Right-Wing Extremism and Alt-Right

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      In Israel, Netanyahu’s Hard-Right Agenda Gains Steam

      by

      Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is pushing to upend the judiciary, entrench Israeli control of the West Bank and strengthen ultraconservative Jews, fueling protests and deepening Israel’s divisions.Less than two weeks into its tenure, the new government in Israel has moved quickly on a wave of far-right agenda items that would weaken the judiciary, entrench Israeli control of the West Bank and bifurcate the military chain of command to give some far-right ministers greater control of matters related to the occupation.On Wednesday night, the government moved forward with the centerpiece of its program — releasing for the first time a detailed plan for a sweeping judicial overhaul that includes reducing the Supreme Court’s influence over Parliament and strengthening the government’s role in the appointment of judges.Coalition leaders have also taken a more combative stance toward the Palestinians than their immediate predecessors. Funding to the Palestinian Authority has been cut, and the new minister for national security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, has angered Palestinians and many Arab countries by touring a sensitive religious site and ordering the police to take down Palestinian flags.The program launched by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a combination of policy announcements, agreements within the coalition and draft legislation, has quickly exacerbated splits in Israeli society. Critics of the prime minister and his allies fear that the agenda threatens Israel’s democratic institutions, its already fraught relationship with the Jewish diaspora and its efforts to form new ties with Arab neighbors like Saudi Arabia — and that it effectively sounds the death rattle for long-ailing hopes for a Palestinian state.Israeli police officers at the Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem on Jan. 3, the day that the new minister for national security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, toured the contested site. Maya Alleruzzo/Associated PressCurrently on trial for corruption, Mr. Netanyahu has presented his plans as the legitimate program of an elected government. He has also portrayed the push for judicial changes as a valid attempt to limit the interference of an unelected judiciary over an elected Parliament.“We received a clear and strong mandate from the public to carry out what we promised during the elections and this is what we will do,” Mr. Netanyahu said in a speech this week. “This is the implementation of the will of the voters and this is the essence of democracy.”But his critics present it as a constitutional coup. “This is not a reform, this is an extreme regime change,” said Yair Lapid, the previous prime minister, in a speech on Monday. “This does not fix democracy, this destroys democracy,” he added.Returning to power for the third time, Mr. Netanyahu now heads a government that is Israel’s most right-wing and religiously conservative administration ever, bringing together far-right parties supported by settlers and ultra-Orthodox parties that have vowed to reshape Israeli society.The main early focus of the new government — and of opposition alarm — has been plans for the justice system.What to Know About Israel’s New GovernmentNetanyahu’s Return: Benjamin Netanyahu has returned to power at the helm of the most right-wing administration in Israeli history. Now, many fear that his unelected family members could play an outsize role.The Far Right’s Rise: To win election, Mr. Netanyahu and his far-right allies harnessed perceived threats to Israel’s Jewish identity after ethnic unrest and the subsequent inclusion of Arab lawmakers in the government.Ultra-Orthodox Parties: To preserve his new government, Mr. Netanyahu has made a string of promises to Israel’s ultra-Orthodox parties. Their push for greater autonomy has potentially broad-ranging implications.A Provocative Visit: In one of his first acts as Israel’s minister of national security, the ultranationalist Itamar Ben-Gvir toured a volatile holy site in Jerusalem, drawing a furious reaction from Palestinian leaders.The new justice minister, Mr. Levin, confirmed on Wednesday that he would pursue his longstanding goal of limiting the Supreme Court’s ability to countermand laws made in Parliament and giving the government more control over the appointment and promotion of judges.Currently, the Supreme Court can strike down laws it deems unconstitutional — a role that its supporters consider an essential restraint on parliamentary overreach but that critics see as an unreasonable restriction on elected politicians.A member of the latter camp, Mr. Levin has proposed legislation that would allow a simple majority of lawmakers to override the court’s decisions.A protest against the new Israeli government in Tel Aviv last week. Abir Sultan/EPA, via ShutterstockHe also wants to give politicians greater influence over the committee that appoints new judges. That would draw the Israeli judiciary closer to its counterpart in the United States, where senators confirm judicial appointments made by the president.But it is an unfamiliar idea in Israel, where senior judges and attorneys dominate the process of deciding who gets to be a judge. Supporters say this mechanism restricts political interference in the court, but to detractors it has turned the judiciary into a self-selecting club.Mr. Netanyahu says he has no plans to use his new office to derail his corruption trial. But the political opposition says the judicial proposals are a harbinger of other legislation that could either reduce his potential punishment, legalize the crimes of which he’s accused or undermine the attorney general who oversees his prosecution.“He’s cooking up what he is really aiming for — an exemption from trial,” said Benny Gantz, an opposition leader, in a speech last week.Thousands of demonstrators protested the plans across Israel last weekend, and opposition leaders have called for even bigger rallies on Saturday, prompting one government lawmaker, Zvika Fogel, to demand their arrest for “treason.”To Palestinians, Mr. Netanyahu’s government represents the most unequivocal Israeli opposition to Palestinian statehood since negotiations to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict gathered momentum in the 1990s.Successive Israeli leaders, including Mr. Netanyahu, had since left open the possibility of ceding parts of the West Bank to a future Palestinian state.Mr. Netanyahu’s new government, however, ended that ambiguity in late December. A list of the coalition’s guiding principles began with a straightforward assertion of the Jewish people’s “exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel,” a biblical term that encompasses both Israel and the occupied West Bank, and pledged to “develop settlements in all parts of the Land of Israel.”A separate side agreement between Mr. Netanyahu’s party, Likud, and another party in its coalition, Religious Zionism, also pledges that Mr. Netanyahu will lead efforts to formally annex the West Bank — albeit at a time of his choosing.The government has also taken several combative steps against Palestinians.Ministers have cut roughly $40 million from the money the government sends the Palestinian Authority, which administers parts of the West Bank, and removed travel privileges from several Palestinian leaders — mainly in retaliation against diplomatic measures taken by Palestinians against Israel at the United Nations.Mr. Ben-Gvir, the minister for national security, who holds criminal convictions for incitement of racism against Arabs and support for a Jewish terrorist group, has instructed the police to confiscate Palestinian flags flown in public in Israel.And last week, he provocatively toured the Aqsa Mosque compound — a deeply sensitive site sacred to both Muslims and Jews, who call it the Temple Mount — in what observers feared might set off another round of fighting with Palestinian armed groups in Gaza.Mr. Ben-Gvir, the minister for national security, has instructed the police to confiscate Palestinian flags flown in public in Israel. Menahem Kahana/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThese moves all had precedents: Politicians have previously risked upheaval by visiting the compound, Israeli governments have often withheld money from the Palestinian Authority, and Israeli police officers have regularly confiscated Palestinian flags in the past.But the fast pace at which the government has acted has led to fears of more drastic — and more consequential — moves in the future, amid what is already the deadliest period in the territory for more than a decade.Within the Israeli military, senior officers are already braced for a showdown over who holds sway over the security forces that oversee the occupation of the West Bank.A law passed in late December is set to give Mr. Ben-Gvir unprecedented control over special police forces in the West Bank that were previously under the purview of the Army. The coalition agreements are also set to give Bezalel Smotrich, another hard-right settler leader, oversight over bureaucratic aspects of the occupation.Both moves have prompted disquiet in the military because they will create three centers of Israeli power in the West Bank.Among secular and liberal Israelis, there is rising concern about the government’s plans to strengthen the autonomy of ultraconservative Jews, who form about 13 percent of Israel’s nine million residents.Mr. Netanyahu agreed to protect funding for the ultra-Orthodox school system despite its failure to teach core subjects like math and English, and to formalize a longstanding arrangement that lets seminary students avoid military service.To secular Israelis, these measures will further limit the ability of ultra-Orthodox Israelis, known as Haredim, to participate in the economy and in the defense of the country — increasing the social and financial burden on secular Israelis.The government contains some secular members, like Amir Ohana, the first openly gay speaker of Parliament, and has officially promised to maintain the current balance between the secular and religious worlds. But because several key coalition leaders have already taken a combative line against secular and liberal society, some fear a looming broadside against religious and social pluralism.Avi Maoz, an ultraconservative who believes women should stay at home and wants to ban Jerusalem’s gay pride parade, has been placed in charge of part of the education budget. Mr. Smotrich, who has described himself as a “proud homophobe” and expressed support for racial segregation in maternity wards, called late last year for soccer authorities to avoid holding games on the Jewish Sabbath.Though that request is unlikely to become a rule, Mr. Netanyahu has already made other commitments to strengthen Orthodox Judaism, setting the stage for greater tension with the Jewish diaspora, who adhere more often to non-Orthodox streams of Judaism than in Israel.The coalition has promised to ban non-Orthodox prayer at the main section of the Western Wall in Jerusalem.Abir Sultan/EPA, via ShutterstockThe coalition agreements pledge to maintain a ban on non-Orthodox prayer at the main section of the Western Wall, a Jerusalem holy site, and bar converts to non-Orthodox streams of Judaism from being recognized by the state as Jewish.“This is how democracies collapse,” Mr. Lapid said in a video on Tuesday night, as the debate over judicial changes turned increasingly rancorous, adding: “We won’t let our beloved country be trampled.”Myra Noveck More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Brazil Riot and Jan. 6 Attack Followed a Similar Digital Playbook, Experts Say

      by

      On TikTok and YouTube, videos claiming voter fraud in Brazil’s recent elections have been recirculating for days.On the WhatsApp and Telegram messaging services, an image of a poster announcing the date, time and location of the protests against the government was copied and shared over the weekend.And on Facebook and Twitter, hashtags designed to evade detection by the authorities were used by organizers as they descended onto government buildings in the capital, Brasília, on Sunday.One day after the thousands of people broke into government buildings to protest what they falsely claim was a stolen election, misinformation researchers are studying how the internet was used to stoke anger and to organize far-right groups ahead of the riots. Many are drawing a comparison to the Jan. 6 protests two years ago in the United States, where thousands broke into the Capitol building in Washington. In both cases, they say, a playbook was used in which online groups, chats and social media sites played a central role.“Digital platforms were fundamental not only in the extreme right-wing domestic terrorism on Sunday, but also in the entire long process of online radicalization over the last 10 years in Brazil,” said Michele Prado, an independent researcher who studies digital movements and the Brazilian far right.She said that calls for violence have been “increasing exponentially from the last week of December.”She and other misinformation researchers have singled out Twitter and Telegram as playing a central role in organizing protests. In posts on Brazilian Telegram channels viewed by The New York Times, there were open calls for violence against the left-wing Brazilian politicians and their families. There were also addresses of government offices for protesters to attack.In one image, which The Times found on more than a dozen Telegram channels, there was a call for “patriots” to gather in Brasília on Sunday to “mark a new day” of independence. Underneath many of the posters were details of gathering times for protesters.The hashtag “Festa da Selma” was also widely spread on Twitter, including by far-right extremists who had previously been banned from the platform, Ms. Prado said.A military police officer at a camp of Bolsonaro supporters in front of an Army facility on Monday.Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesIn the months since Elon Musk took over Twitter, far-right figures from around the world have had their accounts reinstated as a general amnesty unless they violated rules again. Ms. Prado said that misinformation researchers in Brazil have been reporting the accounts to Twitter in hopes that the company takes action.Twitter and Telegram did not respond to requests for comment.Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, said that the attacks Sunday were a “violating event” and that the company was removing content on its platforms that supported or praised the attacks on government buildings in Brazil.The protesters in Brazil and those in the United States were inspired by the same extremist ideas and conspiracy theories and were both radicalized online, Ms. Prado said. In both cases, she added, social media played a crucial role in organizing violent attacks. More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Speaker, Speaker, What Do You See? I See MAGA Looking at Me.

      by

      Bret Stephens: Gail, remember “We Need to Talk About Kevin,” the unforgettable Lionel Shriver novel about a woman whose son murders his classmates? Maybe someone should write the sequel: “We Need to Talk About What They Did to Kevin.”Gail Collins: A book-length disquisition on Kevin McCarthy, Bret? I dunno. Always thought his strongest suit was that he was too boring to hate. But now that he’s apparently promised the Republican right wing everything but permission to bring pet ocelots to the House floor, I can see it.Bret: Too boring to hate or too pathetic to despise? I’ve begun to think of McCarthy almost as a literary archetype, like one of those figures in a Joseph Conrad novel whose follies make them weak and whose weakness leads them to folly.Gail: Love your literary allusions. But let’s pretend you’re in charge of the Republican Party — tell me what you think of him in general.Bret: A few honorable exceptions aside, the G.O.P. is basically split between reptiles and invertebrates. McCarthy is the ultimate invertebrate. He went to Mar-a-Lago just a short while after Jan. 6 to kiss the ring of the guy who incited the mob that, by McCarthy’s own admission, wanted to kill him. He hated Liz Cheney because of her backbone. But he quailed before Marjorie Taylor Greene because she has a forked tongue. He gave away the powers and prerogatives of the office of speaker in order to gain the office, which is like a slug abandoning its shell and thinking it won’t be stepped on. A better man would have told the Freedom Caucus holdouts to shove it. Instead, as a friend of mine put it, McCarthy decided to become the squeaker of the House.Gail: OK, Kevin is House squeaker forever.Bret: If there’s a silver lining here, it’s that the whole spectacle has shown voters what they get for voting for this Republican Party.Gail: Hey, you’re still in charge of Republicans. Now that they’re sort of in command, do you have hopes they’ll make progress on your priorities, like controlling government spending? Without, um, failing to make the nation’s debt payments ….Bret: Buried in the noise about McCarthy’s humiliation is that his opponents had some reasonable demands. One of them was to give members of Congress a minimum of 72 hours to read the legislation they were voting on. Another was to limit bills to a single subject. The idea is to do away with the everything-but-the-kitchen-sink spending packages that Congress has lately become way too fond of.Gail: Yeah, I can buy into that one.Bret: On the other hand, the idea that this Republican clown show is going to accomplish anything significant — particularly since doing so would require them to work with a Democratic president and Senate — is roughly the equivalent of Vladimir Putin leaving the vocation of vile despot to become a … cannabis entrepreneur. Not going to happen.So what do Democrats do?Gail: Well, one plus is that we don’t have to worry about the Republican House passing some terrible, nutty legislation since the Senate is there to put a halt to it. Interesting how much better obstruction looks when your party is doing the obstructing ….Bret: It’s almost — almost — enough to be grateful to people like Herschel Walker and Blake Masters for being such deliriously awful candidates.Gail: When it comes to positive action, like keeping the government running, I’d like to think the moderate Dems and the moderate Republicans could get together and come to some agreement on the basics. Do you think there’s a chance?Bret: What was the name of that Bret Easton Ellis novel? “Less Than Zero.” Bipartisanship became a four-letter word for most Republicans sometime around 2012. If we can avoid another useless government shutdown, I’ll consider it a minor miracle.On the other hand, all this is good for Democrats. In our last conversation, I predicted that McCarthy wouldn’t win the speakership and that Joe Biden would decide against a second term. I was wrong on the first. Now I’m beginning to think I was also wrong on the second, in part because Republicans are in such manifest disarray. What is your spidey sense telling you?Gail: Yeah, Biden knows 80 is old for another run, but the chance to take on Donald Trump again is probably going to be irresistible.Bret: Assuming it’s going to be Trump, which, increasingly, I doubt.Gail: You really think it’s going to be Ron DeSantis? My theory is that if the field opens up at all, there’ll be a swarm of Republican hopefuls, dividing the Trump opposition.Bret: It’ll be DeSantis or you can serve me a platter of crow. Never mind that Trump still managed to seal the deal for McCarthy’s speakership by winning over a few of the last holdouts. It still took him 15 ballots.Gail: But about Biden — if he did drop out, Democrats would have to figure out what to do about Kamala Harris. A woman, a minority, with the classic presidential training job. Yet a lot of people haven’t found her all that impressive as a potential leader.My vote would be for him to announce he’s not running instantly, and let all the other potential heirs go for it.Bret: How do you solve a problem like Kamala? My initial hope was that she’d grow into the job. That hasn’t seemed to happen. My second hope was that Biden would give her a task in which she’d shine. Didn’t happen either. My third hope was that Biden would ask her to fill Stephen Breyer’s seat on the Supreme Court and then nominate Gina Raimondo or Pete Buttigieg to the vice presidency, setting either of them up to be the front-runner in ’24 or ’28. Whoops again. Now Dems are saddled with their own version of Dan Quayle, minus the gravitas.Gail: Not fair to compare her to Dan Quayle. But otherwise OK with your plan. Go on.Bret: I also think Biden should announce he isn’t going to run, both on account of his age and the prospect of running against someone like DeSantis. But the argument is harder to make given the midterm results, Republican chaos, the sense that he’s defied the skeptics to pass a lot of legislation and the increasingly likely prospect that Ukraine will prevail over Russia this year and give him a truly historic geopolitical win.I just hope that if he does run, he switches veeps. It would … reassure the nation.Gail: So happy to hear you’re on a Biden fan track. Does that apply to his new plan for the Mexican border, too?Bret: Not a Biden fan, exactly, though I do root for a successful presidency on general principle. As for the border plan, the good news is that he finally seems to be recognizing the scale of the problem and promising tougher enforcement. It’s also good that he’s doing more for political refugees from oppressive countries like Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela.Gail: And next …Bret: The right step now is to start pushing for realistic bipartisan immigration reform that gives Republicans more money for border wall construction and security in exchange for automatic citizenship for Dreamers, an expanded and renewable guest-worker visa that helps bring undocumented workers out of the shadows and a big increase in the “extraordinary ability” EB-1 visas for our future Andy Groves and Albert Einsteins. What do you think?Gail: I was waiting for you to get to the border wall itself, which we disagree about. Terrible symbol, awful to try to maintain and not always effective.Bret: All true, except that it paves the way for a good legislative compromise and can save lives if it deters dangerous border crossings.Gail: Moneywise, the border states deserve increased federal aid to handle their challenges. A good chunk should go to early childhood education, which would not only help the new arrivals but also local children born into non-English-speaking families.The aid should also go to states like New York that are getting busloads of new immigrants — some from those Arizona and Texas busing plots, but a good number just because they’re the newcomers’ choice destination.I believe there was a bipartisan plan hatched in the House that included citizenship for Dreamers — an obvious reform that, amazingly, we haven’t yet achieved. But bipartisan plans aren’t doing real well right now.Bret: It’s still worth a shot. I’m sorry Biden didn’t invest the kind of political capital into immigration reform that he did into the infrastructure and climate change bills. And if Republicans wind up voting down funding for a border wall out of spite for Dreamers, I can’t see how that helps Republicans or hurts Democrats. Supporting them seems like smart politics at the very minimum.Before we go, Gail, one more point of note: We just passed the second anniversary of the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol. I was happy to see Biden honor the heroes of that day at a White House ceremony. Also happy to see the Justice Department continue to prosecute hundreds of cases. And appalled to watch Brazil’s right-wing loons try to imitate the Jan. 6 insurrectionists by storming their own parliament. Any suggestions for going forward?Gail: Well, what we really need to see is an effort by Republicans, some of whom were endangered themselves during the attack, but virtually none of whom have shown any interest in revisiting that awful moment — only one member of the party showed up for that ceremony.Now that Kevin McCarthy has his job in hand, let’s see him call for a bipartisan committee to come up with some suggestions. Ha ha ha.Sorry — don’t want to end on a snippy note.Bret: Not snippy at all. Truthful. We could start by requiring a civics course for all incoming members of Congress. Maybe some of them might learn that their first duty is to the Constitution, not to themselves.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Just What Do McCarthy’s Antagonists Want, and Why Won’t They Budge?

      by

      The Republican holdouts are showing that party leaders’ usual methods of arm-twisting no longer work. “It’s not about policies, it’s about the fight,” said one former operative.As the Republicans’ drama over Representative Kevin McCarthy’s bid to become House speaker persists for round after round of negotiations and roll-call votes, one puzzling question is just what, exactly, the rebels want.To the endless frustration of McCarthy and his allies, the insurgents’ demands have been heavy on two factors: internal procedural rules meant to expand the power of the far right within the House, and the insurgents’ desire to present themselves as uncompromising foes of Democrats’ agenda. But more than anything else, McCarthy’s most die-hard opponents just seem intent on taking him down.“It’s not about policies, it’s about the fight,” said Doug Heye, a former aide to Representative Eric Cantor, the onetime majority leader who lost his seat in a stunning 2014 upset by a far-right challenger, David Brat. “The more you hear the word ‘fight’ or ‘fighter,’ the less you hear about a strategy for winning that fight.”The longer the speaker battle has dragged on, the more McCarthy’s supporters have expressed exasperation at this state of affairs. Representative Dan Crenshaw of Texas accused the holdouts of mouthing “stupid platitudes that some consultant told you to say on the campaign trail.” Representative Don Bacon, who holds a swing seat in Nebraska, has taken to calling them “the chaos caucus” and the “Taliban 20.”Such strident language isn’t new: Representative John Boehner, who was hounded out of the speakership in 2015 by the ultraconservative Freedom Caucus, later lashed out at one of its co-founders, Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, as a “political terrorist” and a “jerk.” (Jordan is now backing McCarthy, and is set to run the powerful Judiciary Committee if and when the speaker fight is resolved.)Fueled by the grass-roots rightOne of the peculiarities of this speaker vote has been watching McCarthy’s team try to marshal the conservative-industrial media complex, which helped power the rise of political outsiders like Donald Trump and has steadily weakened the ability of party leaders to keep backbenchers in line.“We’ll see what happens when Tucker and Sean Hannity and Ben Shapiro start beating up on those guys,” Representative Guy Reschenthaler of Pennsylvania wistfully told reporters at the Capitol this week. “Maybe that’ll move it.”But Tucker Carlson did not beat up on those guys, instead celebrating the speakership debate as “pretty refreshing.” Nor is it clear that Fox News can command the exclusive loyalties of the right. Witness how, during the Republican primary for Senate last year in Pennsylvania, a network of conservative blogs and podcasts fueled the sudden rise of Kathy Barnette, a little-known conservative media personality who was able to throw a last-minute fright into Trump and Hannity’s preferred candidate, Mehmet Oz.“Is this a game show?” a frustrated Hannity pressed one of the House holdouts, Representative Lauren Boebert of Colorado, on his Fox News show on Wednesday night. She didn’t back down.Chris Stirewalt, a former editor at Fox News, said that “what happens online, on talk radio and on Fox prime time has been and will continue to be the harbinger of what House Republicans will do.” He added that the representatives and congressional aides he was speaking with were “all talking about how their positions were playing with the different hosts and sites.”F.A.Q.: The Speakership Deadlock in the HouseCard 1 of 7A historic impasse. More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Calls on Republicans to Embrace McCarthy for Speaker

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump on Wednesday made a direct appeal to House Republicans to support Representative Kevin McCarthy of California for speaker, after Mr. McCarthy lost three successive votes for the post amid a hard-right rebellion led by some of Mr. Trump’s most loyal allies in Congress.“Some really good conversations took place last night, and it’s now time for all of our GREAT Republican House Members to VOTE FOR KEVIN, CLOSE THE DEAL, TAKE THE VICTORY,” Mr. Trump, who is running for president, wrote on his website, Truth Social.On Tuesday, as the California Republican suffered defeat after humiliating defeat on the House floor, Mr. Trump had refused to reiterate his endorsement for Mr. McCarthy, telling NBC News’ Garrett Haake, simply, “We’ll see what happens.”Mr. Trump and Mr. McCarthy then spoke Tuesday night, after the embarrassing once-in-a-century debacle on the House floor and after Mr. Trump made his tepid comment on NBC.After the conversation, Mr. Trump arrived at a more full-throated statement reiterating his backing for Mr. McCarthy, though he still tempered his praise.“REPUBLICANS, DO NOT TURN A GREAT TRIUMPH INTO A GIANT & EMBARRASSING DEFEAT,” he wrote. “IT’S TIME TO CELEBRATE, YOU DESERVE IT. Kevin McCarthy will do a good job, and maybe even a GREAT JOB — JUST WATCH!”Whether Mr. Trump can sway enough of the holdouts who are opposing Mr. McCarthy is an open question, and one that will test Mr. Trump’s ongoing influence over the House Republican conference, a wing of which has crafted itself in his image, as he mounts his third presidential campaign.Despite Mr. Trump’s earlier endorsement of Mr. McCarthy and his effort to whip votes for him ahead of the speaker vote, 20 Republicans still voted against Mr. McCarthy. The most aggressive McCarthy detractor, Representative Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, is also one of Mr. Trump’s most loyal allies in Congress. Mr. Trump’s support for Mr. McCarthy has done nothing to temper his opposition. More

    • 38 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      A House Divided

      by

      House Republicans are struggling with a test of governing.The vote for House speaker is the kind of government procedure that Americans often ignore, but yesterday’s highly unusual votes have important implications for the future of the Republican Party and how it will govern.On their first day in the majority, House Republicans couldn’t agree on who will lead them. Representative Kevin McCarthy has sought for years to become speaker, but some members of his party’s far-right faction refused to back him. It was the first time in 100 years that the House failed to elect a speaker on the first ballot, and lawmakers adjourned after three ballots without making a choice. The Democratic House leader, Hakeem Jeffries, even received more votes than McCarthy in all three rounds of voting.Marjorie Taylor Greene, a far-right lawmaker who has become a close ally of McCarthy’s, accused her fellow hard-liners of “playing Russian roulette with our hard-earned Republican majority.” Bill Huizenga, another McCarthy supporter, asked his colleagues, “You guys aren’t interested in governing?”Meanwhile, Donald Trump, who had endorsed McCarthy, refused to say after the votes if he was sticking to his endorsement. (McCarthy later said that he had talked to Trump and still had his support.)Part of McCarthy’s problem is that his party holds a narrow margin in the House, with 222 seats to Democrats’ 212. So he requires support from Republicans’ right-wing flank to reach the majority he needs to be speaker. But that is only part of the story.Republicans also don’t agree on what the party is and what it should stand for: Should it continue down the path that Trump began when he won the Republican nomination for president in 2016? Or should the party moderate and embrace more compromise to consolidate power?“There are a number of lawmakers in this group who have never liked McCarthy and have never trusted him,” said my colleague Catie Edmondson, who covers Congress. “They see him as an extension of the establishment in D.C. that they want to tear down.”The answers to these questions will help shape how Republicans will govern — whether they will stick to an uncompromising version of Trumpism or adopt more moderate views to win over more voters. “Regardless of the outcome, the votes have already shown there is a powerful group of right-wing lawmakers who are not going to be afraid to throw their weight around,” Catie said.Today’s newsletter will look at the potential consequences for Republicans and the country.Trumpism or notThe Republican fracture in the House is the latest example of a broader debate within the party: Should Republicans fully embrace Trumpism?McCarthy has sworn allegiance to Trump, who has called him “my Kevin.” But while McCarthy has courted far-right members, he takes a more pragmatic view of politics than much of the party’s far right. He believes that for Republicans to accomplish anything, they have to nominate more moderate candidates who can win in swing districts. And to pass major bills, Republicans may occasionally have to compromise.McCarthy’s Republican opponents take a more hard-line approach. Many do not believe in compromising with politicians who do not believe in Trumpism. They would like to oust Trump critics from the party. And they don’t trust McCarthy to carry out that vision.These ideological divides animate many of the debates over who should be the next speaker. They are also driving other debates within the party, including over who should be the party’s presidential nominee in 2024.No compromiseIn party politics, extreme flanks frequently butt heads with more moderate figures. What’s unusual about modern-day far-right lawmakers is their willingness to reject compromise and take on their own leaders. They effectively evicted the past two Republican speakers, John Boehner and Paul Ryan. McCarthy himself had to withdraw from the speaker race in 2015 after a right-wing revolt, giving way for Ryan’s bid.Since then, McCarthy has made overtures to ultraconservatives to shore up their support. One example: Before yesterday’s vote, he announced that he would allow just five lawmakers to call a vote at any time to oust the speaker. The move was a shift from his previous stance opposing a snap vote altogether, but it still fell short of the view of the party’s hard-liners, who said such a vote should require only one lawmaker proposing it.The concession was not enough for those ultraconservatives, who still see McCarthy as too moderate. The right-wing Club for Growth released a statement on Monday that suggested it opposed McCarthy’s bid for speaker unless he met specific demands. It criticized House Republican super PAC spending in primaries, which McCarthy has leveraged to boost more moderate candidates.Potential consequencesBecause Republicans don’t control the Senate or White House, their infighting in the House may not lead to immediate, broader consequences.But House Republicans do have some things they want to get done and need a speaker for, particularly staffing House committees to investigate the Biden administration. A protracted debate over who should lead the House is already slowing down those inquiries.And eventually, a divided House majority could lead to more government shutdowns and economic crises if Republicans can’t secure the votes for must-pass bills.At the very least, the situation is a preview of Republicans’ struggles to move on from the 2020 election.For moreMcCarthy lost support as the balloting continued. Nineteen Republicans opposed him during the first and second votes, and 20 during the third.The Republican defectors coalesced around Jim Jordan, a hard-right congressman from Ohio who supports McCarthy.Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert are among those opposing McCarthy. Their demands include limits on spending and a vote on term limits for members of Congress.George Santos, who made false claims about his background, spent his first day in Congress shunned by his Republican colleagues.Salary transparency in California. Legal sports betting in Ohio. These are some of the laws taking effect.THE LATEST NEWSN.F.L.Damar Hamlin of the Buffalo Bills is still in critical condition after suffering cardiac arrest during a game on Monday.Medical experts said a blow to the chest, in a precise spot at a precise moment, could have sent Hamlin’s heart into an erratic rhythm.After a wrenching year for Buffalo, one bright spot — the Bills — has become another source of pain. “Buffalo is strong, but this is all too much,” a news anchor said.The N.F.L. is a uniting force. But fans must recognize their complicity in the violence on the field, The Times’s Kurt Streeter writes.Severe WeatherA satellite image of a storm approaching the West Coast.NOAA, via Associated PressCalifornia has endured several powerful storms in recent weeks. Today brings another.Climate change plays a role in shaping these storms, known as “atmospheric rivers.”In the Philippines, flooding and landslides have killed at least 51 people.Other Big StoriesU.S. pharmacies will be allowed to sell abortion pills with a prescription, the F.D.A. ruled.The 28-year-old accused of killing four University of Idaho students in November agreed to be extradited to Idaho from Pennsylvania.Sam Bankman-Fried, the disgraced former cryptocurrency executive, pleaded not guilty to fraud and other charges.Employees at the Microsoft-owned video game maker ZeniMax Media unionized, a labor victory at a large U.S. tech company.A decade after the self-immolation of a 26-year-old fruit seller sparked a revolution, hospital burn wards in Tunisia still fill with young men who set themselves aflame.OpinionsThe surge of respiratory viruses exposes a health care industry unprepared to look after critically ill children, Alexander Stockton and Lucy King argue in this video.It’s time for laws to better support and fairly pay workers with disabilities, Pepper Stetler writes.MORNING READSFamily Arcade in East Hollywood.Franck BohbotWorld Through a Lens: Timeless portraits of the arcades of Los Angeles.Happiness challenge, Day 3: Make small talk with a stranger. (If you missed the first couple of days, start from the beginning.)Wonder: A sense of awe can be a salve for a turbulent mind.A Times classic: His family had money. Hers didn’t.Advice from Wirecutter: Essential home-repair tools.Lives Lived: The drummer Fred White was the “brick wall” of the band Earth, Wind & Fire, his half brother once wrote, providing the beat on hits like “September” and “Boogie Wonderland.” White died at 67.SPORTS NEWS FROM THE ATHLETICU.S.M.N.T. coach claims blackmail: Gregg Berhalter said that someone contacted U.S. Soccer last month about a 1991 domestic violence incident in an apparent attempt to “take him down.”Zion Williamson to miss at least three weeks: The Pelicans star will again miss extended time with an injury — this one a hamstring strain. It’s a blow for New Orleans, whose sustained success is a big surprise of this N.B.A. season.ARTS AND IDEAS A drawing by Roman, 9, shows the fall of Mariupol.Lyndon French for The New York TimesA child’s view of warAs Russia waged war across Ukraine, a mother and daughter visited hospitals, orphanages and residences for displaced families to offer art therapy to children. Their works are part of a new exhibit at Chicago’s Ukrainian Institute of Modern Art.“Their sense of artistic expression is what every adult wishes they had,” said Christina Wyshnytzky, an assistant curator at the museum. Many children chose to depict images of war — tanks, soldiers, planes. But the children who had experienced the most severe trauma tended to focus on lighter images.“It’s hard not to start crying when you work with them,” Yustyna Pavliuk, one of the women behind the program, said, “but they continue living.”PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookChristopher Testani for The New York TimesEach mouthful of kung pao shrimp is a little spicy and chewy, savory and crisp.What to ReadIn her latest novel, “Sam,” Allegra Goodman delivers a portrait of a girl at risk that shimmers with intimacy and depth.What to WatchMurder is as ubiquitous as the bone-chilling Canadian weather in “Three Pines,” a noirish Amazon series.Late NightThe hosts discussed Kevin McCarthy.Now Time to PlayThe pangram from yesterday’s Spelling Bee was tributary. Here is today’s puzzle.Here’s today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: Xbox user (five letters).And here’s today’s Wordle. Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow.P.S. “Tryna,” “doomscrolls” and more than 1,900 other words appeared for the first time in Times Crossword puzzles last year.Here’s today’s front page.“The Daily” is about Russia’s military.Matthew Cullen, Lauren Hard, Claire Moses, Ian Prasad Philbrick, Tom Wright-Piersanti and Ashley Wu contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      How Far Right Are the 20 Republicans Who Voted Against McCarthy

      by

      The Republicans who blocked Representative Kevin McCarthy of California from becoming speaker on Tuesday include some of the most hard-right lawmakers in the House; most denied the 2020 election, are members of the Freedom Caucus, or both. Here’s a closer look at the 20 lawmakers. Re-elected representatives Newly elected Andy Biggs Ariz. 5th Dan Bishop […] More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Speaker Fight Reveals a Divided and Disoriented House Republican Majority

      by

      In failing to coalesce around Kevin McCarthy for speaker, Republicans showcased divisions that portend real difficulties in governing.WASHINGTON — House Republicans began their new majority rule on Tuesday with a chaotic and historic debacle, an embarrassing failure to rally around a leader that showcased the difficulties they will face in performing even the basics of governing and their lack of a unifying agenda.Handed narrow control of the House by voters in November, Republicans squandered the opening hours of the new Congress they could have used to dispel concerns about their capabilities. Instead, they feuded in a disorderly display over who among them should be speaker as the most extreme elements of the new majority repeatedly rejected Representative Kevin McCarthy of California.Despite Mr. McCarthy’s prominent role in fund-raising and delivering the House to Republicans and his backing among most in the party ranks, about 20 Republicans refused to support him and for the first time in a century forced repeated rounds of voting for the speakership. After three flailing attempts at electing a speaker, Republicans abruptly called for the House to be adjourned until noon Wednesday as they scrambled for a way out of their leadership morass. The stalemate meant the usually routine organization of the new House did not occur and its members were not sworn in, nor could any legislation be considered.The paralysis underscored the dilemma facing House Republicans: No matter the concessions made to some of those on the far right, they simply will not relent and join their colleagues even if it is for the greater good of their party, and perhaps the nation. They consider themselves conservative purists who cannot be placated unless all their demands are met — and maybe not even then. Their agenda is mostly to defund, disrupt and dismantle government, not to participate in it.It means that whoever emerges from the messy leadership fight will face deep-seated resistance when trying to shepherd spending bills and other measures that are fundamental to governance. Tuesday’s spectacle reflected that House Republicans have grown more skilled at legislative sabotage than legislative success, leaving the difficult business of getting things done to others.“The rebels just don’t like McCarthy, and they seem to not be able to find a way to like him,” said John Feehery, a longtime Republican strategist and former top House aide. “They lack a legislative maturity to understand it can’t be personal. It has to be just business.”Mr. McCarthy himself sought to make the conflict about something bigger than himself in an appeal to his opponents to put aside whatever feelings they had about him so Republicans could move forward.A New Congress BeginsThe 118th Congress opened on Jan. 3, with Republicans taking control of the House and Democrats holding the Senate.George Santos: The congressman-elect from New York, a Republican who has made false claims about his background, education and finances, brings his saga to Capitol Hill.Pelosi Era Ends: Nancy Pelosi, the first woman to become House speaker, leaves a legacy that will be difficult for the new leadership of both parties to reach.Elise Stefanik: The New York congresswoman’s climb to MAGA stardom is a case study in the collapse of the old Republican establishment, but her rise may also be a cautionary tale.Retirements: While each legislative session always brings a round of retirements, the departure of experienced politicians this year is set to reverberate even more starkly in a divided Congress.“This can’t be about that you are going to leverage somebody for your own personal gain inside Congress,” Mr. McCarthy told reporters. “This has to be about the country.”But the holdouts were not yet budging.“I have heard nothing new from Kevin,” said Representative Lauren Boebert, Republican of Colorado and a McCarthy foe, between rounds of votes.To try to quell the revolt, Mr. McCarthy had already promised new rules that would open him or another figure to regular efforts to depose them from the speakership, along with requirements that would leave the leadership hamstrung and at the mercy of conservatives in trying to advance legislation.Representative Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican and hard-right alternative for speaker favored by some conservatives, conceded that the legislative outlook was limited at best, considering that bills favored by House Republicans were unlikely to pass in the Democratic Senate or to be signed by President Biden.“So be it,” said Mr. Jordan in nominating Mr. McCarthy. “They have to answer to the people in 2024.”He also alluded to what was likely to be an epic struggle to keep the government running and stave off a disastrous debt default with Republicans in charge of the House, saying that their principal task was to ensure that Congress never again passed the kind of sprawling spending bill enacted last month.The breakdown on the House floor was the latest and most pronounced of the assaults by the hard right on its own congressional leadership in recent years. Archconservatives drove out John A. Boehner in 2015, denied Mr. McCarthy the votes needed to succeed Mr. Boehner at the time and complained about the stewardship of the compromise consensus choice of Paul D. Ryan. But Tuesday’s attack was their most aggressive yet, a nationally televised implosion that showcased the intransigence and unwillingness to compromise of a segment of House Republicans in what should have been a moment of triumph.

      .css-5h54w2{display:grid;grid-template-columns:2.271fr 1fr;grid-template-rows:repeat(6,1fr);grid-gap:4px;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-5h54w2{grid-gap:8px;}}.css-5h54w2 > :nth-child(1){grid-column:1;grid-row:1 / 4;}.css-5h54w2 > :nth-child(2){grid-column:1;grid-row:4 / 7;-webkit-align-self:end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:end;}.css-5h54w2 > :nth-child(3){grid-column:2;grid-row:1 / 3;}.css-5h54w2 > :nth-child(4){grid-column:2;grid-row:3 / 5;}.css-5h54w2 > :nth-child(5){grid-column:2;grid-row:5 / 7;-webkit-align-self:end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:end;}.css-rrq38y{margin:1rem auto;max-width:945px;}.css-1wsofa1{margin-top:10px;color:var(–color-content-quaternary,#727272);font-family:nyt-imperial,georgia,’times new roman’,times,Songti TC,simsun,serif;font-weight:400;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1wsofa1{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;}}@media (max-width:600px){.css-1wsofa1{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}The difficulty for Mr. McCarthy to secure speaker illustrated the dilemma facing House Republicans going forward.

      Even Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, typically a Republican firebrand eager to stir turmoil, castigated those holding out on Mr. McCarthy because of how it reflected on the party’s image.“If the base only understood that 19 Republicans voting against McCarthy are playing Russian roulette with our hard-earned Republican majority right now,” Ms. Greene said on Twitter. “This is the worst thing that could possibly happen.”Democrats were enjoying the tumult to a degree but also recognized the problems it could mean down the road. Representative Mike Quigley, a senior Democrat from Illinois, said the speaker fight was the culmination of a growing Republican ethos of “taking their ball and going home” if they fail to get what they demand.Other Democrats watched in amazement as they saw Republicans open their reign with a clash that would leave whoever was eventually chosen badly undermined and the party’s strength diluted from the start.“What a weakened position they have put themselves in,” marveled Representative Rosa DeLauro, a senior Democrat from Connecticut.The uproar in the House was in marked contrast to the opening day of the Senate, where seven new members were sworn in and senators then quietly adjourned for three weeks. While House Republicans were ensnared in a brutal internal battle, Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and minority leader, was scheduled to appear alongside President Biden on Wednesday to celebrate funding for a major public works project in Kentucky.As they sought a way out of their dilemma, some Republicans acknowledged the poor message they were sending with the stalemate but also said that it was likely to be a distant memory with voters once the leadership question was resolved.“Just like everything in three months that becomes small ball, it becomes insignificant,” said Representative Ken Buck, Republican of Colorado. “In a year and a half, when people are starting to think about voting again, they are not thinking about that. They are thinking about what have we accomplished. It is more important to do things than it is to have a good first impression.”His colleagues no doubt hope Mr. Buck is correct. More