Joe Biden

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      I’m happy to debate Trump, says Biden in surprise Howard Stern interview

      by

      Joe Biden sprang a surprise on the Washington press corps on Friday when he gave an interview to the radio host and shock jock Howard Stern.The president also made news. Asked if he would debate Donald Trump before the election in November, Biden said: “I am, somewhere, I don’t know when, but I am happy to debate him.”The Biden campaign confirmed to reporters that Biden was willing to face Trump in person. Chris LaCivita, a senior adviser to Trump and the Republican National Committee, posted: “OK let’s set it up!”Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, has goaded Biden about debating – despite skipping all debates in his own primary this year; withdrawing from his second debate with Biden in 2020; and in 2022 prompting the Republican National Committee to withdraw from the body that organises presidential debates.Trump’s last White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, also revealed that when Trump and Biden did meet on the debate stage, in September 2020, Trump had tested positive for Covid-19 but declined to tell the public. Trump and members of his family then flouted Covid protocols around the debate with Biden.The interview between Biden and Stern was announced minutes before the conversation began on air. Reporting the unscheduled stop in New York, the White House pool report said: “At 10.05am, the motorcade made an unscheduled stop at Sirius XM studio in midtown Manhattan.”Jennifer Witz, chief executive of Sirius XM, said: “We are thrilled that President Biden chose Howard Stern. It’s just another reminder that Howard is in a league of his own, regularly lauded as the world’s best interviewer.”That would be up for debate but Stern does have a habit of making news – often, in the case of Biden’s White House predecessor, retrospectively.Trump’s interviews with Stern before entering politics have regularly resurfaced, particularly over Trump’s usually controversial, often lewd and sometimes disturbing remarks.Wirtz said Sirius XM was “proud to offer distinct and varied insights and commentary spanning the political spectrum”.Biden was in New York after attending a campaign fundraiser hosted by the actor Michael Douglas on Thursday.Stern had never interviewed a sitting president before. In 2019, he interviewed Hillary Clinton, the losing Democratic candidate in the 2016 election.A day after the rightwing-dominated supreme court showed signs of delaying Trump’s federal election subversion trial by indulging his claims about presidential immunity, Stern asked Biden why he had to be careful talking about a court the host called “a joke”.“It’s a really extremely conservative court, maybe the most conservative in modern history,” Biden said.He also excused himself for a “Freudian slip” after saying “Trump” while meaning to refer to Richard Nixon.Much of the interview focused on Biden’s long life in politics, as a senator from Delaware from 1973 to 2009, as vice-president to Barack Obama between 2009 and 2017, and as president since 2021.Discussing the deaths in a car crash in 1972 of his first wife, Neilia Hunter Biden, and young daughter, Naomi, the president told Stern he then contemplated suicide.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“I used to sit there and just think I’m going to take out a bottle of scotch,” Biden said. “I’m going to just drink it and get drunk.“I just thought about it, you don’t need to be crazy to commit suicide. I thought, ‘Let me just go to the Delaware Memorial [Bridge] and jump.’”He also encouraged listeners experiencing mental health issues to seek therapy.About how he met Jill Biden, his second wife, Biden said: “I got a call from my brother. ‘So I have a girl here at Delaware’ – Jill is nine years younger than I am. He said, ‘You’ll love her. She doesn’t like politics.’”Before that, while he was single, Biden said, he “got put in that 10 most eligible bachelors list … and a lot of lovely women, but women, would send very salacious pictures and I just give them to the Secret Service.”The “proudest thing” he had ever done in politics, Biden said, was securing the passage of the Violence Against Women Act, which he introduced in 1990 and which became law four years later. The law was reauthorised and strengthened in 2013, when Biden was vice-president.The 81-year-old president has attracted controversy through his relative reluctance to sit for interviews with the mainstream press.On Thursday, a day before Biden chose to speak to Stern, Politico published an extensive report about what it called a “petty feud” between the Biden White House and the New York Times.“Although the president’s communications teams bristle at coverage from dozens of outlets,” Politico said, “the frustration, and obsession, with the Times is unique, reflecting the resentment of a president with a working-class sense of himself and his team toward a news organisation catering to an elite audience – and a deep desire for its affirmation of their work.“On the other side, the newspaper carries its own singular obsession with the president, aggrieved over his refusal to give the paper a sit-down interview that publisher AG Sulzberger and other top editors believe to be its birthright.”Reporting Biden’s interview with Stern, the Times noted that the president “once again told a story about being arrested at a Delaware desegregation protest as a teenager”, but observed: “There has never been any evidence that he ever was arrested at a civil rights protest.” More

    • 225 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A lot would have to go wrong for Biden to lose’: can Allan Lichtman predict the 2024 election?

      by

      He has been called the Nostradamus of US presidential elections. Allan Lichtman has correctly predicted the result of nine of the past 10 (and even the one that got away, in 2000, he insists was stolen from Al Gore). But now he is gearing up for perhaps his greatest challenge: Joe Biden v Donald Trump II.Lichtman is a man of parts. The history professor has been teaching at American University in Washington for half a century. He is a former North American 3,000m steeplechase champion and, at 77 – the same age as Trump – aiming to compete in the next Senior Olympics. In 1981 he appeared on the TV quizshow Tic-Tac-Dough and won $110,000 in cash and prizes.That same year he developed his now famous 13 keys to the White House, a method for predicting presidential election results that every four years tantalises the media, intrigues political operatives and provokes sniping from pollsters. Long before talk of the Steele dossier or Mueller investigation, it all began with a Russian reaching out across the cold war divide.“I’d love to tell you I developed my system by ruining my eyes in the archives, by deep contemplation, but if I were to say that, to quote the late great Richard Nixon, that would be wrong,” Lichtman recalls from a book-crowded office on the AU campus. “Like so many discoveries, it was kind of serendipitous.”View image in fullscreenLichtman was a visiting scholar at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena when he met the world’s leading authority in earthquake prediction, Vladimir Keilis-Borok, who had been part of a Soviet delegation that negotiated the limited nuclear test ban treaty with President John F Kennedy in Washington in 1963.Keilis-Borok had fallen in love with American politics and began a collaboration with Lichtman to reconceptualise elections in earthquake terms. That is, as a question of stability (the party holding the White House keeps it) versus earthquake (the party holding the White House gets thrown out).They looked at every presidential election since Abraham Lincoln’s victory in 1860, combining Keilis-Borok’s method recognising patterns associated with stability and earthquakes with Lichtman’s theory that elections are basically votes up or down on the strength and performance of the party that holds the White House.They came up with 13 true/false questions and a decision rule: if six or more keys went against the White House party, it would lose. If fewer than six went against it, it would win. These are the 13 keys, as summarised by AU’s website:1. Party mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the US House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.2. Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.3. Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.4. Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.5. Short-term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.6. Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.7. Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.8. Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.9. Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.10. Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.11. Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.12. Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.13. Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.Lichtman and Keilis-Borok published a paper in an academic journal, which was spotted by an Associated Press science reporter, leading to a Washington Post article headlined: “Odd couple discovers keys to the White House.” Then, in the Washingtonian magazine in April 1982, Lichtman used the keys to accurately predict that, despite economic recession, low approval ratings and relative old age, Ronald Reagan would win re-election two years later.That led to an invitation to the White House from the presidential aide Lee Atwater, where Lichtman met numerous officials including then vice-president George HW Bush. Atwater asked him what would happen if Reagan did not run for re-election. Lichtman reckoned that a few important keys would be lost, including incumbent charisma.“Without the Gipper, forget it,” Lichtman says. “George Bush is about as charismatic as a New Jersey shopping centre on a Sunday morning. Atwater looks me in the eye, breathes a huge sigh of relief, and says, thank you, Professor Lichtman. And the rest is history.”For the next election, Bush was trailing his Democratic challenger Michael Dukakis by 18 percentage points in the opinion polls in May 1988, yet Lichtman correctly predicted a Bush victory because he was running on the Reagan inheritance of peace, prosperity, domestic tranquillity and breakthroughs with the Soviet Union.View image in fullscreenThat year Lichtman published a book, The Thirteen Keys to the Presidency. But he was still derided by the punditry establishment. “When I first developed my system and made my predictions, the professional forecasters blasted me because I had committed the ultimate sin of prediction, the sin of subjectivity.“Some of my keys were not just cut and dried and I kept telling them, it’s not subjectivity, it’s judgment. We’re dealing with human systems and historians make judgments all the time, and they’re not random judgments. I define each key very carefully in my book and I have a record.”He adds: “It took 15 to 20 years and the professional forecasting community totally turned around. They realised their big mathematical models didn’t work and the best models combined judgment with more cut-and-dried indicators. And suddenly the keys were the hottest thing in forecasting.”Lichtman was a man in demand. He spoke at forecasting conferences, wrote for academic journals and even gave a talk to the CIA about how to apply the 13 keys to foreign elections. And his crystal ball kept working.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHe predicted that George HW Bush would be a one-term president, even though he was riding high in polls after the Gulf war, causing many leading Democrats to pass on mounting a challenge. Then a call from Little Rock, Arkansas. It was Kay Goss, special assistant to Governor Bill Clinton.“Are you really saying that George Bush can be beaten in 1992?” she asked. Lichtman confirmed that he was saying that. Clinton went on to win the Democratic primary election and beat Bush for the White House. “The Clintons have been big fans of the keys ever since,” Lichtman notes.The one apparent blot on Lichtman’s copybook is the 2000 election, where he predicted victory for the Democratic vice-president Al Gore over George W Bush, the Republican governor of Texas. Gore did win the national popular vote but lost the electoral college by a gossamer-thin margin. Lichtman, however, believes he was right.View image in fullscreen“It was a stolen election. Based on the actual votes, Al Gore should have won going away, except for the discarding of ballots cast by Black voters who were 95% for Gore. I proved this in my report to the United States Commission on Civil Rights. One out of every nine to 10 ballots cast by a Black voter was thrown out, as opposed to one out of 50 cast by a white voter.“Most of those were not so-called hanging chads. They were over-votes because Black people were told punch in Gore and then write in Gore, just to be sure, and those ballots were all discarded. Political scientists have since looked at the election and proved I was right. Al Gore, based on the intent of the voters, should have won by tens of thousands of votes.”He adds: “I contend I was right about 2000 or at a minimum there was no right prediction. You could argue either way. I contend – and a lot of people agree with me – that I’m 10 out of 10. But even if you say I’m nine out of 10, that’s not bad.”Perhaps Lichtman’s most striking prophecy, defying polls, commentators and groupthink, was that Trump – a former reality TV star with no prior political or military experience – would pull off a wildly improbable win over the former secretary of state and first lady Hillary Clinton in 2016. How did he know?View image in fullscreen“The critical sixth key was the contest key: Bernie Sanders’s contest against Clinton. It was an open seat so you lost the incumbency key. The Democrats had done poorly in 2014 so you lost that key. There was no big domestic accomplishment following the Affordable Care Act in the previous term, and no big foreign policy splashy success following the killing of Bin Laden in the first term, so there were just enough keys. It was not an easy call.”After the election, Lichtman received a copy of the Washington Post interview in which he made the prediction. On it was written in a Sharpie pen: “Congrats, professor. Good call. Donald J Trump.” But in the same call, Lichtman had also prophesied – again accurately – that Trump would one day be impeached.He was right about 2020, too, as Trump struggled to handle the coronavirus pandemic. “The pandemic is what did him in. He congratulated me for predicting him but he didn’t understand the keys. The message of the keys is it’s governance not campaigning that counts and instead of dealing substantively with the pandemic, as we know, he thought he could talk his way out of it and that sank him.”In 2020 Lichtman gave a presentation to the American Political Science Association about the keys as one of three classic models of prediction. In recent months he has delivered keynote addresses at Asian and Brazilian financial conferences, the Oxford Union and JP Morgan. As another election looms, he is not impressed by polls that show Trump leading Biden, prompting a fatalistic mood to take hold in Washington DC and foreign capitals.“They’re mesmerised by the wrong things, which is the polls. First of all, polls six, seven months before an election have zero predictive value. They would have predicted President Michael Dukakis. They would have predicted President Jimmy Carter would have defeated Ronald Reagan, who won in a landslide; Carter was way ahead in some of the early polls.“Not only are polls a snapshot but they are not predictors. They don’t predict anything and there’s no such thing as, ‘if the election were held today’. That’s a meaningless statement.”He is likely to make his pronouncement on the 2024 presidential election in early August. He notes that Biden already has the incumbency key in his favour and, having crushed token challengers in the Democratic primary, has the contest key too. “That’s two keys off the top. That means six more keys would have to fall to predict his defeat. A lot would have to go wrong for Biden to lose.”View image in fullscreenLichtman gives no weight to running mate picks and has never changed his forecast in the wake of a so-called “October surprise” But no predictive model is entirely immune to a black swan event.Speaking in the week that saw a jury seated for Trump’s criminal trial in New York involving a hush-money payment to a pornographic film performer, Lichtman acknowledges: “Keys are based on history. They’re very robust because they go all the way back retrospectively to 1860 and prospectively to 1984, so they cover enormous changes in our economy, our society, our demography, our politics.“But it’s always possible there could be a cataclysmic enough event outside the scope of the keys that could affect the election and here we do have, for the first time, not just a former president but a major party candidate sitting in a trial and who knows if he’s convicted – and there’s a good chance he will be – how that might scramble things.”Millions of people will be on edge on the night of 5 November. After 40 years of doing this, Lichtman will have one more reason to be anxious. “It’s nerve-racking because there are a lot of people who’d love to see me fail.” And if he does? “I’m human,” he admits. “It doesn’t mean my system’s wrong. Nothing is perfect in the human world.”Biden v Trump: What’s in store for the US and the world?On Thursday 2 May, 3-4.15pm ET, join Tania Branigan, David Smith, Mehdi Hasan and Tara Setmayer for the inside track on the people, the ideas and the events that might shape the US election campaign. Book tickets here or at theguardian.live More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Is there humour left in the White House? – podcast

      by

      The annual White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner returns this Saturday for a night of comedy ‘roasting’ – where the great and the good are ruthlessly mocked in celebration of the freedom of the press.
      In recent years, however, the night has taken on a different tone, with the atmosphere of warm self-deprecation and bipartisan bonhomie replaced by something more scathing and serious.
      This week Jonathan Freedland is joined by Jeff Nussbaum, a former senior speech writer to Joe Biden, to discuss the art of writing gags for presidents and whether there is still space for humour in US politics.

      How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know More

    • 238 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Justice Barrett signals at least part of Trump’s trial could continue even if court approves immunity defense – live

      by

      In an exchange with attorney John Sauer, conservative justice Amy Coney Barrett signaled she thought Donald Trump could still face trial on some election interference charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith, even if the supreme court agrees with his claims of immunity.“So, you concede that private acts don’t get immunity?” Barrett asked.“We do,” Sauer replied. Barrett then referred to Smith’s brief in the immunity case:
      He urges us even if we … assume that there was some sort of immunity for official acts, that there were sufficient private acts in the indictment … for the case to go back and the trial to begin immediately. And I want to know if you agree or disagree about the characterization of these acts.
      She then posed a series of scenarios to Sauer, and asked him whether the acts were official or private. Sauer said most would be considered private, not official, acts.“So those acts, you would not dispute those were private, and you wouldn’t raise a claim that they were official as characterized?” Barrett asked. It’s a telling statement from the Trump-appointed justice, because the court could find that Trump is immune for official acts – but must face trial for acts done in his capacity as a private citizen.Before the special counsel’s office began presenting its case, Neil Gorsuch, a conservative justice, pondered whether rejecting Donald Trump’s claim of immunity would cause presidents to preemptively pardon themselves, in fear that a successor could decide to prosecute them.“What would happen if presidents were under fear, fear that their successors would criminally prosecute them for their acts in office,” asked Gorsuch, who Trump appointed, in an exchange with his attorney John Sauer.“It seems to me like one of the incentives that might be created as for presidents to try to pardon themselves,” Gorsuch continued, adding, “We’ve never answered whether a president can do that. Happily, it’s never been presented to us.”“And if the doctrine of immunity remains in place that’s likely to remain the case,” Sauer replied.Trump’s lawyer went on to argue that a finding against his immunity claim would weaken all future presidents:
      The real concern here is, is there going to be bold and fearless action? Is the president going to have to make a controversial decision where his political opponents are going to come after him the minute he leaves office? Is that going to unduly deter, or is that going to dampen the ardor of that president to do what our constitutional structure demands of him or her, which is bold and fearless action in the face of controversy?
      “And perhaps, if he feels he has to, he’ll pardon himself every four years from now on,” Gorsuch pondered.“But that, as the court pointed out, wouldn’t provide the security because the legality of that is something that’s never been addressed,” Sauer replied.Arguing before the court now is Michael Dreeben, an attorney representing special counsel Jack Smith, who indicted Donald Trump on federal charges relating to conspiring to overturn the 2020 election.He told the court that agreeing with Trump’s immunity claim means president could not be found liable for all sorts of criminal acts:
      His novel theory would immunize former presidents for criminal liability for bribery, treason, sedition, murder, and here for conspiring to use fraud to overturn the results of an election and perpetuate himself in power.
      Such presidential immunity has no foundation in the constitution. The framers knew too well the dangers of a king who could do no wrong. They therefore devised a system to check abuses of power, especially the use of official power for private gain. Here the executive branch is enforcing congressional statutes and seeking accountability for petitioners’ alleged misuse of official power to subvert democracy.
      Conservative justice Amy Coney Barrett continues to sound somewhat flummoxed by John Sauer arguments in favor of Donald Trump’s immunity.“So how can you say that he would be subject to prosecution after impeachment, while at the same time saying that he’s exempt from these criminal statutes?” Barrett asked.Apparently unsatisfied with his answer, Barrett posed another hypothetical to Sauer: In the “example of a president who orders a coup, let’s imagine that he is impeached and convicted for ordering that coup and let’s just accept for the sake of argument, your position that that was official conduct. You’re saying that he couldn’t be prosecuted for that even after conviction and an impeachment proceeding?”Sauer responded by arguing the law must specify that a president who has been impeached and convicted by Congress can still face criminal prosecution for a coup:
      If there was not a statute that expressly referenced the president and made it criminal for the president. There would have to be a statute that made a clear statement that Congress purported to regulate the president’s conduct.
      In an exchange with attorney John Sauer, conservative justice Amy Coney Barrett signaled she thought Donald Trump could still face trial on some election interference charges brought by special counsel Jack Smith, even if the supreme court agrees with his claims of immunity.“So, you concede that private acts don’t get immunity?” Barrett asked.“We do,” Sauer replied. Barrett then referred to Smith’s brief in the immunity case:
      He urges us even if we … assume that there was some sort of immunity for official acts, that there were sufficient private acts in the indictment … for the case to go back and the trial to begin immediately. And I want to know if you agree or disagree about the characterization of these acts.
      She then posed a series of scenarios to Sauer, and asked him whether the acts were official or private. Sauer said most would be considered private, not official, acts.“So those acts, you would not dispute those were private, and you wouldn’t raise a claim that they were official as characterized?” Barrett asked. It’s a telling statement from the Trump-appointed justice, because the court could find that Trump is immune for official acts – but must face trial for acts done in his capacity as a private citizen.Another liberal justice, Elena Kagan, debated the specifics with Donald Trump’s attorney John Sauer of his alleged misconduct, and whether he would be immune from prosecution.Kagan asked for Sauer’s views on Trump’s attempt to get Republican lawmakers in Arizona to help him disrupt Joe Biden’s election victory there: “The defendant asked the Arizona House Speaker to call the legislature into session to hold a hearing based on their claims of election fraud.”“Absolutely an official act for the president to communicate with state officials on a matter of enormous federal interest and concern, attempting to defend the integrity of a federal election to communicate with state officials,” Sauer replied.In an exchange with liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor, Donald Trump’s attorney John Sauer defended the legality of sending slates of fake electors – as Trump is alleged to have done to stop Joe Biden from winning the White House.The allegation is at the heart of the charges against Trump, both in special counsel Jack Smith’s federal case, and in the case brought in Georgia by Fulton county district attorney Fani Willis.“What is plausible about the president insisting and creating a fraudulent slate of electoral candidates, assuming you accept the facts of the complaint on their face? Is that plausible that that would be within his right to do?” Sotomayor asked.“Absolutely, your honor,” Sauer replied. “We have the historical precedent we cite in the lower courts of president Grant sending federal troops to Louisiana and Mississippi in 1876 to make sure that the Republican electors got certified.”Liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor sounded sharply skeptical of John Sauer’s arguments as she harkened back to the country’s early days in exploring the situations where a president could be prosecuted.Referring to amicus, or “friend of the court”, briefs filed in the case by outside groups, Sotomayor said:
      There are amica here who tell us that the founders actually talked about whether to grant immunity to the president. And in fact, they had state constitutions that granted some criminal immunity to governors. And yet, they didn’t take it up. Instead, they fought to pass an impeachment clause that basically says you can’t remove the president from office, except by a trial in the Senate, but you can impeach him after so … you can impose criminal liability.
      We would be creating a situation in which … a president is entitled not to make a mistake, but more than that, a president is entitled for total personal gain, to use the trappings of his office. That’s what you’re trying to get us to hold? Without facing criminal liability?
      Up first before the court is attorney John Sauer, who is representing Donald Trump.He’s currently in a back-and-forth with chief justice John Roberts, a conservative who has occasionally acted as a swing vote on the rightward-leaning court, as to whether a president accepting a bribe would be legal.The nine supreme court justices are seated and have begun hearing arguments over whether or not Donald Trump is immune from prosecution for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election because he was acting in his official capacity as president.Follow along here for live updates.Should the supreme court throw out Donald Trump’s immunity claim, when might his trial on federal election subversion charges begin?Or, if it is delayed further, which is the next criminal case to go before jurors? And what of the many civil suits against him?For a rundown of the former-perhaps-next president’s multitudinous legal troubles, check out our regularly updated case tracker:Protesters often turn up by the dozens outside the supreme court in Washington DC when it hears high-profiles cases, and Donald Trump’s occasional appearances in the Capitol also typically attract demonstrations.But for whatever reason, the exterior of the high court appears relatively quiet this morning, at least based on the photos on the wire, with few protesters present:The supreme court has not yet even heard arguments in Donald Trump’s claim that he is immune from charges related to attempting to overturn the 2020 election because his alleged actions were taken while serving as president. But legal scholar Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, said the conservative-dominated body has already done the ex-president’s bidding by agreeing to hear the case – and therefore delaying the start of a trial that could prove pivotal to his chances of returning to the White House.“The justices have already done great damage,” Waldman wrote recently. “They engineered one of history’s most egregious political interventions – not with an ugly ruling, at least not yet, but by getting ‘the slows’. At the very least they should issue this ruling in three weeks. That would give trial judge Tanya Chutkan enough time to start the trial [before the election], if barely.”Here’s more on why Waldman thinks the high court erred, and what we can expect in today’s arguments, from the Guardian’s Martin Pengelly:Good morning, US politics blog readers.It’s another big day at the supreme court – perhaps the biggest of its term so far. Beginning at 10am ET, the nine justices will hear arguments over whether Donald Trump is immune from prosecution for acts done while he was in office. The former president has made the claim as part of a bid to blunt special counsel Jack Smith’s case against him for allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election, and while there’s no telling how the court will rule, it has already had one concrete effect: delaying his trial in Washington DC, potentially until after the November election, and therefore preventing a potential guilty verdict that could have damaged his campaign.The supreme court is composed of a six-justice conservative supermajority – three of whom Trump appointed – and a three-justice liberal minority, and the fact that they took this case up at all has raised eyebrows among some legal scholars. A ruling in his favor could lead to at least some of the charges Smith has brought to be dropped. If the court rejects arguments from Trump’s attorneys, his trial may be cleared to proceed – but there is still no telling when it will actually kick off.The former president will not be in Washington DC for today’s oral arguments. He’s in New York City, where his trial is underway on charges of falsifying business documents related to hush money payments made before his 2016 election victory, the first of his four criminal cases to go before jurors. We have a separate live blog covering all that.Here’s what else is going on today:
      Joe Biden is heading to Syracuse, New York to tell the tale of how the 2022 Chips act and other policies are helping turn around the local economy, then heading to New York’s ritzy suburbs for a campaign event.
      Arizona has indicted 18 former top Trump officials, including Mark Meadows, his ex-chief of staff, and attorney Rudy Giuliani for their attempts to overturn Biden’s victory in the state four years ago, the AP reports.
      And in Michigan, a state investigator said he considered Trump and Meadows as unindicted co-conspirators in a plot to interfere with Biden’s victory there in 2020, according to the AP. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden signs $95bn foreign aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan

      by

      Joe Biden has signed into law a bill that rushes $95bn in foreign aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, a bipartisan legislative victory he hailed as a “good day for world peace” after months of congressional gridlock threatened Washington’s support for Kyiv in its fight to repel Russia’s invasion.The Senate overwhelmingly passed the measure in a 79 -18 vote late on Tuesday night, after the package won similarly lopsided approval in the Republican controlled House, despite months of resistance from an isolationist bloc of hardline conservatives opposed to helping Ukraine.“It’s going to make America safer. It’s going to make the world safer,” Biden said, in remarks delivered from the White House, shortly after signing the bill.“It was a difficult path,” he continued. “It should have been easier and it should have gotten there sooner. But in the end, we did what America always does. We rose to the moment, came together, and we got it done.”The White House first sent its request for the foreign aid package to Congress in October, and US officials have said the months-long delay hurt Ukraine on the battlefield. Promising to “move fast”, Biden said the US would begin shipping weapons and equipment to Ukraine within a matter of hours.Biden admonished “Maga Republicans” for blocking the aid package as Ukrainian soldiers were running out of artillery shells and ammunition as Iran, China and North Korea helped Russia to ramp up its aerial assault on Ukrainian cities and critical infrastructure.Rejecting the view that Ukraine is locked in an unwinnable conflict that has become a drain on US resources, Biden hailed Ukraine’s army as a “fighting force with the will and the skill to win”.But the president also pressed the case that supporting Ukraine was in the national security interest of the US.“If [Vladimir] Putin triumphs in Ukraine, the next move of Russian forces could very well be a direct attack on a Nato ally,” he said, describing what would happen if article 5 of the alliance’s charter, which requires the collective defense of a member in the event of an outside attack.“We’d have no choice but to come to their aid, just like our Nato allies came to our aid after the September 11 attacks.”He also promoted the bill as an investment in America’s industrial base, spurring the production of military equipment in states like Alabama, Arizona, Ohio and Pennsylvania, where some of the factories are located.The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who had pleaded for help replenishing his country’s emptying war chest during a December visit to Washington, expressed gratitude to the president and lawmakers for pressing ahead with the security bill despite its long odds.“I am grateful to the United States Senate for approving vital aid to Ukraine today,” he wrote on X, adding: “Ukraine’s long-range capabilities, artillery, and air defense are critical tools for restoring just peace sooner.”The aid comes at a precarious moment for Ukraine, as the country’s beleaguered army attempts to fend off Russian advances. Zelenskiy has said Ukraine badly needed air defense systems and “long-range capabilities”.Shortly after the president signed the foreign aid bill, the Pentagon announced plans to “surge” $1bn in new military assistance to Ukraine. The package includes air defense interceptors, artillery rounds, armored vehicles, and anti-tank weapons.In total the legislation includes $60.8bn to replenish Ukraine’s war chest as it seeks to repel Russia from its territory; $26.3bn for Israel and humanitarian relief for civilians in conflict zones, including Gaza; and $8.1bn for the Indo-Pacific region to bolster its defenses against China.In an effort to attract Republican support, the security bill includes a provision that could see a nationwide ban on TikTok. The House also added language mandating the president seek repayment from Kyiv for roughly $10bn in economic assistance in the form of “forgivable loans”, an idea first floated by Donald Trump, who has stoked anti-Ukraine sentiment among conservatives.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAlthough support for the package was overwhelming, several Democrats have expressed their concern with sending Israel additional military aid as it prosecutes a war that has killed more than 34,000 people in Gaza and plunged the territory into a humanitarian crisis. Three progressive senators, Bernie Sanders, Peter Welch of Vermont and Jeff Merkley of Oregon, voted against the bill for its inclusion of military support to Israel.On Wednesday, Biden called the aid to Israel “vital”, especially in the wake of Iran’s unprecedented aerial assault on the country. Israel, with help from the US, UK and Jordan, intercepted nearly all of the missiles and drones and there were no reported fatalities. The attack had been launched in retaliation against an Israeli strike on an Iranian consular site in Syria.“My commitment to Israel, I want to make clear again, is ironclad,” Biden said. “The security of Israel is critical. I will always make sure that Israel has what it needs to defend itself against Iran and terrorists who it supports.”Biden’s abiding support for Israel’s war in Gaza has hurt his political standing with key parts of the Democratic coalition, especially among young people. As he spoke, students at some of the nation’s most prestigious universities were demonstrating against the war.Biden emphasized that the bill also increases humanitarian assistance to Gaza, touting his administration’s efforts to pressure Israel to allow more aid into the devastated territory. But House Republicans added a provision to the bill prohibiting funds to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, Unrwa, a “lifeline for the Palestinian people in Gaza” that Israel has sought to disband.An independent review published this week said that Israel had yet to present evidence of its claims that employees of the relief agency are affiliated with terrorist organizations.“We’re going to immediately secure that aid and surge it, including food, medical supplies, clean water, and Israel must make sure all this aid reaches the Palestinians in Gaza without delay,” Biden said.Biden’s signatures marks the conclusion of the grueling journey on Capitol Hill. It was not clear whether the bill had a path forward amid the opposition of the newly installed House speaker, Mike Johnson, who holds a tenuous grip on his party’s vanishingly thin majority.Under pressure from his right flank, Johnson initially refused to allow a vote on Ukraine aid unless it was paired with a border clampdown. But then Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, derailed a bipartisan border bill that included significant concessions to hardline conservatives, determined not to hand Biden an election-year victory on an issue that plays to his political advantage.Lobbied by the White House, European allies and pro-Ukraine Republicans, the House speaker finally relented, risking his job to bypass rightwing opposition and pass the foreign aid bill with the help of Democrats.Biden noted the absence of the immigration reform measure, which he called the “strongest border security bill this country has ever seen”, and committed to returning to the issue at another time.Despite the dysfunction in Washington, Biden said passing the bill proved a guiding principle of his presidential campaign: that there was enough goodwill left to forge compromise where it matters.“This vote makes it clear,” he said. “There is a bipartisan consensus for that kind of American leadership. That’s exactly what we’ll continue to deliver.” More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden and Trump clinch Pennsylvania primaries shortly after polls close

      by

      Joe Biden and Donald Trump both won their primaries in Pennsylvania shortly after polls closed.Pennsylvanians had gone to the polls on Tuesday to cast ballots in the state’s primary races – the results provide a window into where voters in the crucial battleground stand roughly six months out from the general election.Biden and Trump had already locked up their parties’ nominations, but Pennsylvania voters still had other options in the presidential primaries.With nearly 50% of the votes counted, Biden got 491,892 votes, or 94.4%, according to state election data. Dean Phillips, a Democratic congressman who dropped out of the race, got 29,333 votes, or 5.6%.Trump got 268,670 votes, or 79.4%, with 33% of the votes counted, while Nikki Haley, who dropped out the race, got 70,648 votes, or 20.6%, data shows.Haley, a former South Carolina governor and UN ambassador, remained on the Pennsylvania ballot after dropping out of the race in March. Primary voting in the state is confined to registered Republicans, locking out the independent voters who favored her.Her results show that a number of Republicans continue to be unhappy with Trump, who is on trial on 34 criminal counts in New York.Biden faced challenges of his own in Pennsylvania, which he won in 2020 by about 80,000 votes, or 1.2 points. A group of progressive activists had run a campaign to encourage Democrats to write in “uncommitted” on Tuesday to protest against Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza. The effort, based on the similar Listen to Michigan campaign, hopes to get at least 40,000 Democrats to write in “uncommitted”, but it may take weeks to get those ballots counted.On Tuesday, voters had the economy and foreign policy on their minds as they cast their ballots.Karen Lau, a 70-year-old retired educator in Kingston, said she would be voting for Trump. She said Biden’s handling of the conflict in Gaza was a top issue. “Biden’s destroying our country,” she said. “The hypocrisy with Israel of saying one thing and meaning another with Biden.”Even though Trump has been quiet on what exactly he would do in Israel, Lau said she was convinced he would handle it better. “He’s always been a supporter of Israel,” she said, citing the Abraham accords and Trump’s decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem. “I just have a lot more trust in what he will do.”Lau, who is Jewish, added that she was “very concerned” with pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses. “The rise of antisemitism is something I never thought I would see in my lifetime,” she said.Richard K, a 69-year-old retired security guard in Kingston who declined to give his last name, also said he was unbothered that Trump was not that much younger than Biden.“Trump plays golf when he can, he has a lot more energy,” he said. “Biden walks like an old man.” He also dismissed the criminal cases against Trump, calling them “election interference”.“If he wasn’t ahead, they wouldn’t be going after him,” he said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBiden and Trump recently held events in Pennsylvania before the primary, underscoring the state’s pivotal role in the election. At a campaign stop last week in Scranton, where Biden was born, the president used the setting to contrast his vision for the country’s future with Trump’s.“When I look at the economy, I don’t see it through the eyes of Mar-a-Lago, I see it through the eyes of Scranton,” Biden said, referring to Trump’s Florida resort home. “Scranton values or Mar-a-Lago values: these are the competing visions for our economy that raise fundamental questions of fairness at the heart of this campaign.”Farther down the ballot, Pennsylvanians will cast votes in congressional primaries that will help determine control of the Senate and the House in November. In the Senate race, incumbent Bob Casey ran unopposed in the Democratic primary, while Dave McCormick was the sole candidate in the Republican primary.McCormick ran for Pennsylvania’s other Senate seat in 2022, but he lost the primary to the celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz, who was later defeated by the Democrat John Fetterman in the general election. The Pennsylvania Senate race will probably be one of the most expensive in the country, as Casey reported having nearly $12m in cash on hand earlier this month while McCormick’s campaign has more than $6m in the bank. The Cook Political Report rates the race as “lean Democrat”.Several House races will provide additional clues about Pennsylvania voters’ leanings ahead of the general election. In the Pittsburgh-based 12th district, the progressive congresswoman and “Squad” member Summer Lee faces a challenge from local council member Bhavini Patel, who has attacked the incumbent over her support for a ceasefire in Gaza. The Moderate Pac, a group that supports centrist Democrats and is largely funded by the Republican mega-donor Jeffrey Yass, has spent more than $600,000 supporting Patel, and the race will be closely scrutinized as an early test for progressives facing primary challenges this year.In south-eastern Pennsylvania, the Republican representative Brian Fitzpatrick won his primary after attracting a threat from an anti-abortion activist, Mark Houck, who criticized the incumbent for being too centrist. In 2022, Fitzpatrick won re-election by 10 points in a district that Biden carried by 4.6 points two years earlier, according to the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics. Cook rates the first district as “likely Republican” in the general election. Fitzpatrick will face Democrat Ashley Ehasz, who ran uncontested in the Democratic primary, in November.Elsewhere in the state, Ryan Mackenzie, a Republican state representative, won the seventh-district GOP primary, vying for the chance to face off against the Democratic incumbent Susan Wild. The Lehigh Valley district is considered a “toss-up” in the general election, per Cook’s ratings.In the 10th district, based around the city of Harrisburg, Democrat Janelle Stelson won the crowded Democratic primary. The former news anchor will face the Republican incumbent and former House freedom caucus chair Scott Perry. Cook rates Perry’s race as “lean Republican” in the general election.Reuters contributed to this report More

    • 263 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Senate leader Chuck Schumer hails bipartisanship and thanks Mike Johnson as foreign aid bill heads for passage – as it happened

      by

      The Senate’s Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, once again spoke from the chamber’s floor after lawmakers voted overwhelmingly to advance the $95b bill authorizing military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.Passing the legislation was a top priority for Joe Biden, his Democratic allies and some Republicans, including the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell. It faced resistance from others in the GOP, among them the Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson. But Johnson relented earlier this month, and allowed it to be voted on in the House, where it passed with more Democrats in favor than Republicans.In his remarks, Schumer thanked Johnson and McConnell, while saying the bill’s passage was a sign that bipartisanship is alive and well in a Congress better known for intractable partisan stalemate.“Today’s outcome yet confirms another thing we’ve stressed from the beginning of this Congress. In divided government, the only way to ever get things done is bipartisanship,” Schumer said.“I thank leader McConnell, as I’ve mentioned before, working hand in hand with us, not letting partisanship get in the way. I thank Speaker Johnson, who rose to the occasion, in his own words, that he had to do the right thing, despite the enormous political pressure on him. And I thank leader Jeffries, who worked so well together in his bipartisan way, with Speaker Johnson.” The last name is Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic House minority leader.The Senate has taken the key step of invoking cloture on the $95b bill that will send military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, and could set the stage for social media app TikTok’s ban nationwide. Lawmakers are now debating the legislation, with final passage expected later today or perhaps tomorrow. The chamber earlier in the day rejected an attempt to make amendments to the bill, which already passed the House, thwarting independent Bernie Sanders’s plans to tweak the text to stop weapons shipments to Israel in what he called “a dark day for democracy”. Meanwhile, GOP senators called on the Biden administration to step in to break up pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses, including New York University and Yale University.Here’s what else happened today:
      Joe Biden assailed Donald Trump’s hand in overturning Roe v Wade in a speech in Florida, and mocked his Bible sales.
      The US plans to ship $1b in weapons to Ukraine that can be quickly deployed on the battlefield once the foreign aid bill passes.
      Trump’s trial on charges of falsifying business records is continuing in New York City, with testimony from former Nation Enquirer publisher David Pecker.
      Republican House speaker Mike Johnson took a risk by allowing the chamber to pass the bill funding Ukraine’s defense, but Trump praised him nonetheless.
      Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s Democratic leader, thanked Johnson for allowing the House to vote on and pass the foreign aid bill, despite his previous hesitancy towards arming Ukraine.
      Back in the Senate, lawmakers continue to debate the foreign aid bill for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, which appears headed for passage later today.The speeches will probably go on for a few hours. Shortly after the chamber overwhelmingly took the key legislative step of invoking cloture on the bill, CNN reports Republican minority leader Mitch McConnell, an ardent supporter of Ukraine, laid into conservative commentator Tucker Carlson for his support of Vladimir Putin, and the damage it has caused:Carlson traveled to Russia in February for an interview with Putin, which did not appear to go the way the conservative commentator hoped:Much of what Joe Biden told the crowd in Florida was well-trod territory for the president, who has pledged to protect abortion access ever since the supreme court overturned Roe v Wade in 2022.But he did try out a new line, one inspired by Donald Trump’s foray into theology.“Trump bragged how proud he was to get rid of Roe v Wade … He took credit for it. He said, there has to be punishment for women exercising their reproductive freedom. His words, not mine,” Biden said.Then he teed up a zinger: “He described the Dobbs decision as a miracle. Maybe it’s coming from that Bible he’s trying to sell. I almost wanted to buy one just to see what the hell’s in it.”If you haven’t heard about it, yes, Trump is selling a Bible:Joe Biden vowed to protect abortion access as president, including vetoing any attempt by Congress to pass a nationwide ban on the procedure.But much of his speech was dedicated to reminding voters of Donald Trump’s role in Roe v Wade’s downfall.“It was Donald Trump who ripped away the right to freedom of women in America. It will be all of us who restore those rights for women in America,” Biden said.“When you do that, you’ll teach Donald Trump and extreme Maga Republicans an extremely valuable lesson: don’t mess with the women of America.”Joe Biden has made it to Tampa, where he’s laying into Donald Trump for his role in the supreme court’s overturning of Roe v Wade, which has allowed states to ban abortion.Beginning next week, abortion will be banned in Florida beyond six weeks of pregnancy – a point at which many women are not aware they are pregnant. During his presidency, Trump appointed to the supreme court three conservative justices who would go on to vote to overturn Roe.“For 50 years, the court ruled that there was a fundamental constitutional right to privacy. But two years ago, that was taken away. Let’s be real clear. There was one person responsible for this nightmare, and he’s acknowledged and he brags about it – Donald Trump,” Biden said.“Trump is worried voters are gonna hold him accountable for the cruelty and chaos he created. Folks, the bad news for Trump is we are going to hold them accountable.”Independent senator Bernie Sanders expressed disappointment that the chamber declined to consider amendments to the foreign aid bill he planned to offer that would restore funding to UN relief agency Unrwa and remove weapons shipments to Israel.“I am very disappointed, but not surprised, that my amendment to end offensive military aid to Netanyahu’s war machine – which has killed and wounded over 100,000 Palestinians, two-thirds of whom are women and children – will not be considered,” the Vermont lawmaker said.“Polls show that a majority of Americans, and a very strong majority of Democrats, want to end US taxpayer support for Netanyahu’s war against the Palestinian people. It is a dark day for democracy when the Senate will not even allow a vote on that issue.”The Senate’s Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, once again spoke from the chamber’s floor after lawmakers voted overwhelmingly to advance the $95b bill authorizing military aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.Passing the legislation was a top priority for Joe Biden, his Democratic allies and some Republicans, including the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell. It faced resistance from others in the GOP, among them the Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson. But Johnson relented earlier this month, and allowed it to be voted on in the House, where it passed with more Democrats in favor than Republicans.In his remarks, Schumer thanked Johnson and McConnell, while saying the bill’s passage was a sign that bipartisanship is alive and well in a Congress better known for intractable partisan stalemate.“Today’s outcome yet confirms another thing we’ve stressed from the beginning of this Congress. In divided government, the only way to ever get things done is bipartisanship,” Schumer said.“I thank leader McConnell, as I’ve mentioned before, working hand in hand with us, not letting partisanship get in the way. I thank Speaker Johnson, who rose to the occasion, in his own words, that he had to do the right thing, despite the enormous political pressure on him. And I thank leader Jeffries, who worked so well together in his bipartisan way, with Speaker Johnson.” The last name is Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic House minority leader.The Senate invoked cloture on the $95bn bill to provide military assistance to Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, an important procedural step that clears the way for a final vote on its passage later today.The bill advanced with 80 votes in favor, and 19 opposed.The measure has already been approved by the House, and will be signed by Joe Biden after it passes the Senate. Lawmakers are now expected to debate the legislation and offer a limited number of amendments.Back in the Senate, they’re voting on whether to invoke cloture on the foreign aid bill.That will set the stage for its final consideration, after a period of debate.A previous motion by Republican senator Mike Lee that would have blocked the bill’s progress was voted down with 50 senators opposed and 48 in favor.When he speaks in Tampa at 3pm, Joe Biden will press his message that Donald Trump is responsible for the spread of abortion bans across the country, his re-election campaign announced.The president will arrive in Florida one week before a law banning abortions after six weeks – a point at which many women are not yet aware they are pregnant – goes into effect. In a memo, Biden’s campaign manager, Julie Chávez Rodriguez, said such laws were out of step with the American public.“Trump is hoping that Americans will somehow forget that he’s responsible for the horror women are facing in this country every single day because of him. It’s a bad bet,” Chávez Rodriguez wrote.Here’s more:
      When President Biden speaks out against attacks on reproductive freedom across the country and yet another extreme Trump abortion ban taking effect in Florida, it will resonate with voters across every battleground state. Women and their families do not want Trump and MAGA Republicans continuing to dismantle their fundamental freedoms. An overwhelming majority of voters have rejected Trump’s abortion bans every time they’ve been on the ballot, and this November, they’ll reject Trump too.
      Joe Biden will shortly arrive in Tampa, where he is scheduled to give an address this afternoon on abortion rights, including attacking Florida’s six-week ban that is set to take effect on 1 May.Reporters on the ground in Tampa say Biden will be faced by several dozen people who have gathered to protest the president’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza.The Senate’s procedural vote on the foreign aid bill is being delayed by Republicans complaining they can’t offer amendments to it.Eric Schmitt, of Missouri, and Utah’s Mike Lee are accusing the Democratic majority leader, Chuck Schumer, of effectively railroading through his version of the bill “with minimal debate and perhaps no amendments”, Lee said.He insists, as extremist House Republicans who opposed the bill last week did, that money for Ukraine is unpopular.Bernie Sanders, independent senator for Vermont, says he agrees with Lee.He says he wants to offer two amendments, one to ensure there’s no money for Israel’s “war machine”. The second is removing a block on aid money for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (Unrwa), which Israel says has been infiltrated by “Hamas terrorists” stealing funds.“Members can agree with me or disagree with me on the issues, but they should be voted upon,” Sanders said.Senators are voting now whether to adopt a motion by Lee to table (kill) Schumer’s motion to move forward with the foreign aid bill.The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, will visit Saudi Arabia this weekend in pursuit of the Biden administration’s ambitious goal of helping to restore that nation’s relations with Israel, Axios reports.He’ll be attending the special meeting of the World Economic Forum in Riyadh on Sunday, and meeting the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, and other regional leaders, the outlet said.Axios, citing US officials, adds that Blinken “is considering” visiting Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, as part of his trip, but has not yet finalized an itinerary.Senators are inching towards a procedural vote on the $95.3bn foreign aid package, expected close to the top of the hour.Arizona Democrat Mark Kelly has just been on the chamber floor, lamenting that it took so long for Congress to pass a bill he said 71% of members ultimately voted for.“Because of delays, Ukraine’s fighters are desperately low [on weapons and ammunition],” he said.“That’s tying the hands of their commanders at the same time Russia is revitalizing its war effort.”But, he says, “Ukraine can win this war. Passing this bill will allow the transfer to them more of what Ukraine needs to turn the tide.”Republican Maine senator Susan Collins concurs. “[This is] a volatile and dangerous time in world history,” she says:
      If [Russia’s president Vladimir] Putin is allowed to succeed in Ukraine, he will continue to pursue his goal of recreating the Soviet Union. He’s made no bones about that.
      She fears Moldova, Georgia, the Baltic nations and Poland are in Putin’s sights.“Then our troops would be involved in a much larger war,” she says.The Senate will soon begin voting on a $95bn foreign aid bill for Israel, Ukraine and other US allies, ending months of negotiations over one of Joe Biden’s top priorities and giving Kyiv another lifeline in its defense against Russia’s invasion. But the drama isn’t over yet. Independent senator Bernie Sanders has vowed to offer amendments stripping from the bill funds to send Israel weapons, while Republicans opposed to arming Ukraine may make their own stand. Voting begins at 1pm with a procedural motion. Meanwhile, GOP senators are calling on the Biden administration to step in to break up pro-Palestinian demonstrations on college campuses, including New York University and Yale University.Here’s what else is going on today:
      The US plans to ship $1b in weapons to Ukraine that can be quickly deployed on the battlefield once the foreign aid bill passes.
      Donald Trump’s trial on charges of falsifying business records is continuing in New York City, with testimony from former Nation Enquirer publisher David Pecker.
      Republican House speaker Mike Johnson took a risk by allowing the chamber to pass the bill funding Ukraine’s defense, but Trump continued to praise him, raising his chances of keeping his job.
      Twenty-five Republican senators have demanded that the Biden administration send federal law enforcement to respond to college campuses where pro-Palestinian protests have occurred, and called the demonstrators “anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist mobs”.“The Department of Education and federal law enforcement must act immediately to restore order, prosecute the mobs who have perpetuated violence and threats against Jewish students, revoke the visas of all foreign nationals (such as exchange students) who have taken part in promoting terrorism, and hold accountable school administrators who have stood by instead of protecting their students,” the group wrote in a letter addressed to the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, and the education secretary, Miguel Cardona.Among the signatories is the party’s Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, and his deputy, John Thune. Josh Hawley, the Missouri senator who separately demanded the president deploy national guard troops to college campuses, also signed the letter.Here’s more on the campus protests: More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on arming Ukraine: US Congress votes against appeasement | Editorial

      by

      In chaos theory, the flapping of butterfly wings can cause a hurricane on the other side of the world. This weekend, Ukraine experienced a butterfly moment. Donald Trump’s efforts to conceal the fact that he bought the silence of a porn star before the 2016 election landed him in court, facing charges that preoccupy him enough for congressional Republicans to reject his policy of prematurely ceding territory to Russia in return for peace in Ukraine. Kyiv will now get billions of dollars to buy the weapons crucial for it to defend against, and push back, the Russian advance. It is fitting that Mr Trump’s divisive appeasement has been defeated – for now – by a bipartisan defence of democracy.The presumptive Republican nominee had, in an election year, counted on using his mendacious, inflammatory rhetoric to further convert his party into a truth-denying sect prepared to abandon the rule of law for the rule of revenge. Instead, he is required to attend every day that the Manhattan court is in session, for a trial expected to last at least six weeks. The proceedings will be closely followed around the world. But they will not be televised. It will be a circus, but without its ringmaster. Deprived of the camera’s attention, the former president won’t be able to bully Republican lawmakers or rally his followers so effectively.Mr Trump’s diminished status was not lost on many Republicans in Congress. President Joe Biden had first called on them to back Ukraine with arms and cash last October. However, it was not until Mr Trump’s attention was elsewhere that the House on Saturday passed the $61bn aid bill for Ukraine. The vote was 311 for and 112 against, with all the Democrats and 101 Republicans voting in favour of the bill and 112 Republicans voting against. It can only be good news that there are still Republicans who want America to be governed effectively. It also signals that Ukraine should deal with Russia from a position of strength not weakness.In the last two months, most Democrats and a sizeable number of Republicans have voted to pass bills to avoid government shutdowns and commit to traditional national security priorities. This governing coalition is on the right side of history. But it may not last. Mr Trump faces four separate indictments. The current case is about sex, money, deception and blackmail. It’s more tawdry than the other, weightier trials about alleged election interference and the mishandling of classified documents. However, only the jury in New York is likely to produce a verdict before the election in November.Mr Trump is an unscrupulous demagogue without the slightest qualification to be president. The US, under his presidency, was maintained at the edge of chaos, between too much and too little control. The long-festering problems in the GOP gave rise to a leader only nominally affiliated with it.By being the first president since Herbert Hoover to lose the House, the Senate and the presidency in a single term, Mr Trump has gained a reputation for being a loser. But the billionaire is not interested in restoring Republican dominance, only shaping it into a cult of personality. He will only fail if he faces active, sustained opposition. Mr Biden has done that by highlighting the choices that divide congressional Republicans. But challenging Mr Trump also means challenging the system that produced him. Mr Biden still has work to do on that score.Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More