US politics

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares24 Views

    Biden issues terse words to Netanyahu over peace deal and election influence

    by

    Joe Biden had terse words at the White House on Friday for Benjamin Netanyahu, saying he didn’t know whether the Israeli prime minister was holding up a peace deal in the Middle East – where Israel is at war with Hamas in Gaza and on a military offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon – in order to influence the outcome of the 2024 US presidential election.“No administration has helped Israel more than I have. None. None, none. And I think Bibi should remember that,” Biden said, using Netanyahu’s nickname. He added: “And whether he’s trying to influence the election, I don’t know – but I’m not counting on that.”The US president made a surprise and rare appearance in the west wing briefing room and answered reporters’ questions there for the first time in his presidency.He was responding to comments made by one of his allies, Chris Murphy, a Democratic US senator of Connecticut, who said on CNN this week that he was concerned Netanyahu had little interest in a peace deal in part because of American politics.The two leaders have long managed a complicated relationship, but they are running out of space to maneuver as their views on the Israel-Gaza war diverge and their political futures hang in the balance.Biden has pushed for months for a ceasefire agreement in Gaza – and the president and his aides boosted the idea repeatedly that they were close to success – but a ceasefire has not materialized. Antony Blinken, the secretary of state, has engaged in shuttle diplomacy to Israel and to peace talks via intermediaries, but to no avail and, in some cases, Netanyahu has publicly resisted the prospect while US and Israeli officials continue to talk in private about eking out a deal.Meanwhile, Israel has recently pressed forward on two fronts, pursuing a ground incursion into Lebanon against Hezbollah and conducting strikes in Gaza. And it has vowed to retaliate for Iran’s ballistic missile attack this week, as the region braced for further escalation.Biden said there had been no decision yet on what type of response there would be toward Iran, though there has been talk about Israel striking Iran’s oilfields: “I think if I were in their shoes, I’d be thinking about other alternatives than striking oilfields.”Biden pushed back against the idea that he was seeking a meeting with Netanyahu to discuss the response to Iran. He wasn’t, he said.“I’m assuming when they make a decision on how they’re going to respond, we will then have a discussion,” he said.Netanyahu has grown increasingly resistant to Biden’s efforts. Biden has in turn publicly held up delivery of heavy bombs to Israel and increasingly voiced concerns over an all-out war in the Middle East and yet has never acquiesced to political calls at home or internationally for a halt on US arms sales to Israel.“I don’t believe there’s going to be an all-out war,” Biden said on Thursday evening. “I think we can avoid it. But there’s a lot to do yet.”Biden has remained consistent in his support for Israel in the aftermath of the 7 October Hamas attacks in Israel. Since then, with few exceptions, Biden has supported ongoing and enhanced US arms transfers to Israel while merely cautioning the Israelis to be careful to avoid civilian casualties.Biden has also ordered the US military to step up its profile in the region to protect Israel from attacks by Hamas, Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and Iran itself. In April, and again earlier this week, the US was a leading player in shooting down missiles fired by Iran into Israel.On Thursday, Biden said the US was “discussing” with Israel the possibility of Israeli strikes on Iran’s oil infrastructure.His off-the-cuff remark, which immediately sent oil prices soaring, did not make clear whether his administration was holding internal discussions or talking directly to Israel, nor did he clarify what his attitude was to such an attack.Asked to clarify those comments, Biden told reporters on Friday: “Look, the Israelis have not concluded what they’re going to do in terms of a strike. That’s under discussion.”Kamala Harris also has not taken a different stance on arms sales but has spoken more assertively for months to demand an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and has decried civilian killings in Israel’s war in the Palestinian territory.The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    More stories

    • 188 Shares23 Views

      in US Politics

      US politics: underwhelming Walz and more presentable Vance in VP debate – Full Story podcast

      by

      Joan E Greve and Leah Wright Rigueur discuss JD Vance and Tim Walz’s clash on the debate stage in New York City on Tuesday night. Although Walz gave a solid performance, it was described as underwhelming, while Vance attempted to reset his image and get on the front foot. Will this debate have moved the needle at all? And as the situation in the Middle East escalates, where do Trump and Harris stand on foreign policy

      How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know More

    • 150 Shares24 Views

      in US Politics

      Man charged with threatening judge in Florida district that heard Trump case

      by

      A man from Illinois has been charged with making violent threats against a federal judge in the Florida district that has handled Donald Trump’s classified documents case, according to an indictment made public on Thursday.Eric James Rennert, 65, is facing five federal charges in the indictment which accuses him of communicating interstate threats and threatening to assault, kidnap and murder a federal judge.The communications also included threats to injure or kidnap members of the judge’s family, prosecutors allege.Court documents do not name the judge who received the threats but indicate they occurred in St Lucie county, Florida. US district judge Aileen Cannon, who presided over the criminal case accusing Trump of illegally retaining classified documents, is based in that county along with another federal magistrate judge.Representatives for the US attorney’s office in Miami, which brought the indictment, and the federal court in the southern district of Florida did not immediately respond to requests for comment.The threats, which were made on three occasions in May and July, were intended to retaliate against the judge “on account of the performance of official duties”, according to the indictment.Rennert has been arrested and will be transported to Florida for his next court appearance, according to court records. He has not yet entered a plea.Cannon was appointed to the bench by Trump during his presidency, and her approach to the classified documents case drew intense scrutiny. She dismissed all charges in July based on a finding that lead prosecutor and special counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed to the role.Prosecutors are appealing Cannon’s ruling with the hopes of reviving the case. If they were to succeed, any trial would not take place until well after the 5 November presidential election, in which the Republican Trump faces Vice-President Kamala Harris.Cannon was also recently assigned to preside over the case of a man accused of attempting to assassinate Trump last month at his Florida golf course. A woman in Texas was sentenced to more than three years in prison in February after admitting to threatening Cannon, court records show.Federal judges have faced a rise in threats as part of an overall surge in violent rhetoric directed toward public officials in the United States. More

    • 150 Shares24 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk says he will attend Trump rally at Pennsylvania shooting site

      by

      Elon Musk plans to attend Donald Trump’s rally on Saturday at the site in Butler, Pennsylvania, where the former president narrowly avoided assassination in July.“I will be there to support!” the tech billionaire replied to a post by Trump on Musk’s social media platform, X, saying he was returning to the Butler Farm show grounds.Trump’s decision to hold the rally in the same open-air venue came after a series of harsh reports into Secret Service security failures that allowed a gunman to open fire from a rooftop on the outskirts of the fairgrounds.Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, injured the former president, killed rally attender Corey Comperatore and severely wounded two others as he got off clear shots with an assault rifle before he was killed by federal snipers.Trump and his campaign have indicated they will turn the rally into a triumphant return for the former president, as well as a way to honor those who were killed or injured.Comperatore’s family will attend, along with those injured in the gunfire, Trump and his campaign have said.“What you’re going to see in Butler … tomorrow is the kind of strength and leadership that we are desperate for back in that White House. I think it’s going to be an emotional rally,” Lara Trump told Fox News.The Pittsburgh Gazette said crowd estimates for Saturday’s planned event ranged from 15,000 to as high as 100,000. The Secret Service is expecting as many as 60,000 people.“There is a pilgrimage sense at all the rallies, but this is going to be the one,” said Jen Golbeck, a University of Maryland professor, told the newspaper. “There are definitely people who feel like – and say to me – the hand of God has touched Trump.”Trump said, “I had God on my side” in surviving the shooting and the “providential” moment, which also produced one of the 2024 presidential campaign’s – and any election in US history – most potent images, with Trump rising from a Secret Service huddle, blood streaked across his face, raising his fist and shouting “Fight!”Religious interpretations aside, the assassination attempt was the first of two Trump has now faced. Last month, 58-year-old Ryan Wesley Routh allegedly aspired to shoot the former president on Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida.Trump has also faced ongoing death threats from Iran, which is also blamed for hacking into his campaign.Trump has accused the Biden administration of intentionally denying security resources to help Kamala Harris, the US vice-president and his Democratic opponent in the November election, by preventing him from addressing large crowds, a signature of his political life.“They couldn’t give me any help. And I’m so angry about it because what they’re doing is interfering in the election,” he said in a Fox News interview.Changes have been made to what he can do on the campaign trail and Trump staffers are on edge, the Associated Press reported. There have been death threats directed at his aides, and his team isn’t as able to quickly organize the mass rallies he prefers.View image in fullscreenArmed security officers stand guard at the campaign’s Florida headquarters, and staff have been told to remain vigilant and alert.Events have been canceled and moved around because the Secret Service lacked the resources to safely secure them. Even with the use of glass barricades to protect Trump on stage, there are concerns about holding additional rallies outdoors due to fears about drones.Trump also now travels with a larger security footprint, with new traffic restrictions outside his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, and a line of dump trucks and big guns on display outside Trump Tower in New York when he is staying there.The Secret Service spokesperson, Anthony Guglielmi, said that Trump “is receiving heightened levels of US Secret Service protection” and that “our top priority is mitigating risks to ensure his continued safety at all times.”Leslie Osche, Butler county commissioners chair, told Pittsburgh’s Action News 4 that officials were “confident” about security at Saturday’s event.Musk has endorsedTrump for another term in the White House. On Friday, the tech billionaire also retweeted a post calling Saturday’s event “HISTORIC!” More

    • 150 Shares27 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Slick talker’ v ‘sincere and truthful’: swing-state voters respond to VP debate

      by

      ‘Walz came across as passionate, sincere and truthful’Walz was rushing and appeared to want to discuss complex issues with depth but didn’t have enough time to delve into some of the points. He had more substance and came across as more sincere than Vance, who was slick, polished and said little of consequence.I would have liked to hear more about how, exactly, Trump and Vance want to build on federal land. For example, if they plan to use land in Montana or Michigan for housing, and I have family in North Carolina and Alabama, how would that be useful to me? I would also like to have heard Vance [being] questioned about how tax breaks for the rich are going to help people on a fixed income like me, or middle-class families like those of my grown children.My favorite moment was when Walz directly addressed the audience in his closing remarks. It came across as passionate, sincere and truthful. I voted for Biden last time and this time I will vote for the Harris-Walz ticket with enthusiasm.– Catherine, 76, part-time consultant in international aid and development, North Carolina‘Vance presented himself to be a slick talker’I voted for Biden-Harris in the last election and will vote for Harris-Walz this year. Vance presented himself to be a slick talker – which I was very apprehensive about because it allowed him to chameleon his way throughout the debate and he did on many instances, making Trumpism seem palatable and humane.Walz was more grounded and refused to display any outrage at what Vance said and this I think was his strong point. Instead, Walz was more polite and sometimes to a fault because he could have pounced on Vance during those instances. Walz talked more about his plans and accomplishments as Minnesota governor to solve the country’s domestic problems, something I wish voters paid attention to – especially healthcare.The final question regarding whether Trump-Vance would accept the results of the upcoming election, I believe, was the moment that had the most tension. It presented the starkest difference between the two. Vance still refuses to accept Trump’s defeat in 2020 and did not express his thoughts if the upcoming election does not go their way.
      – Wilfredo Lukban, 59, retired physician, Doylestown, Pennsylvania‘Vance and Walz were better than the presidential candidates in the last debate’It was a very civil policy-driven debate. I voted for Trump in the last election, would have voted for RFK before he dropped out but now am planning on voting for Trump. Vance and Walz both presented themselves better than the presidential candidates did in the last debate. Vance, especially, impressed with his speaking ability. It was the first time I’d heard him speak for so long. Came away feeling like Vance had a slight edge over Walz. Possibly his youth biased me towards him as well.Wish the discussion on energy had gone on longer. Vance briefly mentioned nuclear power but Walz didn’t engage with it. Vance addressing abortion was what I wish Republicans in government and Trump had been saying all along. Just because we care about the unborn doesn’t mean we’re unsympathetic to women in difficult situations. There’s room for compromise. – IT worker in his mid-20s, Arizona‘How can anyone say that Vance won the debate?’How can anyone say that Vance won the debate when he out and out lied numerous times? A smooth but completely gaslit answer is just appalling. Not to mention the times he just flat out didn’t answer the questions, just came up with gobbledy-gook.And how in the name of all that’s holy can you win a vice-presidential debate if you can’t admit that Trump lost the 2020 election? Why are you even allowed to run for office if you’re so completely out of touch with reality?
      – David, 70, photographer, North Carolina‘Vance showed his gentle side, was polished and sharp’View image in fullscreenVance did a great job of showing the public his gentle side, was polished and sharp on the subject matter. Walz was too folksy, didn’t admit to not being in China when he said he was. Too fumbly and forever taking notes.[I would have liked] specifics on how both parties will grow the economy. Especially considering the almost four years of restricting inflation. I really liked the civility throughout the debate.I almost kicked over the TV when the moderators started factchecking Vance. I thought that wasn’t allowed in this debate. Three against one, just like in the presidential debate. I voted for Donald Trump in the last two elections. Will vote for him in this one, simply because four more years of Democratic policy will do even more harm. – Rod, 70s, Wisconsin‘Neither candidate had specific answers as to how to fix some problems’No doubt Vance was a slick debater, showing his previous debate skills. Neither candidate had much substance or specific answers as to how to fix some of the problems. I wanted to see more about social security and how to keep the country from going bankrupt. Generations after mine will find it difficult to live on social security, let alone have benefits. I don’t want to see social security go bankrupt in my lifetime and possibly see benefits decrease. Everyone knows there is an issue, but neither party has a plan they are willing to discuss.In 2020 I was a staunch Republican worried about what Biden would do and believed the hype from Trump, which is why I voted for him. Little did we know how badly Trump would mangle the Covid epidemic and give tax cuts to the wealthy. He has yet to admit how bad his Covid was. I’m tired of all the lies Trump and Vance spread that cause the discourse in this country. Neither party has all the answers, but we need the Republican party to allow bipartisan solutions. I blame the rightwing facet of the party for much of the division in our country, and I never thought I would say that. I will vote for Harris this year. – Annette, retired, Arizona‘I’d have liked to know how both candidates propose to fund their programs’I was impressed at how well both candidates held their composure. They both appear like they could truly work in a bipartisan atmosphere. I do wish that Walz would have answered the few questions he danced around but all in all I think the debate was on point and informative. Both candidates proposed their plans yet did so with very little detail. With a budget deficit of $35tn I would like to know how they propose to fund these programs.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionI was sharing this experience with my father-in-law, a retired master carpenter who worked many hard and long hours to live the American dream. We both have a great love for our country and the constitution. In short, watching this debate were two blue-collar, working-class men concerned about the future of our country.I voted for Trump in the past. I felt we needed someone who wasn’t a career politician. Electing the same old political leaders has given us root rot. The effects one day may be devastating. I will vote for Trump again this year. Under his presidency our economy was in recovery and there were unprecedented steps taken towards peace in other hostile countries. – Britton Ramsey, 54, welder, Wisconsin‘I wanted to see Walz be more aggressive towards Vance’The debate overall was incredibly boring. I wanted to see Walz be more aggressive towards Vance. It was obvious from the beginning that the Harris campaign had leashed Walz because the only times he came alive were when he got to speak about progressive initiatives in Minnesota.I think that’s a sign the Harris campaign should move more to the left. I’ve begrudgingly voted for the Democratic candidate for president in every presidential election since I could start voting in 2012. They frequently disappoint me by capitulating to the right too often but there are no other viable options yet.– Devon, 31, web developer, Lansing, Michigan‘Both candidates addressed the big issue of this country: division’I thought Vance killed it. On issues besides 6 January, he effectively dismantled Walz’s arguments – while not being a huge jerk about it. I think that he clarified the Trump campaign’s plans on everything much better than Trump ever can. Walz did the same. He really clarified the ticket’s ideas in a respectful manner. If only these two guys were running for president!I think both candidates addressed the big issue of this country: division. The people who watched that debate saw Vance and Walz shake hands and talk to each other after the debate. They didn’t scream at each other.We all have the same problems – just different ways of solving them. Your Republican neighbor does not want the rights of women and democracy as a principle to burn, and your Democrat cousin does not want communism installed, and doesn’t want to kill all the babies in utero. This debate proved that.There were some bad parts to the debate, like Vance dodging January 6, and Walz saying the Trump campaign was going to go with Project 2025; but for the most part, it was very constructive.I wish there [had been] a longer segment on abortion rights. Both sides need to explain their stance more clearly. As a Catholic, I am pro-life; I’m trending towards Vance’s position and understand Walz’s objections.I’m currently undecided on who to vote for. I am a registered Republican, but I don’t exactly like Trump. We were relatively prosperous [under him], but I think he causes scandal. A clarification of what the Harris campaign plans to do on abortion may make me consider Harris if her position is close to the Trump ticket, or even more pro-life. However, given that she seems to be much more radical than she says she is, I would not vote for her. – William, 19, student, Pennsylvania‘Complaints about against-the-rules factchecking highlight how reliant the Trump campaign is on misinformation’I voted for Joe Biden in the last election and will be voting for Harris this year.I think it was great to have the debate to get to know the candidates better, and I appreciated how respectful they both were to each other. I think it highlights how unmanageable Donald Trump actually is, and it makes me wonder why Republican party leadership has allowed him to continue to be the face of the party.Walz was calm, clear and definitely was able to talk about his experience leading a government. JD Vance came off as all rhetoric, and he looked foolish for having been so against Trump in the past and now [being] his running mate.They actually covered the issues I wanted to hear about: energy, healthcare and foreign policy. I wish they had spent less time on immigration.My favorite moment was when JD Vance got fact-checked about the Haitian immigrant comments and the moderators said they are here legally, and JD Vance claimed that the rules were that they weren’t going to be fact-checked. I think it highlights how reliant the Trump campaign is on misinformation, and when you take that away, what are they left with? – Emma, 26, Wisconsin More

    • 163 Shares18 Views

      in Elections

      Stephen Colbert on report on Trump’s attempts to steal election: ‘Smells like consequences’

      by

      Late-night hosts talk Jack Smith’s new report on how Donald Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election and Republican hypocrisy over Joe Biden’s age.Stephen ColbertBack in July, the supreme court released a 6-3 decision declaring that Trump had immunity from prosecution on acts committed as president, “all but guaranteeing that the case would be delayed past the election, and no one would be talking about or learning any more about it”, said Stephen Colbert on Thursday’s Late Show.“Well, surprise!” he added, holding a 165-page report by special counsel Jack Smith on Trump’s efforts to steal the election. “Mhmmm, that’s beefy. Smells like consequences.”The report details efforts by Donald Trump to overturn the 2020 election, and “how they are not covered by that ridiculous immunity ruling”, said Colbert.“We knew stuff in this report already, but it’s still gratifying to read the novelization of the horror movie we all lived through,” he added. According to the report, Trump knew he lost the 2020 election, knowingly pushed false claims of voter fraud and in his bid to hold on to power, “resorted to crimes”.“Pretty damning language, but kinda weird word choice to say Trump ‘resorted’ to crimes,” said Colbert. “That’s like saying ‘With nowhere else to turn, the bear resorted to pooping in the woods.’”“Just to note, ‘resorted to crimes’ should not be confused with ‘crime resort’ – another name for Mar-a-Lago.”Seth MeyersAccording to Republicans, January 6 is ancient history, “which is why a new filing from special counsel Jack Smith in the election subversion case is so damning”, said Seth Meyers on Late Night. “It reminds everyone of what Trump and his allies tried to do, and how brazen they were about it.”According to Smith’s report, Trump was overheard saying to his daughter Ivanka: “It doesn’t matter if you won or lost the election. You still have to fight like hell.”“This is the most damning thing: in private, Trump knew he lost, despite what he was telling his supporters in public,” said Meyers.The report also details how Rudy Giuliani accidentally butt-dialed an NBC reporter, who overheard him discussing his need for cash and trashing the Biden family. “As a favor to Rudy, stop giving this man your phone number,” Meyers laughed. “The only two numbers he should have in his phone are his doctor and a liquor store that delivers.”“Rudy is the first criminal in history who has managed to rat on himself,” he continued. “The FBI doesn’t need to bug him or monitor his calls. They just have to sit around and wait until he accidentally sits on his phone and calls them.”Jimmy KimmelAnd in Los Angeles, Jimmy Kimmel marveled at how Trump is now trying to get out of election fraud charges by claiming that the investigators rigged the election. “The old ‘he who smelt it dealt it’ defense,” said Kimmel.As Trump said in a recent far-right news interview: “The election was rigged. I didn’t rig it. They did.”“He’s actually right about some of that – he didn’t rig the election,” said Kimmel. “He tried to rig the election, and failed to rig the election. He’s rig-noramus, is what he is.”Meanwhile, Trump was “ranting and raving” in Michigan this week on the campaign trail. “If you watch any of his speeches from the last election, from 2020, you’ll see he’s slower,” said Kimmel. “He slurs his words, he repeats the same stories over and over and over again. He’s repeatedly promised to release his medical records and has not.”Which is notable, because Republicans “were very worked up about Joe Biden and how old he was, his energy levels and ability to lead, but even though Trump is only three years younger than Biden, they don’t seem too worried about that anymore”, said Kimmel before a montage of all the GOP Biden criticisms easily applied to Trump’s ravings on the campaign trail. More

    • 188 Shares27 Views

      in US Politics

      Two men have re-engineered the US electoral system in favor of Republicans | David Daley

      by

      Two men recognized and exploited the anti-democratic loopholes within America’s rickety democracy in order to deliver Republicans victories that they could never win at the ballot box.Now their willfully minoritarian creations threaten the very essence of a representative democracy: if Donald Trump, rightwing courts, gerrymandered state legislatures and an extreme Republican caucus in the US House of Representatives create constitutional chaos over the certification of this presidential election, two men cleared the path.The single-minded determination of Leonard Leo built a conservative supermajority on the US supreme court and stacked lower and state courts with Republican ideologues that have pushed the nation to the right via the least accountable branch of government.Chris Jankowski masterminded the partisan gerrymanders that tilted state legislatures and congressional delegations across the south and the purple midwest toward extreme Republicans, ended Barack Obama’s second term before it started, and rendered elections in Wisconsin and North Carolina all but meaningless over the last decade and a half.Leo and Jankowski understood, separately, that the courts and state legislatures were undervalued and often undefended targets for a deliberate strategy aimed at capturing important levers of power that sometimes float under the radar. They could be Moneyball-ed, to borrow the term Michael Lewis used in his book about how the Oakland A’s made an end-run around large-market teams by understanding value that their opponents overlooked.What Leo and Jankowski built separately would soon reinforce the other’s creation (with, of course, crucial assists from chief justice John Roberts), tightening the knots around meaningful elections, pushing policy to the extreme right and making it nearly impossible for voters to do anything about it.Leo’s relentless focus on turning the judiciary Republican, first identifying and fast-tracking conservative jurists through his various roles at the Federalist Society, then coordinating the often eight-figure efforts to secure their confirmation on the US supreme court, helped conservatives to unpopular court-imposed victories on voting rights, abortion restrictions, gun access and gutting the regulatory state that would not have been won through the political process.As I revealed in my book Ratf**ked: Why Your Vote Doesn’t Count, Jankowski pioneered Redmap, short for the Redistricting Majority Project. That 2010 strategy, coordinated when he worked at the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC), flipped state legislative chambers in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Alabama, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Indiana, Tennessee and several other states just ahead of the decennial redistricting. Then, with complete control of those processes, as well in Florida, Georgia, Texas and elsewhere, the RSLC helped draw some of the most extreme partisan gerrymanders in history, locking in huge Republican advantages in state legislatures and congressional delegations.The supreme court’s decision in Citizens United helped make possible the $30m that funded Redmap. Redmap’s lines then proved so stout that they could hold back electoral waves. In 2012, the Republican party would easily hold the US House of Representatives even as they won 1.4m fewer votes nationwide; Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Michigan and Wisconsin all went for Obama statewide, but the Republicans got 64 of those states’ 94 congressional seats.Meanwhile, as Republicans drew themselves giant edges in the US House and state chambers, and packed Democrats into fewer seats they won with bigger majorities, low-turnout, base-driven Republican primaries became the key races to win, producing a new generation of lawmakers fixated on solutions for “voter fraud”.This grim result is a US supreme court that has been captured by conservatives, which has delivered a decade of anti-democracy decisions that have advantaged the Republican party in elections, as well as an audacious plan to gerrymander Republicans into power in state legislatures nationwide and helped produce ever-more-extreme caucuses eager to adapt draconian voter restrictions in the name of stopping fraud that they cannot prove exist. The Roberts court has blessed this as well.Call it the Shelby county-Redmap two-step. The US supreme court’s decisions in Shelby county and other crucial Voting Rights Act (VRA) cases first ended preclearance – the VRA’s enforcement mechanism, which for nearly 50 years prevented lawmakers in states with the worst track records on voting rights from changing the rules without prior approval. Then the court handed lawmakers wide latitude to enact voting restrictions – even those with a demonstrated partisan edge or disproportionate impact on racial minorities – just as long lawmakers said that they believed they were battling fraud.If voters wanted to toss out lawmakers who force citizens to endure harder processes to make their voices heard, well, the politicians and Leo’s rightwing judges had that covered too. Arizona, Georgia, Alabama and Texas – states that the Voting Rights Act has required to pre-approve the equity of legislative maps – were suddenly liberated by the US supreme court to gerrymander themselves into safe districts..Then, in 2019’s disastrous Rucho v Common Cause, Roberts closed off appealing to federal courts to help fix partisan gerrymanders and suggested, apparently with a straight face, that voters still had the power to fix this through the ordinary political process, or by passing a law through Congress. Just like that, time and again, whether on voting rights or reproductive rights, the court would issue a ruling that benefited the Republican party, while telling citizens to fix it through a political process that the court helped engineer against them.It could get worse still. If Georgia’s state election board – appointed largely by the gerrymandered legislature, empowered by Shelby county’s evisceration of preclearance – succeeds in slowing the state’s count or certification to a crawl, it could push the battle for the state’s electors toward courts hand-picked and packed by Leo.Likewise, a close win for Trump in Arizona or Georgia – where fewer than 11,000 and 12,000 votes, respectively, made the difference in 2020 – could easily be attributed to aggressive new voting restrictions that target minority communities, passed by gerrymandered legislatures freed from preclearance after Shelby. And if certification runs aground in the US House, where a majority of the Republican caucus voted against certifying free and fair results from Pennsylvania and Arizona in 2020, one big reason will be the new breed of extremist lawmaker elected to Congress from districts gerrymandered to be wildly uncompetitive.This would be the ultimate proof of concept for the right’s judicial capture and gerrymandering schemes: tilted legislatures, newly liberated by the courts, tipping the presidency back to a supreme court supermajority packed with three justices who proved their conservative bona fides working on Bush v Gore in 2000.Moneyball did not last forever. Big-market teams caught on to Oakland’s methods. But whether or not this election ends with a Bush v Gore redux, this anti-democratic moment is here to stay. It has proven nearly impossible to defeat because Leo remains a step ahead of hapless Democrats, and because the unfair after-effects of hijacked courts and hijacked legislatures have proven so long-lasting. Then, when the supreme court shuttered federal courts to redistricting cases, state supreme courts became the last bulwark. So Leo and the RSLC have worked together to identify, fund and elect conservative justices in crucial states in part to protect the tilted maps.Now they’ve combined forces: Jankowski brokered the $1.6bn bequest that built Leo’s latest dark money operation, the Marble Freedom Trust. Last month, Leo said he’d spend as much as $1bn to “crush liberal dominance where it’s most insidious”, in the worlds of media and culture.If Redmap cost just $30m to execute, if it cost upwards of $17m to keep a seat warm for Neil Gorsuch before confirming him after Trump took office, just imagine what they might bankroll now. Installing a conservative supermajority in the nation’s impoverished newsrooms, buying once-trusted brands and remaking them in their ideological image, could be both a bargain and a finishing masterstroke in their push for the radical right’s ongoing push for an enduring minority rule.

      David Daley is the author of the new book Antidemocratic: Inside the Right’s 50 Year Plot to Control American Elections as well as Ratf**ked: Why Your Vote Doesn’t Count More

    • 213 Shares25 Views

      in US Politics

      Barack Obama to hit campaign trail for Kamala Harris to woo swing-state voters – US elections live

      by

      On Thursday evening, Kamala Harris enlisted the help of Republican former senator Liz Cheney for a campaign event in Wisconsin. The pair focused their speeches on Trump’s 2020 election lie.The Guardian’s Lauren Gambino reports this from the event:Liz Cheney, one of Donald Trump’s most prominent conservative critics, appealed to the millions of undecided Americans who could decide the outcome of the 2024 election, asking them to “reject the depraved cruelty” of the former president.The daughter of Dick Cheney, the Republican former vice-president, said she had never voted for a Democrat before, but would do so “proudly” to ensure Trump never holds a position of public trust again. Her father will join her in casting his ballot for Harris.“I know that the most conservative of conservative values is fidelity to our constitution,” Cheney said, speaking from a podium adorned with the vice presidential seal. The crowd broke into a chant: “Thank you, Liz!” A large sign looming over them declared: “Country over party.”Cheney and Harris agree on little politically – only that Trump should not be allowed to serve a second term. But their union is part of an effort by the Harris campaign to win over Republican voters who, like Cheney, believe in “limited government” and “low taxes” but are repelled by Trump and his Maga movement.“No matter your political party, there is a place for you with us and in this campaign,” Harris said. “I take seriously my pledge to be a president for all Americans.”Good morning US politics readers.Former US president Barack Obama will crisscross the battleground states for Kamala Harris, with a kickoff in all-important Pennsylvania next week.According to a senior Harris campaign official, Obama will hold his first event in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania next Thursday, the beginning of blitz across the handful of rust belt and Sun belt states that will likely decide the 2024 election.Obama remains one of the Democrats’ most powerful surrogates, second perhaps only to his wife, Michelle Obama. His return to the campaign trail follows a rousing speech at the Democratic National Convention in August, where he cast Harris as a forward-looking figure and a natural heir to his diverse, youth-powered political coalition. Harris was one of Obama’s earliest supporters of what seemed like a long-shot presidential bid against Hillary Clinton. She knocked doors for him ahead of the Iowa caucuses in 2008. More than 15 years later, he will return the favor.With just 32 days away to the election, here’s what else is happening today:

      Kamala Harris will hold a rally in Flint, Michigan, this evening – one of the swing states critical to her winning the presidency. Her event comes a day after Donald Trump promised to make Michigan the “car capital of the world again”.

      Trump and Georgia governor Brian Kemp will visit Evans, Georgia, to receive a briefing on the devastation of Hurricane Helene. They’ll give a press conference at 3.45pm ET.

      JD Vance is in Lindale, Georgia, and will deliver remarks at 1 pm.

      Trump hosts a town hall in Fayetteville, North Carolina, at 7 pm. More

    • 138 Shares17 Views

      in US Politics

      Barack Obama to campaign for Harris across battleground states next week

      by

      Former president Barack Obama will crisscross the battleground states for Kamala Harris, with a kickoff in all-important Pennsylvania next week, according to a senior Harris campaign official.Obama will hold his first event in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania next Thursday, the beginning of a blitz across the handful of rust belt and sun belt states that will probably decide the 2024 election.Obama will be appearing in the swing state after Republican nominee Donald Trump returns on Saturday to Butler, the Pennsylvania town where he survived an assassination attempt in July.Obama remains one of the Democrats most powerful surrogates, second perhaps only to his wife, Michelle Obama. His return to the campaign trail follows a rousing speech at the Democratic National Convention in August, in which he cast Harris as a forward-looking figure and a natural heir to his diverse, youth-powered political coalition.“We do not need four more years of bluster and bumbling and chaos,” he told the convention in August. “We have seen that movie before and we all know that the sequel is usually worse. America is ready for a new chapter.”Harris was one of Obama’s earliest supporters when he launched a long-shot presidential bid against Hillary Clinton in 2007. She would go on to knock on doors for him ahead of the Iowa caucuses in 2008.Harris’s campaign already includes several former Obama campaign staff, including strategist David Plouffe, Stephanie Cutter – who was Obama’s deputy campaign manager in 2012 – and Mitch Stewart, Obama’s grassroots strategist for both campaigns. Stewart is Harris’s adviser for battleground states, among which Pennsylvania is a must-win for either side.Key to winning Pennsylvania could be winning the Latino vote. About 90,000 Latino voters might still be undecided, according to Penn State professor, A K Sandoval-Strausz, writing in the Conversation, who argues that an endorsement for Harris from Puerto Rican singer Bad Bunny could have a greater impact on the election than Taylor Swift’s. In 2020, Biden won the state by 80,000 votes – or a single point. In 2016, Trump took the state with just 44,292 votes.According to the latest average of Pennsylvania polling from the Hill/Decision Desk HQ, Harris leads Trump by just 0.9 points in the state. More