US news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 250 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘We are on a dangerous path’: Oregon attorney general slams decision allowing Trump to send troops to Portland – live

      by

      The Oregon attorney general, Dan Rayfield, has issued a statement following the ruling from the ninth circuit court of appeals, which lifted the temporary restraining order blocking the deployment of the state’s national guard.He said that if the ruling is allowed to stand, it would give Donald Trump “unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification”.“We are on a dangerous path in America,” he added.The three-judge panel was split in their decision, with Clinton-appointee Susan Graber dissenting from her colleagues. Rayfield added:
      Oregon joins Judge Graber in urging the full Ninth Circuit to ‘act swiftly’ en banc ‘to vacate the majority’s order before the illegal deployment of troops under false pretenses can occur.’ And, like her, we ‘ask those who are watching this case unfold to retain faith in our judicial system for just a little while longer’.
      In a court-ordered disclosure filed on Monday, the US interior department revealed that it plans “to abolish 2,050 positions”, including sweeping cuts to the Bureau of Land Management, and smaller numbers at the Fish and Wildlife Service, US Geological Survey and other agencies. Among the positions slated for elimination are Bureau of Reclamation workers who provide maintenance for the Hoover Dam.The declaration, with a detailed appendix of positions to be cut from Rachel Borra, the interior department’s chief human capital officer, was submitted to comply with an order issued by the US district court for the northern district of California in a lawsuit brought by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and four other national unions that represent federal workers at risk of losing their jobs.The planned layoffs are paused for now by a temporary restraining order that US District court judge Susan Illston expanded during an emergency hearing on Friday.As our colleague Anna Betts reports, construction crews started demolishing part of the East Wing of the White House to make way for Donald Trump’s planned ballroom on Monday.The Washington Post on obtained and published a photo of the demolition activity, showing construction in progress and parts of the exterior ripped down.A Daily Mail reporter shared video of the demolition on social media.Read the full story here:Hakeem Jeffries, the leader of the House Democratic minority, just called on Republicans to negotiate an end to the government shutdown by citing Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Maga Republican from Georgia.“The Republican health care crisis, as Marjorie Taylor Greene has repeatedly indicated, is real,” Jeffries told reporters. “And it’s having devastating impacts that are becoming increasingly apparent to the American people. In Idaho, 100,000 Americans are at risk of losing their health care if the Affordable Care Act tax credits expire, because it will become unaffordable for them.”He went on to cite examples in other states where some people are “finding out that their health insurance premiums are about to increase by more than $2,000 per month.”A growing share of Americans believe religion is gaining influence and society – and view its expanding role positively, a new report by the PEW research center has found. It comes as the Trump administration has sought to fuse conservative Christian values and governance, especially in the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk. In just one year, the share of US adults who believe religion is gaining influence in American society has increased sharply. While still a minority view, 31% say religion is on the rise — up from just 18% a year earlier, in February 2024 – the highest figure recorded in 15 years.Meanwhile, the percentage who say religion is losing influence dropped from 80% to 68%.According to the PEW survey, these changing perceptions of religion suggest a broader shift in a country that was rapidly secularizing. Nearly 6 in 10 Americans (59%) now express a positive view of religion’s influence in public life, either because they see its rising power as a good thing, or view its decline as a bad thing. Only 20% express negative views, while the rest remain neutral or uncertain.Notably, the shift is not confined to one party or demographic. Both Republicans and Democrats, as well as nearly all major religious groups and age brackets, have become more likely to say religion is gaining ground — and more likely to feel their religious beliefs conflict with mainstream American culture. That sense of cultural conflict is now a majority view, with 58% of US adults reporting at least some tension between their beliefs and broader society.Finally, while views on religious truth vary, nearly half of Americans (48%) say many religions may be true — more than double the share (26%) who say only one religion is true.Pew’s findings suggest a significant cultural shift unfolding under an administration that has explicitly championed Christian conservatism as a governing ethos.It is perhaps significant that Susan Graber, the lone dissenting voice on the three-judge federal appeals court panel that just permitted Donald Trump to deploy federal troops to Portland, Oregon, in the only one of the three to be based in Portland.Graber, a former law school classmate of Bill and Hillary Clinton who was nominated to the federal bench by Clinton while serving on the Oregon supreme court, wrote a scathing dissent to the majority ruling, which lifts a lower-court order that had temporarily blocked Trump from sending in troops to what he falsely claims is a “war-ravaged” city.The other two judges on the panel, both nominated by Trump during his first term, are based in Arizona and Idaho.Graber said in an interview in 2012, that “it was kind of love at first sight with Portland” for her when she first moved to the city to work as a law clerk.In her dissent, she urged the full appeals court to reverse the decision by the panel, writing that there was “no legal or factual justification supported the order to federalize and deploy the Oregon National Guard”.She continued: “Given Portland protesters’ well-known penchant for wearing chicken suits, inflatable frog costumes, or nothing at all when expressing their disagreement with the methods employed by ICE, observers may be tempted to view the majority’s ruling, which accepts the government’s characterization of Portland as a war zone, as merely absurd. But today’s decision is not merely absurd. It erodes core constitutional principles, including sovereign States’ control over their States’ militias and the people’s First Amendment rights to assemble and to object to the government’s policies and actions.”The judge added: “The majority’s order abdicates our judicial responsibility, permitting the President to invoke emergency authority in a situation far divorced from an enumerated emergency.”Graber concluded:“We have come to expect a dose of political theater in the political branches, drama designed to rally the base or to rile or intimidate political opponents. We also may expect there a measure of bending – sometimes breaking – the truth. By design of the Founders, the judicial branch stands apart. We rule on facts, not on supposition or conjecture, and certainly not on fabrication or propaganda. I urge my colleagues on this court to act swiftly to vacate the majority’s order before the illegal deployment of troops under false pretenses can occur. Above all, I ask those who are watching this case unfold to retain faith in our judicial system for just a little longer.”The Oregon attorney general, Dan Rayfield, has issued a statement following the ruling from the ninth circuit court of appeals, which lifted the temporary restraining order blocking the deployment of the state’s national guard.He said that if the ruling is allowed to stand, it would give Donald Trump “unilateral power to put Oregon soldiers on our streets with almost no justification”.“We are on a dangerous path in America,” he added.The three-judge panel was split in their decision, with Clinton-appointee Susan Graber dissenting from her colleagues. Rayfield added:
      Oregon joins Judge Graber in urging the full Ninth Circuit to ‘act swiftly’ en banc ‘to vacate the majority’s order before the illegal deployment of troops under false pretenses can occur.’ And, like her, we ‘ask those who are watching this case unfold to retain faith in our judicial system for just a little while longer’.

      A three-judge panel on the ninth circuit court of appeals has ruled that the Trump administration can deploy the national guard to Portland, Oregon. They lifted a lower court judge’s decision that blocked the president from federalizing and sending roughly 200 troops to the city to guard federal buildings, as largely small and peaceful protests took place in recent weeks outside an immigration facility in the city.

      Donald Trump welcomed Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese to the White House, signing a rare earth minerals deal as trade tensions with China escalate. The pair just signed a rare earths agreement which opens up Australia’s vast mineral resources. Albanese added that the deal was an “eight and a half billion dollar pipeline” to supply critical rare earths to the US. Meanwhile, Trump doubled down on his threat of imposing a 157% tariff on Chinese imports if both nations can’t reach a trade deal. This, after Beijing announced they were tightening exports of rare earth minerals. “We have a tremendous power, and that’s the power of tariff, and I think that China will come to the table and make a very fair deal,” the president added.

      Donald Trump said he didn’t think Ukraine would win back land that was captured by Russia during the war. “They could still win it,” Trump remarked during his meeting with Australian Prime Minster Anthony Albanese. “I don’t think they will. They could still win it. I never said they would win it. Anything can happen. You know, war is a very strange thing.” Trump’s seeming skepticism of a Ukrainian victory came several days after a meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, during which he appeared more keen on negotiating a peace agreement than supplying the nation with Tomahawk cruise missiles.

      The president has said that Hamas is “going to behave” or will face severe repercussions. While taking questions from reporters today, Trump said that Hamas are “going to be nice, and if they’re not, we’re going to go and we’re going to eradicate them”. This comes after Israel launched waves of deadly airstrikes on Sunday and cut off all aid into Gaza “until further notice” after a reported attack by Hamas, in escalations that marked the most serious threat so far to the fragile ceasefire in the devastated territory.

      The government shutdown entered its 20th day, with little end in sight. The House remains out of session, as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle blame the other party for the impasse on Capitol Hill. Earlier, White House economic adviser said that shutdown would “likely” end this week after the No Kings protests took place across the country. The Senate will vote, for the 11th time, on a House-passed funding bill to reopen the government at 5:30pm ET.
      A three-judge panel on the ninth circuit court of appeals has ruled that the Trump administration can deploy the national guard to Portland, Oregon.They lifted a lower court judge’s decision that blocked the president from federalizing and sending roughly 200 troops to the city to guard federal buildings, as largely small and peaceful protests took place in recent weeks outside an immigration facility in the city.Per that last post, it’s worth putting that in the context of Greene’s decision to buck the Republican party line in recent months.My colleagues David Smith and George Chidi, have been reporting on the Georgia’s congresswoman’s “streak of independence” on issues ranging from healthcare to Gaza to the Jeffrey Epstein files. They report that Greene has broken ranks with Republicans and won unlikely fans among Democrats, stirring speculation about her motives – and future ambitions.David and George write that the lawmaker, who was once “one of Donald Trump’s most loyal foot soldiers” has stopped short of directly criticising the president himself and has so far avoided incurring his wrath. “But her willingness to dissent is all the more remarkable under a president who notoriously prizes loyalty and punishes critics,” they note.You can read more of their reporting below.Marjorie Taylor Greene, a representative of Georgia, on Monday morning criticized Mike Johnson’s strategy to keep the House shuttered for weeks, calling on the lower chamber to return to session immediately.“The House should be in session working,” Greene wrote on X. “We should be finishing appropriations. Our committees should be working. We should be passing bills that make President Trump’s executive orders permanent. I have no respect for the decision to refuse to work.”The callout from Greene, who is aligned with the right flank of her party, is a noticeable crack in support for Johnson’s hardline approach from the GOP over an extended congressional recess. Since 19 September, when members last cast votes, the chamber has not been conducting legislative business, although members have staged press conferences.According to Politico, House speaker Mike Johnson spoke with the president earlier, and will be at the White House at 4pm as Donald Trump welcomes the Louisiana State University (LSU) baseball champions.Also present will be the athletes from LSU Shreveport, the city where Johnson was born and raised. Part of his congressional district also includes the city.in BogotáColombia has recalled its ambassador to Washington amid a furious war of words between the Colombian president, Gustavo Petro, and Donald Trump over deadly US strikes on boats in the Caribbean.The row took a sharp turn this weekend when Petro accused the US of “murdering” a Colombian fisher in an attack on a vessel in its territorial waters. Petro and his administration said the mid-September strike was a “direct threat to national sovereignty” and that the victim was a “lifelong fisherman” and a “humble human being”.In response, Trump, who has claimed such attacks are designed to stop drug-smuggling to the US, called Petro an “illegal drug dealer” and vowed to end aid payments to Colombia, one of the largest recipients of US counter-narcotics assistance. He also ordered Petro to “close up” drug cultivation sites, saying if not “the United States will close them up for him, and it won’t be done nicely”. Speaking onboard Air Force One, Trump added that he would announce new tariffs on Colombian goods.Colombia’s interior minister, Armando Benedetti, said the remarks were a “threat of invasion or military action against Colombia”. Petro said that Colombia’s five-decade conflict stemmed from “cocaine consumption in the United States” and claimed American contributions had been “meagre and null in recent years”.Texas Republican congressman Chip Roy suggested using the “nuclear option” to end the shutdown that would avoid Senate filibuster requirements which mandate a 60-vote majority to reopen the US government, The Hill reports.“We need to be taking a look at the 60-vote threshold. We really do,” Roy said on Monday.Top Republican senators used this tactic to avoid needing Democrats’ support to confirm a host of Trump nominees in September. South Dakota Republican Senator John Thune, the Senate majority leader, said he would not do this to achieve a continuing resolution that would reopen the government, per the Hill.“At a minimum, why don’t we take a look at it for [continuing resolutions]?” Roy reportedly said. “Why don’t we just say, look, I mean, we have a 50-vote threshold for the budget, we have a 50-vote threshold for reconciliation, why shouldn’t we have a 50-vote threshold to be able to fund the government?”Republicans have supported this 60-vote benchmark when Democrats hold the majority. Thune has said that maintaining the filibuster is among his leading priorities, the Hill reported.“I think Republicans ought to take a long, hard look at the 60-vote threshold, because I think we’re just being beholden to a broken system right now,” Roy also said.Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson has expressed concern about eliminating this threshold.”I would be deeply concerned if the Democrats had a bare majority in the Senate right now, Marxist ideology taking over the Democrat party,” Johnson reportedly said earlier this month. “Do I want them to have no safegaurds and no stumbling blocks or hurdles at all in the way of turning us into a communist country? I don’t think that’s a great idea.”While the US Senate is poised to vote – for the 11th time – on a House-approved bill that would reopen the government this afternoon, Americans could face still more shutdown-related travel delays if funding efforts fail.US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said on Monday that travelers might see more disruptions because air traffic controllers are not getting paid during the shutdown.Air traffic controllers are deemed “excepted” staffers, meaning they still work during shutdowns, but receive back pay when the government reopens and funding resumes, CBS News explains.“They got a partial paycheck a week ago Tuesday. Their next paycheck comes a week from Tuesday, and in that paycheck there will be no dollars. They don’t get paid,” Duffy said in a Fox and Friends interview.“I think what you might see is more disruptions in travel as more of them look to say, how do I bridge the gap between the check that’s not coming and putting food on my table?” CBS noted him saying. “And we have heard they are taking Uber jobs. They are doing DoorDash, they are figuring out ways to keep their families afloat … And, again, a lot of them are paycheck to paycheck.”Donald Trump on Monday doubled down on his threat of imposing a 157% tariff on Chinese imports if both nations can’t reach a trade deal.“We have a tremendous power, and that’s the power of tariff, and I think that China will come to the table and make a very fair deal, because if they don’t, they’re going to be paying us 157% in tariffs,” Trump told reporters during his sit-down with Australian Prime Minster Anthony Albanese.Trump, who claimed that “China has treated us with great respect” not afforded to prior administrations, said that if a deal weren’t brokered, “I’m putting on an additional 100%” on 1 November.Trump and China’s president, Xi Jinping, are expected to meet in several weeks to discuss trade.Trump’s reiteration of this tariff threat comes just several days after he admitted that a 157% tax is unfeasible.“It’s not sustainable, but that’s what the number is,” Trump said in an interview with Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo. “It’s probably not, you know, it could stand. But they forced me to do that.”Donald Trump said he didn’t think Ukraine would win back land that was captured by Russia during the war.“They could still win it,” Trump remarked during his meeting with Australian Prime Minster Anthony Albanese. “I don’t think they will. They could still win it. I never said they would win it. Anything can happen. You know, war is a very strange thing.”Trump’s seeming skepticism of a Ukrainian victory came several days after a meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, during which he appeared more keen on negotiating a peace agreement than supplying the nation with Tomahawk cruise missiles.Trump told Ukraine and Russia to “stop the war immediately”.The comments mark yet another shift in Trump’s position on Ukraine’s chances in the years-long conflict. Trump said in September that he believed Ukraine could regain all territory seized by Russia.During Trump’s presidential campaign in 2024, and early this year, Trump said that Ukraine would have to give up territories seized by Russia to stop the war, The Associated Press notes.The president has said that Hamas is “going to behave” or will face severe repercussions.“They’re going to be nice, and if they’re not, we’re going to go and we’re going to eradicate them,” Trump added.This comes after Israel launched waves of deadly airstrikes on Sunday and cut off all aid into Gaza “until further notice” after a reported attack by Hamas, in escalations that marked the most serious threat so far to the fragile ceasefire in the devastated territory.“Hamas has been very violent, but they don’t have the backing of Iran any more. They don’t have the backing of really anybody any more. They have to be good, and if they’re not good, they’ll be eradicated,” Trump said in the Cabinet Room at the White House. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Construction appears to start on Trump’s $250m White House ballroom

      by

      Construction crews appear to have started demolishing part of the East Wing of the White House to make way for Donald Trump’s planned ballroom, prompting widespread criticism on social media and beyond.One former lawmaker even called the renovation an “​​utter desecration”.The Washington Post, which obtained and published photos of the demolition activity and cited two eyewitnesses, reported on Monday that demolition is under way and shared an image showing construction in progress and parts of the exterior ripped down.Other images, including ones seen in the New York Post, also show demolition of parts of the East Wing.The White House did not respond to a request for comment from the Guardian.On his Truth Social platform on Monday, Trump said that “ground has been broken on the White House” to build the new ballroom.“I am honored to be the first President to finally get this much-needed project underway — with zero cost to the American Taxpayer! The White House Ballroom is being privately funded by many generous Patriots, Great American Companies, and, yours truly,” he added.Earlier, at a ceremony in Washington DC celebrating the NCAA champion Louisiana State University baseball team on Monday, Trump said his administration plans to build “the most beautiful ballroom in the country”.“I didn’t know I’d be standing here right now because, right on the other side, you have a lot of construction going on, which you might hear periodically,” he said during the White House event.Plans to build an enormous $250m ballroom addition to the White House – one of the largest projects at the White House in more than a century – emerged in July. At the time, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the renovated space would span 90,000 sq ft (8,300 sq meters) and seat up to 650 people. Officials said that it would be paid for by Trump and unnamed donors.View image in fullscreenOf the renovation, Trump said in July: “In the White House, for 150 years, they’ve wanted to have a ballroom,” adding that “there’s never been a president that was good at ballrooms.“I’m good at building things and we’re going to build quickly and on time” he said. “It’ll be beautiful, top, top of the line.”Reports broke in August that work would begin in September. It’s expected to be completed before the end of Trump’s second term, in January 2029.Trump previously claimed that the new structure would not “interfere with the current building”, according to the Washington Post.View image in fullscreen“It’ll be near it but not touching it – and pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of,” Trump said during an executive order signing in July, according to the Post. “It’s my favorite. It’s my favorite place. I love it.”Earlier this month, Trump hosted a dinner at the White House for donors funding the ballroom. During the event, he reportedly opened the curtains of the East Room to show where construction on the ballroom had started. He told the guests that the new venue would feature bulletproof glass, accommodate 1,000 people and be capable of hosting a presidential inauguration.Guests at the dinner reportedly included representatives from Amazon, Apple, Meta, Google, Microsoft, Palantir and Lockheed Martin.Concerns and criticisms over Trump’s renovation plans have cropped up from lawmakers and on social media.Democratic representative Mark Takano of California proposed a bill that would prohibit the use of federal funds for any construction or renovation at the White House during a government shutdown, unless the work is directly related to health or safety. Monday marked day 20 of the ongoing government shutdown.Joe Walsh, a former Republican member of Congress, called the renovation an “​​utter desecration”.“If I ran for President in 2028, I’d run on taking a bulldozer to Trump’s ballroom, an utter desecration of the peoples’ house,” Walsh said in a post on X on Monday, reacting to a picture showing part of the White House being demolished.“In fact, I’d invite the American people one weekend to bring their own sledgehammers & crowbars to the White House to help tear that abomination down.”“Wealth & income inequality is at record highs in America, but glad we’re spending $250M on a vanity project,” said human rights lawyer Qasim Rashid. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump nominee reportedly boasted of ‘Nazi streak’ in group chats

      by

      A Donald Trump nominee who is scheduled for a confirmation hearing this week told other Republicans he “has a Nazi streak” and that holidays commemorating Black people should be “eviscerated,” according to a report based on a private group chat.Trump nominated Paul Ingrassia to serve as special counsel of the United States, a role charged in part with safeguarding federal whistleblowers from retaliation. His confirmation hearing is set for Thursday.Politico reported on Monday that Ingrassia told other Republicans in a group chat that the Martin Luther King Jr holiday, which celebrates the civil rights icon, should be ended.“MLK Jr was the 1960s George Floyd and his ‘holiday’ should be ended and tossed into the seventh circle of hell where it belongs,” Ingrassia wrote in the messages from early 2024, Politico reports. He also wrote that holidays commemorating Black people, such as Black history month or Juneteenth, should all be “eviscerated”, though he used an Italian slur for Black people.His comment about a “Nazi streak” came amid a discussion of a Trump campaign staffer who wasn’t being deferential enough to the founding fathers being white, Politico reported. Another participant said Ingrassia “belongs in the Hitler Youth”, to which Ingrassia responded: “I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time, I will admit it.”Ingrassia’s attorney, Edward Andrew Paltzik, told the outlet that the texts could have been manipulated or lacking context, though that if they were real, they “clearly read as self-deprecating and satirical humor making fun of the fact that liberals outlandishly and routinely call Maga supporters ‘Nazis’”.Ingrassia, 30, has had several roles in the second Trump administration. He was a White House liaison to the justice department, then moved to the Department of Homeland Security. He was nominated in May to lead the office of special counsel, but his appointment was postponed. His critics have drawn on his public comments and inexperience for the role, as well as his support of white supremacist Nick Fuentes.Ingrassia was also accused of sexual harassment earlier this year, Politico reported. He has called the report about the alleged harassment a “vexatious political attack” and said it should be retracted.Politico reported last week on a trove of 2,900 pages of leaked chats from a Telegram group with young Republicans, in which the participants made racist comments, praised Hitler and celebrated rape.“If we ever had a leak of this chat we would be cooked fr fr,” said Bobby Walker, who was recently made chair of the New York division.The New York Republican state committee suspended the authorization of their young Republicans chapter after its members were implicated in the chat. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Comey asks judge to dismiss criminal charges claiming selective prosecution

      by

      Former FBI director James Comey formally asked a federal judge to dismiss criminal charges against him, arguing he was the victim of a selective prosecution and that the US attorney who filed the charges was unlawfully appointed.“The record as it currently exists shows a clear causal link between President Trump’s animus and the prosecution of Mr Comey,” Comey’s lawyers wrote in their request to dismiss the case, calling a 20 September Truth Social post in which he disparaged Comey and called for his prosecution “smoking gun evidence”. “President Trump’s repeated public statements and action leave no doubt as to the government’s genuine animus toward Mr Comey.” Comey’s lawyers attached an exhibit to their filing on Monday, which contains dozens of public statements from Trump criticizing Comey.Comey was indicted on 25 September with one count of making a false statement and one count of obstructing a congressional proceeding. The charges are related to Comey’s 30 September 2020 testimony before Congress, and are connected to Comey’s assertion he had never authorized anyone at the FBI to leak information. The precise details of the offense have not been made public and Comey has pleaded not guilty and forcefully denied any wrongdoing.The charges were filed against Comey, though career prosecutors in the justice department determined charges were not warranted. Trump forced out Erik Siebert, the US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia, in September and installed Lindsey Halligan, a White House aide. The Comey charges were filed days later.“In the ordinary case, a prosecutor’s charging decision is presumptively lawful and rests within her broad discretion. This is no ordinary case,” Comey’s lawyers wrote. “Here, direct evidence establishes that the President harbors genuine animus toward Mr. Comey, including because of Mr. Comey’s protected speech, that he installed his personal attorney as a ‘stalking horse’ to carry out his bidding; and that she then prosecuted Mr. Comey—days before the statute of limitations expired, with a faulty indictment—to effectuate the President’s wishes.”Comey’s Monday filing says that the fact that career prosecutors did not believe there was enough evidence to bring a case bolsters his argument that he was selectively prosecuted. They also argue that the indictment mischaracterizes the question Comey was asked that prompted the answer prosecutors say was a lie and the basis of his criminal false statement.According to the indictment, Comey was asked by a US senator whether he “had not ‘authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports’ regarding an FBI investigation concerning PERSON 1”. (Comey’s lawyers wrote in their filing on Monday that Person 1 was Hillary Clinton.)The accusation relates to a question from Senator Ted Cruz of Texas. During the 2020 hearing, Cruz noted that in 2017 congressional testimony, Comey denied “ever authoriz[ing] someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton Administration”. Cruz went on to note that Andrew McCabe, the former deputy director of the FBI, had said Comey authorized him to leak information to the Wall Street Journal.In response, Comey said he stood by his prior testimony. Comey’s lawyers argued on Monday the indictment was defective because Cruz’s question had been focused on McCabe, but the government informed them that the person Comey is alleged to have authorized to leak to the media is Daniel Richman, a friend of Comey’s and professor at Columbia University.“The indictment omits Senator Cruz’s words that explicitly narrow the focus of his questions to Mr. McCabe and misleadingly implies that the questioning related to Mr. Richman. In fact, Mr. Comey’s September 2020 exchange with Senator Cruz made no reference whatsoever to Mr. Richman, who ultimately appears in the indictment,” they wrote. They also note that Cruz asked about the “Clinton administration” and not “Hillary Clinton”.Career prosecutors interviewed Richman as part of their investigation into Comey and found him not helpful to making a case, according to the New York Times. John Durham, a special counsel appointed to investigate the FBI’s inquiry into Russian meddling, also told investigators he did not uncover evidence to support charges against Comey.Comey’s lawyers also argued on Monday that the case should be dismissed because Halligan was not lawfully appointed.“The United States cannot charge, maintain, and prosecute a case through an official who has no entitlement to exercise governmental authority,” they wrote.US attorneys must be confirmed by the Senate and can only serve for 120 days on an interim basis unless their appointment is extended by the judges overseeing their district. Siebert, Halligan’s predecessor, served for the 120-day limit and Halligan does not appear to have met other exceptions that would allow her to continue to serve.“The period does not start anew once the 120-day period expires or if a substitute interim U.S. Attorney is appointed before the 120-day period expires,” Comey’s attorneys wrote.Halligan has also overseen criminal fraud charges against New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, in connection to allegations she lied on mortgage documents. James has said she is not guilty. Legal experts have said that case does not appear to be strong. More

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Ukraine peace talks: Europe must ensure Zelenskyy can resist Trump’s bullying | Editorial

      by

      It wasn’t quite the calamity of February, when Volodymyr Zelenskyy was publicly humiliated in the Oval Office by Donald Trump and his vice-president, JD Vance. But the Ukrainian president’s latest visit to the White House on Friday was, by all accounts, a disquieting experience. Mr Trump’s public musings before the meeting suggested that his stance had hardened towards Vladimir Putin, to the strategically significant extent of being willing to sell long-range Tomahawk missiles to Kyiv. But by the time Mr Zelenskyy arrived in Washington, the US president had changed his mind, instead lecturing his guest on the need to make territorial concessions to Russia.So far, so familiar. Since being re-elected, Mr Trump has repeatedly resiled from following up tough talk on Russia with meaningful action. Faux deadlines for Mr Putin to make substantive steps towards peace have come and gone, treated with indifference by the Kremlin. Last week, the US secretary of war, Pete Hegseth, stated that Washington was ready to “impose costs” if Russia continued the conflict. But a two-hour phone call at Mr Putin’s request was enough to defuse that threat, and for Mr Trump to once again position himself as a neutral arbitrator between two warring parties.The return of that insidious and amoral framing signifies a moment of diplomatic peril for Mr Zelenskyy. In language that is more suitable for describing a contested real-estate deal than an illegal invasion costing hundreds of thousands of lives, Mr Trump told Fox News that Mr Putin was “going to take something … he’s won certain property”. Should a planned meeting in Budapest take place between the US and Russian presidents – to be hosted by Hungary’s Putin-friendly leader, Viktor Orbán – discussion of a potential carve-up will dominate the agenda, as it did in the failed Alaska head-to-head.That prospect should concentrate minds ahead of a EU leaders’ summit later this week in Brussels. In the wake of the signing of the Gaza peace agreement – in relation to which Mr Putin was careful to offer fulsome congratulations – Mr Trump has taken to describing himself as “the mediator president”. In grimly paradoxical fashion, there is every possibility that he will try to bully Mr Zelenskyy into an unacceptable deal that rewards Russia’s aggression, in order to burnish his supposed credentials as a supreme peacemaker.It is critical that Europe provides Ukraine with the resources and staying power which allow it to resist such pressure. Progress is reportedly being made on proposals backed by the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, which would use frozen Russian assets to secure an interest-free £122bn loan to Kyiv. Such money, however it is sourced, will be fundamental to supporting Ukraine’s defence effort into next year. At a more symbolic level, there are also signs of a new determination to find ways to circumvent Mr Orbán’s opposition to advancing Ukraine’s bid for EU membership.As Mr Trump pursues his mercurial path, guided only by vanity, mercantilism and admiration for the exercise of brute force, EU leaders will need to be creative and determined in ensuring that Ukraine’s interests are adequately defended in the weeks and months to come. Mr Putin is playing the US president again, exploiting the absence of a moral compass in Washington. More than ever, a robust counterweight is required on the other side of the Atlantic. More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump says China ‘doesn’t want’ to invade Taiwan and reaffirms trust in Xi

      by

      Donald Trump has expressed doubt on Monday that China would invade Taiwan as he voiced confidence in his relationship with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, whom he will meet later this month.Trump was asked about an earlier Pentagon assessment that Xi could in the next six years attempt to seize Taiwan, a self-governing democracy claimed by China.“I think we’ll be just fine with China. China doesn’t want to do that,” Trump told reporters as he met the Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese.Speaking of Xi’s designs on Taiwan, Trump said: “Now that doesn’t mean it’s not the apple of his eye, because probably it is, but I don’t see anything happening.”Without explicitly saying he would authorize force to defend Taiwan, Trump said that China knows that the United States “is the strongest military power in the world by far”.“We have the best of everything, and nobody’s going to mess with that. And I don’t see that at all with President Xi,” Trump said.“I think we’re going to get along very well as it pertains to Taiwan and others,” he said.Trump will hold his first meeting with Xi of his second term when the leaders of the world’s two largest economies visit South Korea later this month for an Asia-Pacific summit.Trump said his priority was reaching a “fair” trade deal with China. He declined to answer a question on whether he would sacrifice US support for Taiwan as part of an agreement with Xi.“I want to be good to China. I love my relationship with President Xi. We have a great relationship,” Trump said.The United States recognizes only Beijing and not Taiwan, where the Chinese mainland’s defeated nationalists fled in 1949 after losing the civil war to the communists and which has since turned into a flourishing democracy and technology hub.Under US law, the United States is required to provide Taiwan weapons for its self-defense but Washington has been deliberately ambiguous on whether it would use force to defend Taiwan.Trump’s predecessor Joe Biden repeatedly suggested he would order the US military to intervene if China moved on Taiwan. More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The massive No Kings protests may mark a new American political posture | Moira Donegan

      by

      Over the past week or so, it seemed as if some Republican leaders were hoping that Saturday’s No Kings demonstrations – the marches and rallies hosted by a coalition of liberal groups across the country and worldwide – would turn violent. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, called them “Hate America” rallies, a moniker that was quickly picked up by other Republicans, and described the No Kings protests as a crucible of potential riots, representing “all the pro-Hamas wing and, you know, the antifa people”. “You’re gonna bring together the Marxists, the socialists, the antifa advocates, the anarchists, and the pro-Hamas wing of the far-left Democrat party,” he said. Tom Emmer, a representative for Minnesota, described the rallies as a product of the “terrorist wing” of the Democratic party. And Roger Marshall, a senator from Kansas, fantasized that the protests would require action by the national guard. Others, such as the attorney general, Pam Bondi, mused about who might be paying the protesters to show up – an idea that seemed to dismiss the notion that anyone might oppose Donald Trump’s agenda for principled, rather than cynical, reasons.At times they sounded almost wistful. Republicans, the president himself chief among them, have been fervently endeavoring to cast those who oppose their authoritarian consolidation of power as enemies – contemptible un-Americans who lack virtue, common values, or the protection of the law. In a world where it was once considered the height of inappropriate partisanship for Hillary Clinton to refer to a “basket of deplorables” among Trump voters or Barack Obama to mourn the conservatives who “cling to guns or religion”, it barely registered as news on Thursday when the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told Fox News: “The Democrat party’s main constituency are made up of Hamas terrorists, illegal aliens, and violent criminals.”But no matter how fervently and how deeply the Trump regime appears to hate the American people, the No Kings protests that brought millions to the streets on Saturday suggests that the American people hate them even more. In the densely packed streets of cities from New York to Austin to Oakland to St Augustine, Florida, the massive protests took on a tone of jubilant contempt, with Trump and his various lackeys derided on signs and in effigies, with jokes that ranged from the high-minded to the vulgar. At a protest in San Francisco, I saw one man holding a sign that quoted Walt Whitman, walking near a woman making a vulgar reference to Trump’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein. A number of people donned inflatable character costumes – I saw a starfish, a teddy bear, two unicorns, a rooster and a pickle. They originated from Portland’s protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement and national guard deployments as cheeky ways to mock the Trump administration’s claims that the city was “war-torn” and in need of armed invasion. If the anti-Trump resistance movements of his first administration were characterized by a kind of self-serious righteousness, those of the No Kings era have devolved into irreverence and humor. At times I was reminded of a peculiar feeling I have sometimes had, in the desperate hours after funerals or bad breakups, when I have been crying for so long that I find I’ve started laughing.The No Kings protests have been criticized for their capaciousness and indefinite agenda, and it is true that the demonstrations are the product of several large liberal groups and bring together people whose politics and inclinations would not ordinarily mix. At San Francisco’s protest, I saw the signature red rose of the democratic socialists, the Aztec eagle of the United Farm Workers, and a gold lamé sign held aloft by a largely unclothed man who declared himself a libertarian – in addition to a motley mix of men wearing the powdered wigs and tricorn hats of the founding fathers, women with white feathered sleeves and hoods posing as bald eagles, and a staggering number of people who wrapped themselves in the American flag.The hodgepodge of symbolism might reflect the chaotic and disorganized nature of the anti-Trump coalition – which, containing as it does the majority of the US’s 340 million people, is rife with contradictions. This has long been a problem for the Democrats: the party fears that their tent is too big, their base is too far from swing voters, and the coalitions of Obama and Joe Biden are too fractured and fragile to ever be maintained. But Trump has perhaps created a new kind of glue that can hold together a different kind of political movement: something that vast swaths of the American people hate even more than they hate each other.Amid the density of references and imagery, No Kings might also indicate a new political posture being born: a left-liberal popular front that mixes principle with irreverence. The aspiration of No Kings, in a way, is to abolish itself – to rebuild, perhaps a little sturdier and more honest this time, the kind of constitutional system in which law and persuasion replace Trump’s model of violence and domination. To put it another way: the people at the No Kings rallies all agree that they want to restore the kinds of liberal-democratic conditions that will enable them to disagree with one another.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAt any rate, the violence that the Trump regime seemed to long for did not materialize. In San Francisco, an organizer speaking into a megaphone urged attenders to ignore any pro-Trump agitators they might encounter, and to not engage with any federal agents. “If you see uniformed feds outside a building,” he warned the crowd, “it’s bait.” Before the marches, some seemed frightened of what might happen – whether Trump-aligned federal forces might crack down with mass arrests, or whether pro-Trump militias might instigate a fight. But the demonstrations seem to have been remarkably peaceful, even cheerful, avoiding provocations and meeting virtually no violence from Trump-aligned forces. In New York, an estimated 100,000 marchers participated in No Kings events across the five boroughs, and an official Twitter account associated with the New York police department reported that there had been no arrests of protesters.Trump appeared disappointed. On Saturday evening, after the marches had largely disbanded and the millions who had turned out to oppose him went home, he took to Truth Social, his proprietary social media platform, to post an AI-generated video of himself. In the cartoon, Trump – wearing a crown – flies a fighter jet over the No Kings protests, and dumps feces on the protesting citizens. It was a peevish, petulant little display of contempt – the kind of behavior that you would punish in a child but which has become bog standard for the president of the United States. He evidently wanted Americans to know that he hates them. The feeling is mutual.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 263 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      The right wants Charlie Kirk memorials across the US – but is it just an attempt to capitalize on his killing?

      by

      Republicans and conservatives are campaigning to quickly build statues and other memorials across the United States for the slain rightwing activist Charlie Kirk in the wake of his assassination at a college event in Utah last month.Political leaders in states such as Florida, Michigan and Oklahoma have not only called for construction of memorials but in some cases also threatened to penalize colleges that refuse to publicly honor Kirk, who was killed on 10 September.The heavy-handed push to honor Kirk, who held views that many see as racist and sexist, follows Donald Trump’s moves to restore monuments of Confederate leaders that were removed in recent years, which appear to be part of a broad effort to impose rightwing views on the country.“The way in which you keep the culture war going – or the way that you win it – is to have religious icons like Charlie and use their face and their name and their likeness to further your cause,” said Matthew Boedy, an English professor at the University of North Georgia who has studied Christian nationalism.Kirk, who co-founded the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA, was killed at Utah State University during one of his signature events in which he debated students.Since then, Trump and others in his administration, such as Stephen Miller, have blamed the shooting – without producing any evidence – on a coordinated violent effort by the “radical left” and threatened to “identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy” the left’s “terrorism and terror networks”.Kirk often criticized gay and transgender rights and made Islamophobic statements and once suggested that the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a “mistake”. However, at the state and local level, Republican lawmakers have described Kirk as a “modern civil rights leader” who stood for “allowing everybody to voice their opinion respectfully”.Just a week after Kirk’s murder, Ohio Republican state senators Shane Jett and Dana Prieto introduced legislation that would require all of the state’s public universities to build a “Charlie Kirk memorial plaza” with a statue “that features the conservative leader sitting at a table with an empty seat across from him” or one of Kirk “and his wife standing and holding their children in their arms”.A few weeks later, in Florida, Kevin Steele, a state house Republican, also proposed legislation that would require all of the state’s public universities to rename roads for Kirk.“The Florida State University shall redesignate Chieftain Way as Charlie James Kirk Road,” the bill states. “Pasco-Hernando State College shall redesignate Mrs Prameela Musunuru Health and Wellness Trail as Charlie James Kirk Trail.”In Florida, if the schools do not establish the memorials by stated deadline, the state would withhold funding from the institutions, and in Oklahoma, the state would fine the schools, according to the legislation.Boedy, the University of North Georgia professor, likened the lawmakers’ threats to withhold state money to Trump’s moves to cut off federal funding to universities unless they met his list of demands.“State funding for education should be based upon students’ interest in majors, in enrollment and in science, in objective criteria, and honoring a single person is not part of that,” said Boedy, who has been on Turning Point’s watchlist of “professors who discriminate against conservative students and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom”.Jett, Prieto and Steele did not respond to requests for comment.Kirk was critical of higher education and wrote a book titled The College Scam: How America’s Universities Are Bankrupting and Brainwashing Away the Future of America’s Youth.“I find it really ironic that the state of Oklahoma is demanding that every public university have a Charlie Kirk memorial plaza,” said Erika Doss, an art historian at the University of Texas at Dallas and the author of Memorial Mania: Public Feeling in America.While the states have not approved the legislation requiring the memorials, at least one Florida county has installed a sign for a Charlie Kirk Memorial Highway, despite some public opposition.And less than a week after the murder, New College of Florida, a liberal arts university that has been the subject of a conservative takeover, also posted on X an AI-generated image of a bronze sculpture of Kirk at a table and stated that it would build the statue on campus “to defend and fight for free speech and civil discourse in American life”.That may not be easy. After events like 9/11, the Vietnam war, and the assassinations of John F Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr, public monuments were often not built for years, sometimes decades.Quickly sharing a fake image of a Kirk memorial “is a lie”, Doss said. “It matters because it doesn’t tell the truth about how complicated and necessarily complicated making public art should be.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBy waiting years to build a memorial, you can see how time really changes the “emotional tenor and the perspective on the event”, said Gabriel Reich, a professor of history and social studies at Virginia Commonwealth University who has studied collective memories of the US civil war and emancipation.“How people feel about [Kirk’s killing] five years from now may be different, and it may depend on what happens between now and then,” said Reich. “Does the political violence escalate and continue? Does it get tamped down?”It’s not a foregone conclusion that the schools will build the monuments.In Michigan, the Mecosta county board of commissioners wanted Ferris State University to build a statue for Kirk and offered to split the funding, but the school president declined, citing a “a longstanding practice that limits statues on campus to individuals who have made significant, direct contributions to Ferris State University itself”, according to the Detroit Free-Press.At New College, alum William Rosenberg sees the proposed statue as an attempt by the administration to distract from problems at the school, which was once a highly ranked institution considered among the most liberal in the country.“New College was a welcoming environment for people who were motivated and wanted to learn and wanted to do it on their own terms,” said Rosenberg, who graduated in 1980 with a degree in medieval studies.Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, a Republican, has tried in recent years to transform the school by appointing political allies such as the conservative activist Christopher Rufo to its board of trustees, firing its president and revamping its curriculum.Since then, the school has seen its national ranking and graduation and retention rates plummet, while the state now spends significantly more on each student than those at its other public universities, according to Inside Higher Ed.After posting the AI image of the statue, New College’s president, Richard Corcoran, touted the public response in a weekly email.“In the first 72 hours of the announcement, New College of Florida was mentioned nearly 3 billion times (including traditional media in the graph below, and reposts on social media),” the email stated. “Normally, New College receives about 100 million impressions a month. In 72 hours, New College received about 2 1/2 years of media coverage.”A New College spokesperson, James Miller, declined an interview request.Rosenberg, a semi-retired computer engineer, doubts the school will actually build the statue because of Corcoran’s “history of promising the world and delivering nothing”.“A lot of alumni feel it was a gross PR move to capitalize on Charlie Kirk’s murder,” Rosenberg said. “New College of Florida has now become a political pawn whose real mission is about making political headlines while the on-the-ground education has nosedived.” More