More stories

  • in

    Classifying Houthis as terrorists will worsen famine in Yemen, Trump is warned

    The Trump administration is facing mounting calls to abandon threats to sanction Houthi rebels in northern Yemen to avoid an imminent danger of extreme famine in the country, where almost two-thirds of the population are in need of food aid.US state department officials are considering designating the Houthis as a terrorist group before the 20 January inauguration of Joe Biden, a move that would complicate the delivery of essential aid in large parts of the country, senior UN officials and NGOs have said.The widely predicted move would be alongside a raft of flagged sanctions against Iran and its interests over the final five weeks of Trump’s rule, in which squeezing Tehran and its allies looms as a central plank of Washington’s foreign policy.The Labour party in the UK added its voice to the concerns on Sunday, saying the expected move against the Houthis, whom Iran supports in Yemen, would result in aid being unable to reach much of the country’s north. The shadow minister for international development, Anna McMorrin, said this would deprive millions of people who had no choice but to remain under Houthi control of much-needed assistance.In a letter to the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, imploring the UK not to follow the US’s lead, McMorrin wrote: “We are concerned that a blanket definition for the Houthis would create a near insurmountable hurdle to the delivery of essential humanitarian relief, with those providing material relief or economic support to agencies and multilateral programmes at risk of legal or financial sanctions.“Humanitarian organisations would also be denied practical contact with much of the Houthis’ administrative infrastructure and would be barred from using local civilian contractors to deliver programmes.”Human Rights Watch has also warned of the consequences of US designation. “Many Yemenis are already on the brink of starvation, and US actions that would interfere with the work of aid organisations could have catastrophic consequences,” said the organisation’s Yemen researcher, Afrah Nasser, in a report released on Friday. “Any designation of the Houthis should at a minimum provide clear and immediate exemptions for humanitarian aid, but millions of lives should not have to depend on that.”Yemen, one of the region’s most impoverished states, has been in turmoil over most of the past decade. Instability worsened when the Houthis overthrew the Yemeni government in early 2015. That was followed by a military intervention led by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which has further destabilised the country and led to soaring humanitarian needs. Despite temporary lulls in fighting, calls for a permanent ceasefire have not been met.The United Nations’ secretary general, António Guterres, said last month: “Yemen is now in imminent danger of the worst famine the world has seen for decades. In the absence of immediate action, millions of lives may be lost.”Calls to support humanitarian efforts have repeatedly met funding difficulties. Humanitarian needs have been exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, which has ravaged much of the country. However, a dysfunctional bureaucracy has made understanding the scale of the spread of disease almost impossible.Iran has provided support to Houthi rebels throughout the conflict with Saudi Arabia, which has led to mass displacement and disease and at least 12,000 civilian casualties. Riyadh insists Tehran’s level of backing is far higher than it acknowledges and amounts to a strategic threat against its eastern border. Ballistic missiles fired from Yemen have sporadically hit Saudi cities throughout the war, which has also been marked by repeated Saudi airstrikes inside the country.McMorrin and Human Rights Watch both say attempts to secure a negotiated ceasefire would be much more complicated if the US moves ahead with a designation of the Houthis.The US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, has told regional allies that he is determined to tighten pressure on Iran’s allies elsewhere in the region in the waning days of the administration, with proxies in Iraq and the powerful Lebanese militia and political bloc also in Washington’s crosshairs.A senior regional source said designating the Houthis and escalating pressure on Tehran over the next five weeks had been agreed between Washington and Riyadh during Pompeo’s most recent visit to the Middle East. More

  • in

    After Trump review: a provocative case for reform by Biden and beyond

    At times, the Trump administration has seemed like a wrecking ball, careening from floor to floor of a building being destroyed, observers never quite knowing where the ball will strike next. At others, it has worked stealthily to undermine rules and norms, presumably fearing that, as the great supreme court justice Louis Brandeis wrote, “sunshine is the best of disinfectants”.
    These changes, far beyond politics or differences of opinion on policy, should trouble all those who care about the future of the American republic. Jack Goldsmith and Bob Bauer, veterans of Republican (Bush) and Democratic (Clinton) administrations, are students of the presidency whose scholarship is informed by their service. They have combined to write a field guide to the damage and serious proposals to undo it.
    Presidencies do not exist in a vacuum, and many of the excesses of which the authors complain did not begin in 2017. But Trump upped the stakes: the violations of rules and norms are not merely quantitatively more numerous but qualitatively different. Whether seeking to fire the special counsel investigating him, making money from his businesses or attacking the press, he has made breathtaking changes.
    As the authors write, “Trump has merged the institution of the presidency with his personal interests and has used the former to serve the latter”, attacking “core institutions of American democracy” to an extent no president had before.
    The American constitutional system, unlike the British, is one of enumerated powers. But over 230 years, norms have arisen. Unlike laws of which violations are (usually) clear, norms are “nonlegal principles of appropriate or expected behavior that presidents and other officials tacitly accept and that typically structure their actions”. In an illustration of the great American poet Carl Sandburg’s observation that “The fog comes on little cat feet”, norms “are rarely noticed until they are violated, as the nation has experienced on a weekly and often daily basis during the Trump presidency”.
    Those two axioms – that Trump’s offences are worse than others and that norms can easily be overcome by a determined president – show reform is essential.
    The first section of After Trump deals with the presidency itself: the dangers of foreign influence, conflicts of interest, attacks on the press and abuses of the pardon power.
    Here the reforms – political campaigns reporting foreign contacts, a requirement to disclose the president’s tax returns and criminalizing pardons given to obstruct justice – are generally straightforward. Regarding the press, where Trump has engaged in “virulent, constant attacks” and tried to claim his Twitter account was not a public record even as he happily fired public officials on it, the authors would establish that due process applies to attempted removal of a press pass and make legal changes to deter harassment of or reprisals against the media because “the elevation of this issue clarifies, strengthens, and sets up an apparatus for the enforcement of norms”.
    Goldsmith and Bauer’s second section focuses on technical legal issues, specifically those surrounding special counsels, investigation of the president, and the relationship between the White House and justice department.
    The American constitution is far more rigid that the British but it too has points of subtlety and suppleness. One example is the relationship between the president and an attorney general subordinate to the president but also duty bound to provide impartial justice, even when it concerns the president.
    The issues may seem arcane, but they are vital: “Of the multitude of norms that Donald Trump has broken as president, perhaps none has caused more commentary and consternation than his efforts to defy justice department independence and politicize the department’s enforcement of civil and criminal law.”
    And yet even as the attorney general, William Barr, sought a more lenient sentence for Roger Stone, stood by as Trump fired the US attorney in New York City, and kept up a “running public commentary” on an investigation of the origins of the investigation into the Trump campaign, the authors oppose those actions but remain cautious. They decline to endorse some of the more radical proposals, such as separating the justice department from the executive branch. More

  • in

    Trump loses another case challenging election results in latest legal rebuke

    [embedded content]
    Donald Trump lost a federal court challenge on Saturday in Wisconsin while judges said yet another case being fought there “smacks of racism”.
    The slap-downs came less than 24 hours after the abrupt dismissal by the US supreme court of the most audacious Republican attempt yet to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the election almost six weeks ago.
    But despite the latest stinging legal defeats and rebukes, Trump took to the skies in the Marine One presidential helicopter on Saturday on his way to an engagement in New York and flew above a protest of several hundred diehard supporters in Washington DC, who persist in bolstering his false claims that the election was “stolen” from him by fraud and conspiracy.
    This as the US electoral college will vote on Monday to confirm Biden’s resounding victory, alongside his Democratic vice president-elect, Kamala Harris.
    And a trickle of Republicans joined leading Democrats in speaking up about the increasing futility but also the insidiousness of the lame duck president’s aggressive clinging to power.
    After the supreme court decision, Christine Todd Whitman, the former Republican governor of New Jersey, said of the Trump campaign challenges to the election result: “It is now truly over. Trump and his acolytes need to stop all efforts to deny millions of votes.”
    More than 120 Republican members of the House of Representatives wrote an amicus brief to the supreme court last week in support of the lawsuit brought by Texas, which had been joined by Trump and aimed to overturn Biden’s victory in four key swing states, which the court on Friday night abruptly refused to consider.
    Michael Steele, the former chair of the Republican National Committee, called the effort “an affront to the country”.
    “It’s an offense to the constitution and it leaves an indelible stain that will be hard for these 126 members to wipe off their political skin,” he told the New York Times.
    In Wisconsin on Saturday, the US district judge Brett Ludwig dismissed one of Trump’s latest lawsuits there that asked the court to order the state’s Republican-controlled legislature to name him as the winner, whereas in fact Biden won Wisconsin on his way to winning the White House.
    Even as Ludwig said Trump’s arguments “fail as a matter of law and fact” an attorney for the president, Jim Troupis, was busy arguing in another case, before a skeptical Wisconsin state supreme court, a lawsuit that, if successful, would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters in Wisconsin’s most diverse counties, Dane and Milwaukee, where Biden won.
    Trump is not challenging any votes in Wisconsin counties that he won.
    “This lawsuit, Mr Troupis, smacks of racism,“ the justice Jill Karofsky said to Trump’s attorney early in his arguments.
    “I do not know how you can come before this court and possibly ask for a remedy that is unheard of in US history … It is not normal,” she added.
    One of Karofsky’s fellow judges in that case, where a decision is now awaited, pointed out that Trump also did not make such challenges when he won Wisconsin on his way to the White House in 2016. More

  • in

    'Abolish the death penalty': Brandon Bernard execution prompts wave of anger

    A wave of outrage from human rights group, activists, elected officials, and others over the execution Thursday night of federal prisoner Brandon Bernard continued to grow on Friday behind a coordinated call for the abolition of the death penalty.Bernard, 40, was executed by lethal injection at a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, after the US supreme court rejected a last-minute appeal to stay the execution and Donald Trump did not publicly respond to calls for him to intervene.After 17 years without a federal execution, the Trump administration has executed nine inmates since July, and plans five more executions before Joe Biden takes office on 20 January. Biden has pledged to eliminate the death penalty.Massachusetts Representative Ayanna Pressley, the sponsor of legislation in the House to end the federal death penalty, tweeted footage on Thursday night of Bernard speaking from prison. “Abolish the death penalty,” she wrote.That call was taken up by activists from Pressley’s progressive allies in Congress to Vanita Gupta, president of the leadership conference on civil and human rights.In a world of incredible violence, the state should not be involved in premeditated murder“Brandon Bernard should be alive today,” Vermont senator Bernie Sanders tweeted on Friday morning. “We must end all federal executions and abolish the death penalty. In a world of incredible violence, the state should not be involved in premeditated murder.”Sister Helen Prejean, an anti-death penalty advocate, said she had spoken with Bernard the day before he died. He “told us about everything he was grateful for in his life,” she said. “He died with dignity and love, in spite of the cruel, unjust system that condemned him to die as a result of egregious prosecutorial misconduct.”Prejean called the killing a “a stain on us all”.Bernard was sentenced for a role in the 1999 killings in Texas of an Iowa couple whose bodies he burned in the trunk of their car after they were shot by an accomplice, Christopher Vialva.He directed his last words to the family of Todd and Stacie Bagley, the couple he and Vialva were convicted of killing: “I’m sorry,” he said. “That’s the only words that I can say that completely capture how I feel now and how I felt that day.”He was pronounced dead at 9.27pm eastern time.“Brandon Bernard was 19 when he committed murder,” tweeted Julián Castro, the former housing secretary from Texas. “Since then, five jurors and a former prosecutor have said they don’t support the death penalty in his case. Brandon will be the ninth person executed by the federal government this year. We must end this horrible practice.”Advocates for Bernard included the reality show star Kim Kardashian West and others thought to have Trump’s ear, including two lawyers who defended Trump at his impeachment trial this year in the US Senate and who filed briefs in the supreme court appeal, Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth Starr.Todd Bagley’s mother, Georgia, spoke to reporters within 30 minutes of the execution, saying she wanted to thank Trump, the attorney general, William Barr and others at the justice department for bringing the family some closure. She became emotional when she spoke about the apologies from Bernard before he died and from Vialva, who was executed in September.“The apology and remorse … helped very much heal my heart,” she said, beginning to cry and then recomposing herself. “I can very much say: I forgive them.”In a statement when executions were resumed in July, Barr said the government “owed” it to victims to kill the convicts.“The justice department upholds the rule of law – and we owe it to the victims and their families to carry forward the sentence imposed by our justice system,” Barr said.Alfred Bourgeois, a 56-year-old Louisiana truck driver, is set to die Friday for killing his two-year-old daughter. Bourgeois’ lawyers alleged he was intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible for the death penalty. Several courts said evidence did not support that claim.The first series of federal executions over the summer were of white men, which critics said seemed calculated to make them less controversial amid summer protests over racial discrimination.Four of the five inmates set to die before Biden’s inauguration are Black men. The fifth is a white woman who would be the first female inmate executed by the federal government in nearly six decades. More

  • in

    ‘Will he ever concede?’: Trump keeps GOP leaders in endless political limbo

    First Republicans in Congress gave Donald Trump a week to admit he lost the presidential election. Then they called for the lame duck president to have his day in court, where the Trump campaign amassed a 1-51 win-loss record in challenging Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.Next Republicans pointed to the so-called “safe harbor” deadline of 8 December, when states would certify their respective results, as the date when Trump would surely be forced to admit his loss. But that deadline came and went on Tuesday, seemingly unnoticed by the White House.Now, it is beginning to dawn on some members of the Republican leadership that Trump is working on a calendar all his own, and that the political limbo they now inhabit – unable to take the basic step, as elected officials in the United States of America, of recognizing the rightful winner of a free and fair election – might never end, assuming they will not summon the courage to contradict Trump.“I don’t know that he’s ever gonna concede,” John Thune, the Senate majority whip, told Politico on Wednesday. More than 200 Republicans in Congress – about 90% of the total – will not say publicly who won the presidential election, the Washington Post found.The Republican silence has given Trump a window to expand his attacks on US democracy. The president’s tweeted lies about fake election fraud have escalated in the last month to include the simple message on Twitter “#OVERTURN”.The majority of Republican voters who think the election was fraudulent, despite findings to the contrary by Trump’s own administration and no supporting evidence, is still growing.The high stakes are plain. As Trump himself put it on Wednesday: “How can you have a presidency when a vast majority think the election was RIGGED?”Some Republicans cling to hopes that upcoming events in the transfer of power – future dates on the election calendar – will cause Trump to change course, and relax the pressure on them. Next Monday, 14 December, the electoral college meets to cast votes based on state certifications of the result.On 6 January, Vice-President Mike Pence, in his capacity as president of the US Senate, is to preside over a ceremonial meeting of a joint session of Congress at which the electoral votes are added up and Joe Biden is formally declared the next president.Representative Alex Mooney, a Republican from West Virginia who introduced a House resolution on Tuesday that encourages neither Trump nor Biden to concede until all the investigations are completed, expressed faith that the congressional count would convince Trump and end the silence of his colleagues.“The end is when the roll call is put up here,” Mooney told the Associated Press.But the five weeks since the election are littered with flawed speculation by Republicans about the supposedly imminent moment when Trump would admit reality and they could safely follow suit.“I think the goal here is to give the president and his campaign team some space to demonstrate there is real evidence to support any claims of voter fraud,” one senior Senate Republican aide told Reuters on 10 November. “If there is, then they will be litigated quickly. If not, we’ll all move on.”“At some point this has to give,” a second aide told Reuters at the time. “And I give it a week or two.”The result is a risky standoff like none other in US history. The refusal to agree upon the facts of the election – which was called for Biden by the leading media decision desks, including the Associated Press and, thereby, the Guardian, on 7 November, threatens to undermine voter confidence, chisel away at the legitimacy of Biden’s presidency and re-stack civic norms.Trump sent his party down this unprecedented path by claiming the election was “rigged”, but Republican leadership has enabled doubts to swell through their past four weeks of silence.The president has personally called on some local elected officials to reconsider the results. Now, the disputed election has taken on a political life of its own that the party’s leadership may not be able to squash, even as Trump’s legal challenges crumble and state and national level officials declared it the most secure election in US history.Republicans say it makes little political sense at this point for them to counter Trump’s views lest they risk a backlash from his supporters – their own constituents – back home.They are relying on Trump voters to power the Georgia runoff elections on 5 January that will determine control of the Senate. And while some GOP lawmakers have acknowledged Biden’s victory, most prefer to keep quiet, letting the process play out “organically”, as one aide put it, into January.But election experts warn of long-term damage to the long-cherished American system.“It clearly hurts confidence in the elections,” said Trey Grayson, the Republican former secretary of state for Kentucky and a past president of the National Association of Secretaries of State.“My hope,” he said, is by 14 December “there will be some more voices, but my gut is it won’t be until the 6th” (of January).Edward Foley, an elections expert and constitutional law professor at Ohio State University, said it was true that the election winner is not officially the president-elect until the Congress declares it so with its vote on 6 January to accept the electoral college results.“I’m less concerned about the timing, but that it happens,” he said.For Americans to “have faith” in the elections, the losing side has to accept defeat. “It’s very, very dangerous if the losing side can’t get to that,” he said.“It’s essential for the parties to play by that ethos – even if one individual, Mr Trump, can’t do it, the party has to do it,” he said.“What’s so disturbing about the dynamic that has developed since election day is that the party has been incapable of conveying that message because they’re taking their cues from Trump.” More

  • in

    Trump officials scramble to justify decision not to buy extra Pfizer vaccine doses

    The Trump administration on Tuesday scrambled to justify a decision not to buy millions of backup doses of a Covid-19 vaccine developed by Pfizer as the vaccine appeared likely to become the first approved for use in the United States.Government regulators with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced favorable preliminary findings on Tuesday from a review of Pfizer data, following approval for use in the UK and the first post-approval vaccination there.The Trump administration last spring made a deal for 100m doses of the Pfizer vaccine candidate, but the administration turned down an offer to reserve additional doses, Scott Gottlieb, a current Pfizer board member and former FDA commissioner, confirmed on Tuesday.“Pfizer did offer an additional allotment coming out of that plan, basically the second-quarter allotment, to the US government multiple times – and as recently as after the interim data came out and we knew this vaccine looked to be effective,” Gottlieb told CNBC.“I think they were betting that more than one vaccine is going to get authorized and there will be more vaccines on the market, and that perhaps could be why they didn’t take up that additional 100m option agreement.”With global demand for its vaccine soaring following successful trial results and approval in the United Kingdom, New York-based Pfizer cannot guarantee the United States additional doses before next June, the New York Times reported.The extent to which the decision not to acquire more of the Pfizer vaccine could impede the vaccination effort in the United States was unclear.The news came as the US was on the verge of surpassing 15 million coronavirus cases, the highest number in the world.A second vaccine candidate is currently up for emergency approval from the FDA, and multiple additional vaccine candidates – some of them easier to manage than the Pfizer vaccine, which must be stored at extremely cold temperatures – are in the final stages of clinical review.But Donald Trump and officials involved in the vaccine development program scrambled on Tuesday to head off the perception that the government had failed to get first in line for sufficient supplies of a vaccine produced by an American-based company. US-based Pfizer partnered and its German pharmaceutical partner, BioNTech, are on track to have the first vaccine approved in the US.To celebrate the good vaccine news and tout his role in it, Trump planned to host an event at the White House on Tuesday billed as a “vaccine summit”. He planned to unveil an executive order to prioritize vaccine shipments to “Americans before other nations,” but as with many headline-grabbing orders issued by Trump the decree did not appear to be impactful or enforceable, analysts said.Asked on ABC’s Good Morning America on Tuesday how the order would work, the official in charge of the government’s vaccine development program, Operation Warp Speed, Moncef Slaoui, said: “Frankly, I don’t know.”Health officials named by president-elect Joe Biden, who will lead the vaccine rollout effort after taking office next month, were not invited to the White House event, underscoring the risks of a lack of continuity in the effort.And executives from two drug companies, Pfizer and Moderna – whose own vaccine candidate is also up for approval from the FDA – were invited to the White House by Trump but declined, Stat News reported.Slaoui defended the administration’s decision not to buy more doses of the Pfizer vaccine, in his appearance Tuesday on ABC, saying they were looking at several different vaccines during the summer when it had the option to lock in additional Pfizer vaccine doses.“No one reasonably would buy more from any one of those vaccines because we didn’t know which one would work and which one would be better than the other,” said Slaoui. Before taking his current post, Slaoui resigned from the Moderna board.The US government has also contracted for 100m doses of the Moderna vaccine. Both vaccines require two doses per patient, although a preliminary report on the Pfizer vaccine issued on Tuesday by the FDA found some protection after just one dose.The report, which found “no specific safety concerns identified that would preclude issuance” of an emergency use authorization, accelerated the path to approval. “FDA has determined that [Pfizer] has provided adequate information to ensure the vaccine’s quality and consistency for authorization of the product under an EUA,” the report said.A spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services told the Times that in addition to Pfizer and Moderna, the government had signed contracts for doses for other vaccine candidates that have not yet reached the stage of seeking regulatory approval.“We are confident that we will have 100 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine as agreed to in our contract, and beyond that, we have five other vaccine candidates, including 100 million doses on the way from Moderna,” she said. More

  • in

    Trump administration refused offer to buy millions more Pfizer vaccine doses

    The Trump administration passed up a chance last summer to buy millions of additional doses of Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine, a decision that could delay the delivery of a second batch of doses until the manufacturer fulfills other international contracts.
    The revelation, first reported by the New York Times and confirmed to the Associated Press on Monday, came a day before Donald Trump aimed to take credit for the speedy development of forthcoming vaccines at a White House summit.
    Pfizer’s vaccine, one of the leading Covid-19 vaccine contenders, is expected to be approved by a panel of Food and Drug Administration scientists as soon as this week, with delivery of 100m doses – enough for 50 million Americans – expected in coming months.
    Under its contract with Pfizer, the Trump administration committed to buy an initial 100m doses, with an option to purchase as many as five times more. This summer, the White House opted not to lock in an additional 100m doses for delivery in the second quarter of 2021, according to people who spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

    Days ahead of the vaccine’s expected approval, the administration is reversing course, but it is not clear that Pfizer, which has since made commitments to other countries, will be able to meet the latest request on the same timeline.
    The Pfizer vaccine is one of two on track for emergency FDA authorization this month, the other coming from drugmaker Moderna.
    The Trump administration insisted late Monday that between those two vaccines and others in the pipeline, the US will be able to accommodate any American who wants to be vaccinated by the end of the second quarter of 2021.
    Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar told NBC the administration is “continuing to work across manufacturers to expand the availability of releasable, of FDA-approved vaccine as quickly as possible. We do still have that option for an additional 500m doses.”
    The “Operation Warp Speed” summit on Tuesday will address the Trump administration’s plans to distribute and administer the vaccine. But officials from president-elect Joe Biden’s transition team, which will oversee the bulk of the largest vaccination program in the nation’s history, were not invited.
    Both the Pfizer and the Moderna vaccines have been determined to be 95% effective against the virus that causes Covid-19. Plans call for distributing and then administering about 40m doses of the two companies’ vaccines by the end of the year – with the first doses shipping within hours of FDA clearance. Each of the forthcoming vaccines has unique logistical challenges, including storage, distribution and administration.
    The news comes as states across the US continue to experience some of the worst surges since the pandemic began. On Monday, millions in California went back under the nation’s harshest lockdowns, as Covid-19 cases hit record levels. New York is also weighing further restrictions as hospitalisations climb.
    Health officials are warning Americans not to let their guard down, even with a vaccine on the horizon. Dr Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert, said that “without substantial mitigation, the middle of January can be a really dark time for us”. More

  • in

    What next? Three books for America after Trump

    On 3 November, a majority of the US electorate voted to eject the president from the White House. Yet Donald Trump still refuses to accept the verdict. Populism’s pretense of devotion to “the will of the people” lies in shambles. Conservatives have demonstrated their readiness to jettison democracy for the sake of clinging to power or appeasing an unhinged man-child.Ominously, Gen Michael Flynn has demanded martial law and suspending the constitution. Elsewhere, one Michigan Republican called for voiding the vote in Wayne county, thereby disenfranchising Detroit. At the same time, the president and his allies remain committed to burnishing the legacy of long-dead Confederate generals, even if means killing a pay increase for US troops.As Thomas Ricks reminds us in First Principles, the paradox of equality melded to racism dates back to the founding. The most famous pronouncement in the Declaration of Independence, “that all men are created equal”, was written by a slave-owner, Thomas Jefferson.A Pulitzer-winning author and military historian, Ricks also observes that one of our two parties has felt perpetually compelled to offer a “home to white supremacists, up to the present day”. First the Democrats, now the Republicans.Case in point: the fight over DC statehood. Back in June, the Arkansas senator Tom Cotton argued that the majority-minority District of Columbia (population 684,000) did not deserve to be a state because it lacked the “well-rounded working class” of Wyoming (population: 577,000).Elsewhere, Mike Pompeo, Trump’s secretary of state, recently tweeted that it was “essential” to “keep Ethiopia on the path to democracy”. The US has seen this movie before, back when the cold war turned hot and the rice paddies of south-east Asia became killing fields.While freedom was supposedly on the march overseas, the home front was markedly different. Black churches were bombed. Martin Luther King was jailed, stabbed, assassinated. John Lewis was beaten in Selma. Others were sent to an early grave.Jon Meacham is a native of Tennessee, a biographer of George HW Bush and now a speechwriter for Joe Biden. In His Truth is Marching On, his new book about the young Lewis, Meacham says “the hypocrisy of an America fighting for liberty abroad while tolerating white supremacy at home” characterised the Vietnam era.And yet as Edmund Fawcett, a self-described “leftwing liberal” and former writer at the Economist, notes in his new book, Conservatism, “although liberal democracy is a child of the left, its growth and health have relied on support from the right.” Half a century ago, Senate Republicans defeated a southern Democratic-led filibuster and enacted the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Those days are gone.He also posits that “when, as now, the right is divided, the haves sleep less easily that government is in safe hands.” Said differently, monied America is not simply about tax cuts. It can even come with a conscience, a reality that troubles both the president and the woke left. Philadelphia’s upscale suburbs made the difference for Biden in Pennsylvania, and possibly the US.Fawcett is keenly aware of the rise of the hard right, of Trumpism in America, of Marine Le Pen in France, UKIP in Great Britain and the AfD in Germany. “The arrival of a new century,” he writes, “scrambled assumptions and shook the conservative center.” These tremors continue. Brexit tethered to a pandemic is expensive – and lethal.Amid America’s winter of political discontent, Ricks, Meacham and Fawcett are well worth reading. Each conveys a message that deserves our attention as we strive to exit, or at least better understand, the morass.The way of CincinnatusSpurred by the seismic shock of the 2016 election, First Principles focuses on America’s first four presidents, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, their education and outlooks. In Ricks’ view, ancient Greece and Rome influenced these men more than contemporary religion.“Christianity simply did not loom as large in colonial America as it would a century later,” Ricks writes, “or indeed does now.” The Declaration of Independence summons the Creator and Nature’s God but Jesus does not appear. The constitution refers to religion but is silent as to a deity.Between Greece and Rome, Ricks contends the latter held sway over the early presidents, with the exception of Jefferson. In the run-up to and aftermath of the revolutionary war, Rome came to exemplify republicanism, civic virtue and stoicism, as well as a cautionary tale of decline and tyranny. It came as little surprise that Washington would lead the new nation. More remarkable was the fact that he did not seize power and instead stepped down voluntarily. Cincinnatus, the citizen-soldier, was the paragon, Caesar the anathema.Even so, it is Jefferson, Greece and the epicurean notion of happiness that mark our Fourth of July celebrations. America’s Declaration of Independence hinged on a country dedicated to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, instead of John Locke’s formulation of government existing explicitly to protect property. Importantly, for Jefferson happiness was about more than just the right to party. Rather, it spoke to a general tranquility and the possibility of a common purpose.His subtle shift in wording was seismic: the landless could no longer be so easily marginalized or subordinated. A single phrase would help incubate the seeds of Jacksonian democracy. “America works best when it gives people the freedom to tap their own energies and exploit their talents,” Ricks concludes.‘The way of Jesus’Under the subtitle John Lewis and the Power of Hope, Meacham covers the first 28 years of the civil rights leader’s life, from his birth in 1940 to the murders of Dr King and Robert Kennedy in 1968. It is practically a hagiography, portraying Lewis as saint and hero – and yet imperfect.As a boy, Lewis preached to the chickens on the family farm. Later he attended American Baptist College in Nashville, Tennessee. He was ordained as a minister but instead of settling into a pulpit, he took up the cross and threw his body and soul into the civil rights movement.In Meacham’s telling, Lewis “rejected the tragedy of life and history” and “embraced the possibilities of realizing a joyful ideal”. The late congressman “seemed to walk with Jesus himself”, making the cause of the poor, the downtrodden and the oppressed his own.Meacham’s religious tenor is organic. He is a believing Christian who discounts a wholly secular public square. Instead, he observes that “one way to a nation where equality before the law and before God is more universal, is the way of King and of Lewis. Which is also the way of Jesus.”Unlike Ricks, Meacham sees the constitution as a distinctly Calvinist document. It is “theological and assumes our sinfulness and that we will do the wrong thing far more often than the right thing”. He adds: “We have done everything since then to prove them right.”Fittingly, Meacham gives Lewis the final say in the book’s “afterword”, in which the congressman plays off the text of the Gospel of John, proclaiming that America’s “moral compass comes from God, is of God, and is seen through God”.More hauntingly, Lewis writes: “And God so loved the world that he gave us countless men and women who lost their homes and their jobs for the right to vote” and the “children of freedom who their lives in a bombing in Birmingham and three young men who were killed in Mississippi”.In other words, Christ’s Passion can be relived and reimagined; suffering can bring redemption in this world. Those who bled and died were more than just historic figures.The way of Weimar?If anyone needs further reminder of the American right’s apparent discomfort with universal suffrage, Fawcett offers a telling examination of extreme libertarianism and populism. He recalls the work of Jason Brennan, a Georgetown business school professor who complains of “ignorant majorities” and their capacity to “thwart” economic growth.Unmentioned is Palantir’s Peter Thiel and his infamous 2009 take: that women and minorities have mucked things up. Thiel has since partnered with the Trump administration, and holds a passel of government contracts.Back then, he wrote: “Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women – two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians – have rendered the notion of ‘capitalist democracy’ into an oxymoron.”Fawcett also calls our attention to the tension between populism and participatory democracy. His characterizations are borne out by the last gasps of Trump’s presidency. He asserts that “populists are ill at ease with multi-party competition” and “indifferent or hostile to countervailing powers within the state or society”.Here, Fawcett is dead on. Trump’s campaign cries of “lock her up”, branding the press as “the enemy of the people” and bashing the “deep state” are cut from the same cloth.The final paragraphs of Conservatism pose these questions regarding the center-right: “Do they side with the hard right and leave liberal democracy to the mercies of uncontrolled markets and national populism? Or do they look for allies with whom to rebuild a shaken center?”If the response of Republican congressional leadership to Trump is a case study, the answer is discouraging. The other day, Mitch McConnell stood sobbing in the Senate over a colleague’s pending departure but had nothing to say about the president’s destructive behavior. Weimar is not an abstract. In the end, guardrails don’t always withstand the stress. More