More stories

  • in

    Adam Schiff reportedly tells donors ‘I think we lose’ if Biden is nominee

    The high-profile California Democrat Adam Schiff told donors Joe Biden remaining on top of the ticket for November would cost the party the presidency and probably the House and Senate too, the New York Times reported.“I think if he is our nominee, I think we lose,” Schiff told donors in East Hampton, New York, last Saturday, the paper said, citing “a person with access to a transcription of a recording of the event”.“And we may very, very well lose the Senate and lose our chance to take back the House.”According to the Times, Schiff spoke before Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for president, was shot in the ear in an assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally.As the paper noted, Democratic calls for Biden to stand aside, stoked by concerns about his age and cognitive fitness for office, surged after a disastrous debate with Trump in Atlanta last month but have dropped off since the Trump shooting, in which one rallygoer was killed and two injured.Nineteen House Democrats and one senator have publicly called for Biden to quit.Schiff is not among them but he is an influential voice in the party, a former House intelligence chair who led Trump’s first impeachment, sat on the January 6 committee and is now a candidate for US Senate.The Times said the fundraiser was in support of Schiff’s Senate campaign and those of Elissa Slotkin (Michigan) and Angela Alsobrooks (Maryland), who both face competitive races.“At least one donor … left dejected,” the Times reported, “believing that Mr Biden’s chances of winning were now slim and that they should concentrate giving their time and money to down-ballot candidates in the hopes of salvaging something.”Schiff did not comment. Biden’s campaign told the Times he “maintained strong support from members of Congress”.Biden remains defiant, telling NBC on Monday: “Look, 14 million people voted for me to be the nominee in the Democratic party, OK? I listen to them.”He also attacked NBC and other outlets for their coverage of Trump’s debate display, asking, “Why don’t you guys ever talk about the … 28 lies he told?”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionRegardless, Biden’s party remains in turmoil.On Tuesday, Axios reported a move by the Democratic National Committee to conduct a virtual roll call, the process by which the presidential nominee is confirmed, before the party convention in Chicago next month.Politico then reported a draft letter in which dozens of House Democrats opposed the plan.The virtual roll call was “a really bad move by the DNC”, Jared Huffman, a California Democrat who has not called publicly for Biden to quit, told the site.“Somebody thinks it’s a clever way to lock down debate and I guess by dint of sheer force, achieve unity, but it doesn’t work that way.” More

  • in

    Aileen Cannon has taken the sledgehammer to the rule of law | Laurence H Tribe and Dennis Aftergut

    If Trump v United States, the US supreme court majority’s shocking immunity decision on 1 July, left anyone unconvinced that America’s courts are on the ballot, federal judge Aileen Cannon just sealed the deal, dropping a sledgehammer on the rule of law. Just two weeks after the disgraceful immunity decision, she tossed out Trump’s prosecution for stealing national security documents after losing re-election, smashing the longstanding and vital authority of special counsels in the bargain.This election, our constitutional republic is at stake, along with its first principle: no one, including the most powerful, is above the law. Only We, the People, can preserve the freedom and security our laws safeguard.Cannon’s opinion makes a mockery of justice under law. Reduced to its essentials, she accepted the complaint of Trump’s lawyers that special counsel Jack Smith wields power too independent of the president and attorney general to fit within the statutes Congress enacted to authorize appointment of special federal prosecutors – while Trump himself was publicly saying the very opposite: that Smith is persecuting him as Biden’s puppet.For over a year, Cannon slow-walked a grand jury’s meticulous indictment of the former president for criminally risking the free world’s safety by walking off with nuclear secrets and intelligence sources and methods, leaving them in places accessible to apparent foreign agents, and obstructing the government’s efforts to retrieve them. Now she has toppled the whole case by shredding the long-established structure through which successive attorneys general have appointed special counsel to investigate and prosecute crimes against the nation too sensitive for the justice department to handle in the ordinary course.Cannon proceeds backwards from her desired result to its jerry-rigged justification: that the laws whose language plainly authorized special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment and oversight by the attorney general didn’t do that at all.Only someone determined to reach that conclusion could have written what Cannon concocted. To decide that Congress never gave the attorney general authority to appoint a special counsel, she first had to set aside the landmark holding underpinning the 1974 Nixon Tapes case. She wrongly dismissed as mere “dictum” – chatter she was free to ignore – its essential conclusion that the Watergate special prosecutor who demanded the tapes was lawfully appointed.She was wrong from the start. To get where she was determined to go, she had to set aside as irrelevant the flawless 2019 ruling of the US court of appeals for the District of Columbia which followed Nixon. That decision, the appellate court correctly concluded, had unanimously held that Congress, in enacting the very statutes Cannon found wanting here, had “vested in the Attorney General … the power to appoint subordinate officers to assist him in the discharge of his duties”.Cannon’s tortured reasoning fails throughout her 93-page opinion. She asserts, for example, that the congressional statute authorizing the attorney general to “appoint officials … to detect and prosecute crimes against the United States” cannot mean what it says because it is “housed within a chapter [largely] devoted to the FBI”. She never explains why, if Congress intended this statute to give attorneys general broad authority to appoint only FBI officials to “detect” crimes against the United States, Congress chose to include the words “and prosecute?”Her mental gymnastics boggle the mind. At one point, she insists that “whatever possible linguistic overlap might exist between the present-tense formulations of the verbs ‘appoint,’ ‘retain,’ or ‘commission,’ [the relevant statute …] us[es] instead the past participle adjective application.”Never mind that Cannon’s ruling flies in the face of all relevant precedents – including those upholding the appointment of the special counsel trying Lt Col Oliver North for his role in the Iran Contra scandal and the special counsel prosecuting Hunter Biden in Delaware and California. And never mind that Congress had acquiesced for half a century in the unbroken judicial interpretation of its statutes authorizing appointments like Smith’s.Judge Cannon’s opinion conspicuously echoes (and duly cites) Justice Clarence Thomas’s solo concurrence two weeks earlier in Trump v United States. Going beyond the immunity issue raised in that case, Thomas alone expressed doubt about the constitutionality of special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment. As though coaching Cannon from the sidelines, he invited unnamed “lower courts” to answer what he called “essential questions concerning … Smith’s appointment”, venturing where no prior court (or fellow justice) dared to tread. Cannon happily took the hint.Smith is appealing the dismissal and may ask the court of appeals for the 11th circuit, if it reverses, to reassign the case to another judge. Twice in 2022, that court harshly rejected as utterly lawless Cannon’s appointment of a special master to review the classified documents seized at Mar-a-Lago in a judicially authorized search.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEven if Smith’s appeal succeeds, as it should, the clock is ticking. With a supreme court Maga majority potentially ready to rescue Trump, no jury will decide this case before the election. And if Trump becomes president, his attorney general will drop this prosecution and the appeal of Cannon’s ruling faster than a radioactive hot potato.Should the government’s appeal be dismissed, her decision would remain on the books, providing precedent to unravel all the work of all the special counsels appointed over the years under the statutes she neutered.Inexperience alone cannot explain Cannon’s bizarre decision. Perhaps she is showing gratitude to the president who appointed her. Or perhaps, as a Maga-vetted judge of Hispanic heritage in her early 40s, she is vying, if Trump wins re-election, for a supreme court seat when an elderly justice retires. Might virtue, in Shakespeare’s words, have been “chok’d with foul ambition?”Whatever the case, November is what matters. It’s up to us to elect a president who will take care to appoint federal judges with the integrity to heed the rule of law and preserve intact the constitution it supports.

    Laurence H Tribe is the Carl M Loeb University professor of constitutional Law Emeritus at Harvard University. Follow him on @tribelaw

    Dennis Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor, currently of counsel to Lawyers Defending American Democracy More

  • in

    I’m from Appalachia. JD Vance doesn’t represent us – he only represents himself

    Back in 2016, I was an Appalachian expat living in Boston, feeling homesick and displaced like I do most of the time up here. I saw a book in the Harvard Coop with the word Hillbilly on the cover and jumped at it. No one up here knew that word, or if they did, they understood it as derogatory, while I understood it as home. Here home was, I thought, staring me in the face from the front table at a major bookstore.View image in fullscreenI barely read 30 pages before I saw the book Hillbilly Elegy for what it was: a political platform masquerading as memoir. Before I saw JD Vance for what he was: an opportunist. One willing to double down on stereotypes, to paint the people of Appalachia with a culture of poverty brush, rather than be honest about the ways in which both electoral politics and industry have failed our region.Here’s the thing: JD Vance doesn’t represent Appalachia. JD Vance only represents himself.To the outside world, Vance is sure to appear far more Appalachian than I do. He is white, Christian, and has longstanding generational ties to the region. I, on the other hand, am south Asian, the child of Indian immigrants who settled in Appalachia in the 1970s, because work in the chemical industry brought them there, and left in the early 2000s, because work disappeared.We do have this in common, though: both of us left Appalachia in pursuit of higher education, and have lived away for as long as we lived within the region. But while Vance uses the story of his upbringing to perpetuate a flat, stereotyped representation of Appalachia, my identity, that of my family and community, complicates the narrative in ways that are politically inconvenient.My friends with generational ties to Appalachia experienced the book much as I did. They felt misrepresented. Misunderstood. Scapegoated for the result of the 2016 election. Many wrote pieces in direct response. Elizabeth Catte’s What You’re Getting Wrong About Appalachia is an absolute must-read in this regard.But up here in Boston? People were lapping up Hillbilly Elegy. Theoretically liberal, educated people brought the book up in conversation, claiming his story helped them understand more about where I was from.It absolutely didn’t.People like me and my family – immigrants who neighbor and labor alongside white working-class Appalachians – don’t exist in Vance’s narrative. Black folks don’t exist in his narrative. Queer folks don’t exist in his narrative. And in his campaign rhetoric, we only exist as the root of Appalachia’s problems; never as one of its sources of strength.View image in fullscreenFolks outside Appalachia devoured Hillbilly Elegy because it reinforced what they already believed about us: that we were lazy, homogenous, and to blame for the unemployment, addiction and environmental disasters that plagued us. Vance’s description of a Jackson, Kentucky, where “people are hardworking, except of course for the many food stamp recipients who show little interest in honest work”, allowed liberals and conservatives alike to write Appalachia off as beyond saving, and its problems as self-created, and thus, deserved.Harper gladly published, and continues to profit off, his memoir. Major publishing outlets issued rave reviews. The book sat atop the New York Times bestseller list for 54 weeks and Ron Howard subsequently made it into a Netflix movie. (More profits, in case you missed them.) Vance quickly became a go-to for legacy media, appearing on CNN as the Rust belt explainer, and talking on NPR as the Appalachian expert, when in fact he was in no position to do either.Vance’s narrative, and the people and institutions who championed it, who profited off it, are why he is Trump’s pick for vice-president. His candidacy rests on the platform that they created for him.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionVance has only been in office since 2023. He’s not being chosen because of his legislative acumen. He’s got none to speak of.He’s also not being chosen because of his ardent support of Trump. He didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 and went so far as to write an op-ed for the New York Times in which he said “Trump is unfit for our nation’s highest office”.So what then, is the basis for Trump’s choice of Vance? Is it to court Appalachian votes? Or to court voters who believe the stereotypes about Appalachians? Or to appease those who profit off Appalachia’s resources while exploiting its people (looking at you, extractive industries and big pharma)?View image in fullscreenA person who truly represented Appalachian people wouldn’t take money from the same big pharma lobby that left West Virginia with the highest opioid overdose rate in the country. They wouldn’t deny climate change in the face of catastrophic flooding that eastern Kentucky still hasn’t recovered from two years out. They wouldn’t stoke fear of immigrants, who provide essential labor in Appalachia in healthcare, agriculture and service industries. They wouldn’t sow division through culture wars in a region where solidarity is desperately needed.My Appalachian friends and I are tired of being reduced to stereotypes. We are tired of the single-source, corporate-funded narrative that is propagated about us. Appalachia deserves a more complicated narrative, and better representation, than a Trump-Vance presidency offers us.Neema Avashia is the daughter of Indian immigrants and was born and raised in southern West Virginia. Her first book, Another Appalachia: Coming Up Queer and Indian in a Mountain Place, was published by West Virginia University Press.

    This article was amended on 16 July 2024 to correct that Vance has been in office since 2023, not 2022. He was elected in 2022 and sworn into office in 2023. More

  • in

    JD Vance once worried Trump was ‘America’s Hitler’. Now his own authoritarian leanings come into view

    JD Vance once feared Donald Trump might be “America’s Hitler”. Last Saturday, the Ohio senator claimed Democrats calling Trump “an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs” caused the assassination attempt the former president survived.But on Monday, after Trump made Vance his vice-presidential pick, worries about Vance’s own authoritarian leanings came straight to the fore.“Trump picked JD Vance as his running mate because Vance will do what Mike Pence wouldn’t on January 6: bend over backwards to enable Trump and his extreme Maga agenda, even if it means breaking the law and no matter the harm to the American people,” Jen O’Malley Dillon, Joe Biden’s re-election campaign chair, told reporters.Vance has indeed said that if he had been vice-president on 6 January 2021, he would have done as Trump and his supporters demanded and blocked certification of results in key states won by Biden during the election weeks earlier.Elsewhere on Monday, a profile of Vance was widely shared. Zack Beauchamp of Vox, author of new book The Reactionary Spirit: How America’s Most Insidious Political Tradition Swept the World, outlined political views “fundamentally incompatible with the basic principles of American democracy”.Beauchamp described how Vance has repeated Trump’s stolen election lie; has called for a criminal investigation of a journalist he did not like; advocates politicising the federal bureaucracy; and believes presidents can simply ignore the law.“JD Vance,” Beauchamp wrote, “is a man who believes that the current government is so corrupt that radical, even authoritarian steps are justified in response.“He sees himself as the avatar of America’s virtuous people, whose political enemies are interlopers scarcely worthy of respect. He is a man of the law who believes the president is above it.”Trump’s lawyers recently presented that argument to the supreme court he stacked with rightwingers – and won. But Trump will be gone one day and as Vance told Politico recently, “There is a big question about what comes after him.”It looks like it’s Vance, now the leading elected exponent of “New Right” political thought, as championed by figures prominently including Peter Thiel, a PayPal co-founder, tech billionaire and influential donor.The biographer Max Chafkin has described Thiel’s politics as “closer to authoritarianism” than typical Silicon Valley libertarianism, “super-nationalistic [and] longing for a sort of more powerful chief executive or … a dictator”.While Vance is a fan of writers who want “monarchist” government or “regime change”, Thiel himself once wrote: “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.” He also played a key role in the making of Vance.Born in Middletown, Ohio, in 1984, Vance enlisted in the US marines, becoming a military journalist and going to Iraq. He graduated from Ohio State and Yale Law School, becoming a venture capitalist, eventually for a Thiel firm in Silicon Valley.Vance’s first book, Hillbilly Elegy, was published in 2016. Subtitled A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis, it was a huge bestseller, widely acclaimed for its portrait of a region where support for Trump is strong.Vance returned to Ohio and ran a non-profit as well as a venture capital fund. At first opposed to Trump, he switched sides and won his Senate seat in 2022, with Trump’s endorsement and Thiel’s financial support.During that campaign, the libertarian Reason magazine said Vance was “more willing than most on the New Right to openly declare his intent to use the state in obviously extralegal ways”.The magazine noted Vance’s contention “that conservatives should employ the taxation power to ‘seize’ the assets of ‘woke, leftist’ nonprofits such as the Ford Foundation and universities such as Harvard”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionVance has continued to target universities he says should be brought under state control. In May, speaking to Margaret Brennan of CBS, he said: “If they’re not educating our children well and they’re layering the next generation down in mountains of student debt, then they’re not meeting their end of the bargain.“I think it’s totally reasonable to say there needs to be a political solution to that problem.”Challenged about his admiration for how Viktor Orbán, the authoritarian prime minister of Hungary, took control of universities there, Vance said Orbán had “made some smart decisions … that we could learn from in the United States”.On Monday, responses to Trump’s selection of Vance noted his affinity for Orbán. Many also focused on Vance’s warm words for Project 2025, a plan for a second Trump term coordinated by the Heritage Foundation and advocating radical rightwing reform to every facet of government.Trump has disavowed links to Project 2025, given the potency of Democratic attacks on the subject. But Vance has long advocated an assault on the federal government.As noted by Reason, Vance in 2021 told Jack Murphy, a controversial “manosphere” figure: “A lot of conservatives have said we should … basically eliminate the administrative state. And I’m sympathetic to that project.“But another option is that we should just seize the administrative state for our own purposes. We should fire all of the people. I think Trump … [will] probably win again in 2024, and he’ll win by a margin such that he’ll be the president of the United States in January of 2025.“I think what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: fire every single mid-level bureaucrat. Every civil servant in the administrative state.“Replace them with our people, and when the courts – because you will get taken to court … stop you, stand before the country like [president] Andrew Jackson did, and say, ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.’”As Beauchamp noted, the Jackson quote “is likely apocryphal, but the history is real”.An 1832 supreme court ruling said the government should respect Native American land rights. Jackson simply ignored it. The result was the forcible displacement of 60,000 people, an outrage known as the Trail of Tears. More

  • in

    ‘Turning down the temperature’ shouldn’t mean silencing all criticism of Trump | Margaret Sullivan

    Since Donald Trump was injured on Saturday in the chilling assassination attempt at his Pennsylvania rally, the nation has been advised – including by Joe Biden – to reduce the political rhetoric that can lead to violence.“Turn down the temperature,” is the going phrase.That’s a fine idea.But it shouldn’t mean silencing criticism of Trump in this extremely consequential election season. It shouldn’t mean transforming him into some mythic combination of martyr and hero. And it certainly shouldn’t mean that he gets a pass – a literal get-out-of-jail-free card – for his innumerable past misdeeds.The assailant’s bullets didn’t destroy history, and they shouldn’t destroy the rule of law.But we’re already seeing evidence of that.Most notably, the Trump-appointed judge in Florida, Aileen Cannon, on Monday issued a stunning ruling that is a huge, although legally questionable, win for the Republican presidential frontrunner. She dismissed the entire case about Trump’s mishandling of classified documents, citing violations of the constitution in the appointment of the special prosecutor Jack Smith.Cannon’s decision, fully in keeping with the way she has leaned hard right at almost every turn, may well be reversed on appeal – “it’s wrong six ways from Sunday,” opined the Georgetown University law professor Steve Vladeck. Nevertheless, the immediate effect is to delay any consequences for Trump’s apparent malfeasance until after November’s election.It’s likely, of course, that Cannon was headed this way long before the assassination effort this past weekend. But the good will that Trump is garnering makes her ruling much more acceptable, at least to the millions who buy the idea that he has been woefully mistreated by a rigged justice system. And perhaps by others, too.And her action fits perfectly with a broader movement to shut down criticism and accountability for Trump in the wake of the shooting. A lot of former critics are running scared, unwilling to be branded unpatriotic or insensitive in this fraught moment.Trump’s allies, both in politics and media (good luck trying to tell the difference), immediately blamed Democrats for the Pennsylvania attack. The gunman was motivated, they charge, by the left’s constant depictions of Trump as a would-be authoritarian, and therefore any such talk must stop.Not so fast.One, we still don’t know what motivated the 20-year-old assailant, though we do know he was a registered Republican who had ready access to an assault-style weapon; two, Trump himself has bragged that he wants to be a dictator on day one of a second term and his confederates have cooked up a detailed plan to help; and three, if anyone has inflamed the nation’s anger, sense of grievance and propensity for violence, it’s Trump himself with his threats of retribution and promises to persecute his political rivals.Somehow, however, we’re now supposed to believe he’s had a profound spiritual awakening and to forget all that divisiveness, including the Trump campaign email that called Joe Biden a “threat to democracy” just last week.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Can we wait to see some evidence before declaring that he is Mandela now?” suggested Tim Miller of the Bulwark, commenting on an Axios report that imagined a kinder, gentler Trump as well as the view from the former Fox News rabble-rouser Tucker Carlson that “getting shot in the face changes a man”.Perhaps, as many are predicting in lofty terms, this assassination attempt will change America forever. Maybe it should.But then again, the slaughter of innocent schoolchildren from Newtown, Connecticut, to Uvalde, Texas, should have done that, but apparently did not.As we wait for that wondrous change, it is more important than ever to hold fast to things that matter. That goes for the news media, for public officials and for American citizens.Let’s be steered not by political opportunism, delusion and blame-casting, but by a more constant north star: the rule of law and the truth.Sympathy for Trump is called for. A free pass is not.

    Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

  • in

    Unfortunately, gun violence – against Trump or anyone else – is all too American | Rebecca Solnit

    “Political violence is unacceptable and has no place in this country,” said Arizona’s governor, Katie Hobbs, and “political violence has absolutely no place in this country”, insisted California congresswoman Barbara Lee, while President Joe Biden stated, “There’s no place for this kind of violence in America.”“As one whose family has been the victim of political violence, I know firsthand that political violence of any kind has no place in our society,” affirmed Nancy Pelosi, referencing the attacker who broke into her home in 2022 to kidnap her and, in her absence, seriously injured her husband. “There is no place for political violence in this country, period,” said Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who was the target of a kidnapping plot by far-right militiamen in 2020 who intended to make her the centerpiece of a show trial.Dozens of others reached for versions of this “no place in America” declaration, and I wondered if “no place” meant something like when Jesus was born in a stable because, according to the Gospel of Luke, “there was no place for them in the inn.” That is, the United States is full to overflowing of violence of many kinds and afflicted with many enthusiasts for violence and the weapons with which it is most often fatally inflicted.All this came in the wake of an event in Pennsylvania in which the ear of an elderly man was grazed by a bullet fired by a young man with a semi-automatic weapon. One bystander died of a bullet to the head and two others were seriously injured. Later that night four people were killed in a nightclub in Birmingham, Alabama, and nine others wounded by another gunman. Four more people were killed in a home in Holly Springs, Mississippi, in yet another shooting Sunday, and three people were shot in Charleston, South Carolina, non-fatally. None of them were running for president, so these other stories weren’t major news.You could drop in dozens of local news stories of shootings like that any weekend in this country over the past decade years, if it wasn’t the kind of week in which the carnage was so immense it became a major news story, as when an 18-year-old gunman murdered 19 elementary-school children and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas, in May of 2022, while heavily armed police stood by. Every day, on average, 327 Americans are shot and 117 die of the injuries, according to one gun-control-advocacy site.On Wednesday a white policeman shot and killed a Black shoplifter reportedly suffering from mental health issues in Charlotte, North Carolina. The United States is drenched in violence, riddled with violence, rotten with violence. There is room for violence in this country founded on slavery and the genocide and dispossession of Native Americans. There has always been epidemic violence against women in this country. But a lot of recent violence has been cultivated as an asset for rightwing politicians and a cash crop for gun manufacturers.The day the Black shoplifter died, I spoke at a campaign launch for a first time San Francisco candidate. So did the activist Cleve Jones, who talked about Harvey Milk. In the late 1970s Jones was a young intern for and friend of Milk, the out gay politician whose election to San Francisco’s board of supervisors was a watershed moment in queer history. On the morning of 27 November 1978, he heard that Milk’s ally, Mayor George Moscone, had been shot and rushed to City Hall, where he saw thensupervisor Dianne Feinstein rush past him, one sleeve and hand stained with blood. It was Milk’s blood from her attempt to take his pulse when she found him shot, and moments later he saw his friend lying dead of five bullets fired at close range. Along with the mayor, he had been assassinated by a disgruntled former supervisor, the rightwinger and ex-cop Dan White.Dianne Feinstein became mayor, then ran for the US senate, and after winning she introduced the 1994 federal assault rifle ban that passed but which Republicans allowed to lapse a decade later. Democrats have long tried to institute gun control laws; Republicans have largely tried to prevent or overturn them. In Pennsylvania, where a 20-year-old man climbed onto a roof Saturday, anyone over 18 can buy a semi-automatic like the one he wielded without a waiting period, and private sales don’t require background checks. It has in recent years become an open-carry state, as have the majority of states in this country.One person pulled the trigger; thousands of elected officials, lobbyists, and gun industry employees worked to make it possible for him to do so. To make more room for violence in America.The elderly man – and yeah, of course I’m talking about Donald Trump – whose ear was grazed had instigated a violent assault on Congress in which hundreds of defenders of the institution and process of democracy were injured, sprayed with bear mace, stabbed with American flags, crushed in a door, battered with barricades, and he has long encouraged political violence.His associate in trying to steal the 2020 election, Rudy Giuliani, was found liable for spreading lies that encouraged Trump supporters to target two Black women, Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, who had been ordinary Georgia election workers. The resultant threats, racial slurs, and menacing appearances that forced Freeman to sell her home and both to go into hiding. A jury awarded them $148m in compensatory and punitive damages late last year.“How death threats get Republicans to fall in line behind Trump” was the headline of a report earlier this year, and a 2020 report by ABC News “identified at least 54 criminal cases where Trump was invoked in direct connection with violent acts, threats of violence or allegations of assault.” There is room for violence in America. Some politicians have long tried to make more room for it. One of them escaped a bullet on Saturday. A lot of other Americans have not been so lucky.

    Rebecca Solnit is a Guardian US columnist. She is the author of Orwell’s Roses and co-editor with Thelma Young Lutunatabua of the climate anthology Not Too Late: Changing the Climate Story from Despair to Possibility More

  • in

    A Trump-Vance administration would be ‘the most dangerous’ for abortion rights, say advocates

    Within minutes of Donald Trump’s announcement that he had tapped Ohio senator JD Vance as his running mate in the 2024 elections, abortion rights groups vociferously condemned the pick.“A Trump-Vance administration will be the most dangerous administration for abortion and reproductive freedom in this country’s history,” Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All, said in a statement.“By naming Vance to his ticket, Trump made clear that his administration will sign a national abortion ban and put birth control and IVF at risk,” said Jessica Mackler, president of Emily’s List, an organization that supports Democratic women who support abortion rights running for office.Vance, the venture capitalist turned Hillbilly Elegy author turned GOP standard-bearer, has long opposed abortion.In 2021, while running for Ohio senate, Vance told an Ohio news outlet that he did not support rape and incest exceptions in abortion bans. “It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term,” he said. “It’s whether a child should be allowed to live, even though the circumstances of that child’s birth are somehow inconvenient or a problem to the society.”But voters’ outrage over the overturning of Roe v Wade has grown, leading abortion rights supporters to a string of victories at the ballot box, and harnessing that outrage is widely considered Democrats’ best hope for winning the November elections. As Trump and other Republicans have tried to project a moderated stance on the issue – despite the fact that Trump handpicked three of the supreme court justices who overturned Roe – Vance has also tempered his public position.“We have to accept that people do not want blanket abortion bans. They just don’t,” Vance told CNN’s Jake Tapper last year. “I say this as a person who wants to protect as many unborn babies as possible. We have to provide exceptions for the life of the mother and rape and so forth.”In 2022, Vance said he would support a national 15-week abortion ban with exceptions. He also told NBC News that he wants mifepristone, a common abortion pill that was at the heart of a major supreme court case this year, to remain accessible.Even while supporting a national ban, Vance has said he would like abortion to be “primarily a state issue”.“Ohio is going to want to have a different abortion policy from California, from New York, and I think that’s reasonable,” he said. “I want Ohio to be able to make its own decisions, and I want Ohio’s elected legislators to make those decisions.”But, he added: “I think it’s fine to sort of set some minimum national standard.”Much of Vance’s public persona, however, remains defined by his support of what he sees as the traditional nuclear family. He has backed policies that he says will increase birth rates, such as making childbirth free, and said that people who are childfree by choice “do not have any physical commitment to the future of this country”.“I think the rejection of the American family is perhaps the most pernicious and the most evil thing that the left has done in this country,” said Vance, a father of three. He then went on to suggest that several Democratic politicians, like Kamala Harris and New Jersey senator Cory Booker, should not have political power because they do not have children.“Why have we let the Democrat party become controlled by people who don’t have any children? And why is this just a normal fact of American life?” Vance asked. “That the leaders of our country should be people who don’t have a personal and direct stake in it via their own offspring, via their own children?” (The vice-president has two stepchildren.)“Many of the most unhappy and most miserable and most angry people in our media are childless adults,” he continued.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionVance has also called people who fear having kids “cat ladies” who “must be stopped” and said that universal daycare is “class war against normal people”.Two days after the US supreme court overturned Roe, Vance tweeted: “If your worldview tells you that it’s bad for women to become mothers but liberating for them to work 90 hours a week in a cubicle at the New York Times or Goldman Sachs, you’ve been had.”Shortly after Trump announced he had chosen Vance as his running mate, Joe Biden’s campaign started to circulate a clip of comments Vance made in 2021 about violence in marriages.“This is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace, which is the idea that, like: ‘Well, OK, these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy. And so getting rid of them and making it easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear, that’s going to make people happier in the long term,’” Vance said in response to a question on fatherlessness.Vance has said that he was not defending men who commit domestic abuse and that he himself is a victim of domestic abuse.Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the powerful anti-abortion group SBA Pro-Life America, praised Vance on Monday.“His ability to compellingly share these stories on a national stage will surely be an asset,” Dannenfelser said in a statement. “With approximately 750,000 babies in states like California and New York still lacking basic protections, we need champions whose boldness will not waver.” More