in our lifetime”.The congressman, who has written a book to try to make sense of the 50 days that upended his life, says: “I would like to say that 6 January was the end of something but it feels much more to me like the beginning of something.“Ultimately, that’s up to us. We are definitely in a struggle over the future of democracy. Joe Biden is the right president to try to lead us out of this period of emotional devastation but at this point Donald Trump’s ‘big lie’ lives and his control over the Republican party is absolute. So we are still very much in the fight of our lives.” Unthinkable: Trauma, Truth, and the Trials of American Democracy by Jamie Raskin will be published by HarperCollins on 4 JanuaryTopicsUS Capitol attackThe Observer’s faces of 2021DemocratsUS politicsJoe BidenDonald TrumpfeaturesReuse this content More