Republicans

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden ‘determined to ban assault weapons’ as he lays out crime prevention plans – live

      by

      Joe Biden says he is “determined” to achieve an assault weapons ban in the US.The push to reenact such a ban forms a centerpiece of the Safer America Plan that the president is laying out in an address Tuesday afternoon in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.He is reminding the crowd that in 1994, as chair of the Senate judiciary committee, he helped engineer the original assault weapons ban that later lapsed:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}I’m determined to ban assault weapons in this country. Determined.
      I did it once before. And I’ll do it again. For many of you at home, I want to be clear. It’s not about taking away anybody’s guns. In fact, we should be treating responsible gun owners as examples, how every gun owner should be.
      Over 48,000 people died from gunshot wounds in 2021 in the United States of America. Over 26,000 by suicide.”Biden also attacked the National Rifle Association, touring the success of the bipartisan gun control law he signed into law this year..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}We beat the NRA. We took them on and we beat ‘em straight up.
      You have no idea how intimidating they are to elected officials. The NRA was against it, which means a vast majority. The vast majority of Republicans in Congress couldn’t even stand up and vote for it.
      Law enforcement supported it. Faith leaders, teachers supported it. Victims of gun violence and their families supported it. Young people in this country, like the students of this great university, supported it.
      And the NRA, the vast majority of congressional Republicans, voted against it, saving lives and keeping America safe. But guess what? We took on NRA we’re gonna take them on again. And we won and we will win again. We’re not stopping here. I’m determined to ban assault weapons in this country.The US politics blog is closing now and will resume tomorrow. It’s been a busy day in news from Washington, DC, and beyond of a political nature, finishing with US president Joe Biden’s speech in Pennsylvania on gun safety and law enforcement.Here’s how the day went:
      Joe Biden said he is “determined” to achieve an assault weapons ban in the US. The push to reenact such a ban formed a centerpiece of the Safer America Plan that the president laid out in an address this afternoon in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
      The US president made a case for how funding the police – a deliberate rebuffing of the progressive cause of defunding the police (switching funds from policing to a spectrum of social services) – provides “peace of mind” to the American public.
      The Biden administration announced it is sending more monkeypox vaccines to certain states and cities in an effort to combat further spread of the disease.
      Victor Madrigal-Borloz, United Nations independent expert on sexual orientation and gender identity, warned that LGBTQ+ equality in the US ‘not yet within reach’ because of states that have passed legislation restricting LGBTQ+ rights.
      The DoJ tightened rules around some staff attending election events when attorney general Merrick Garland issued a memo saying that political appointees at the US Department of Justice will be barred from attending election campaign events or fundraisers.
      And the public still awaits the DoJ’s legal response to Donald Trump’s request for a “special master” to oversee its review of classified documents seized by the FBI in a raid on his Florida home. The deadline for the latest filing in federal court in West Palm Beach is today.
      We’ll be closing this US politics blog shortly. By now you will probably have heard or read that former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev has died. The Guardian has launched a separate live blog to cover details and reaction, which you can follow here. And here is the current main news story. There will be a lot more coverage on this huge event from the Guardian.Joe Biden closed his remarks with a vociferous attack on Republicans who defended the January 6 insurrection incited by Donald Trump at the US Capitol, and called the deadly riot that claimed several lives, including police officers, “sickening”:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}What I find even more incredible is the defense. Cops attacked, assaulted. Speared with flag poles. Sprayed with mace. Stomped on. Dragged. Brutalized. Police lost their lives as a result of that day.
      Let me say this to my Maga Republican friends in Congress. Don’t tell me you support law enforcement if you won’t condemn what happened on January 6. Don’t tell me. For God’s sake, whose side are you on?
      You can’t be pro law enforcement and pro insurrection. You can’t be a party of law and order and call the people who attacked the police on January 6 patriots. You can’t do it.Biden also condemned Republicans who have called for the FBI to be defunded after the raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida that resulted in the seizure of classified documents the former president was hoarding:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}It’s sickening to see the new attacks on the FBI, threatening the lives of law enforcement agents and their families for simply carrying out the law and doing their job.
      I want to set it out as clear as I can. There is no place in this country, no place, for endangering the lives of law enforcement. No place, no, never, period.Biden recalls a long list of mass shootings in the US.“More children in America die from guns than active duty police and active duty military in the United States,” he says. “We have to act for those families of Buffalo, Uvalde, Newtown, El Paso, Parkland, Charleston, Las Vegas, Orlando … I’ve been to every one of those. Sat down with those parents. I spent four hours last time with every single one of the parents and families who have lost someone, and seen the looks in their faces.”“Think about it. Think about the devastation that’s occurred. We have to act for all those kids gunned down on our streets every single day that never make the news. There’s a mass shooting every single day in this country.”Joe Biden says he is “determined” to achieve an assault weapons ban in the US.The push to reenact such a ban forms a centerpiece of the Safer America Plan that the president is laying out in an address Tuesday afternoon in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.He is reminding the crowd that in 1994, as chair of the Senate judiciary committee, he helped engineer the original assault weapons ban that later lapsed:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}I’m determined to ban assault weapons in this country. Determined.
      I did it once before. And I’ll do it again. For many of you at home, I want to be clear. It’s not about taking away anybody’s guns. In fact, we should be treating responsible gun owners as examples, how every gun owner should be.
      Over 48,000 people died from gunshot wounds in 2021 in the United States of America. Over 26,000 by suicide.”Biden also attacked the National Rifle Association, touring the success of the bipartisan gun control law he signed into law this year..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}We beat the NRA. We took them on and we beat ‘em straight up.
      You have no idea how intimidating they are to elected officials. The NRA was against it, which means a vast majority. The vast majority of Republicans in Congress couldn’t even stand up and vote for it.
      Law enforcement supported it. Faith leaders, teachers supported it. Victims of gun violence and their families supported it. Young people in this country, like the students of this great university, supported it.
      And the NRA, the vast majority of congressional Republicans, voted against it, saving lives and keeping America safe. But guess what? We took on NRA we’re gonna take them on again. And we won and we will win again. We’re not stopping here. I’m determined to ban assault weapons in this country.Joe Biden is laying into Republicans who refused to back the American Rescue Plan in congress last year, which he says provided $350bn to states to help make their communities safer..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Guess what? Every single Republican member of Congress, every single one voted against us support law enforcement. They talk about how much they love it. They voted against the funding. Flat out. Flat out. Every Republican in the House. Every Republican in the Senate. Every single one.
      And know we expect so much of our law enforcement officers, so we need to support them. That’s why my crime plan to help communities recruit, hire and train nationwide more than 100,000 additional officers for community policingJoe Biden is talking up his crime prevention plans during a speech in Pennsylvania, and says funding the police is the pathway to providing American families with peace of mind.During an address at which he is also expected to call for an assault weapons ban, the president is laying out his Safer America Plan. A series of deadly mass shootings have destroyed Americans’ sense of security, he says:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Peace of mind [is] knowing your kids can go to school, or the playground, or movies, at a high school game, and come home safely. Not have to think about it for too long. So many families haven’t had that peace of mind.
      They watch the news and they see kids being gunned down in schools and on the streets. Almost every single night you turn the news on that’s what you see. They see their neighbors lose their loved ones to drugs like fentanyl, which is a flat killer.
      They see hate and anger and violence. Just walking the streets of America and they just want to feel safe again. They want to feel a sense of security. That’s what my crime plan is all about.Turning to funding law enforcement funding, which some Republicans accuse Democrats of wanting to scrap, Biden was clear:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}When it comes to public safety in this nation, the answer is not defund the police. It’s to fund to the police. We expect them to do everything. We expect them to be protect us, to be psychologist to be sociologists. I mean, we expect you to do everything. We ask so much of you.The Biden administration has announced it is sending more monkeypox vaccines to certain states and cities in an effort to combat further spread of the disease.The White House national monkeypox response team said at a press briefing on Tuesday afternoon that the aim was to “protect individuals most at risk of contracting the virus.”Additional vaccines and support will be sent to states and cities holding events that convene large groups of LGBTQI+ individuals, specifically gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men, officials said.They also announced a pilot to “surge” vaccine availability and other prevention resources to communities of color in light of recent CDC data showing the disproportionate reach of the virus among Black and Latino gay, bisexual, and other men.New Orleans, Louisiana; Atlanta, Georgia; and Oakland, California are among the first cities benefiting from the additional vaccines. The White House released a monkeypox fact sheet to accompany the briefing. Three Arizona Republicans, including secretary of state nominee Mark Finchem and congressman Paul Gosar, must pay $75,000 in attorney fees for filing a defamation suit against a former Democratic lawmaker “primarily for purposes of harassment”, a judge has ruled.The Associated Press reports that the Republicans filed the lawsuit last year against former state representative Charlene Fernandez after she and other Democrats called for an investigation of their roles in the 6 January insurrection at the US Capitol. The judge, Levi Gunderson, dismissed the lawsuit in April, saying Fernandez’s request was protected by the first amendment’s rights to free speech and to petition the government.On Tuesday, Gunderson ruled that the lawsuit appeared to have been “written for an audience other than the assigned trial court judge” as it made irrelevant references to open borders and Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.The lawsuit “was brought for an improper purpose, having been filed against a political opponent primarily for purposes of harassment,” he added.Fernandez and 41 other Democratic lawmakers signed a letter in January 2021 urging the justice department to investigate Finchem, Gosar and then state representative Anthony Kern, allies of Donald Trump who were in or around the US Capitol at the time of the riot. All deny wrongdoing.States that have passed legislation restricting LGBTQ+ rights have come under attack from an independent United Nations expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.Speaking at a UN briefing on discrimination against LGBTQ+ communities in New York on Tuesday, Victor Madrigal-Borloz said he looked at a cross-section of key indicators from housing to health care access:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Equality is not yet within reach, and in many cases not within sight of LGBT communities and populations in the US. All outcomes in the sectors I mentioned are inferior, and in many cases significantly inferior, for the LGBT population.
      I am extremely concerned about a series, and I would say a concerted series, of actions at state level, both legislative and administrative, that tend to base on prejudice and stigma, to attack and to rollback the rights of LGBT persons.00:47Numerous US states have passed, or have been contemplating restrictive anti-LGBTQ+ legislation in recent months, none more so than Florida. Republican governor Ron DeSantis signed into law a “don’t say gay” bill that outlaws most classroom discussion of gender identity and sexual orientation topics, as well as a law banning transgender athletes.Political appointees at the US Department of Justice (DoJ) will be barred from attending campaign events or fundraisers, according to new guidance issued by attorney general Merrick Garland today, ahead of November’s midterm elections, Reuters reports..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}I know you agree it is critical that we hold ourselves to the highest ethical standards to avoid even the appearance of political influence as we carry out the department’s mission. It is in that spirit that I have added these new restrictions on political activities by non-career employees,” Garland wrote in a memo.While it is common for the justice department to remind its staff to tread carefully about political activities ahead of election seasons, Garland’s memo contains among the most restrictive policies in recent times.Federal employees in general are subject to the Hatch Act, a law which limits some of their political activities to ensure the government is free from partisan influence.Previously, political appointees at the department were permitted to attend partisan events in their personal capacity, as long as they sought prior approval.Under the new guidance, however, there will be no exceptions – including on the evening of election day itself.The change comes at a time when the justice department is under a national microscope over its extraordinary decision to search the Florida estate of former Republican president Donald Trump earlier this month.This was part of an ongoing criminal investigation into whether he illegally retained government records, including some marked as top secret.In addition to the pressure the department has faced over its investigation into Trump, some of its political appointees have also faced criticism for attending political functions.Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas in July called for an investigation after Rachael Rollins, an outspoken progressive prosecutor who serves as the US attorney for Massachusetts, attended a Democratic fundraiser that month that was also attended by first lady Jill Biden.Rollins in a tweet following news reports on her attendance said she had “approval to meet Dr. Biden & left early to speak at 2 community events”.A spokesperson for Rollins did not immediately respond to a request for comment on today. More

    • 213 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump seized classified documents – but for Republicans the story is Hunter Biden’s laptop | Lawrence Douglas

      by

      Trump seized classified documents – but for Republicans the story is Hunter Biden’s laptopLawrence DouglasThere was a time when Republican lawmakers took dangerous security breaches seriously but Trump’s actions are unworthy of attention for the likes of Senator Ron Johnson In a Friday appearance on Newsmax, the rightwing media site, Ron Johnson blasted the FBI for not being aggressive enough in following the evidence. Was the great patriotic Republican senator from Wisconsin angry that the FBI had waited too long before searching Mar-a-Lago for illegally stashed documents critical to US national security? Hardly. What agitated Johnson was an alleged whistleblower’s complaint that the FBI had failed to take the “necessary investigative steps after receiving Hunter Biden’s laptop”.Remember laptop-gate? The FBI received the laptop back in 2020 from a computer repair shop owner who claimed the PC had been left in his shop but never retrieved by Hunter Biden. Analysts determined that much of the data was a “disaster” from a forensics standpoint, as the hard-drive had clearly been accessed by persons other than Biden’s son. Nonetheless, after exhaustive studies completed earlier this year, both the New York Times and the Washington Post concluded that some of the retrieved material had been authentic; and while it showed that Hunter clearly tried to trade on his father’s name, it failed to indicate any corruption on Joe Biden’s part.For the likes of Senator Johnson, the laptop remains the story of the hour. Unworthy of the senator’s attention was the release of the redacted affidavit that indicated former president Trump, in defiance of a subpoena, had refused to hand over documents that had the highest security classification and arguably included the names of American intelligence assets abroad. There was a time when Republican lawmakers took dangerous security breaches seriously. But this was back when Republican lawmakers also recognized the possibility of electoral defeat after a fair vote.Senator Johnson was hardly alone in his peculiar priorities. The Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, attacked the “raid” on Mar-a-Lago as “another escalation in the weaponization of federal agencies against the Regime’s political opponents, while people like Hunter Biden get treated with kid gloves”. Also joining the attack was former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, who earlier lamented, “look what the DoJ did … to President Trump, while it slow-rolls and looks the other way on Hunter Biden”. And while Senator Johnson is yet to join Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar in their calls to “defund the FBI”, the Wisconsin senator insists the handling of the laptop affair demonstrates the FBI’s “corruption”; the bureau, he concludes, is “not to be trusted”.If we struggle to characterize the unrelenting efforts of those like Johnson, who defend Trump through systematic misdirection and by attacking the integrity of US institutions of law enforcement, President Biden himself supplied a helpful term – “semi-fascism”. In a speech given last Thursday, the president rightly described “Maga Republicans” as a “threat to our very democracy”.The rise of semi-fascism within the heart of the Republican party underscores the exceptional risks in indicting Trump and bringing him to trial. That some form of indictment will soon follow now seems increasingly likely. The redacted affidavit reveals that in hoarding and refusing to surrender government documents, Trump may have violated three separate federal criminal statutes, which carry penalties from three to 20 years imprisonment. And this investigation is unrelated to the criminal fraud inquiry in Manhattan; the election interference investigation in Georgia; and the Department of Justice’s examination of the election tampering scheme that culminated in the violence of January 6.While many no doubt eagerly look forward to Trump’s day of legal reckoning, dread is the more proper response. When even a Maga-lite lawmaker like the Florida senator Marco Rubio counters the president’s claim of authoritarian strains within the Republican party by tinnily declaring, “If you’re looking for authoritarianism, look no further than what happened under the watch of Anthony Fauci and his allies in the elite establishment,” we know that any future indictment will be greeted by hysterical and violent attacks on the integrity of the US system of justice.And yet the costs of inaction are greater still than the costs of moving against Trump. A failure to indict born of fear of the political risks of doing so suggests that Trump and the semi-fascists have already succeeded in deforming the rule of law in America. Holding Trump to legal account may not succeed; it may trigger civil unrest and redound to his favor. But it may also begin a long, painful process of removing the poison of Maga authoritarianism from our body politic.Those who cherish democracy need to call out the proto-fascist tendencies now seizing the Trump-occupied Republican party.
      Lawrence Douglas is the author, most recently, of Will He Go? Trump and the Looming Election Meltdown in 2020. He is a contributing opinion writer for the Guardian US and teaches at Amherst College
      TopicsUS newsOpinionUS politicsMar-a-LagoDonald TrumpHunter BidenJoe BidenRepublicanscommentReuse this content More

    • 288 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Americans are starting to get it: we can’t let Trump – or Trumpism – back in office | Austin Sarat and Dennis Aftergut

      by

      Americans are starting to get it: we can’t let Trump – or Trumpism – back in officeAustin Sarat and Dennis AftergutRepublicans have put all their chips on extremism. But voters are sending more and more signals that they’re fed up with it Polls and election results over the last week reminded Americans that politics seldom moves in a straight line. As in physics, action produces reaction. Overreach invites backlash.For a long while former President Trump and his cronies seemed to be immune from this rule of political life and from the consequences of even the most outrageous conduct. As Trump himself once famously said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.”And so it seemed. He escaped conviction in not one but two impeachment trials and cowed Republican leaders to fall in line after the January 6 insurrection. He remains the leading contender for the Republican party’s 2024 presidential nomination.Today Republicans are still falling over themselves to prove their loyalty to him by outdoing each other in extremism.On 19 August, a Republican candidate for Florida’s state assembly even took to Twitter to call for violence against federal law enforcement officials. “Under my plan,” Luis Miguel tweeted, “all Floridians will have permission to shoot FBI, IRS, ATF and all other [federal agents] ON SIGHT! Let freedom ring!”In Washington, the US supreme court cast aside almost 50 years of settled precedent to overturn Roe v Wade. Republican-dominated state legislatures rushed to enact draconian restrictions on women’s reproductive rights.This kind of extremism may be off-putting to swing voters. There are signs that most Americans aren’t ready to trade their rights and freedoms for a strongman and his election-denying, rights-infringing, violence-threatening allies. As the Cook Report’s Amy Walters wrote on 26 August: “The more Trump is in the news, the more dangerous the political climate for the GOP.”But let’s start with the supreme court’s Dobbs decision.Dobbs sent shock waves across the political spectrum and has jolted Democratic turnout. On 25 August, Axios reported that immediately after Dobbs, “Democratic primary turnout for governors’ races increased … in five of the eight states holding contested primaries.”Similarly, a report from TargetSmart suggests that in states like Michigan and Wisconsin “where reproductive rights are at stake”, women “are out-registering men by significant margins.”This pattern portends a “pink wave” in November, as women mobilize to defeat pro-life candidates. We saw evidence of this in the 23 August special congressional election in New York, where Democrat Pat Ryan defeated Republican Marc Molinaro, 52% to 48% in a bellwether swing district.Ryan’s campaign message was largely focused on protecting abortion rights. His victory follows the striking 2 August referendum vote in Kansas, where voters overwhelmingly rejected an attempt to ban abortion.Are Republicans being taught a lesson they should have learned from history?When the supreme court gets too far out in front of – or too far behind – the American public by ignoring American sentiment, political backlash results. That happened in the 1850s in the run-up to the civil war and in the 1930s when the conservative court that Franklin Roosevelt inherited struck down a new minimum wage law.It happened again after Roe v Wade, when abortion foes reacted and organized for a 50-year battle that resulted in a reactionary court majority.Republicans may now be reaping what those reactionaries on the court sowed.And it isn’t only that many Americans have been alarmed and aroused by what the court did last June. They are also awakening to the threats posed by Trump’s “big lie” and the election denial it has inspired.Democratic messaging that has called out the “big lie”, along with the meticulously presented hearings of the January 6 congressional hearings, seem to be taking root.Americans are coming to see that, as President Biden has warned, “A poison is running through our democracy … with disinformation massively on the rise. But the truth is buried by lies, and the lies live on as truth.”At the start of this summer’s January 6 hearings, Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney echoed that sentiment: “People must pay attention. People must watch, and they must understand how easily our democratic system can unravel if we don’t defend it.”An NBC News poll last week suggests that the American people are indeed now paying attention. It found that more respondents ranked “threats to democracy” as the most important issue facing the country, more important than inflation or jobs.Other polls suggest that candidates who are running as election deniers or opponents of a woman’s right to choose will pay a price in November.Take Pennsylvania, for example. A Franklin & Marshall poll released on 25 August found that the Democratic candidate for the Senate, John Fetterman, is leading Trump-endorsed election denier Mehmet Oz, 43% to 30%. Fetterman is also a vocal abortion rights supporter, while Oz supported overturning Roe.The same poll also shows that the Democratic candidate for governor in Pennsylvania, Josh Shapiro, leads the Trump favorite and abortion foe, Republican Doug Mastriano, by 44% to 33%.According to the Washington Post, “In 2020, Mastriano tried to block Pennsylvania’s certification of Biden’s victory by introducing a resolution asserting incorrectly that the Republican-dominated legislature had the right to choose which electors’ votes should be counted.” As the Post also notes, “He attended the Jan. 6 riot … where he was captured on video crossing the police line.”This is not to say that in Pennsylvania or elsewhere the Trump fever has completely broken. And polls are not the same thing as an election. But they are signs of hope.Democracy won’t save itself. Abortion rights will not restore themselves. The American majority’s power to defeat Trumpism lies at the ballot box. If Trumpist candidates lose in general elections, over time Republicans may get the message that they’ve placed a losing bet on extremism.There is much to be done by Americans committed to preserving our republic and to saying “no” to Trump. As former president Obama put it in his 2017 farewell address: “It falls to each of us to be … jealous guardians of democracy.” Across America, a majority of voters are ready to do just that.
      Austin Sarat is a professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College and the author of Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and America’s Death Penalty
      Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor, currently of counsel to Lawyers Defending American Democracy
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionRepublicansDonald TrumpUS midterm elections 2022US SenateUS CongressHouse of RepresentativescommentReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      More than 40% of Americans think civil war likely within a decade

      by

      More than 40% of Americans think civil war likely within a decadeMore than half of ‘strong Republicans’ think such a conflict is at least somewhat likely, poll finds More than two-fifths of Americans believe civil war is at least somewhat likely in the next 10 years, according to a new survey – a figure that increases to more than half among self-identified “strong Republicans”.US political violence is surging, but talk of a civil war is exaggerated – isn’t it?Read moreAmid heated rhetoric from supporters of Donald Trump, the findings, in research by YouGov and the Economist, follow similar results in other polls.On Sunday night, the South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham predicted “riots in the streets” if Trump is indicted over his retention of classified documents after leaving the White House, materials recovered by the FBI at Trump’s home this month.Graham earned widespread rebuke. On Monday, Mary McCord, a former acting deputy attorney general, told CNN it was “incredibly irresponsible for an elected official to basically make veiled threats of violence, just if law enforcement and the Department of Justice … does their job”.Saying “people are angry, they may be violent”, McCord said, showed that “what [Trump] knows and what Lindsey Graham also knows … is that people listen to that and people actually mobilise and do things.“January 6 was the result of this same kind of tactic by President Trump and his allies.”Nine deaths including suicides among police officers have been linked to the Capitol attack on 6 January 2021, when supporters Trump told to “fight like hell” to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden attempted to stop the certification of electoral results.Since then, fears of political violence have grown.Most experts believe a full-scale armed conflict, like the American civil war of 1861-65, remains unlikely.But many fear an increase of jagged political division and explicitly political violence, particularly as Republican politicians who support Trump’s lie about electoral fraud run for Congress, governor’s mansions and key state elections posts.This month, Rachel Kleinfeld, a specialist in civil conflict at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the Guardian: “Countries with democracies and governments as strong as America’s do not fall into civil war. But if our institutions weaken, the story could be different.”In the poll by YouGov and the Economist, 65% of all respondents said political violence had increased since the start of 2021. Slightly fewer, 62%, thought political violence would increase in the next few years.Participants were also asked: “Looking ahead to the next 10 years, how likely do you think it is that there will be a civil war in this country?”Among all US citizens, 43% said civil war was at least somewhat likely. Among strong Democrats and independents that figure was 40%. But among strong Republicans, 54% said civil war was at least somewhat likely.TopicsUS politicsRepublicansDemocratsnewsReuse this content More

    • 225 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Critics denounce Lindsey Graham for warning of ‘riots in the street’ if Trump indicted – as it happened

      by

      Critics are decrying as “irresponsible” and “shameful” South Carolina Republican Senator and enthusiastic Trump convert Lindsey Graham’s comments that there will be “riots in the street” if Donald Trump is prosecuted.Graham twice made the reference when he went on Fox News’s Sunday Night in America show last evening, the Washington Post reports.Richard Haass, president of the nonpartisan think tank the Council on Foreign Relations, a nonpartisan think tank, tweeted that Graham’s “prediction that violence may follow any prosecution of the former Potus may not qualify legally as incitement but it is irresponsible all the same as it will be seen by some as a call for violence. Public officials are obligated to call for the rule of law.”.@LindseyGrahamSC’s prediction that violence may follow any prosecution of the former Potus may not qualify legally as incitement but it is irresponsible all the same as it will be seen by some as a call for violence. Public officials are obligated to call for the rule of law.— Richard N. Haass (@RichardHaass) August 29, 2022
      Republican Joe Walsh, described by the Post as the former congressman and a tea party adherent turned frequent Trump critic, also tweeted “a message for Graham” that: “Yes, if Trump is indicted, there will be violence. I see & hear those threats all the time. But threats of violence should NEVER stop the pursuit of justice. NEVER. And you KNOW that Lindsey. But you’re too much of a coward to say that. Shameful.”A message for @LindseyGrahamSC:Yes, if Trump is indicted, there will be violence. I see & hear those threats all the time. But threats of violence should NEVER stop the pursuit of justice. NEVER. And you KNOW that Lindsey. But you’re too much of a coward to say that.Shameful.— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) August 29, 2022
      And the Post added that Trump posted the Fox News interview without comment to his Truth Social platform.I’m handing the blog over to Richard Luscombe now, fresh from his disappointment at Cape Canaveral at seeing NASA’s Artemis rocket not lift off from the Kennedy Space Center, but ready to take you through US political news developments for the next few hours.Thanks for joining us on a very Trump-centric day in US politics. We’re closing our blog now, but here’s a final look at what we were covering:
      Critics decried as “irresponsible” and “shameful” South Carolina Republican Senator and enthusiastic Trump convert Lindsey Graham’s comments that there will be “riots in the street” if Donald Trump is prosecuted.
      The White House said it was “appropriate” that the US intelligence community is reviewing potential national security risks from disclosure of materials recovered during a search of Trump’s Florida residence. But national security spokesperson John Kirby said the White House was not involved in the review.
      The justice department told a federal court in Florida more about its review of materials seized by the FBI during the raid, and also said it will provide a further filing, sealed, with a more detailed receipt of what was seized on August 8.
      A Georgia judge ruled this morning that the state’s Republican governor Brian Kemp must testify before a special grand jury that’s investigating possible illegal attempts by Trump and others to influence the 2020 election result there – but not until after the November midterm election.
      Florida federal judge Aileen Cannon is leaning towards approving a request by Trump to appoint a so-called “special master” to review the assessment of the materials taken away in the FBI search. Other material had previously been returned by Trump after pressure from the government, but more was found upon the search.
      The DoJ and the Trump legal team square off this week in Cannon’s court, with the government obliged to provide more details about the FBI search and Trump’s team expected to present arguments in a hearing on Thursday afternoon in favor of the appointment of a special master.
      Karine Jean-Pierre took a swipe at Washington politicians for failing to act on the Biden administration’s request for pandemic funding, and hastening the end of widespread free Covid-19 tests.The White House has announced it is halting the distribution of free tests starting next month, and blames a lack of funding. The last day for orders will be 2 September.White House press secretary Jean-Pierre said the lack of progress in the House towards funding a package to support testing, vaccines and therapies had led to “some tough decisions”:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}We warned that congressional inaction would bring unacceptable trade-offs and harm our preparedness and response and guidance, and the consequences would worsen over time.
      This is an action we’ve been forced to take that will help preserve our limited remaining supply, ensuring we have a limited supply of tests available in the fall.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is delivering her daily briefing and is taking pains to stress again that Joe Biden has not been briefed about, and has had no input in the justice department’s criminal investigation into Donald Trump.The office of the director of national intelligence (ODNI) is currently sifting material seized in the FBI raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida, where he is alleged to have hidden improperly retained classified documents from his administration.Without evidence, the former president has accused Biden, the ODNI, the FBI and anybody else he believes had a hand in the search and seizure, of a political witch-hunt against him.But Jean-Pierre said this afternoon that Trump was off track:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}We have been very clear that the president was not briefed in advance of the justice department’s recent actions. We have not been involved. We are committed to the independence as it relates to any matter the justice department has.
      This is an ODNI decision that they have made. The president hasn’t been briefed on any of this. None of us have.Joe Biden will visit the battleground states of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania next week, aiming to ride a wave of increased popularity and attempting to lift Democrats’ fortunes two months before the midterm election.Biden will speak at Milwaukee’s Laborfest celebration, then go to Pittsburgh where other national labor leaders are appearing at that city’s Labor Day Parade, the Associated Press reports.The president plans to “celebrate Labor Day and the dignity of American workers,” according to the White House.Biden is expected to tout the bipartisan infrastructure law passed last year, as well as the Inflation Reduction Act, which he signed in August.Both states have races for governor and seats in the US Senate.In Wisconsin, Democrats are trying to reelect governor Tony Evers and oust Republican senator Ron Johnson. “We have a good relationship,” Evers said. “I’m looking forward to it.”In Pennsylvania, Democrats are trying to hold on to the state’s open governor’s office and to flip the Senate seat being vacated by retiring Republican Pat Toomey.An “aspiring member” of the far-right Proud Boys extremist group was sentenced on Monday to more than four years in prison for storming the US Capitol during the 6 January riot, the Associated Press reports.Joshua Pruitt, 40, came face-to-face with Chuck Schumer, the Democratic senate majority leaders as he joined fellow Donald Trump supporters in efforts to halt the certification of Joe Biden’s election win, the court heard.“One look at Pruitt, and the leader of Senator Schumer’s security detail immediately saw the threat and hustled the 70-year-old senator down a hallway, having to change their evacuation route on a dime,” assistant US attorney Alexis Loeb wrote in a court filing.US district court judge Timothy Kelly sentenced Pruitt, of Maryland, to four years and seven months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release.Prosecutors wanted a five-year sentence for Pruitt, a bartender and personal trainer they described as “an aspiring Proud Boys member” whose intimidating figure made him an “ideal recruit” for the group.Democrats’ apparently resurgent fortunes ahead of November’s midterms are pushing Republicans into panic-buying “aggressive” media slots in markets where believe they are lagging.That’s the assessment from Axios, which has looked into Republican campaign spending across the country, including a $125m ad buy by House minority leader Kevin McCarthy’s political action committee, the Congressional Leadership Fund (CLF), in almost entirely Democrat held districts.Of McCarthy’s spending, “$9 of every $10 [is] targeting seats carried by President Biden in 2020,” Axios reports.“CLF is doubling down on offensive spending, even in places where Biden won by double digits two years ago”.First look: Kevin McCarthy’s leadership PAC has reserved another $37 million in TV time — with $9 of every $10 targeting seats carried by President Biden in 2020.It’s a rejoinder to growing talk about Democrats finding a shot to retain the House. https://t.co/5oBNmGgwje— Axios (@axios) August 29, 2022
      Biden’s approval ratings have climbed steadily since earlier this year, buoyed by a series of legislative successes including the Inflation Reduction Act, and a perceived backlash by more moderate voters to the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v Wade federal abortion protections.Republicans who once assumed retaking control of the House in November was a given appear increasingly fearful that there will be no rout of the Democratic majority, and the rash of sudden spending is an attempt to shore up their support, Axios says.“Democrats hope to harness voter energy around protecting abortion rights to motivate their base and appeal to independents in an election Republicans had hoped would focus on economic anxiety,” the media site says.Critics are decrying as “irresponsible” and “shameful” South Carolina Republican Senator and enthusiastic Trump convert Lindsey Graham’s comments that there will be “riots in the street” if Donald Trump is prosecuted.Graham twice made the reference when he went on Fox News’s Sunday Night in America show last evening, the Washington Post reports.Richard Haass, president of the nonpartisan think tank the Council on Foreign Relations, a nonpartisan think tank, tweeted that Graham’s “prediction that violence may follow any prosecution of the former Potus may not qualify legally as incitement but it is irresponsible all the same as it will be seen by some as a call for violence. Public officials are obligated to call for the rule of law.”.@LindseyGrahamSC’s prediction that violence may follow any prosecution of the former Potus may not qualify legally as incitement but it is irresponsible all the same as it will be seen by some as a call for violence. Public officials are obligated to call for the rule of law.— Richard N. Haass (@RichardHaass) August 29, 2022
      Republican Joe Walsh, described by the Post as the former congressman and a tea party adherent turned frequent Trump critic, also tweeted “a message for Graham” that: “Yes, if Trump is indicted, there will be violence. I see & hear those threats all the time. But threats of violence should NEVER stop the pursuit of justice. NEVER. And you KNOW that Lindsey. But you’re too much of a coward to say that. Shameful.”A message for @LindseyGrahamSC:Yes, if Trump is indicted, there will be violence. I see & hear those threats all the time. But threats of violence should NEVER stop the pursuit of justice. NEVER. And you KNOW that Lindsey. But you’re too much of a coward to say that.Shameful.— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) August 29, 2022
      And the Post added that Trump posted the Fox News interview without comment to his Truth Social platform.I’m handing the blog over to Richard Luscombe now, fresh from his disappointment at Cape Canaveral at seeing NASA’s Artemis rocket not lift off from the Kennedy Space Center, but ready to take you through US political news developments for the next few hours.The White House today said it is “appropriate” that the US intelligence community is reviewing potential national security risks from disclosure of materials recovered during a search of former president Donald Trump’s Florida residence, Reuters reports.The director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, told lawmakers in a letter last week that her office is working with the Justice Department to “facilitate a classification review” of documents including those recovered during the August 8 search.Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines has told congressional leaders that her department has launched a review “of the potential risk to national security” in the event that Trump compromised secrets from classified Mar-a-Lago documents. pic.twitter.com/lDBeeEwbkO— The Recount (@therecount) August 29, 2022
      The White House is not involved in the assessment of the risk associated with those documents, National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby told reporters.John Kirby just now tells reporters the White House is not involved in the damage assessment DNI is conducting re: classified docs Trump took to Mar-a-Lago. Kirby calls the assessment an “appropriate action.”— Morgan Chalfant (@mchalfant16) August 29, 2022
      Meanwhile:DOJ also tells the court it is conducting a classification review, along with ODNI, of the materials seized from Trump’s home. It also confirms what was reported this weekend: ODNI is leading an intelligence community assessment— Sarah N. Lynch (@SarahNLynch) August 29, 2022
      It’s been a very Trump-dominated morning and we’ll have some updates on other things coming up shortly, as well, while also bringing you any further developments in the various legal cases enveloping the former president.Here’s where things stand:
      The US Department of Justice has told a federal court in Florida more about its review of materials seized by the FBI during a search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago private resort and residence in Palm Beach and also said it will provide a further filing, sealed, with a more detailed receipt of what was seized on August 8.
      A Georgia judge ruled this morning that the state’s Republican governor Brian Kemp must testify before a special grand jury that’s investigating possible illegal attempts by then-president Donald Trump and others to influence the 2020 election result there – but not until after the November midterm election.
      Florida federal judge Aileen Cannon is leaning towards approving a request by Trump to appoint a so-called “special master” to review the assessment of the materials taken away from Mar-a-Lago after the FBI search. Other material had previously been returned by Trump after pressure from the government, but more was found upon the search.
      The DoJ and the Trump legal team square off this week in Cannon’s court, with the government obliged to provide more details about the FBI search and Trump’s team expected to present arguments in a hearing on Thursday afternoon in favor of the appointment of a special master. This all involves the criminal investigation into Trump hanging onto highly-sensitive official documents after he left office and potential obstruction.
      In the Department of Justice’s filing in federal court in south Florida today, relating to the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago and seizure of classified documents apparently secreted there by former president Donald Trump, it has told the court it will comply with the request to provide “a more detailed receipt” for property seized during the search on August 8.The government has promised “a sealed, supplemental filing” on this with the court “as well as a ‘particularized notice indicating the status of [the United States’] review of the seized property, including any filter review conducted by the privilege review team and any dissemination of materials beyond the privilege review team’,” according to the filing. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Graham predicts ‘riots in streets’ if Trump is prosecuted over classified records

      by

      Graham predicts ‘riots in streets’ if Trump is prosecuted over classified recordsRepublican South Carolina senator cites ‘the ‘Clinton debacle’ and claims the FBI failed to investigate Hunter Biden Amid growing fears about political violence in the US, a senior Republican senator predicted “riots in the streets” if Donald Trump is prosecuted for mishandling classified information.Of all the legal threats Trump is facing, is this the one that could take him down?Read moreLindsey Graham, of South Carolina, made his remarks about the ex-president while speaking to Fox News’s Sunday Night in America, hosted by Trey Gowdy, a former Republican congressman from the same state.Graham said: “Most Republicans, including me, believe when it comes to Trump, there is no law. It’s all about getting him. There’s a double standard when it comes to Trump.”Alleging a failure by the FBI to investigate Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, Graham added: “I’ll say this, if there’s a prosecution of Donald Trump for mishandling classified information, after the Clinton debacle … there’ll be riots in the streets.”As a House committee chairperson, Gowdy investigated Hillary Clinton’s work as secretary of state, including her handling of the attack on a US facility in Benghazi in 2012 and her use of a private email server for government business. Clinton was not charged over the email issue.Trump is under investigation and could be indicted over the handling of classified White House records he took to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home, in contravention of federal law.On Friday, an affidavit released with redactions showed how concerns about illegal activity and obstruction of justice merited an FBI search at Trump’s resort earlier this month.Trump seized on the search to claim unfair treatment and whip up supporters. He is reportedly close to announcing another White House run. He is eligible to do so because he escaped conviction in his second impeachment trial for inciting the Capitol attack.Graham’s remarks were widely condemned.Law professor and former White House ethics chief Richard Painter referred to Trump supporters’ deadly attack on the Capitol when he said: “A senator who calls for ‘riots in the streets’ if Trump is indicted should be expelled from the Senate. He’s inciting January 6 all over again.”The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, said the “prediction that violence may follow any prosecution of the former [president] may not qualify legally as incitement but it is irresponsible all the same as it will be seen by some as a call for violence. Public officials are [obliged] to call for the rule of law.”Graham was on friendly terms with Biden when they were senators together but his dogged support for Trump has reportedly prompted the president to ice Graham out. In his interview with Gowdy he slammed Biden’s handling of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, then returned to his theme.Saying that as “a simple-minded guy” he thought “people want to be treated the same without regard to political ideology”, Gowdy asked about his guest’s own legal problems.Graham is resisting attempts to force him to testify about his involvement in Trump’s attempt to overturn his electoral defeat in 2020 by Biden in Georgia, a swing state.Graham said: “If we let county prosecutors start calling senators and members of Congress as witnesses when they’re doing their job, we’re out of … constitutional balance here.“I’ve got a good legal case. I’m going to pursue it … I love the law. I’ve never been more worried about the law and politics as I am right now.”US political violence is surging, but talk of a civil war is exaggerated – isn’t it?Read moreHe continued: “How can you tell a conservative Republican that the system works when it comes to Trump? … If they try to prosecute President Trump for mishandling classified information after Hillary Clinton set up a server in her basement, there will literally will be riots in the streets. I worry about our country.”Trump indicated his approval, posting video of Graham’s remarks to Truth Social, the platform Trump set up after being suspended from Twitter over the Capitol attack.Former Republican congressman Joe Walsh, who has emerged as a Trump critic, predicted that there will indeed be violence if Trump is indicted.“I see and hear those threats all the time,” he wrote. “But threats of violence should NEVER stop the pursuit of justice. NEVER. And you KNOW that Lindsey. But you’re too much of a coward to say that. Shameful.”TopicsDonald TrumpMar-a-LagoUS politicsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 225 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Billions in ‘dark money’ is influencing US politics. We need disclosure laws | David Sirota and Joel Warner

      by

      Billions in ‘dark money’ is influencing US politics. We need disclosure lawsDavid Sirota and Joel WarnerA donor secretly transferred $1.6bn to a Republican political group. Because of America’s lax laws, the donation was never disclosed in any public record or database This week, the Lever, ProPublica and the New York Times discovered the largest known political advocacy donation in American history. We exposed a reclusive billionaire’s secret transfer of $1.6bn to a political group controlled by the Republican operative Leonard Leo, who spearheaded the construction of a conservative supreme court supermajority to end abortion, block government regulations, stymie the fight against climate change and limit voting rights.This anonymous donation – which flowed to a tax-exempt trust that was never disclosed in any public record or database – was probably completely legal.Whether you support or abhor Leo’s crusade, we should be able to agree on one larger non-partisan principle: such enormous sums of money should not be able to influence elections, lawmakers, judicial nominations and public policy in secret. And we should not have to rely on a rare leak to learn basic campaign finance facts that should be freely available to anyone.Unfortunately, thanks to our outdated laws, those facts are now hidden behind anonymity, shell companies and shadowy political groups. America is long overdue for an overhaul of its political disclosure laws – and news organizations in particular should be leading the charge for reform.In the early 1970s, leaks and shoe-leather reporting by news organizations uncovered the Watergate scandal – the modern era’s foundational dark money exposé. That debacle birthed the original federal disclosure laws and a golden age of journalism. For a time, the new statutes allowed campaign finance reporting to become systematic, methodical and based on required disclosures, rather than sporadic, random and reliant on the goodwill of courageous whistleblowers.A half-century later, however, the dark money practices of 50 years ago have again become normalized. In 2020 alone, more than $1bn worth of dark money flooded around weak disclosure rules and into America’s elections, financing Super Pacs, ad blitzes, mailers and door-knocking campaigns. As millions of votes were swayed, reporters and the public had no knowledge of the money sources, or what policies they were buying.Heading into the 2022 election, the situation is getting worse. The two parties’ major Senate and House Super Pacs are all being funded by anonymous dark money groups that are not required to disclose their donors.These problems aren’t unique to the campaign arena. Front groups are also shaping public policy, leaving reporters unable to tell voters who exactly is funding what. In the last few years, an anonymously funded group used post-election ads to successfully pressure lawmakers to water down landmark healthcare legislation designed to eliminate so-called “surprise” medical bills.Similarly, Leo’s anonymously funded network spent tens of millions to boost the nomination campaigns of three conservative supreme court justices, after leading a campaign supporting Republicans’ refusal to hold a vote on Barack Obama’s 2016 high court nominee, Merrick Garland.To be sure, news outlets can still cover the shrinking portion of the political finance system that still discloses some money flows to politicians, lobbyists and advocacy groups. And thankfully, there are occasionally disclosures like the Leo leak, which provide a fleeting glimpse into the real forces influencing sweeping policy decisions.But for every sporadic leak, there are scores of secret donors systematically funneling ever more dark money into elections and legislative campaigns without ever being exposed – and they are reaping the rewards of corrupted public policy.That’s the bad news. The good news is there is already a legislative blueprint for reform.The Disclose Act, sponsored by the Democratic senator Sheldon Whitehouse, would force dark money groups to disclose any of their donors who give more than $10,000, require shell companies spending money on elections to disclose their owners, and mandate that election ads list their sponsors’ major contributors. These requirements would extend not only to election-related activity, but also to campaigns to influence governmental decisions – including judicial nominations.A separate Whitehouse bill would additionally require donor disclosure from shadowy groups lobbying the supreme court through amicus briefs designed to tilt judicial rulings without letting the public know which billionaire or CEO’s thumb is on the scale. And other pending legislation would finally allow the Securities and Exchange Commission to require major corporations to more fully disclose their political spending.Journalists should proudly advocate for laws like these, which allow us to tell the public what its government is doing. Our industry has done that before in defending open records laws, and we must do it now in advocating for new campaign finance disclosure rules.In practice, that means reporters elevating the transparency issue and demanding answers from politicians about where they stand on disclosure laws – rather than ignoring or downplaying the rising tide of dark money now shaping every public policy in America.It means newspaper editorial boards advocating for campaign finance reform.It means media organizations lobbying for stronger disclosure laws at the federal, state and local levels.It means the journalism industry participating in – and at times leading – this fight, rather than using objectivity as a cop-out.This battle to update campaign finance disclosure laws and bring sunlight to the darkest of dark money already faces powerful opponents. In recent years, the US Chamber of Commerce and Koch Industries – which represent some of America’s biggest dark money spenders – have been lobbying against the Disclose Act, preventing it from advancing for more than a decade.The Koch network recently convinced the supreme court’s conservative bloc to strike down a California law requiring non-profit dark money groups to at least disclose their major donors to state tax regulators, after spending to back some of those justices’ confirmations to the court.Most recently, conservative groups and Republican state attorneys general have been trying to block a proposal to force companies to disclose greenhouse gas emissions by arguing that it is unlawful “compelled speech” – a preview of the argument they might use against new campaign finance transparency legislation.Just as alarming, segments of the journalism industry itself have opposed transparency efforts. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) — which represents the major media outlets making huge profits off of dark money ads — tried to block a rule at the Federal Election Commission a decade ago to require TV and radio stations to disclose ad buys from political groups, arguing it would cost them advertising revenue. The NAB has recently successfully opposed the Federal Communications Commission’s requirements that broadcasters disclose when foreign governments sponsor material. NAB is right now lobbying on the Disclose Act.But this week’s revelations about history’s largest dark-money donation should be an alarm telling us that the status quo must change – and indeed it can change, even within the confines of the supreme court’s own precedents.In the landmark Citizens United ruling that unleashed the modern era of big money politics, the majority noted that while it was unwilling to permit political spending restrictions, it still held that “government may regulate corporate political speech through disclaimer and disclosure requirements”.Those requirements are so desperately needed now – for the free press to play its vital role, and for voters to make informed decisions when they go to the polls.But the only chance it will happen is if news outlets and reporters get off the sidelines and enter the battle to secure what they need to do their jobs – and what we all need to preserve our democracy.
      David Sirota is an award-winning journalist who founded the investigative news outlet the Lever
      Joel Warner is the Lever’s managing editor
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionRepublicansUS supreme courtUS political financingcommentReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Kinzinger: Republicans ‘hypocritical’ for defending Trump over taking classified material

      by

      Kinzinger: Republicans ‘hypocritical’ for defending Trump over taking classified materialParty spent years chanting ‘lock her up’ at Hillary Clinton for private email system, says congressman, a vocal critic of Trump Congressman Adam Kinzinger, the Illinois Republican who has been one of the most vocal critics of Donald Trump, called out his party for criticizing Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while continuing to defend the former president’s decision to take sensitive government information to his home at Mar-a-Lago.Kinzinger’s comments came days after the FBI released a redacted version of the affidavit the agency submitted to a federal judge to justify a search of Trump’s home. The document details how Trump retained classified material at Mar-a-Lago and that the government had been working for more than a year to retrieve those materials. A batch of documents returned earlier this year contained 184 documents marked as classified, including 25 marked as top secret.“The hypocrisy of folks in my party that spent years chanting, ‘Lock her up,’ about Hillary Clinton because of some deleted emails or – quote/unquote – ‘wiping a server,’ are now out there defending a man who very clearly did not take the national security of the United States to heart,” Kinzinger, who is retiring from Congress after this term, said on NBC’s Meet The Press. “And it’ll be up to [the US justice department] whether or not that reaches the level of an indictment.“But this is disgusting in my mind. And, like, no president should act this way, obviously.”It’s not yet clear whether Trump will face criminal charges in the matter. But during the 2016 presidential campaign that propelled him to the Oval Office, Trump and his Republican allies said his Democratic rival Clinton should be punished for her use of a private email server while she was serving as secretary of state.“Lock her up,” became a rallying cry at Trump rallies on the campaign trail. A US state department investigation ultimately found there was “no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information”.The former justice department official who oversaw the agency’s investigation into Clinton’s handling of classified material, David Laufman, told Politico earlier this month that case and Trump’s were different.“For the department to pursue a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago tells me that the quantum and quality of the evidence they were reciting – in a search warrant and affidavit that an FBI agent swore to – was likely so pulverizing in its force as to eviscerate any notion that the search warrant and this investigation is politically motivated,” Laufman said.Trump has asked a federal judge to appoint a so-called special master who would determine whether materials that the FBI seized from his Florida resort can be used in any criminal investigation into him. The judge late Saturday issued an order indicating an openness to appointing a special master in the case, though that ruling is not final and called for a Thursday afternoon hearing to further consider the matter.Kinzinger is one of two Republicans on the US House committee investigating the deadly January 6 Capitol attack that Trump supporters staged in a desperate attempt to prevent the congressional certification of Trump’s defeat to Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.The other Republican on the committee, the Wyoming congresswoman Liz Cheney, recently lost her bid for re-election in a party primary against Trump-backed challenger Harriet Hageman.TopicsRepublicansDonald TrumpHillary ClintonUS politicsnewsReuse this content More