More stories

  • in

    Top Republicans held ‘atrocious’ Trump responsible for Capitol attack, book says

    Top Republicans held ‘atrocious’ Trump responsible for Capitol attack, book saysNew book reveals post-insurrection anger from Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy, who said of Trump: ‘I’ve had it with this guy’ In the days after the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol, Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell, the two top Republican leaders in Congress, privately told associates that they believed Donald Trump should be held responsible for the attack.A new report from the New York Times, the reporting for which comes from a forthcoming book by reporters Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns called This Will Not Pass: Trump, Biden and the Battle for America’s Future, details private conversations that McCarthy and McConnell had with colleagues revealing the extent of their anger toward Trump.“I’ve had it with this guy,” McCarthy reportedly told a group of Republicans in the immediate aftermath of the attack.The leaders floated the idea of impeachment with their colleagues, though both men ultimately voted to acquit Trump in Democratic-led impeachment proceedings.On a phone call with several top House Republicans, McCarthy allegedly said that Trump had been “atrocious and totally wrong” and blamed him for “inciting people”. He inquired about invoking the 25th amendment, which involves the removal of a president from office.McCarthy, the book reports, went on to tell colleagues that his plan was to tell Trump to resign. “What he did is unacceptable. Nobody can defend it and nobody should defend it,” he said.Other top Republicans chimed in supporting the idea of moving away from Trump, including Steve Scalise of Louisiana, who said that the party should think of a “post-Trump Republican House” and Tom Emmer of Minnesota, who brought up the possibility of censuring the president. Scalise and Emmer voted against Trump’s impeachment.McCarthy also spoke of his wish that the big tech companies would de-platform Republican lawmakers, as Twitter and Facebook did with Trump following the insurrection, who had also played a role in stoking the insurrection.“We can’t put up with that,” McCarthy said. “Can’t they take their Twitter accounts away, too?”A spokesperson for McCarthy told the New York Times that McCarthy “never said that particularly members should be removed from Twitter”.It appears that McCarthy and other top Republicans heeded more to warnings that their Republican base would retaliate if House members publicly denounced Trump. Bill Johnson, a congressman from Ohio, told McCarthy that his voters would “go ballistic” if they criticized Trump.“I’m just telling you that that’s the kind of thing that we’re dealing with, with out base,” Johnson reportedly said.In a statement to the New York Times, a spokesperson for McCarthy said that he “never said he’d call Trump to say he should resign”.Meanwhile, McConnell met with two longtime advisers over lunch in Kentucky on January 11, five days after the insurrection. He spoke to the men about the upcoming impeachment proceedings led by the Democrats.“The Democrats are going to take care of the son of a bitch for us,” McConnell said. “If this isn’t impeachable, I don’t know what is.”Several senior Republican senators believed that McConnell was leaning toward impeachment once the proceedings would get to the Senate. Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer told associates that he believed McConnell’s frustration with Trump could push him toward impeachment, but said “I don’t trust him, and I would not count on it.”While McCarthy and McConnell acknowledged Trump’s responsibility in the immediate aftermath of the insurrection, both men quickly went back to publicly supporting Trump. In April 2021, McCarthy told Fox News that Trump was unaware that the attack was happening until McCarthy broke the news to him.“He didn’t see it, but he ended the call … telling me he’ll put something out to make sure to stop this.”As the special House panel investigating the attack prepares to hold public hearings next month, McCarthy has denounced the committee’s investigation, refusing to cooperate with its inquiry on conversations the leader had with Trump in the days after the attack.McConnell, meanwhile, has taken a more supportive stance of the committee, saying in December that he believes their investigation is “something the public needs to know”. Still, the Senate minority leader said he would “absolutely” support Trump if he was the Republican presidential nominee in 2024.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Joe Biden weighs appeal as judge’s lifting of travel mask mandate sows confusion – live

    US politics liveUS politicsJoe Biden weighs appeal as judge’s lifting of travel mask mandate sows confusion – liveRuling by district court judge in Florida that Covid-19 measure was illegal is opposed by 49% of Americans, poll shows

    Russia-Ukraine war – follow the latest news
    Sign up to receive First Thing – our daily briefing by email
     Updated 1h agoVivian HoWed 20 Apr 2022 16.04 EDTFirst published on Wed 20 Apr 2022 08.52 EDT Show key events onlyLive feedShow key events onlyFrom More

  • in

    Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge says

    Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge saysFederal judge cites ‘whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests’ in allowing 14th-amendment challenge to far-right Republican An attempt to bar the far-right Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress over her support for the January 6 attack can proceed, a federal judge said.‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lieRead moreCiting “a whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests of public import”, Amy Totenberg of the northern district of Georgia sent the case on to a state hearing on Friday.A coalition of liberal groups is behind the challenge, citing the 14th amendment to the US constitution, passed after the civil war.The amendment says: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”Supporters of Donald Trump attacked the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, seeking to stop certification of his defeat by Joe Biden. A bipartisan Senate committee connected seven deaths to the riot. About 800 people have been charged, some with seditious conspiracy.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection. Acquitted, he is free to run again.Organisers of events in Washington on January 6 have tied Greene to their efforts. Greene has denied such links and said she does not encourage violence.In October, however, she told a radio show: “January 6 was just a riot at the Capitol and if you think about what our Declaration of Independence says, it says to overthrow tyrants.”In the immediate aftermath of the Capitol attack, Greene was one of 147 Republicans in Congress who objected to results in battleground states, an effort inspired by Trump’s lies about electoral fraud.An effort to use the 14th amendment against Madison Cawthorn, an extremist from North Carolina, was unsuccessful, after a judge ruled an 1872 civil war amnesty law was not merely retroactive.In her ruling on Greene’s attempt to dismiss her challenge, on Monday, Totenberg said: “This case involves a whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests of public import. Upon a thorough analysis of each of the claims asserted in this case, the court concludes that [Greene] has not carried her burden of persuasion.”Even if a state judge rules against Greene, she could challenge the ruling. The Georgia primary is on 25 May, cutting time short. Greene seems likely to win re-election.Writing for the Guardian this month, the Georgetown University professor Thomas Zimmer said: “Greene’s position within the Republican party seems secure … in fact, Greene is the poster child of a rising group of rightwing radicals … [not] shy about their intention to purge whatever vestiges of ‘moderate’ conservatism might still exist within the Republican party.”Extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the future of the Republican party | Thomas ZimmerRead moreOne of the groups behind the challenge to Greene is Free Speech for the People. In January, the group’s legal director, Ron Fein, told the Guardian the group aimed to set “a line that says that just as the framers of the 14th amendment wrote and intended, you can’t take an oath to support the constitution and then facilitate an insurrection against the United States while expecting to pursue public office”.On Monday, Fein said: “We look forward to asking Representative Greene about her involvement [in January 6] under oath.”Mike Rasbury, an activist with the Bernie Sanders-affiliated Our Revolution group and a plaintiff in the lawsuit against Greene, said he was “elated” by Totenberg’s ruling.Greene, Rasbury said, “took an oath of office to protect democracy from all enemies foreign and domestic, just as I did when I became a helicopter pilot for the US army in Vietnam. However, she has flippantly ignored this oath and, based on her role in the January 6 insurrection, is disqualified … from holding any future public office”.TopicsRepublicansThe far rightUS Capitol attackUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsUS constitution and civil libertiesnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    ‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lie

    ‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lieThe Conservative Partnership Institute’s meetings promote poll watching and ‘clean’ voter rolls, sparking fears of vote suppression An influential conservative group that includes two Trump allies who helped push lies about voter fraud in 2020 is spearheading “election integrity” summits in battleground states, advocating for expanded poll watching, “clean” voter rolls and other measures watchdogs say could curb voting rights to help Republican candidates.The Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) “election integrity network” is run by the veteran GOP lawyer Cleta Mitchell, who helped to spread misinformation about supposed election fraud in 2020.Mark Meadows, Donald Trump’s last White House chief of staff, is a senior partner of the CPI and reportedly had a lead role in at least one of its summits.Mitchell, CPI’s senior legal fellow, has hosted multi-day summits, seeking to mobilize hundreds of conservative activists for elections this year in Georgia, Arizona and Pennsylvania, all states that Trump lost to Joe Biden, and Florida, which he won.CPI is slated to hold summits this spring in Virginia, Michigan and Wisconsin, as it seeks to build “election integrity” infrastructure in swing states.Powerful groups on the right such as Heritage Action and Tea Party Patriots Action have participated in previous summits.Ties between CPI and Trump were underscored last July, when the former president’s Save America leadership Pac donated $1m to the group weeks after the House voted to create a committee to investigate the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 by Trump loyalists seeking to disrupt certification of Biden’s election victory.Mitchell’s election summits began in February this year. Previously, she and other conservatives worked with legislators in states such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan and Texas to spur the passage of voting laws, including new voter ID requirements and curbs on absentee voting, that seem heavily aimed at Black voters, voting rights advocates say.A participant at the CPI Arizona event said falsehoods about voter fraud in 2020 were voiced to gin-up enthusiasm for more aggressive election monitoring in 2022.“The event definitely used the false allegations of fraud in 2020 as a call to action to rally support for vigilant engagement this year in the election process,” the participant told the Guardian, speaking on condition of anonymity.“There was a large focus on recruiting precinct officials to watch the polls and all of the other processes associated with elections.”Voting rights watchdogs voiced strong concern about the CPI summits.“Ongoing efforts to promote false claims of widespread voter fraud are dangerous and damaging to our democracy,” Wendy Weiser, vice-president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice, said.“There is a multi-pronged attack on the core principles of our democracy in the name of election integrity. The country’s history with these kinds of so-called ‘election integrity’ operations makes clear that they create a serious risk of racial targeting, voter intimidation, and vote suppression.”The push to forge state election “integrity” networks is occurring while Mitchell and Meadows face congressional scrutiny and other investigation of their efforts to help Trump stay in power.Mitchell participated in a 2 January 2021 call with the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, in which Trump urged the state official to “find” 11,780 votes, in order to overturn Biden’s win in the state.The Fulton county district attorney and a special grand jury are investigating whether Trump and others broke laws barring the solicitation of election fraud and other statutes in Georgia. Last month, Mitchell was subpoenaed by the House January 6 committee that is investigating the Capitol attack.Meadows was a “keynote speaker” at a two-day CPI Georgia summit in February, where he was scheduled to discuss “what happened in Georgia in 2020 and what we must do to protect future elections”, according to the Citizen Times, a paper in Meadows’ home state, North Carolina.Meadows is now under scrutiny for alleged voter fraud in 2020. North Carolina officials announced last week the four-term congressman had been removed from voter rolls pending the outcome of an investigation prompted by a New Yorker report that in 2020 he registered to vote using an address he never lived at.In March, several days before the North Carolina inquiry was announced, Meadows pulled out of the CPI’s Arizona summit, where he had been billed as a top speaker. He has reportedly not participated in other events.Meadows also faces a criminal contempt of Congress referral to the US justice department, for refusing to comply fully with requests from the January 6 committee.‘Capitalizing on confusion’CPI declined to answer queries about the summits and about Meadows’ role.Watchdog groups say the summits are sham efforts based on the lie that the 2020 election was subject to widespread fraud.“The people who perpetrated the fraudulent notion that the 2020 election was stolen are capitalizing on the confusion they deliberately sowed to undermine the safety and security of future elections and, not coincidentally, rake in money in the process,” Melanie Sloan, a senior adviser to the government watchdog group American Oversight, said.Some details of CPI’s gameplan for the 2022 elections have been revealed by websites promoting state summits.In Pennsylvania, a three-day summit in late March was advertised to include sessions on how to form a “local election integrity taskforce”; how to protect “vulnerable voters from leftist activists”; “researching your local election office”; “monitoring voting equipment and systems”; and more.Some “election integrity” meetings have drawn powerful conservative groups such as FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity that have to varying degrees amplified false claims about the 2020 elections.Some groups at the summits have been bankrolled by donors including the oil and gas billionaire Charles Koch, billionaire businessman Richard Uihlein and the conservative Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, where Mitchell is a board member.CPI gatherings have also been attended by GOP figures including candidates running for governor in Pennsylvania and the sitting Florida governor, Ron DeSantis.According to the Center for Media and Democracy, at a secretive January meeting with leaders of Tea Party Patriots and conservative groups from several states, Mitchell and CPI distributed a “citizens’ guide to building an election integrity infrastructure” to promote the summits and her message.Mitchell was also tapped last March by FreedomWorks to spearhead what it billed as a $10m drive to push tougher voting laws in more than half a dozen states and to fight Democratic proposals to make voting easier.Some watchdog groups say the CPI summits pose several threats to voting rights in 2022.Sloan, of American Oversight, said the CPI agenda had echoes of “Jim Crow-style voter suppression techniques, and a recipe for more verbal and physical threats against election administration officials”, similar to ones that occurred in Georgia and other states after the 2020 elections.Weiser, of the Brennan Center, warned: “There is a growing risk that in the name of election integrity, partisans and vigilantes will mobilize to intimidate voters and thwart their participation.”TopicsRepublicansUS politicsUS voting rightsfeaturesReuse this content More

  • in

    Florida rejects 54 math textbooks over ‘prohibited topics’ including critical race theory

    Florida rejects 54 math textbooks over ‘prohibited topics’ including critical race theoryMove follows a series of hardline measures by Republicans in the state to alter teaching in schools as governor welcomes news Florida’s education department has rejected 54 mathematics textbooks from next year’s school curriculum, citing alleged references to critical race theory among a range of reasoning for some of the rejections, officials announced.The department said in a news release Friday that some of the books had been rejected for failure to comply with the state’s content standards, Benchmarks for Excellent Student Thinking [Best], but that 21% of the books were disallowed “because they incorporate prohibited topics or unsolicited strategies, including CRT”.Department officials disapproved an additional 11 books “because they do not properly align to Best Standards and incorporate prohibited topics or unsolicited strategies, including CRT”.Critical race theory is an academic practice that examines the ways in which racism operates in US laws and society.The release does not list the titles of the books or provide any extracts to offer reasons why the books were removed. The announcement follows a series of hardline measures by Republicans in the state to alter teaching in schools as conservatives thrust the issue of critical race theory into the country’s ongoing political culture wars.In June last year, the Florida board of education ruled to ban the teaching of critical race theory in public schools. That included the teaching of the New York Times’s Pulitzer prize-winning series the 1619 Project, which re-examines American history in the context of slavery and its consequences.In a statement, Florida’s Republican governor Ron DeSantis welcomed the education department’s announcement and accused some textbook publishers of “indoctrinating” children with “concepts like race essentialism, especially, bizarrely, for elementary school students”.Florida Democrats rebuked the announcement. Democratic state representative Carlos G Smith argued on Twitter that DeSantis had “turned our classrooms into political battlefields and this is just the beginning”.Swathes of Republican-controlled states in the US have passed measures seeking to ban the teaching of critical race theory, which will probably be a prominent conservative talking point in this year’s midterm elections.Many of those bills and orders are vaguely worded, leading to fears of censorship on school and college campuses around the country.TopicsFloridaRon DeSantisUS educationRaceUS politicsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    ‘The GOP needs to look like America’: ex-congressman Will Hurd’s manifesto for the right

    ‘The GOP needs to look like America’: ex-congressman Will Hurd’s manifesto for the right In new book, Republican and former undercover CIA officer rejects political extremesIt was a plot twist worthy of Homeland.Will Hurd got home one night and told his fiancee that he was in fact an undercover officer in the CIA. And there was more. They would have to move to Pakistan.Republicans’ ugly attacks on Ketanji Brown Jackson show lurch to far rightRead moreThey never married.“You know, it probably had a chilling effect on our relationship, especially when you confirm, ‘Hey babe, I actually work in the CIA and we’re going to Islamabad. Pack your bags. Great!’” Hurd recalls in a phone interview from Washington.Now 44, the former Republican congressman is still a bachelor. “I dated a woman for a while when I was in Congress but being on the road, putting a hundred and so thousand miles on your car every year and having close to three-quarters of a million airline miles a year, is not conducive to a relationship unless they’re riding with you.”Hurd joined the CIA in 2000. After the September 11 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, he spent eight years on the frontlines of the “war on terror” including Pakistan, India and Afghanistan. He then helped build a cybersecurity firm before entering politics and winning election in the highly competitive 23rd congressional district of Texas.For two terms he was one of two Black Republicans in the US House of Representatives; for his third term, he was the only one. When in 2019 he decided to walk away, it felt to some like a light going out – proof that former president Donald Trump’s regressively nativist version of the Republican party had prevailed.Hurd channeled his energies into technology companies working on national security. He has also just written a book, American Reboot, partly a manifesto for fixing America’s ailing democracy and beating China, partly a memoir delving back into his childhood in San Antonio, Texas.Like former president Barack Obama, Hurd is the son a Black father and white mother. He writes that it was neither fashionable nor widely accepted to be an interracial couple in early 1970s south Texas. He elaborates by phone: “I don’t know of another interracial couple in San Antonio around the time that my parents were married.“I was a mama’s boy growing up in and it was only in later life that my mom would reveal stories to us about how people would look at her weird because she had these dark babies. We never saw that or necessarily understood that when we were growing up so the things that I faced were similar things that my peers and friends faced.”Hurd endured racism as a teenager. He writes how “shopkeepers wouldn’t want a young Black kid in their place of business so they’d call me the N-word and tell me to get out. Non-Black fathers of girls I dated tried to persuade their daughters not to date me because of my race.”Much has been written about Obama’s gift for “code-switching” between Black and white spaces, campaigning in a Black barbershop one moment, appearing with his white great-uncle– a second world war veteran – the next. It was said to have given him an unusual ability to walk in someone else’s shoes.Hurd reflects on being mixed race: “I think it gives me an empathy and compassion for anybody who might be different in a room because I’m used to always being different. It’s to try to understand and appreciate somebody else’s perspective.”“When I was first running for Congress and crisscrossing the district, and going into communities that had never seen a Republican before, it wasn’t daunting for me because being different from the other people in the room was something I always had experience with.”“I’m not equating race and political affiliation; I’m just saying that because of the things that I had to deal with being am interracial kid, I was able to take those lessons and apply them in places. It made me more effective.”But speaking of political affiliation, why did Hurd choose the Republicans, a party associated with racist dog-whistling since before he was born, from Richard Nixon’s 1960s “southern strategy” to Ronald Reagan lauding “states’ rights” in Mississippi in 1980?Hurd’s response: “What I would say is that’s probably the minority of the party. And so why am I a Republican? It starts with my dad. My dad’s been a Republican all his life. He has always said he’s been a Republican since Lincoln freed us.”Then when Hurd went to study at Texas A&M University he befriended former president George HW Bush, was tutored by former defense secretary Robert Gates and got to know former Texas governor Rick Perry. “When I look at what I look at people that were influential and in my life, these were Republicans.”“Then when you start thinking about the principles and theories at the core, it is about freedom leads to opportunity, opportunity leads to growth, growth leads to progress – those foundational things. And when I criss cross the district or the country, that’s where most Republicans are.“Yes, there are some that don’t espouse those things but it is, in my opinion, not the majority of the party. But they’re enough that they color the entire party, which is why we have to be diligent in forcing those kind of voices out of the party.”It could be said the Republicans have just been through a lost decade. After nominee Mitt Romney lost the presidential election to Obama in 2012, an “autopsy report” concluded the party needed to diversify or die and broaden appeal to young voters, women and minorities.Along came Trump, who turned the autopsy upside down and cast aside racist dog whistles in favor of megaphones. He duly lost the national popular vote but got lucky in the electoral college and became president – a sugar high for Republicans in the moment but recipe for long term heart disease.Part one of Hurd’s book is entitled “The GOP needs to look like America”. He writes: “The party can’t have in it assholes, racists, misogynists and homophobes. For our party to more accurately reflect a broader America, we will need to appeal to the middle, not the edges.”He adds by phone: “When you look at some of the original polling after Trump won, people said they didn’t necessarily like his ideas, but they thought he was going to be different. But he ultimately didn’t follow through on some of the things outlined in the autopsy and guess what? We lost all three: the House, Senate and the White House.”In November’s midterm elections, however, polls suggest that Republicans will regain the House and possibly the Senate. Won’t the party feel its embrace of Trump has been vindicated? “I don’t know the answer because I can say that Donald Trump has a very strong, solid base but his influence down the ballot is waning.”Hurd was never on the Trump train. When in October 2016 an Access Hollywood tape revealed the Republican nominee saying “grab ‘em by the pussy”, Hurd denounced the remarks “utterly sickening and repulsive” and urged him to “step aside for a true conservative”. In the election, Hurd voted for independent candidate Evan McMullin, with whom he had served in the CIA.When Trump, early in his presidency, drew moral equivalence between white nationalists and civil rights protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, Hurd called on him to apologize. He comments now: “Has he said racist things? Yes.”Yet despite outrage after outrage, even an insurrection, most Republicans have bowed the knee over the past five years. Some still refuse to acknowledge that Trump lost the 2020 election lest they incur his wrath. Asked if he wishes that more would take a stand, Hurd declines to criticize his old colleagues.“Look, I wish for the Republican party to be successful among communities that we’re not very successful with now,” he says. “In the long term we need to be a party that’s based on values and our audio and video need to match, meaning our words and our actions need to reflect that.”To try again from a more positive welcome, does Hurd welcome the defiance of Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, two Republicans sitting on the House committee investigating January 6? “Liz and Adam are trying to help the party get beyond the 2020 election.Mitt Romney warns of ‘extraordinary challenge’ in preserving democracyRead more“The 2020 election was not stolen. It was lost. We need more people to understand that because if we’re able to get beyond that, then we can start talking about some of these issues that this country needs to deal with.”Hurd could have remained in the trenches with the handful of anti-Trump rebels. But he decided it was time to go. “I always believe that these positions, if you’re doing well, you have a shelf life. I said back in 2009 when I first ran, it was six, seven or eight years. These seats, these positions were not designed to be in for ever.“Being a career politician is not what is going to be helpful for our country. I thought it was the opportunity for me to do other things. I enjoyed talking technology in a policy setting’ now I love talking policy in a technology setting. Your ability to have an impact is not connected with a position that you hold.”For good measure, he insists: “Donald Trump had no influence on what I did or didn’t do in Congress and he doesn’t have any influence on what I do after Congress.”Hurd’s book argues that elected officials appeal to the extremes rather than the middle partly because of the design of congressional districts. He accuses both sides of fear mongering rather than trying to inspire. Joe Biden might have seemed like the right man to deliver bipartisan healing after the trauma of the Trump years. But Hurd has been disappointed.“The promise of that has not unfolded. The Democratic party is so afraid of their far left that it’s influencing their actions. The 2020 election told us: don’t be a jerk and don’t be a socialist. The fact that Joe Biden won and had zero coattails – the Democratic House and Senate lost seats – is a sign to say, ‘Hey, we don’t want that kind of rhetoric [from Trump] but we also don’t want the terrible ideas that the Democratic party is pushing.’“But guess what? Democrats haven’t learned that lesson and so in 2022 you’re going to see Republicans take the House and likely the Senate. It’s not, as the far left likes to say, because they haven’t done a lot. No, it’s because the country doesn’t want to see the things that they’re talking about actually happen.”Hurd even manages to turn Republicans’ disingenuous attacks on Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman nominated to the supreme court, into an excuse to bash Democrats. “It was Democrats who took away the joy because, instead of talking about the historic nature of her nomination – she is the second most popular judicial candidate in history – it was the left that wanted to talk about some senators asking crazy questions. That’s not news.”What does he make of the current political manipulation of the teaching of race in schools? “Slavery happened. Jim Crow happened. These things have impacts; we should be talking about them. But you also shouldn’t be segregating kids based on their eye colour or hair colour to tell that lesson. All those things can be true at the same time.”American Reboot has triggered a wave of media speculation that Hurd is considering a run for president in 2024. He has the electoral pedigree and national security credentials. And as Republicans’ first Black presidential nominee, he would personify a resounding statement that the party had shrugged off Trump and learned from that decade-old autopsy report after all. He does not rule it out.“Look, it’s nice that you write a really good book and everybody thinks you’re running for office,” he says. “For me, if I can serve my country again, I’ll evaluate it but right now the best way to serve my country is to put some of these ideas out there and say, hey, we don’t have to accept the way we’re currently doing things and there’s a better way.”TopicsRepublicansUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

  • in

    What does Republicans’ break from the presidential debate commission mean?

    What does Republicans’ break from the presidential debate commission mean?The US presidential debate has been thrown into doubt – and the move is proof of the RNC’s eagerness to do Trump’s bidding One of the marquee moments of any US presidential election – the televised debate – has been thrown into doubt by the Republican party’s decision on Thursday to withdraw from the Commission on Presidential Debates.The Republican National Committee (RNC) grumbled that the group that has run the debates since 1988 is biased and refuses to enact reforms. It promised to “find newer, better debate platforms” in future.The long-threatened move was proof of the RNC’s continued eagerness to do the bidding of former president Donald Trump, who has endlessly complained about the timing and formats of debates and the choice of moderators.But in a week that also saw the Democratic National Committee resolve that Iowa and New Hampshire are no longer guaranteed to go first in the party’s presidential nominating process, it was also a reminder that seemingly immutable traditions are fragile.The Commission on Presidential Debates was founded in 1987 as a non-profit sponsored by both Democrats and Republicans to codify debates as a permanent part of presidential elections.But it has faced criticism from various quarters. Republicans in particular have complained that it favours Democrats since the Barack Obama v Mitt Romney debates of a decade ago.Trump, as ever, took the grievance to a new level and refused to take part in what was meant to be the second of three debates with Joe Biden in 2020 after the commission made it virtual in the wake of the then president’s coronavirus infection.“He’s got a long-running dispute with the commission,” said Aaron Kall, director of debate at the University of Michigan. “He thinks the composition is a bunch of Never Trumpers and the deck has been stacked against him and they haven’t given him a fair shake.“In some ways it’s a negotiating ploy if this particular commission’s not involved. I think there’s still likely to be some debates but there’s going to be negotiation for timing and location and who the moderator is. So, if he’s the candidate again, it may give him more leverage.”The RNC is chaired by Ronna McDaniel, a Trump loyalist who has proven determined to enforce his will. Earlier this year the RNC censured Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, two Republicans who broke with Trump to sit on the House of Representatives select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol.Should Trump be the party’s nominee in the 2024 presidential election, McDaniel would no doubt push hard for debates that suit his whims – a potentially tough and complicated negotiation with TV networks, social media companies, thinktanks or other entities.Kall continued: “The Commission on Presidential Debates have been doing it for the last several decades but they weren’t the first one; they won’t be the last one. I don’t think anyone will shed a tear if whatever debates we have in the next cycle are not sponsored by the commission.“But it’ll be kind of the wild west and everyone will want to be involved in a debate. They get tens of millions of viewers. There’s very few events these days, given how bifurcated we are, that command the respect of debates. We have basically the Super Bowl, presidential debates, the inaugural address, the State of the Union – it’s very rare.”The value of debates has been questioned in this highly partisan, fragmented media age. This month Republican Herschel Walker and Democrat John Fetterman skipped primary debates in Georgia and Pennsylvania, respectively.Now the Commission on Presidential Debates may have passed its sell-by date. Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, said: “I’m only surprised it took this long. It’s all about Trump, really, but there’s another segment of people who’ve looked at that and the whole system is stale and it’s run by the same people that have been running it for decades.“That’s what I’m kind of torn about. I certainly don’t agree with Trump’s reasoning for doing it but I do think the system needs shaking up. This won’t do it because they’re just trying to avoid tough questions and they won’t want neutral anchors and reporters asking questions. They’re going to want partisans. They want the hosts of Fox’s morning show.”Presidential debates were first made famous by John F Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960 but were then not held again until 1976. Sabato added: “We actually had 16 years there with no presidential debates until they were restarted because both candidates needed them in 1976.“We thought for a while that it was so well established that candidates couldn’t avoid debates; they’d have to participate. Well, just goes to show, nothing’s permanent. It doesn’t hurt anybody to say no. All they have to do is tell their partisans, ‘This thing is stacked against us. You know how those awful media people are.’”TopicsRepublicansUS politicsUS elections 2024Donald TrumpanalysisReuse this content More