Republicans

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      AOC accuses Republicans of making up evidence in Biden hearing

      by

      Questioning witnesses in the first impeachment hearing staged by House Republicans, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez prompted each to say they were not presenting “firsthand witness accounts” of crimes committed by Joe Biden.The New York Democrat also accused Republicans of fabricating supposed evidence of corruption involving the president and his surviving son, Hunter Biden.Republicans on the House oversight committee called three witnesses, Democrats one.Ocasio-Cortez questioned the Republican witnesses first.Turning to Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and well-known conservative commentator, she said: “In your testimony today, are you presenting any firsthand witness account of crimes committed by the president of the United States?”“No, I’m not,” said Turley, who had already made headlines by saying he did “not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment”.Ocasio-Cortez asked the same question of Eileen O’Connor, a former assistant attorney general in the justice department tax division who worked for Donald Trump’s transition team and is a member of the rightwing Federalist Society.“No, I’m not,” said O’Connor, who was also called out during the hearing for omitting the word “Hunter” when referring to the title of a piece she wrote for the Wall Street Journal in July, namely: “You’d go to prison for what Hunter Biden did.”Ocasio-Cortez asked the same question of Bruce Dubinsky, a forensic accountant:“As the third and final Republican witness in this hearing, have you in your testimony presented any firsthand witness account of crimes committed by the president of the United States?”“I have not,” he said.Ocasio-Cortez said she would “assume the same” of the sole witness called by Democrats, Michael J Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor.He said: “I’m not a fact witness. Correct.”Widely known as AOC, the congresswoman has a passionate following among progressives and an equally passionate legion of haters among conservatives. Her questioning duly made a splash on social media.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTurning to an item of actual evidence presented by Republicans, she accused them of making it up.Referring to Byron Donalds, she said: “Earlier today, one of our colleagues, the gentleman from Florida, presented up on the screen something that … appeared to be a screenshot of a text message containing or insinuating an explosive allegation.“That screenshot of what appeared to be a text message was a fabricated image.”Donalds showed text messages he claimed indicated that Hunter Biden engaged in fraud and money laundering, to the benefit of his father.“I don’t know where it came from,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “I don’t know if it was the staff of the committee, but it was not the actual direct screenshot from that phone.”She added: “What was brought out from that fabricated image excluded critical context that changed the underlying meaning and allegation that was presented up on that screen, by this committee and by members of this committee.”Ocasio-Cortez also noted that only the witnesses in the hearing were under oath and therefore bound to tell the truth. In contrast, members of Congress could say whatever they wanted. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans struggle to provide proof of wrongdoing at Biden impeachment inquiry

      by

      Republicans struggled to put forward any evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden during a hearing on Thursday that’s part of a newly launched impeachment inquiry.The hearing did not go well for Republicans, who control the US House and allege Biden was connected to his son’s business dealings that could have resulted in bribery and corruption. They have been investigating the matter for months and have yet to produce evidence linking the president to his son’s financial affairs. They failed to do so again on Thursday. Instead, the strategy appeared to be to lay the groundwork to justify a longer fishing expedition.The three Republican witnesses who testified on Thursday all conceded they did not have firsthand knowledge of any criminal activity by Biden. Two of those witnesses, Jonathan Turley, a conservative law professor, and Bruce Dubinsky, a forensic accountant, acknowledged that the information put forward so far by the committee did not amount to corruption.“I have previously stated that, while I believe that an impeachment inquiry is warranted, I do not believe that the evidence currently meets the standard of a high crime and misdemeanor needed for an article of impeachment,” Turley said in prepared testimony. Still, Turley argued that there were signs of influence-peddling and that the committee should investigate further.Republicans were reportedly caught off-guard by Turley’s conclusion and an unnamed Republican aide told CNN the hearing was an “unmitigated disaster” for the effort.“I am not here today to even suggest that there was corruption, fraud, or any wrongdoing. In my opinion, more information needs to be gathered and assessed before I would make such an assessment,” Dubinsky, the forensic accountant, said in his opening statement.Thursday’s hearing, led by the House oversight committee, is titled The Basis for an Impeachment Inquiry of President Joseph R Biden Jr. The other Republican witness was Eileen O’Connor, a former assistant attorney general in Department of Justice’s tax division, who wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal criticizing the investigation into Hunter Biden’s finances. O’Connor served on Trump’s 2016 transition team for the treasury department, the Washington Post reported.The impeachment inquiry appears to be a thinly veiled effort to try to muddy the waters as Donald Trump, who leads the Republican primary field, faces four different criminal cases after being twice impeached.With little concrete evidence to work with, Republicans instead relied on Hunter Biden’s business transactions and text messages to try to cast aspersions on the president. They offered no connection to Joe Biden.“The dots are not connected. The name that’s been mentioned the most often in this hearing is Hunter Biden, not President Biden,” Michael Gerhardt, the lone Democratic witness and a law professor at the University of North Carolina, said several hours into the hearing.“The problem is when you sling mud, you have to have mud,” Representative Jared Moskowitz of Florida said at one point.The White House essentially ignored the hearing. Instead, its press office blasted out several versions of the same statement throughout the day with a countdown until the government shuts down for lack of funding.“There are 60 hours and 55 minutes until the government shuts down because of extreme House Republicans’ chaos and inability to govern. The consequences for the American people will be very damaging – from lost jobs, to troops working without pay, to jeopardizing important efforts to fight fentanyl, provide food assistance, and more. Nothing can distract from that,” one such statement read on Thursday morning.With little substance to debate, and no fact witnesses to testify, the hearing often turned theatrical. At one point, Greg Casar, a representative of Texas, asked members to raise their hands if they thought both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump should be tried, and held accountable for their actions if convicted. All of the Democrats present raised their hands, but no Republicans did.“I think it is worse than embarrassing that Republicans won’t raise their hands. They refuse to say that equal justice under the law should apply to everyone,” he said.Democrats also rebuked Republicans for moving forward with an impeachment inquiry absent a full vote from the US House authorizing it. It is not clear whether there is enough GOP support for impeachment in the House for it to survive a full vote.The New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also accused Republicans of presenting a fabricated text message between Jim and Hunter Biden – the president’s brother and son, respectively – that she pointed out omitted critical context. Representative Byron Donalds of Florida displayed a selectively edited exchange between the two in the format of iMessages, which was not how the committee originally received the communication.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn his opening statement, Representative James Comer, the Republican chairman of the House oversight committee, claimed the panel had obtained a “mountain of evidence” showing corruption.“He lied by telling the American people that there was an ‘absolute wall’ between his official government duties and his personal life. Let’s be clear: there was no wall. The door was wide open to those who purchased what a business associate described as ‘the Biden Brand’,” he said.But the New York representative Daniel Goldman, a Democrat, pointed to the fact that Republicans had declined to call Devon Archer, Hunter Biden’s business partner to testify. He noted that, in an interview with the committee, Archer had said Joe Biden “never discussed business with Hunter Biden and his associates, he got nothing from the businesses, and never took any official acts related to the businesses”.Republicans also rejected at least two efforts to subpoena Rudy Giuliani, a close ally of Donald Trump who was instrumental in spreading allegations of improprieties by Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden is currently suing Giuliani for the “total annihilation” of his data privacy.For years, Republicans have sought to link Hunter Biden’s business dealings with foreign companies to Joe Biden. But after reviewing thousands of pages of Hunter Biden’s financial records, they have yet to turn up any kind of substantial evidence, according to the New York Times. GOP lawmakers hope to build enough of a case of bribery and abuse of power by Biden.The hearing comes as Republicans have struggled to pass a spending plan to keep the US government open. Democrats have seized on the Thursday hearing to accuse Republicans of being unserious about passing a spending plan.Jason Smith, a Missouri Republican who chairs the House ways and means committee, also said Biden was connected to his son’s business dealings, something Republicans have been unable to prove. “Whether it was lunches, phone calls, White House meetings or official foreign trips, Hunter Biden cashed in by arranging access to Joe Biden, the family brand,” Smith said in his opening remarks.In a lengthy response, Representative Jamie Raskin, the ranking Democrat on the committee, blasted Republicans for focusing on impeachment days before the US government was set to shut down due to lack of funding.“We’re 62 hours away from shutting down the government of the United States of America and Republicans are launching an impeachment drive based on a long debunked and discredited lie,” he said. “They don’t have the votes because dozens of Republicans recognize what a futile and absurd process this is.”Republicans have said they will move forward with impeachment, even if the government shuts down. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      US shutdown moves ever closer as McCarthy digs in over stopgap deal

      by

      A government shutdown appeared all but inevitable as the House speaker, Kevin McCarthy, dug in on Thursday, vowing he will not take up Senate legislation designed to keep the federal government fully running despite House Republicans’ struggle to unite around an alternative.Congress is at an impasse just days before a disruptive federal shutdown that would halt paychecks for many of the federal government’s roughly 2 million employees, as well as 2 million active-duty military troops and reservists, furlough many of those workers and curtail government services.But the House and Senate are pursuing different paths to avert those consequences, even though time is running out before government funding expires after midnight on Saturday.The Senate is working toward passage of a bipartisan measure that would fund the government until 17 November as longer-term negotiations continue, while also providing $6bn for Ukraine and $6bn for US disaster relief.The House, meanwhile, has teed up votes on four of the dozen annual spending bills that fund various agencies in hopes that would cajole enough Republicans to support a House-crafted continuing resolution that temporarily funds the government and boosts security at the US border with Mexico. It’s a long shot, but McCarthy predicted a deal.“Put your money on me; we’re going to get this done,” he said in a CNBC interview. “I think we can work through the weekend. I think we can figure this out.”Lawmakers were already weary from days of late-night negotiating. The strain was evident at McCarthy’s closed-door meeting with Republicans on Thursday morning, which was marked by a tense exchange between the speaker and Florida congressman Matt Gaetz, according to those in the room.Gaetz, who has taunted McCarthy for weeks with threats to oust him from his post, confronted the speaker about conservative online influencers being paid to post negative things about him. McCarthy shot back that he wouldn’t waste his time on something like that, Gaetz told reporters as he exited the meeting.McCarthy’s allies left the meeting fuming about Gaetz’s tactics.With his majority splintering, McCarthy is scrambling to come up with a plan for preventing a shutdown and win Republican support. The speaker told Republicans he would reveal a Republican stopgap plan, known as a continuing resolution, or CR, on Friday, according to those in the room, while also trying to force Senate Democrats into giving some concessions.But with time running out, many GOP lawmakers were withholding support for a temporary measure until they had a chance to see it. Others are considering joining Democrats, without McCarthy’s support, to bring forward a bill that would prevent a shutdown.With his ability to align his conference in doubt, McCarthy has little standing to negotiate with Senate Democrats. He has also attempted to draw Joe Biden into negotiations, but the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said Congress and the White House had already worked out top-line spending levels for next year with an agreement this summer that allowed the government to continue borrowing to pay its bills.McCarthy was deviating from that deal and courting a shutdown by catering to Republicans who said it didn’t do enough to cut spending, he said.“By focusing on the views of the radical few instead of the many, speaker McCarthy has made a shutdown far more likely,” Schumer said.Biden also sought to apply more pressure on McCarthy, urging him to compromise with Democrats even though that could threaten his job.“I think that the speaker is making a choice between his speakership and American interests,” Biden said.The White House, as well as the Department of Homeland Security, notified staff on Thursday to prepare for a shutdown, according to emails obtained by the Associated Press. Employees who are furloughed would have four hours on Monday to prepare their offices for the shutdown. More

    • 288 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trainers are now allowed in the US Senate – so why on earth can’t I wear them to a party? | Emma Brockes

      by

      It was John Fetterman, the Democratic senator for Pennsylvania with a penchant for “unapologetically wearing shorts” while on duty in the Senate, who seems to have broken the system. Last week, when the majority leader, Chuck Schumer, announced a relaxing of the dress code on the Senate floor, he didn’t mention Fetterman. But nobody was fooled. For weeks, Fetterman has been attracting attention in his baggy shorts, shapeless hoodie and massive, scruffy trainers – and now look what he’s done. Stepping up to provide journalists with the mandatory quote on these sorts of occasions, Republican senator Roger Marshall observed gravely that it was “a sad day in the Senate”.When questioned on the matter, Fetterman remarked that the clothes, which he started wearing after a spell in hospital for depression earlier this year, made him more comfortable. There’s probably a pandemic hangover at work here, too – and possibly, given the state of the world, some fiddling-while-Rome-burns displacement. Traditionally, the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms would pull up male senators for appearing tieless on the floor, and out of respect they would vote from the doorways. The understanding is that, from now on, they may be emboldened to take their place alongside colleagues in something more casual.All of which falls into the familiar and pleasing category of the slipping-standards-it-wasn’t-like-that-in-my-day outrage, other iterations of which include people wearing jeans to the theatre, going hatless at weddings and running multibillion-dollar companies from inside an oversized hoodie. If there is a single, pivotal influence at work it is the last one: the uniform of the tech industry, where suits have come to be associated with small-minded, non-disruptive thinking, while dorm room sweats and sneakers, or at the very most jeans and a white shirt, signify the visionary.I find it hard to pick a side in this debate, operating as I am from the disadvantage of working in an industry where formal attire means finding a T-shirt that doesn’t have a stain down the front. And I’ve shifted positions over the years. For example, having once been strongly in favour of school uniforms, the experience of having kids in a US school – one of them sits all day wearing a baseball cap backwards and the other, occasionally, shows up in pyjama bottoms – has conditioned me out of it. British uniform requirements that legislate down to the socks and hair accessories look prissy and pointless in comparison.I also find myself thinking that definitions of what constitutes formal attire need to change. I have to go to dinner on a fancy ship soon and the dress code stipulates no jeans or sneakers. I’m willing to argue the toss on jeans. But sneakers, come on. This overlooks the sheer breadth of the trainer spectrum, which ranges from Fetterman’s sloppy workout shoes to Virgil Abloh’s Off-White for Nike sneakers that are more expensive and greater works of art, if you want to look at it that way, than what would be considered the more appropriate attire of (in my opinion) dumbass Manolos and their brethren.Anyway, what a time to be alive in the Senate. Colleagues of Fetterman’s fell into line for or against him largely along partisan lines, although that division wasn’t entirely uniform. It was noted that Josh Hawley, Republican senator for Missouri, rocked up in jeans, boots and no tie last week, an outfit he says he normally wears at the start of the week when he flies in from his home state and was reportedly very happy not to have to change out of.Republican senator Susan Collins of Maine, meanwhile, joked: “I plan to wear a bikini tomorrow to the Senate floor,” prompting various unsisterly thoughts that had to be immediately quashed. As one of a minority of women in the Senate, there’s a decent feminist point Collins might have made about all this, although, of course, she didn’t; no one looks to Collins – who voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the supreme court because he gave her his word he wouldn’t challenge Roe v Wade – to defend the interests of women. The fact remains: had either she or one of her 24 female colleagues pulled a number like Fetterman and turned up, as he himself characterised it, looking like “a slob”, I have a hunch the response might not have been so indulgent and jovial.
      Emma Brockes is a Guardian columnist More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      This pointless Republican debate left us all feeling a little bit dumber | Moira Donegan

      by

      “Every time I hear you I feel a little bit dumber,” Nikki Haley said at the second Republican presidential primary debate last night. She was talking to Vivek Ramaswamy, the businessman currently polling at an average of about 6% among likely Republican voters. But she could have been talking about any one of the seven candidates: Haley, Ramaswamy, the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, South Carolina senator Tim Scott, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, former vice-president Mike Pence and the North Dakota governor, Doug Burgum. The debate was rancorous, chaotic and punctured by statements so hateful, outlandish and extreme that they made an impression even by the current Republican party’s very low standards.Worst of all, the whole thing was pointless: Donald Trump, who is leading in the polls by more than 40 points, was not there. The candidates, wannabes, also-rans and cynical self-promoters, spent much of the evening attacking each other. But for the most part, they did not attack him.Donald Trump’s absence was, like in the first Republican debate, the most significant presence on the stage. As indictments, debts and civil judgements against the former president accumulate, and as his bluster and vulgarity lose their novelty and capacity to shock, there has been some suggestion that perhaps Trump will disqualify himself from running for president. Can a candidate make a credible bid for the presidency while also being charged with dozens of felonies? Can Trump persuade voters – of whom a majority have never voted for him, and who turned on him in large numbers just four years ago? These are legitimate questions, but they are questions for a general election: they are not relevant in the primary. Neither charges, nor convictions, nor legal judgments, nor mounting attorney’s fees will cause Trump to withdraw or lose significant support. His followers are immune to facts, and he is immune to shame. Barring his death, he will be the Republican nominee. His shadow loomed over the candidates onstage at the Reagan library like former Air Force One, which hung from the mezzanine above their line of gleaming podiums. One was tempted to imagine, more than once, what would happen if it fell.The purpose of the Republican presidential primary debates, if they can be said to have one, is to begin to define the party’s post-Trump identity. But this is premature: Donald Trump is very much still the party’s gravitational center, the sun that all other Republican politicians orbit around. And so why, exactly, were any of the candidates there? Why are these people running? DeSantis, for his part, seems to have once entertained sincere delusions that he might become president, but surely those have long since waned. Chris Christie’s campaign is something of a suicide mission, an expenditure of money and effort in the hope of damaging Trump; it is not working. Nikki Haley spends much of her time on the debate stages trying to steer her party away from what she views as its unelectable fringes, primarily the charismatic incoherence of Ramaswamy’s breed of “America First” right-populism. Tim Scott, the South Carolina senator, appears to be seeking to reignite the Christian conservative sect of the party, but that lane is already crowded by the stiff and uncomfortable presence of Mike Pence, who is in the delicate position of trying to claim credit for all of Donald Trump’s accomplishments while also condemning the man who tried to get an angry mob to hang him. Doug Burgum, for his part, spent much of his time on stage complaining that everyone was ignoring him.To their great credit, the Fox and Univision moderators did attempt to press the candidates on policy, challenges that the seven contenders on stage largely ignored. Towards the start of the debate, in response to a question about the autoworkers’ strike, several of the candidates attempted to push the claim that Republicans are becoming the party of the working class, by which they mean white men in Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin. All dodged a question about the affordability of childcare. Nikki Haley tried to attack Ron DeSantis for being insufficiently friendly to energy interests; Tim Scott attacked Nikki Haley for the curtains that hung in her official residence while she was ambassador to the United Nations.That exchange commanded more total airtime than abortion, the issue that has driven the greatest trends in voting over the past year, but in the candidates’ brief foray into the topic, Ron DeSantis did take one of the evening’s few shots at Trump, whose anti-abortion stance he says is not extreme enough. Tim Scott, the only Black person onstage, made a point of asserting that slavery had no redeeming qualities – evidently a point that has to be made, for a Republican audience. And yet, he said, Black people survived slavery (in point of fact, many of them didn’t); worse, he suggested, was Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society program.Ramaswamy, in two of the evening’s moral nadirs, both called for the elimination of birthright citizenship and referred to “transgenderism” as “a mental disorder”. Chris Christie attacked Joe Biden for “sleeping with” a member of the teacher’s union – an evident reference to the first lady, Jill Biden, who is a community college professor. By way of a response, Mike Pence, who has been known to refer to his wife as “mother”, commented that he has been sleeping with a teacher, his own wife, for 38 years. Like the debate itself, Pence’s comment left an image in my mind that I will never be able to expunge (and now, neither will you).If you think things cannot possibly sink lower, know that another Republican presidential debate is scheduled for November, in Miami. The presidential election is still more than a year away, but it is certain to feel much, much longer.
      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Crosstalk and weak zingers hand win to absent Trump at Republican debate

      by

      It’s hard to pick the low point of a debate that dissolved frequently into incoherent crosstalk and included former vice-president Mike Pence, a Christian conservative who has famously said he would never dine alone with a woman other than his wife, attempting to make a joke about his sex life. (“My wife isn’t a member of the teachers union, but I gotta admit I’ve been sleeping with a teacher for 38 years,” he said.)In a debate conducted not far from Ronald Reagan’s grave, seven GOP presidential candidates shouted and sniped at each other for two hours without producing a single standout moment.Whether echoing Donald Trump’s rhetoric, or attempting to criticize him – Chris Christie dubbed him “Donald Duck” for choosing not to participate – none of the presidential hopefuls succeeded in upending the expectations of the race. Once again, Trump won the GOP debate without even having to show up.On substantive issues, the Republican candidates endorsed virulent transphobia, with entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy arguing that “transgenderism” is “a mental health disorder”. He said he wanted to end birthright citizenship, so that children born in the US to undocumented parents would not be given citizenship.Florida governor Ron DeSantis suggested he would address the fentanyl overdose crisis by using the US military against drug dealers in Mexico, and treat them like “foreign terrorist organizations”. He also did not believe Republican losses in the 2022 midterm elections should be blamed on the party’s embrace of extreme anti-abortion policies.Pence said his plan for preventing future mass shootings was not new gun control laws, but instituting “a federal expedited death penalty for anyone involved in a mass shooting”. (Research shows that many mass shooters are suicidal.)But some of the brutal Trumpian rhetoric seemed to have lost its punch. “Yes, we’ll build the wall,” DeSantis said, sounding almost bored.On Fox News after the debate, former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway argued that “nobody made the case” that they had something different from Trump to offer voters. “They want to build a wall, they want to secure the border, they sound a lot like him,” she said.Trump’s rivals also tried, and largely failed, to produce memorable attack lines against each other.South Carolina senator Tim Scott tried to criticize former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley for a set of $50,000 curtains at her residence as UN ambassador. “Do your homework, Tim, because Obama bought those curtains,” Haley responded.Haley, in turn, savaged 38-year-old entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy for doing business in China and for joining the social media app TikTok, which Ramaswamy defended as a logical thing to do to help the party attract younger voters, even as he said that people under 16 should not be “using addictive social media”.“TikTok is one of the most dangerous social media apps that we could have,” Haley said. “Honestly, every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber for what you say.”“We can’t trust you,” she said. “We can’t trust you.”The reviews were mixed. New York Times political correspondent Maggie Haberman wrote early in the debate, “This is unwatchable.” But Fox News’ Laura Ingraham argued after the debate that Haley and Ramaswamy were the most promising candidates in two flavors – Ramaswamy as the populist, Haley as the more traditional conservative supported by GOP donors.Ramaswamy seemed at one point to flaunt his youth and inexperience, acknowledging that as the “new guy”, he expected that voters would see him as “a young man who’s in a bit of a hurry, maybe a little ambitious, bit of a know-it-all”.“I’m here to tell you, no, I don’t know it all. I will listen. I will have the best people, the best and brightest in this country, whatever age they are, advising me,” he promised.Scott earned applause from the audience and praise from Sean Hannity for saying that, while he had experienced discrimination as a Black man, “America is not a racist country.”At the end of the debate, moderator Dana Perino of Fox News asked the candidates: “Which one of you onstage tonight should be voted off the island?” Almost everyone refused to reply. When Christie did, he attacked the one person who wasn’t on that particular island.Donald Trump. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Fact-check: six Republican debate claims from crime to immigration

      by

      Seven Republican presidential candidates participated in a Wednesday night debate in California, offering up an array of dubious data and claims to prop up their talking points.Here are six fact-checks from the night.The claim: Candidates said crime was overrunning US citiesWhile Republicans discussed fears of crime overrunning cities, it’s worth noting that the best data we have so far suggests that, after an increase in killings during the early pandemic, the number of murders across the country fell substantially last year. Crime analyst Jeff Asher has also noted that murders appear to be falling even more this year.The 2023 drop in murders began early in the year, when Asher’s analysis of early data suggested that the “United States may be experiencing one of the largest annual percent changes in murder ever recorded”.The claim: Mike Pence suggested the threat of the death penalty would deter people from committing mass shootingsThe former vice-president volunteered his plan for preventing mass shootings in the United States: “a federal expedited death penalty for anyone involved in a mass shooting.” He said he was disgusted that the teenager who committed the Parkland school shooting did not get a death sentence.According to the Violence Project, a research firm, “Seventy-two percent of mass shooters were suicidal either before or at the time of the shooting.”Data from the FBI on mass shootings in 2021 and 2022 also showed that a third to nearly a half of perpetrators either died by suicide or were killed by police or other citizens during the attack.The claims: Vivek Ramaswamy said children who are transgender have ‘a mental health disorder’ , while Mike Pence implied that children could transition without parents’ consentRamaswamy said: “Transgenderism, especially in kids is a mental health disorder.”But major medical organizations, like the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association, say being transgender is not a mental disorder. Gender dysphoria is recognized as a medical condition that doctors agree should be remedied by offering gender-affirming treatment.Pence, meanwhile, misleadingly claimed: “The Linn-Mar community schools in Iowa had a policy where you could, you had to have a permission slip from your parents to get a Tylenol but you could get a gender transition plan without notifying your parents.”Linn-Mar’s policy directed educators to use students’ chosen names, without consulting with parents. That’s a far reach from a “gender transition plan”.Claim: Pence boasted that under his and Donald Trump’s administration, illegal immigration dropped drasticallyskip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“We reduced illegal immigration and asylum abuse by 90%,” Pence said.In fact, the number of border patrol apprehensions was higher during the Trump administration than during the last four years of Barack Obama’s administration. There was a change in how US Customs and Border Protection reports migrant encounters during the pandemic, complicating some of this data – pre-pandemic, the agency reported enforcement actions taken under immigration law, but after, it also began reporting actions taken under the Title 42 public health policy that authorized officers to immediately send most migrants at the border back to Mexico.Analysis by PolitiFact found that Pence’s 90% reduction figure could be approximated by comparing enforcement data from May 2019, the month that saw the highest number of apprehensions, with data from April 2020 – just as governments around the world moved to drastically restrict travel due to the Covid-19 pandemic. “That’s a severely cherry-picked period,” the fact-checking group writes.Claim: Ron DeSantis denied that the Florida school curriculum suggests that enslaved people drew benefits from slaveryThe Florida governor was asked about the curriculum in Florida that said enslaved people “develop skills which in some instances, could be apply for their personal benefit”.Historians and educators decried the new teaching standard, which came after the state enacted the “Stop Woke Act” signed by DeSantis, prohibiting instruction that could cause students to feel discomfort or guilt due to their race, sex or national origin.DeSantis decried the criticism as “a hoax that was perpetrated by Kamala Harris”, mispronouncing the vice-president’s name. In an impassioned speech reacting to the standard, Harris said: “They insult us in an attempt to gaslight us and we will not stand for it.” More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Who won the Republican debate? Our panel responds | Panelists

      by

      Bhaskar Sunkara: ‘We’re far away from a pro-worker Republican party’A new Republican party was supposed to be in the making. Donald Trump as president catered to corporate interests and the super-rich, but as candidate he wrote a playbook to winning over workers in greater numbers.At tonight’s debate, it’s clear his would-be successors haven’t read it. While Trump has been traveling around Michigan signaling his support for working people (though tellingly at non-union factories), in California the rest of the field struck a far different note when discussing workers that will be key in battleground states like Michigan and Pennsylvania.Senator Tim Scott openly attacked the United Auto Workers’ demands and said that instead of showing up on their picket lines, President Biden should be protecting our southern border. Insurgent candidate Vivek Ramaswamy had a similar response: “If I was giving advice to those workers, I would say go picket in front of the White House in Washington DC,” advocating energy deregulation as an alternative solution to America’s woes.In between his anti-Trump posturing, Chris Christie joined in. “This public school system is no longer run by the public. It is run by the teachers’ unions in this country,” the former New Jersey governor said. “And when you have the president of the United States sleeping with a member of the teachers’ union, there is no chance that you could take the stranglehold away from the teachers’ unions.”The reference to Jill Biden has all the crassness of a Trump line, but none of the political acumen. It’s no wonder no one on the stage is likely to square up against President Biden in November.
      Bhaskar Sunkara is the president of the Nation, the founding editor of Jacobin, and the author of The Socialist Manifesto: The Case for Radical Politics in An Era of Extreme Inequalities
      Lloyd Green: ‘Cringe-worthy comes to mind’Donald Trump won Wednesday night’s debate. From 2,295 miles away, he dominated the seven Republicans who appeared at the Reagan library. His legal woes escaped real attention, albeit his latest posturing over abortion less so. He narrowly leads Joe Biden and leaves the Republican pack in the dust. The race’s dynamics remain unchanged.On stage, Ron DeSantis got the airtime he craved but polls third in New Hampshire. Nikki Haley auditioned to be Trump’s running mate but earned his campaign’s ire as she was onstage. Mike Pence is officially irrelevant and a bad joke-teller.“Thank you for speaking while I’m interrupting.” Vivek Ramaswamy’s quote of the night was an instant classic. Tim Scott let us know that African Americans had a tougher time enduring the Great Society than slavery. Cringe-worthy comes to mind.At the same time, the evening definitely highlighted Biden’s vulnerabilities. For starters, bedlam reigns at the Mexican border.Upcoming legislative contests in Virginia offer a reality check. Republican victory would scream “danger” for the president and his party. A Trump-backed shutdown, however, might provide them with a lifeline. The Old Dominion is filled with government contractors and small businesses.Early in his term, Biden mistakenly took a premature victory lap. “I am confident that Barack is not happy with the coverage of this administration as more transformative than his,” he said. He also compared himself to FDR. Uh, that guy won four terms, assisted by convincing congressional majorities. Also, Hunter Biden isn’t Obama’s child.
      Lloyd Green is an attorney in New York and served in the US Department of Justice
      Osita Nwavenu: ‘Nothing but an act of God can dislodge Trump’s lead’Do debates matter? This is itself the subject of some debate among those who follow presidential elections closely. Commonsensically, big breakout moments for candidates that are replayed in the days after the big event can boost the profiles of candidates who manage to pull them off. And there did seem to be some movement in favor of at least Nikki Haley after the first debate of this cycle. But the race before the candidates in the Republican field hasn’t fundamentally changed – Donald Trump, the last president of the United States and a now-heroic figure in the Republican party – retains and will continue to retain a commanding lead over his rivals that seemingly nothing short of an act of God, and maybe not even that, can dislodge.Trump gained the most of any candidate in the field after the first debate. The huffing and puffing from the other contenders felt a bit different this time around, though. Tim Scott took center stage for much of the night – delivering not only his stock lines about how his own experiences disprove the existence of structural racism in American society, but hits against the records of his rivals, including Nikki Haley, who engaged him in an extended exchange about whether the state department paid for her curtains. Riveting stuff, but the substance really mattered less than the demonstration, to anyone watching, that he’s still in the fight.Trump’s absence, by comparison, was a theme many candidates hit upon, though frankly there were moments during the night when some of the candidates on the stage themselves seemed like nonentities. It took a strikingly long time for Fox’s moderators to send questions Ron DeSantis’s way – he acquitted himself well when they arrived, but not well enough that he’s likely to see the bump in his standing he needed coming out of tonight.The night’s real surprise, really, was Fox’s editorial line – there were questions early on about income inequality and the party’s standing with Latino voters, for instance. It felt throughout like a debate aimed at pulling the primary towards the center from two different directions – the business conservatism that Trump upended with his victory in 2016 and the populist conservatism that hopes to succeed him. There are substantive ideological tensions aplenty to be wrestled with on the right at the moment and the powers that be in the heart of the conservative press are evidently interested in teasing them out. They did their best and so did the candidates. But it’s still Trump’s party and still Trump’s race to lose.
      Osita Nwanevu is a Guardian US columnist
      Jill Filipovic: ‘These egomaniacs don’t care about women’If there’s one takeaway from the second Republican debate on Wednesday night, it’s that this party of blustering egomaniacs simply does not care about women.There was only a single woman on stage – perhaps not a surprise from a party that struggles to put women in office and struggles to capture women’s votes. Startlingly few questions were about the issues that animate the lives of so many American families, and women’s lives especially: childcare, healthcare, abortion.While Republican lawmakers criminalize abortion in conservative states, and while even red state voters vote for abortion rights when given the chance, the Republican hopefuls were wishy-washy on the issue – not wanting to be accountable for their party’s own extremism, but also refusing to align themselves with America’s pro-choice majority. Chris Christie turned a question about abortion rights into talking about defunding Planned Parenthood and wanting to fund drug treatment. Ron DeSantis simply refused to accept that pro-choice voters cost Republicans some midterm wins. There was only a single question about childcare, and it went largely unanswered. Chris Christie, though, did find time to refer to the first lady, Jill Biden, as someone who the president is “sleeping with”.The candidates had more to say about invading Mexico than invading women’s uteruses – although most of them seemed to favor both.Even Donald Trump, he of “grab ’em by the” – you know – seems to understand the bind Republicans have put themselves in with their legislative misogyny. Trump isn’t an abortion moderate – he’s the reason Roe v Wade was overturned, and he has voiced support for jailing women who have abortions – but the truth is that he doesn’t really care; he’s willing to do whatever he thinks will put him in power and keep him there. He is a keen observer of his own party, and his flip-flopping on abortion seems to signal that he sees the Republican’s anti-abortion extremism as a liability.But he wasn’t on stage tonight. Those who were seem committed to doubling down on their attacks on women’s rights – or ignoring women altogether.
      Jill Filipovic is the author of the The H-Spot: The Feminist Pursuit of Happiness More