More stories

  • in

    Fauci tests positive for Covid with mild symptoms – as it happened

    Steve Bannon, former president Donald Trump’s one-time campaign manager and senior White House strategist, will face trial on contempt of Congress charges, a federal judge has ruled.BREAKING: Judge Carl Nichols DENIES Steve Bannon’s motion to dismiss the indictment against him for contempt of Congress. Trial set for July 18. Story to come.— Jordan Fischer (@JordanOnRecord) June 15, 2022
    Bannon was indicted for the offense last year after he refused to cooperate with a subpoena from the House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection. He pled not guilty to the charges, which are rarely used and punishable by up to a year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000.Following the ruling, Bannon vowed to call the committee members to testify at his trial.BANNON used the post-ruling avail to say he expects his lawyer to call members of the Jan. 6 select committee to testify at his trial. That seems…highly unlikely. pic.twitter.com/ZG46vPUjrW— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 15, 2022
    Steve Bannon pleads not guilty to criminal contempt of CongressRead moreJudges in Washington were busy today. The supreme court started Wednesday off with a slew of rulings that touched on the farthest reaches of federal law, while a federal judge ruled Trump confidante Steve Bannon will have to stand trial on contempt of Congress charges and another judge found two January 6 rioters guilty at a bench trial. Here’s what else happened today:
    The Federal Reserve made its biggest rate hike in nearly 30 years to fight runaway inflation.
    The Biden administration announced another $1 billion in weapons for Ukraine as it tries to defend cities in the east from Russia’s advance.
    The justice department has brought federal hate crimes charges against the alleged shooter at a Buffalo supermarket who killed 10 Black people in a racist attack.
    Questions continue to swirl over the actions of Republican House representative Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, after the January 6 committee released video evidence of a man who accompanied the lawmaker on a tour taking photos of Capitol hallways and a security checkpoint the day before the insurrection.
    A special election in Texas ended with bad news for the Democrats when voters sent a Republican to represent their district for the first time. GOP voters also embraced a number of candidates who endorsed Trump’s “big lie.”
    The US politics live blog returns Thursday at 9 am eastern time, ahead of another hearing of the January 6 committee.The January 6 committee hasn’t publicly said whether they’ll recommend prosecuting Trump, but CNN reports that its members agree the former president committed a crime by acting to stop Joe Biden from entering the White House. The question is, what to do about it?From CNN’s article:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The internal debate, which has heated up in recent weeks, spilled into the open on Monday night when the committee’s chairman, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, repeatedly told a group of reporters at the Capitol that the committee would not be issuing any criminal referrals.
    “No, that’s not our job,” Thompson said when pressed.
    Thompson’s off-the-cuff remarks sparked an immediate response from several of his fellow committee members who rushed to knock down the notion they would not be pursuing criminal charges.
    “The January 6th Select Committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time,” GOP Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the vice chair of the committee, tweeted 15 minutes after Thompson’s comments.
    Sources tell CNN Cheney is a leading voice among those members who believe the committee should issue a criminal referral.
    Committee member Elaine Luria, a Virginia Democrat, took it one step further, tweeting Monday night that the committee has yet to vote on whether it will recommend criminal referrals but made clear she believes “if criminal activity occurred, it is our responsibility to report that activity to the DOJ.”
    In a video released Tuesday, Cheney said that Trump likely violated two criminal statues in his efforts to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count lawful electoral votes.
    The episode Monday night illustrates that after nearly a year of work, the committee remains divided over what is likely the most pressing question it faces: whether to seek criminal charges against Trump based on the evidence it has uncovered.Also under pressure as the committee airs its evidence is attorney general Merrick Garland, who could order the opening of an investigation into Trump. He’s only said that he’s watching the hearings, but Democrats want him to do more than watch.Garland says he is watching January 6 hearings amid pressure to investigate TrumpRead moreTwo more January 6 rioters have been found guilty by a federal judge today, including one who jabbed Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman with a flagpole.Kevin Seefried and his adult son Hunter Seefried opted for a bench trial before judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee who sits in Washington. Goodman, who was hailed for diverting the rioters away from lawmakers, testified at their trial.Reminder:Kevin Seefried === > pic.twitter.com/Igf0bgZzyK— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) June 15, 2022
    Mixed verdict coming here for kevin Seefried’s son Hunter NOT GUILTY – of some destruction charges. Judge says it wasn’t shown Hunter smashed window. But GUILTY – of disorderly and entering restricted building— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) June 15, 2022
    But as for Kevin Seefried .. who carried the Confederate flag …. GUILTY of top charge of obstruction Also guilty of other charges: disorderly, entering restricted building Among many other things, judge cites Seefried jabbing Confederate flag at Capitol officer.— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) June 15, 2022
    Federal courts are working through the many cases of people who participated in the January 6 insurrection, with a former West Virginia city councilmember sentenced yesterday to a brief stint in jail for breaking into the Capitol.The primaries held yesterday in states across the country confirmed that the spirit of Donald Trump is very much still alive in the Republican party. My colleague Lauren Gambino reports that voters embraced candidates who campaigned on the former president’s “big lie” about the 2020 election:In pivotal primary races from Nevada to South Carolina on Tuesday, Republican voters chose candidates who fervently embraced Donald Trump’s lie about a stolen election, prompting warnings from Democrats that US democracy will be at stake in the November elections.Victories of pro-Trump candidates in Nevada set the stage for match-ups between election-deniers and embattled Democrats in a state both parties see as critical in the midterms.In South Carolina, a vote to impeach Trump for inciting the January 6 insurrection proved one Republican’s undoing while another survived the former president’s wrath to win the nomination.Pro-Trump Republicans’ primary wins raise alarm about US democracyRead moreMore than two years after he became the public face of the US government’s response to the world’s largest Covid-19 outbreak, top infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci has tested positive for the coronavirus, National Institutes of Health (NIH) said.“He is fully vaccinated and has been boosted twice. He is currently experiencing mild symptoms. Dr. Fauci will isolate and continue to work from his home,” according to the NIH.“He has not recently been in close contact with President Biden or other senior government officials,” the NIH said, noting Fauci will return to the institutes when he tests negative.The 81-year-old is a frequent guest in media outlets and in Congress, and also the target of ire from people opposed to Covid-19 restrictions, particularly Trump supporters. Fauci has, in turn, criticized the former president for his handling of the pandemic’s early months.Fauci says he will resign if Trump retakes the presidency in 2024Read moreOn the complete opposite end of the pay spectrum from the world of Washington politics, The Guardian’s Dani Anguiano has delved into a new American Civil Liberties Union report that has found people who work while imprisoned are often paid literally pennies for their labor, or not at all:Incarcerated workers in the US produce at least $11bn in goods and services annually but receive just pennies an hour in wages for their prison jobs, according to a new report from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).Nearly two-thirds of all prisoners in the US, which imprisons more of its population than any other country in the world, have jobs in state and federal prisons. That figure amounts to roughly 800,000 people, researchers estimated in the report, which is based on extensive public records requests, questionnaires and interviews with incarcerated workers.ACLU researchers say the findings outlined in Wednesday’s report raise concerns about the systemic exploitation of prisoners, who are compelled to work sometimes difficult and dangerous jobs without basic labor protections and little or no training while making close to nothing.US prison workers produce $11bn worth of goods and services a year for pittanceRead moreRemember Bill Stepien, Trump’s campaign manager in 2020 who told the January 6 committee he never believed the election was stolen, and implied he had somehow cut ties with the former president? Stepien played a major role in Monday’s hearing of the committee investigating the attack on the Capitol, but HuffPost has discovered that Stepien seems to still have plenty of ties to Trump:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} Yet Stepien never really left Trump, with his firm receiving $20,000 in both February and March of 2021, and as much as $30,000 and no less than $10,000 in every month since. His work for Trump to this day, according to an adviser to the former president, is to coordinate Trump’s political strategy, including Trump’s efforts to defeat candidates who challenge his false claim that the election was stolen from him or, worse, voted to impeach him for inciting the Jan. 6 attack.
    Each week, Stepien is on an hourlong call with other top Trump aides, including Dan Scavino, Jason Miller, and Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr. The last such call was June 6; Monday’s call was canceled because it conflicted with the Jan. 6 committee hearing.
    “He’s trying to tell the world he quit,” the Trump adviser, who is familiar with Trump’s political operation, said on condition of anonymity. “He has been on every call since Jan. 6. He gets paid every month to do that. … I mean, come on, man.”The article doesn’t say how Stepien’s relationship with Trump is following the airing of the campaign manager’s testimony to the committee.The Federal Reserve has announced its largest increase rate increase in almost 30 years as it looks to tame inflation by reducing demand. Dominic Rushe explains what the central bank’s decision means:With soaring inflation and the shadow of recession hanging over the United States, the Federal Reserve announced a 0.75 percentage-point increase in interest rates on Wednesday – the largest hike since 1994.In a statement after a two-day meeting, the Fed said “overall economic activity appears to have picked up after edging down in the first quarter”.But it warned that “inflation remains elevated”, and the invasion of Ukraine by Russia had created “additional upward pressure on inflation and [is] weighing on global economic activity. In addition, Covid-related lockdowns in China are likely to exacerbate supply-chain disruptions.”It added: “The committee is highly attentive to inflation risks.”Federal Reserve announces biggest interest rate hike since 1994Read moreSteve Bannon, former president Donald Trump’s one-time campaign manager and senior White House strategist, will face trial on contempt of Congress charges, a federal judge has ruled.BREAKING: Judge Carl Nichols DENIES Steve Bannon’s motion to dismiss the indictment against him for contempt of Congress. Trial set for July 18. Story to come.— Jordan Fischer (@JordanOnRecord) June 15, 2022
    Bannon was indicted for the offense last year after he refused to cooperate with a subpoena from the House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection. He pled not guilty to the charges, which are rarely used and punishable by up to a year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000.Following the ruling, Bannon vowed to call the committee members to testify at his trial.BANNON used the post-ruling avail to say he expects his lawyer to call members of the Jan. 6 select committee to testify at his trial. That seems…highly unlikely. pic.twitter.com/ZG46vPUjrW— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 15, 2022
    Steve Bannon pleads not guilty to criminal contempt of CongressRead moreJoe Biden’s optimism persists. In fact, he has “never been more optimistic about our future”, he often tells the public.Today on Twitter is no exception and it’s because of America’s trade unions, the perseverance and revival of which was a strong theme during his 2020 election campaign to restore a Democrat to the White House after Donald Trump’s corrosive one-term presidency.Wall Street didn’t build this country.The middle class built this country.And unions built the middle class.— President Biden (@POTUS) June 15, 2022
    Biden was in Philly yesterday with organizers, and is still aglow about it.It was great to be with AFL-CIO yesterday in Philadelphia. These folks are a big reason why I’ve never been more optimistic about our future. Unions have never let this country down, and we’re going to keep building a better America – together. pic.twitter.com/NT1Jqmcd5h— President Biden (@POTUS) June 15, 2022
    Joe Biden has freshly reaffirmed American commitment to Ukraine’s efforts against the Russian invasion as US and NATO allies meet in Europe amid talk of cracks opening in the west’s resolve.The US president announced more aid for Ukraine, $1bn more in military aid and $225m in humanitarian assistance, and back up his defense secretary, Lloyd Austin, who said in Brussels earlier today that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was at a “pivotal” moment and America and its allies “cannot afford to let up and lose steam”.Biden said in a statement just released by the White House that he had spoken with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy this morning:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} To discuss Russia’s brutal and ongoing war against Ukraine. I reaffirmed my commitment that the United States will stand by Ukraine as it defends its democracy and support its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of unprovoked Russian aggression.He announced more funding for “additional artillery and coastal defense weapons, as well as ammunition for the artillery and advanced rocket systems that the Ukrainians need to support their defensive operations in the Donbas,” the heart of Ukraine’s industrial east where Russia has focused its bombardment to increasingly powerful effect in recent weeks.The pledge came amid clear signs that Zelenskiy is hardening his determination to try to beat back Russia in the east, against the odds, amid fierce combat, and has been urging the west for more weaponry.Biden added:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} We also discussed Secretary Austin’s efforts in Brussels today to coordinate additional international support for the Ukrainian armed forces. We also remain committed to supporting the Ukrainian people whose lives have been ripped apart by this war….The bravery, resilience, and determination of the Ukrainian people continues to inspire the world. And the United States, together with our allies and partners, will not waver in our commitment to the Ukrainian people as they fight for their freedom.The New York Times has reported western unity “seems to be fraying among some Western allies”, with those further east close to Russia hardening their resolve while countries such as Italy, France and Germany were wary of stagnation in Ukraine (and stagflation at home, among other fears), but without a clear path to resolution. Meanwhile, the US continues, for now, to bolster Ukraine’s resistance.The day thus far has been busy, with the supreme court releasing a slew of decisions in cases that touched on the farthest reaches of federal law. In the Senate, signs emerged that the bipartisan compromise on gun control was facing obstacles that could delay its passage.Here’s a rundown of the day’s events:
    The Biden administration is set to announce another $1 billion in weapons for Ukraine as it tries to defend cities in the east from Russia’s advance.
    The justice department has brought federal hate crimes charges against the alleged shooter at a Buffalo supermarket who killed 10 Black people in a racist attack.
    Questions continue to swirl over the actions of Republican House representative Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, after the January 6 committee released video evidence of a man who accompanied the lawmaker on a tour taking photos of Capitol hallways and a security checkpoint the day before the insurrection.
    A special election in Texas ended with bad news for the Democrats when voters sent a Republican to represent their district for the first time.
    June is Pride Month, and President Joe Biden’s administration announced today he had signed an executive order that would counter “legislative attacks” against LGBTQ+ children and adults.“President Biden believes that no one should face discrimination because of who they are or whom they love. Since President Biden took office, he has championed the rights of LGBTQI+ Americans and people around the world, accelerating the march towards full equality,” the White House said.Among the provisions of Biden’s executive order detailed by the White House:
    Addressing discriminatory legislative attacks against LGBTQI+ children and families, directing key agencies to protect families and children;
    Preventing so-called “conversion therapy” with a historic initiative to protect children from the harmful practice;
    Safeguarding health care, and programs designed to prevent youth suicide;
    Supporting LGBTQI+ children and families by launching a new initiative to protect foster youth, prevent homelessness, and improve access to federal programs; and
    Taking new, additional steps to advance LGBTQI+ equality.
    The provision addressing “legislative attacks” is meant to deal with the more than 300 “anti-LGBTQI+ laws” the White House said were introduced in statehouses over the past year, many of which are targeted at transgender youth. The order directs the federal health and human services department to “release new sample policies for states on how to expand access to comprehensive health care for LGBTQI+ patients.” The education department is also directed to release “a sample school policy for achieving full inclusion” of students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer.The alleged gunman who killed 10 people in a racist massacre at a Buffalo, New York supermarket last month could face the death penalty after prosecutors brought hate crimes charges against him.The Associated Press reports:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} Payton Gendron already faced a mandatory life sentence without parole if convicted on state charges in the 14 May shooting which also wounded three survivors – one Black, two white.
    The US attorney general, Merrick Garland, was in Buffalo on Wednesday to visit families of the 10 people killed. He was expected to address the federal charges during the visit.
    Gendron’s radical, racist worldview and extensive preparation for the attack at the Tops Friendly Market are laid out in documents he apparently posted online.
    The documents embrace a conspiracy theory about a plot to diminish white Americans’ power and “replace” them with people of color, through immigration and other means.
    The posts detail months of reconnaissance, demographic research and shooting practice for a bloodbath meant to scare anyone not white and Christian into leaving the country.
    Gendron drove more than 200 miles from his home in a nearly all-white town near the New York-Pennsylvania border to a predominantly Black part of Buffalo. There, authorities say, he killed shoppers and workers using an AR-15-style rifle, wearing body armor and livestreaming the carnage from a helmet-mounted camera.
    The 18-year-old surrendered to police as he exited the supermarket.Buffalo mass shooting suspect charged with federal hate crimesRead moreWhile Washington has publicly stated it remains committed to defending Ukraine, Bloomberg News reports that some in the White House worry the sanctions on Russia have worsened the American economy more than expected while doing little to deter Russian President Vladimir Putin.From their story:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Some Biden administration officials are now privately expressing concern that rather than dissuading the Kremlin as intended, the penalties are instead exacerbating inflation, worsening food insecurity and punishing ordinary Russians more than Putin or his allies.
    Officials were initially impressed by the willingness of companies from BP Plc. to McDonald’s Corp. to abruptly “self-sanction,” sometimes selling assets at fire-sale prices. But the administration was caught off-guard by the potential knock-on effects — from supply chain bottlenecks to uninsurable grain exports — due to the companies’ decisions to leave, according to people familiar with internal discussions.
    In some cases, companies have signaled that they are being extra-cautious or want clearer guidance from the US before continuing business with Russia. Until that happens, they are going beyond any legal requirements to ensure they don’t accidentally violate sanctions policies, according to Justine Walker, the head of global sanctions and risk at the Association of Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists, an industry group.
    “Because we just have so many changes at once, governments are not able to step in and give precise clarification and we are seeing many, many examples of authorities coming to different positions,” Walker said in an interview. “Companies ask, ‘Should we be applying sanctions to this entity?’ and the government will come back and say, ‘You need to make your own decision.’”The war in Ukraine has played a role in driving inflation higher in the United States, and in particular the price of gas, which has played a major role in the Biden’s deepening unpopularity.According to an article in Politico, the White House is growing frustrated with its ability to respond to the increase in costs across the economy:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Prices keep rising. And the clock keeps ticking.
    So the White House has started to change up its messaging on inflation, even though President Joe Biden has limited tools at his disposal to battle the crisis. The president stepped up efforts to draw contrasts with Republicans, unleashing a series of new attack lines Tuesday in a speech delivered amid a flurry of sobering headlines on rising costs and interest rates.
    “America still has a choice to make. A choice between a government by the few, for the few,” Biden said at an AFL-CIO union convention in Philadelphia. “Or a government for all of us – a democracy for all of us, an economy where all of us have a fair shot.”
    But with the midterms rapidly approaching, voters’ patience appears likely to run out – and the president and party in power stand poised to pay the political price.
    “The political environment is brutal for Democrats. There are few more economic issues more politically painful than high food and high gas prices and we are heading into high stakes midterms,” said Dan Pfeiffer, former senior advisor to President Barack Obama. More

  • in

    US House passes bill to expand supreme court security to justices’ families

    US House passes bill to expand supreme court security to justices’ familiesThe bill comes after an armed man was arrested outside Brett Kavanaugh’s house as the court is due to rule on an abortion case The US House of Representatives has given final congressional approval to a bill to bolster supreme court security, ahead of an anticipated ruling curtailing abortion rights and in light of the arrest of a man charged with attempting to murder Brett Kavanaugh, a member of the court’s conservative majority.The legislation, which had already cleared the Senate, passed the House on a 396-27 vote. Joe Biden is prepared to sign it into law. It will expand police protection to families of justices and senior court officials.Man arrested near Brett Kavanaugh’s home charged with attempted murderRead moreThe House Republican leader said the bill would protect justices from “leftwing radicals”.A prominent Democrat said family members of court clerks and officials were also under threat, from “rightwing activists”.The court is due to rule in a major abortion case from Mississippi. A leaked draft opinion showed the conservative majority poised to overturn the 1973 Roe v Wade ruling that legalized abortion. Protests have ensued outside some justices’ homes.Last week, a California man carrying a handgun, ammunition, a crowbar, pepper spray and zip-tie handcuffs was arrested outside Kavanaugh’s home in Maryland.Republicans have led calls for improved protection but some progressives have contrasted such eagerness to act with many Republicans’ refusal to consider gun reform, even in the wake of a series of mass shootings.On the House floor on Tuesday, Veronica Escobar, a Democrat from El Paso, Texas, said: “It is incredible to stand here and listen to our Republican colleagues talk about the risks and the dangers that exist to the supreme court.“I want to know where they were when the risks and the dangers existed in my community. In El Paso, Texas, where 23 innocent people were slaughtered by a white supremacist with an AK-47 [in 2019]. Where were they then?“How about Uvalde? Where were they then? How about every other mass shooting? Buffalo, you name it.”Ginni Thomas pressed 29 lawmakers in bid to overturn Trump loss, emails showRead moreNineteen children and two teachers were killed in Uvalde last month. Also in May, 10 people died in a racist attack at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York.Referring to gun reforms passed by the House but with no chance of passing the Senate, Escobar said: “Last week, we brought to the floor legislation intended to protect millions of Americans, especially including children.“The vast majority of our Republican colleagues voted against those protections for vulnerable people who don’t have access to 24-hour, round-the-clock US marshals protection. Who don’t have access to round-the-clock 24/7 police protection, which supreme court justices have today.“Supreme court justices have far more protection than members of Congress do. But more importantly [they have more protection] than those innocent lives that were taken in innumerable cities across America.”The US justice department is already providing additional support to court police.In the Kavanaugh case, Nicholas John Roske, 26 and from Simi Valley, California, was dressed in black when he arrived by taxi outside Kavanaugh’s home around 1am last Wednesday. According to court documents, he spotted two US marshals guarding the house and walked in the other direction, calling 911 to say he was having suicidal thoughts and planned to kill Kavanaugh.Roske said he had found the address on the internet.On Tuesday the House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, greeted passage of the bill by saying: “We are sending a clear message to leftwing radicals: you cannot intimidate supreme court justices.”House Democrats had wanted to add protections for families of clerks and other court employees who, in the words of Ted Lieu, a congressman from California, “are getting threats from rightwing activists”.But Senate Republicans objected.“The security issue is related to supreme court justices, not the nameless staff that no one knows,” the minority leader, Mitch McConnell, said on Monday.Lieu said measures to protect families of clerks and other employees would be considered separately.The federal judiciary is calling for separate legislation to offer more protection for judges. The US marshals service said judges were subject to 4,511 threats and inappropriate communications last year.TopicsUS supreme courtLaw (US)US CongressUS SenateHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Jan 6 updates: Garland says he’s watching hearings as pressure mounts to charge Trump – as it happened

    Attorney General Merrick Garland said he and his prosecutors are watching the hearings of the January 6 committee as the justice department faces pressure to bring charges against former president Donald Trump.NEW: AG Merrick Garland says he’s watching the Jan. 6 committee hearings, adding “I can assure you the January 6 prosecutors are watching the hearings as well”— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) June 13, 2022
    Some of the lawmakers on the committee have called for Garland to levy criminal charges against Trump. The former president is at the center of an array of investigations, including an inquiry into his business practices in New York. He will testify under oath in that probe on 15 July, along with his daughter Ivanka Trump and son Donald Trump Jr.Donald Trump to testify in New York investigation into his business practicesRead moreGarland answered reporters questions during a DoJ press conference about gun trafficking.The January 6 committee’s second public hearing was today’s main story, as it aired testimony from several of Donald Trump’s top advisors, all of whom said they told the former president there was no fraud in the 2020 election that would change the result of his loss to Joe Biden.Nonetheless, Trump pressed on with making the claims, which the committee said fueled the violence at the Capitol.Here’s what else happened today:
    Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer said the chamber will vote on a bipartisan gun control bill as soon as it’s written. The compromise measure doesn’t go as far as Democrats would like, but represents the best chance to pass legislation at the federal level in response to the mass shootings in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Texas.
    The supreme court released five opinions that dealt with a number of aspects of federal law, though none of the verdicts were in any of the major cases touching on abortion, gun rights or other hot-button issues.
    Attorney General Merrick Garland said he is watching the hearings of the January 6 committee, as the justice department comes under pressure to bring charges against Trump.
    Separately, Capitol Police Officer Eugene Goodman, who was hailed for leading rioters away from the senate chamber, testified in the criminal trial of two men facing charges in the attack.
    The blog is wrapping up for the day and will return on Tuesday morning around 9am ET. For updates on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, please tune into our global live blog on the war, here.At the White House daily media briefing, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has reiterated in response to a question that Joe Biden is going to leave the topic of whether Donald Trump will be prosecuted over the January 6 hearing “up to the Department of Justice”.The White House wants “Americans to watch” the January 6 hearings, the second of which occurred this morning, “and remember the horrors of one of the darkest days in our history” but the US president will stay away from commenting on related prosecutions.He chose US attorney general Merrick Garland “because of his loyalty to the law”, Jean-Pierre said, and also “to restore the independence and integrity of the Department of Justice.”That’s a dig at how the DoJ was regarded by Democrats as an extension of Donald Trump’s White House and under his sway instead of staying independent.Meanwhile in New York, an ongoing sell off on Wall Street has pushed the S&P 500 into a bear market, meaning a loss of 20 percent from its most recent high.The stock market’s health and wider economy’s health are generally regarded as two different things, but the S&P 500’s nearly four percent loss in today’s trading is fueled in part by concerns that the United State’s decades-high inflation rate will cause a recession. It’s also more bad news for Joe Biden and his economic policies, overshadowing more positive developments such as the drop in unemployment on his watch.From the Associated Press:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The S&P 500 dropped 3.8% in the first chance for investors to trade after getting the weekend to reflect on the stunning news that inflation is getting worse, not better. The Dow Jones was down 879 points, or 2.8%, at 30,513, as of 11.08am ET, and the Nasdaq composite was 4.5% lower.
    The center of Wall Street’s focus was again on the Federal Reserve, which is scrambling to get inflation under control. Its main method is to raise interest rates in order to slow the economy, a blunt tool that risks a recession if used too aggressively.
    Some traders are even speculating the Fed on Wednesday may raise its key short-term interest rate by three-quarters of a percentage point. That’s triple the usual amount and something the Fed hasn’t done since 1994. Traders now see a 34% probability of such a mega-hike, up from just 3% a week ago, according to CME Group.
    No one thinks the Fed will stop there, with markets bracing for a continued series of bigger-than-usual hikes. Those would come on top of some already discouraging signals about the economy and corporate profits, including a record-low preliminary reading on consumer sentiment that was soured by high gasoline prices.S&P 500 sinks into bear-market territory as recession fears pound US stocksRead moreSenate majority leader Chuck Schumer said he’ll bring a recent bipartisan gun control bill to a vote on the chamber’s floor as soon as it’s written.“I will put this bill on the floor as soon as possible, once the text of the final agreement is finalized so the Senate can act quickly to make gun safety reform a reality,” Schumer said in a speech in the Senate. “Yesterday’s agreement does not have everything Democrats wanted but it nevertheless represents the most significant reform to gun safety laws that we have seen in decades.”Democratic and and Republican lawmakers have been trying to find a common ground on the highly controversial topic of gun control following a recent spate of mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas and Buffalo, New York.Attorney General Merrick Garland said he and his prosecutors are watching the hearings of the January 6 committee as the justice department faces pressure to bring charges against former president Donald Trump.NEW: AG Merrick Garland says he’s watching the Jan. 6 committee hearings, adding “I can assure you the January 6 prosecutors are watching the hearings as well”— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) June 13, 2022
    Some of the lawmakers on the committee have called for Garland to levy criminal charges against Trump. The former president is at the center of an array of investigations, including an inquiry into his business practices in New York. He will testify under oath in that probe on 15 July, along with his daughter Ivanka Trump and son Donald Trump Jr.Donald Trump to testify in New York investigation into his business practicesRead moreGarland answered reporters questions during a DoJ press conference about gun trafficking.Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor who was one of Trump’s top attorneys near the end of his term, has denied he was drunk on election night in 2020.Giuliani’s attorney says Giuliani was not drunk on election night. “Giuliani denies all falsehoods by the angry and misguided Ms Cheney,” Robert Costello tells CNN. https://t.co/lsOdoaOgvv— Kara Scannell (@KaraScannell) June 13, 2022
    While the latest report of Giuliani being drunk in public came from today’s hearing of the January 6 committee, such claims are not new.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre will soon start her daily briefing to reporters, and there’s a chance she’ll be asked about this story from The New York Times.The piece asks a provocative question: given his low approval ratings, among other issues, should Biden not run in 2024? The president says he will stand again, but the article features a trickle of Democratic voices questioning the wisdom of that idea, or even outright telling him not to.As the Times reported:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}As the challenges facing the nation mount and fatigued base voters show low enthusiasm, Democrats in union meetings, the back rooms of Capitol Hill and party gatherings from coast to coast are quietly worrying about Mr. Biden’s leadership, his age and his capability to take the fight to former President Donald J. Trump a second time.
    Interviews with nearly 50 Democratic officials, from county leaders to members of Congress, as well as with disappointed voters who backed Mr. Biden in 2020, reveal a party alarmed about Republicans’ rising strength and extraordinarily pessimistic about an immediate path forward.
    “To say our country was on the right track would flagrantly depart from reality,” said Steve Simeonidis, a Democratic National Committee member from Miami. Mr. Biden, he said, “should announce his intent not to seek re-election in ’24 right after the midterms.”Democratic stalwart Howard Dean has perhaps the sharpest criticism in the piece, though it’s not aimed at Biden alone:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Howard Dean, the 73-year-old former Vermont governor and Democratic National Committee chairman who ran for president in 2004, has long called for a younger generation of leaders in their 30s and 40s to rise in the party. He said he had voted for Pete Buttigieg, 40, in the 2020 primary after trying to talk Senator Chris Murphy, 48, of Connecticut into running.
    “The generation after me is just a complete trash heap,” Mr. Dean said.The United States is indeed led by elderly people these days, as Axios reports in a closer look at the subject that’s fittingly titled “American gerontocracy”:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Diversity and technology are making the workplace, home life and culture unrecognizable for many older leaders. That can leave geriatric leadership of government out of step with everyday life in America — and disconnected from the voters who give them power.
    Washington is run by Biden, 79 … House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 82 … Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a comparatively youthful 71 … and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, age 80.
    Dr. Anthony Fauci, running the U.S. pandemic response, is 81.Separate from the January 6 committee hearing, Capitol Police Officer Eugene Goodman was in a federal courtroom describing how one of two defendants facing charges over the attacked jabbed him with a Confederate battle flag.Goodman is one of the most prominent defenders of the Capitol that day, credited with diverting the mob away from the Senate chamber and appearing in a well-known photo.He was testifying at the trial of Kevin Seefried and his adult son Hunter Seefried, whom the Associated Press reported face charges including a felony count of obstruction of an official proceeding. According to the AP:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Goodman recalled seeing Kevin Seefried standing alone in an archway and telling him to leave. Instead, Seefried cursed at him and jabbed at the officer with the base end of the flagpole three or four times, Goodman said.
    “He was very angry. Screaming. Talking loudly,” Goodman said. “Complete opposite of pleasant.”
    U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden is hearing testimony without a jury for the Seefrieds’ bench trial, which started Monday. The Seefrieds waived their right to a jury trial, which means McFadden will decide their cases.Today has been dominated by the latest revelations from the January 6 Committee, which aired testimony from a number of former officials in Donald Trump’s campaign and White House, all of whom told the president the same thing: the 2020 election was not stolen. Nonetheless, Trump pressed on with making the claims, which the committee said fueled the violence at the Capitol.Here’s what else happened today:
    The supreme court released five opinions that dealt with a number of aspects of federal law, though none of the verdicts were in any of the major cases touching on abortion, gun rights or other hot-button issues.
    The senate reached a compromise on gun rights legislation that can hopefully win enough support from both Democrats and Republicans to pass the evenly divided chamber. Further negotiations on the bill are expected in the days to come.
    Lawmakers on the January 6 committee continued their calls for the justice department to bring criminal charges against Trump, saying the evidence they uncovered justifies the move.
    Separately, Capitol Police Officer Eugene Goodman, who was hailed for leading rioters away from the senate chamber, testified in the criminal trial of two men facing charges in the attack.
    The US Supreme Court has ruled against immigrants who are seeking their release from long periods of detention while they fight deportation orders, the Associated Press writes.In two cases decided on Monday morning, the court said that the immigrants, who fear persecution if sent back to their native countries, have no right under a federal law to a bond hearing at which they could argue for their freedom no matter how long they are held.The nine justices also ruled 6-3 to limit the immigrants ability to band together in court, an outcome that Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Will leave many vulnerable non-citizens unable to protect their rights.”In recent years, the high court has taken an increasingly limited view of immigrants’ access to the federal court system under immigration measures enacted in the 1990s and 2000s..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} For a while, it seemed like the court was going to push back a bit. In extreme cases, it would interpret a statute to allow for as much judicial review as possible. Clearly now, the court is no longer willing to do that,”said Nicole Hallet, director of the immigrants rights clinic at the University of Chicago law school.The immigrants who sued for a bond hearing are facing being detained for many months, even years, before their cases are resolved.The court ruled in the cases of people from Mexico and El Salvador who persuaded Homeland Security officials that their fears are credible, entitling them to further review.Their lawyers argued that they should have a hearing before an immigration judge to determine if they should be released. The main factors are whether people would pose a danger or are likely to flee if set free.Sotomayor wrote the court’s opinion in one case involving Antonio Arteaga-Martinez, who had previously been deported to Mexico. He was taken into custody four years ago, and won release while his case wound through the federal courts. His hearing on whether he can remain in the United States is scheduled for 2023.But Sotomayor wrote that the provision of immigration law that applies to people like Arteaga-Martinez simply doesn’t require the government to hold a bond hearing.The court, however, left open the issue of the immigrants’ ability to argue that the Constitution does not permit such indefinite detention without a hearing.Justice Samuel Alito wrote the court’s opinion holding that federal judges can only rule in the case of the immigrants before them, not a class of similarly situated people.Sotomayor dissented from that decision, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan.She wrote that the ability to join together in a class was especially important for people who have no right to a lawyer and “are disproportionately unlikely to be familiar with the U.S. legal system or fluent in the English language.”The cases are Johnson v Arteaga-Martinez, 19-896, and Garland v Aleman Gonzalez, 20-322.The US Supreme Court issued five opinions this morning, just around the time the January 6 hearing was getting underway. None of them was one of the four big cases being mostly closely watched, on abortion, gun rights, rules on emissions affecting climate change and an immigration issue affecting undocumented people crossing the US-Mexico border in order to claim asylum in the United States, known as Remain in Mexico.In one of the most significant opinions of the day, the nine-judge court ruled that Native Americans prosecuted in certain tribal courts can also be prosecuted based on the same incident in federal court, which can result in longer sentences, the Associated Press writes.The 6-3 ruling is in keeping with an earlier ruling from the 1970s that said the same about a more widely used type of tribal court.The case before the justices involved a Navajo Nation member, Merle Denezpi, accused of rape. He served nearly five months in jail after being charged with assault and battery in what is called a Court of Indian Offenses, a court that deals exclusively with alleged Native American offenders.Under federal law Courts of Indian Offenses can only impose sentences of generally up to a year. Denezpi was later prosecuted in federal court and sentenced to 30 years in prison. He said the Constitution’s “Double Jeopardy” clause should have barred the second prosecution.But the justices disagreed..css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Denezpi’s single act led to separate prosecutions for violations of a tribal ordinance and a federal statute. Because the Tribe and the Federal Government are distinct sovereigns, those offenses are not the same. Denezpi’s second prosecution therefore did not offend the Double Jeopardy Clause,” the court decided.Amy Coney Barrett, the ultra conservative leaning associated justice confirmed in the dying days of the Trump administration, wrote the opinion for the majority.The Biden administration had argued for that result as had several states, which said barring federal prosecutions in similar cases could allow defendants to escape harsh sentences.In a dissent, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the case involved the same “defendant, same crime, same prosecuting authority” and said the majority’s reasoning was “at odds with the text and original meaning of the Constitution.” The conservative Gorsuch was joined in dissent by two of the court’s three liberal justices, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan.The case before the justices involves a tribal court system that has become increasingly rare over the last century.Courts of Indian Offenses were created in the late 1800s during a period when the federal government’s policy toward Native Americans was to encourage assimilation. Judges and generally prosecutors are appointed by federal officials.The January 6 committee has ended the day’s testimony by taking viewers back to the scene of the attack and showing how the people who broke in to the Capitol were believers in a conspiracy that many of Trump’s top officials told him was bogus.“I know exactly what’s going on right now. Fake election!” a rioter said in video aired by the committee. The hearing closed with the jarring words of Eric Herschmann, a White House lawyer, who recalled a phone call with John Eastman, another of the president’s lawyers whom a judge has said conspired with Trump to overturn the election. “I said to him, Are you out of your effing mind?” Herschmann recalled. “I said I… only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth for now on: orderly transition.”Before the hearing ended, the committee’s senior investigative counsel Amanda Wick outlined one possible motivation for why Trump stuck with the fraud claims: they were a money-making opportunity.“As the select committee has demonstrated, the Trump campaign knew these claims of voter fraud were false, yet they continue to barrage small dollar donors with emails encouraging them to donate to something called Official Election Defense Fund. The select committee discovered no such fund existed,” she said.Wick goes on to say much of the $250 million raised for the supposed effort was funneled into a political action committee that made donations to pro-Trump organizations, as well as confidantes like his chief of staff Mark Meadows. The barrage of fundraising emails to supporters “continued through January 6, even as President Trump spoke on the ellipse. Thirty minutes after the last fundraising email was sent, the Capitol was breached,” Wick said.The committee said to expect more testimony from Herschmann in the future. It reconvenes on Wednesday at 10 am.The second panel of witnesses for the day has been dismissed, after Lofgren went through the many court rulings against Trump’s claims of fraud.“The rejection of {resident Trump’s litigation efforts was overwhelming. Twenty two federal judges appointed by Republican presidents, including 10 appointed by President Trump himself and at least 24 elected or appointed Republican state judges dismissed the president’s claims,” Lofgren said, noting that 11 lawyers have been referred for disciplinary proceedings due to “due to bad faith and baseless efforts” to undermine the election.Prior to their dismissal, the committee heard from Benjamin Ginsberg, whom Lofgren called, “the most preeminent Republican election lawyer in recent history.” “In no instance did a court find that the charges of fraud were real,” Ginsberg said. He also rejected arguments pushed by the Trump campaign that they didn’t get a fair hearing, noting that of 62 lawsuits filed by the campaign, 61 were dismissed, and the one upheld didn’t affect the outcome. More

  • in

    Jan 6 hearings: Trump ‘lit the fuse that led to horrific violence’, committee chair says – live

    The January 6 committee is beginning its second hearing into “the conspiracy overseen and directed by Donald Trump to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and block the transfer of power, a scheme unprecedented in American history,” as committee chair Bennie Thompson put it in his opening statement.The Mississippi Democrat is making clear today’s hearing will deal specifically with the former president’s actions.“This morning, we will tell the story of how Donald Trump lost an election and knew he lost an election and as a result of his loss, decided to wage an attack on our democracy and attack on American people, trying to rob you of your voice in our democracy, and in doing so lit the fuse that led to the horrific violence of January 6,” Thompson said.Trump claimed that there was “major fraud” on election night, his former attorney general William Barr told the January 6 committee, according to video the committee aired.“Right out of the box on election night, the president claimed that there was major fraud underway,” Barr said.The commission is discussing the “red mirage” that often occurs on presidential election nights, when Republicans who vote on election day have their votes counted first but Democrats, who often vote early or by mail, sometimes have their votes counted later, creating the impression that Republicans are leading early in the night only to have their share eroded as more Democrats have their votes counted.Barr testifies that though this dynamic was familiar and Trump had been warned about it, the president seized on it to allege fraud.“That seemed to be the basis for this broad claim that there was major fraud. And I didn’t think much of that because people had been talking for weeks and everyone understood for weeks that that was going to be what happened on election night,” Barr said.The committee’s first witness of the day Chris Stirewalt, a former politics editor for Fox News, has been sworn in, and the hearing is now showing a montage of clips from interviews with Trump’s lawyers and other officials.These include Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor who became one of Trump’s most notable attorneys. Jason Miller, another former Trump attorney, described Giuliani as being “intoxicated” on election night.Trump’s campaign manager Bill Stepien testified by video that he did not think the president should declare victory on election night, but said the president disagreed with him.It looks like William Barr, Trump’s final attorney general during the time of the 2020 election, will be playing a major role in the today’s hearing.The committee last Thursday aired video in which he said he thought Trump’s claims of election fraud were “bullshit,” and committee members say he will reappear today to elaborate on his views.“You’ll hear detailed testimony from attorney general Barr describing the various election fraud claims the department of justice investigated. He’ll tell you how he told Mr. Trump repeatedly that there was no merit to those claims. Mr. Barr will tell us that Mr. Trump’s election night claims of fraud were made without regard to the truth, and before it was even possible to look for evidence of fraud,” Democratic representative Zoe Lofgren said as the hearing began.Liz Cheney, the committee’s vice chair, is showing videos from lawyers who worked for Trump’s campaign that are testifying they never saw evidence that the 2020 election was stolen.“The Trump campaign legal team knew there was no legitimate argument, fraud, irregularities or anything to overturn the election. And yet, President Trump went ahead with his plans for January 6 anyway,” Cheney said.The Wyoming representative accused Trump of using this evidence to deceive his supporters into attacking the Capitol. “As one conservative editorial board put it recently, ‘Mr. Trump betrayed his supporters by conning them on January 6, and he is still doing it,’” she said.The January 6 committee is beginning its second hearing into “the conspiracy overseen and directed by Donald Trump to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and block the transfer of power, a scheme unprecedented in American history,” as committee chair Bennie Thompson put it in his opening statement.The Mississippi Democrat is making clear today’s hearing will deal specifically with the former president’s actions.“This morning, we will tell the story of how Donald Trump lost an election and knew he lost an election and as a result of his loss, decided to wage an attack on our democracy and attack on American people, trying to rob you of your voice in our democracy, and in doing so lit the fuse that led to the horrific violence of January 6,” Thompson said.Meanwhile in the Capitol, we may have more developments today on the gun control compromise reached over the weekend, which could attract enough Republican support to pass. Richard Luscombe has this look at what exactly the measure would do.Joe Biden has urged US lawmakers to get a deal on gun reforms to his desk quickly as a group of senators announced a limited bipartisan framework on Sunday responding to last month’s mass shootings.The proposed deal is a modest breakthrough offering measured gun curbs while bolstering efforts to improve school safety and mental health programs.It falls far short of tougher steps long sought by Biden, many Democrats, gun reform advocates and America citizens. For example, there is no proposal to ban assault weapons, as activists had wanted, or to increase from 18 to 21 the age required to buy them.Even so, if the accord leads to the enactment of legislation, it would signal a turn from years of gun massacres that have yielded little but stalemate in Congress.US senators reach bipartisan gun control deal after recent mass shootings Read moreCould Trump face criminal charges over January 6? As my colleague Richard Luscombe reports, some members of the committee investigating the assault believe the evidence is there.Members of the House committee investigating Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat called on Sunday for the US justice department to consider a criminal indictment for the former president and warned that “the danger is still out there”.Their comments on the eve of the second of the panel’s televised hearings into the January 6 2021 insurrection and deadly Capitol attack will add further pressure on the attorney general, Merrick Garland, who has angered some Democrats by so far taking no action despite growing evidence of Trump’s culpability.“There are certain actions, parts of these different lines of effort to overturn the election, that I don’t see evidence the justice department is investigating,” committee member Adam Schiff, Democratic congressman for California, told ABC’s This Week.Capitol attack panel members urge DoJ to consider criminal charges for TrumpRead moreThe January 6 committee will soon continue building its case against former president Donald Trump, with today’s hearing looking at the motivations behind the attack on the Capitol.However, a wrench has already been thrown into their plans: the ex-president’s former campaign manager has a family emergency, and won’t be able to testify as planned, and the hearing has been pushed back to 10:30 am eastern time.The second hearing of the committee will have some important differences from the first, held last Thursday. First of all, it’s taking place during work hours, not during the primetime TV hour, as in the case of last week’s hearing. Committee member Zoe Lofgren is also set to question witnesses, rather than the body’s counsel.As for the goal of these hearings, my colleague Joan E Greve describes it in the words of committee chair Bennie Thompson:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}If the committee is successful in building its case against Trump, the hearings could deliver a devastating blow to the former president’s hopes of making a political comeback in the 2024 presidential election. But if Americans are unmoved by the committee’s findings, the country faces the specter of another attempted coup, Thompson warned.
    “Our democracy remains in danger. The conspiracy to thwart the will of the people is not over,” Thompson said on Thursday. “January 6 and the lies that led to insurrection have put two and a half centuries of constitutional democracy at risk. The world is watching what we do here.”Protesters are gathering outside the supreme court, with the justices less than a half hour away from releasing rulings in which the conservative majority could make major changes to abortion access, gun rights and environmental regulation.Opposing protestors face to face right now. pic.twitter.com/epObAVwJnp— Whitney Wild (@WhitneyWReports) June 13, 2022
    Scene outside the Supreme Court this morning. Two small groups of protesters have gathered with a group of police on bicycles separating the two groups. T-minutes 40 minutes until opinions. ⁦I’m standing by with ⁦@fox5dc⁩. Join us live on ⁦@SCOTUSblog⁩ TikTok. pic.twitter.com/PNPQifGuD2— Katie Barlow (@katieleebarlow) June 13, 2022
    Last month, the court was rocked by the unprecedented leak of a draft opinion showing conservatives were poised to strike down Roe v Wade and end abortion rights nationwide. Those same justices may also opt to expand the ability to carry concealed weapons and curb the government’s regulatory powers.Bill Stepien, the former campaign manager for Donald Trump who was to be a main witness in today’s hearing of the January 6 committee, will not attend due to an emergency.The hearing is now delayed by 30 minutes to 10.30am, the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports:Just in: Former Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien is no longer appearing at the second Jan. 6 committee hearing this morning due to a family emergency — and hearing has been delayed to around 10:30a ET— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) June 13, 2022
    The development throws a wrench into the plans for the committee’s second hearing, which was to look deeper into the conspiracy theories that fueled the attack on the Capitol.Lies are going to be the subject of this morning’s January 6 committee hearing, specifically those that motivated Donald Trump’s supporters to attack the Capitol, the Guardian’s Joan E Greve reports:The House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection in 2021 will reconvene Monday to scrutinize the conspiracy theories that led a group of Donald Trump’s supporters to attack the US Capitol.The Democratic chair of the committee, Mississippi congressman Bennie Thompson, has said the second hearing will focus on “the lies that convinced those men and others to storm the Capitol to try to stop the transfer of power”.“We’re going to take a close look at the first part of Trump’s attack on the rule of law, when he lit the fuse that ultimately resulted in the violence of January 6,” Thompson said on Thursday.House panel to scrutinize conspiracy theories that led to Capitol attackRead moreGood morning, everybody. Today could be a very big day in Washington, with the inquiry into the January 6 insurrection continuing, the supreme court releasing opinions and the Senate considering a proposal to restrict gun access following a spate of mass shootings.Here’s a rundown of what to expect:
    Senators have reached a deal on a framework for gun control legislation meant to respond to recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Texas, which looks like it could get the support of enough Republicans and Democrats to pass the chamber.
    The supreme court will release another batch of decisions at 10 am eastern time. There’s no telling what the court will opt to release, but major rulings on abortion rights, gun control and environmental regulation are expected before the term is out.
    At the same time, the January 6 committee will begin its second hearing following last Thursday’s blockbuster look into what happened at the Capitol that day. Today’s hearing will look deeper at the conspiracy theories that motivated the attack.
    Democratic senator Bernie Sanders and Republican senator Lindsey Graham will take part in a one-hour debate organized by The Senate Project, intended to build bridges between the two parties while also allowing the lawmakers to air their (very different) perspectives on politics. The event begins at 12 pm eastern time, and will be streamed on Fox Nation. More

  • in

    ‘Enough is enough’: thousands rally across US in gun control protests

    ‘Enough is enough’: thousands rally across US in gun control protestsThe March for Our Lives rallies come after mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas and Buffalo, New York

    New Yorkers join march for gun reform
    01:59Rallies for gun reform were held in Washington, New York, other US cities and around the world on Saturday, seeking to increase pressure on Congress to act following a spate of mass shootings.‘Caring and giving’: funeral for Uvalde victim held amid gun law protestsRead moreIn Washington, the son of an 86-year-old victim in the Buffalo supermarket shooting said: “Enough is enough. We will not go quietly into the night.”The March for Our Lives rallies came less than a month after 10 people were killed in the racist attack in Buffalo, New York and 19 children and two teachers were killed at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.Other mass shootings, widely defined as shootings in which four people or more excluding the shooter are hurt or killed, have also helped put the issue center-stage.March for Our Lives was formed in 2018 after a shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in Parkland, Florida, in which 14 students and three adults were killed. Organisers estimated a million people, mostly young, joined protests then.The group helped force Republicans in Florida to enact reforms including raising the age to buy long guns, including AR-15-style rifles, from 18 to 21; enacting a three-day gap between purchase and access; allowing trained school staff to carry guns; and putting $400m into mental health services and school security.Florida lawmakers also approved a “red flag law” that can deny firearms to individuals believed to pose a danger to themselves or others.Organisers on Saturday were focusing on smaller marches at more locations. The DC protest was expected to draw 50,000. The 2018 march filled downtown Washington with more than 200,000 people.By noon on Saturday, thousands had gathered around the Washington Monument. Protestors held signs demanding justice for the victims of Uvalde and Buffalo. Speakers included activists, family members of those killed and shooting survivors.Garnell Whitfield, son of Ruth Whitfield, an 86-year-old killed in Buffalo, told the crowd he and his family were “still in a state of shock”. When she was killed, Ruth Whitfield was buying groceries after visiting her husband at a nursing home.Happening now: March for our Lives in Buffalo #MarchForOurLivesJune11 pic.twitter.com/QHPtmTzbor— Gabriel Elizondo (@elizondogabriel) June 11, 2022
    “We are being naive to think that it couldn’t happen to us,” Garnell Whitfield said. “Enough is enough. We will not go quietly into the night as victims. We hear a lot about prayer, and prayer is wonderful and we thank you for your prayers. But prayer is not a noun, it’s a verb. It’s an action. You pray, then you get up and you work.”The parents of Joaquin Oliver, a 17-year-old killed in the Parkland shooting, wore shirts bearing a picture of their son.“I was hoping to avoid attending a march like this ever again,” Manuel Oliver said, standing next to his wife, Patricia. “Our elected officials betrayed us and have avoided the responsibility to end gun violence.”The crowd heard from two founders of March for Our Lives, David Hogg and X Gonzalez, both Parkland survivors.“All Americans have a right to not be shot, a right to safety,” Hogg said. “Nowhere in the constitution is unrestricted access to weapons of war a guaranteed right.“We’ve seen the damage AR-15s do. When we look at the innocent children of Uvalde, tiny coffins horrify us. Tiny coffins filled with small, mutilated and decapitated bodies. That should fill us with rage and demands for change.”Hogg emphasized state and local gun legislation passed since 2018. He noted a red flag law that saw a court-ordered disarming of an individual who sent his mother a death threat. He encouraged the crowd to bring the issue of gun control to the polls.“If our government can’t do anything to stop 19 kids from being killed and slaughtered in their own school and decapitated, it’s time to change who is in government,” Hogg said.Gonzalez gave an impassioned rebuke to Congress.“I’ve spent these past four years doing my best to keep my rage in check. To keep my profanity at a minimum so everyone can understand and appreciate the arguments I’m trying to make, but I have reached my fucking limit. We are being murdered. Cursing will not rob us of our innocence.“You say that children are the future, and you never listen to what we say once we’re old enough to disagree with you, you decaying degenerates. You really want to protect children, pass some fucking gun laws.”Gonzalez said Congress had started treating mass shootings as a “fact of life”, like natural disasters. She criticized politicians for their relationships with gun lobbyists, saying: “We saw you cash those fucking checks. We as children did the heavy lifting for you. Act your age, not your shoe-size, Congress. You ought to be ashamed.”Yolanda King, who spoke at the 2018 March for Our Lives rally when she was nine, spoke of hope for action after Uvalde and Buffalo. Now 14, she evoked her grandfather, Martin Luther King Jr.“My grandfather was taken from the world by gun violence. Six years after his death, his mother, my great-grandmother, was killed in church during Sunday service. We have all been touched by tragedy, we have all been lifted up by hope.“Today we’re telling Congress, we’re telling the gun lobby and we’re telling the world this time is different. This time is different because we’ve had enough. We’ve had enough of having more guns than people here in America. Together, we can carve that stone of love and hope out of that mountain of death and despair. Together we can build a gun-free world for all people.Dozens of other rallies saw protesters call for stronger legislation. In Buffalo, hundreds protested outside the supermarket where the shooting happened. The group held a moment of silence and chanted “Not one more”.March for Our Lives has called for an assault weapons ban, universal background checks for gun purchases and a national licensing system.The US House has passed bills that would raise the age limit to buy semi-automatic weapons and establish a federal “red flag” law. But previous such initiatives have stalled or been watered down in the Senate. The new marches were to take place a day after senators left Washington without reaching agreement in guns talks.On Saturday, Joe Biden tweeted his support.“I join them by repeating my call to Congress: do something,” the president said, adding that Congress must ban assault weapons, strengthen background checks, pass red flag laws and repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity to liability.“We can’t fail the American people again,” the president wrote. More

  • in

    A celebrity heart surgeon wins in Pennsylvania, what next? Politics Weekly America – podcast

    Dr Mehmet Öz is the Republican nominee for the Pennsylvania Senate race, which will take place in November. Up against him is another interesting character in John Fetterman. Both see themselves as political outsiders, but who will win this important swing state in the midterms? Jonathan Freedland puts this to politics reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer Julia Terruso

    How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know

    Find a link to Jonathan Freedland’s new book, The Escape Artist: The Man Who Broke Out of Auschwitz to Warn the World, here Send your questions and feedback to podcasts@theguardian.com Help support the Guardian by going to theguardian.com/supportpodcasts More

  • in

    Pressure mounts on Senate to act on gun safety amid Republican resistance

    Pressure mounts on Senate to act on gun safety amid Republican resistanceRelatives of victims urge action while group of over 220 CEOS send joint letter pushing Senate to address gun violence Pressure is mounting on the US Senate to act on gun safety in the wake of the Uvalde and Buffalo massacres, as Republican intransigence continues to stand in the way of all but modest reforms.On Wednesday the House of Representatives passed a package of gun safety measures designed to staunch the disaster of mass shootings. The extent of Republican resistance was underlined by the fact that only five out of 208 House Republicans voted for the legislation.Uvalde survivor, 11, tells House hearing she smeared herself with friend’s blood Read moreNow the focus – and with it the anger of victims’ families and gun safety advocates – turns to the Senate. With the chamber divided 50-50, and 60 votes needed to overcome the filibuster, there is no chance of Democrats passing any changes unless they can bring Republican leaders with them.As compromise talks continue, there are tentative hopes that a deal might be in the offing. But the outcome is likely to be dictated by Republican refusal to contemplate anything other than limited steps.The most promising proposals under discussion include plans to increase resources for mental health treatment, school safety provisions and money to encourage states to introduce “red flag laws” that remove guns from those who might harm themselves or others.On Thursday a group of more than 220 CEOs from some of the biggest brands in the US sent a joint letter to the Senate in which they lamented what they called the “public health crisis” of gun violence. “We urge the Senate to take immediate action … Transcend partisanship and work together to pass bold legislation to address gun violence in our country,” the letter said.Among the signatories were business leaders of some of the most familiar corporations, including Levi Strauss & Co, Lyft, Unilever US, Yelp and the Philadelphia Eagles.Chip Bergh, CEO of Levi Strauss, said in a statement that it was time for senators to act. “Inaction on federal legislation has made gun violence a uniquely American problem,” he said.Gun safety groups are also piling on the pressure on the Senate. Kris Brown, president of the Brady campaign, pointed out that the Senate has sat on legislation to tighten federal background checks on gun sales for the past 15 months.“That’s 15 months of lethal inaction,” he said.The most visceral cries for something to be done are coming from relatives of those who died in the recent massacres. Kimberly Rubio, the mother of Lexi, 10, who was killed in last month’s mass shooting in Uvalde elementary school in Texas, told a House committee this week that it was time for a ban on assault rifles of the sort used to murder her daughter.“We understand for some reason, to some people – to people with money, to people who fund political campaigns – that guns are more important than children. So at this moment, we ask for progress,” she said.A ban on AR-15 style rifles – the sort used in both Uvalde, where 19 children and two teachers were killed, and in Buffalo, New York, where 10 Black people were killed at a grocery store – is not on the agenda for the Senate compromise talks. The discussions, which are being led by the Democratic senator from Connecticut Chris Murphy and his Republican counterpart John Cornyn from Texas, are focusing on more granular measures that have greater hope of moving forward.Other ideas on the table are a proposal to introduce juvenile records into federal background checks for anyone under 21 trying to buy a firearm. Senate Republicans will not countenance raising the age limit to buy AR-15s to 21, even though both the Uvalde and alleged Buffalo shooters were aged 18.Mass shootings continue to be an epidemic in the US, occurring far more frequently than high-profile disasters such as Uvalde and Buffalo. The Gun Violence Archive, which tracks mass shootings, defined as events in which four or more people are shot or killed, counts 251 such incidents in the US so far this year.TopicsUS SenateUS gun controlUS politicsRepublicansDemocratsHouse of RepresentativesnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    US House passes gun control bill but it faces defeat in Senate

    US House passes gun control bill but it faces defeat in SenateSweeping legislation would raise age limit for buying a semiautomatic rifle and put curbs on ammunition sales The US House of Representatives has passed a wide-ranging gun control bill in response to recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Texas, but the proposals have almost no chance of being approved by the Senate and becoming law.The bill would raise the age limit for buying a semi-automatic rifle and prohibit the sale of ammunition magazines with a capacity of more than 15 rounds. The legislation passed by a mostly party-line vote of 223-204. It has almost no chance of becoming law as the Senate pursues negotiations focused on improving mental health programmes, bolstering school security and enhancing background checks. But the House bill does give Democratic lawmakers a chance to frame for voters in November where they stand on policies that polls show are widely supported. “We can’t save every life, but my God, shouldn’t we try? America we hear you and today in the House we are taking the action you are demanding,” said Veronica Escobar, a Texas Democrat. “Take note of who is with you and who is not.”The vote came after a House committee heard wrenching testimony from recent shooting victims and family members, including from an 11-year-old girl, Miah Cerrillo, who covered herself with a dead classmate’s blood to avoid being shot at Uvalde elementary school. 01:59The seemingly never-ending cycle of mass shootings in the US has rarely stirred Congress to act. But the shooting of 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde has revived efforts in a way that has lawmakers from both parties talking about the need to respond. “It’s sickening, it’s sickening that our children are forced to live in this constant fear,” said the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi.Pelosi said the House vote would “make history by making progress”. But i is unclear where the House measure will go after Wednesday’s vote, given that Republicans were adamant in their opposition. “The answer is not to destroy the second amendment, but that is exactly where the Democrats want to go,“ said the Republican Jim Jordan of Ohio. The work to find common ground is mostly taking place in the Senate, where support from 10 Republicans will be needed to get a bill signed into law. Nearly a dozen Democratic and Republican senators met privately for an hour on Wednesday in hope of reaching a framework for compromise legislation by the end of the week. Participants said more conversations were needed about a plan that is expected to propose modest steps. In a measure of the political peril that efforts to curb guns pose for Republicans, five of the six lead Senate GOP negotiators do not face re-election until 2026. They are senators Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, John Cornyn of Texas, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. The sixth, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, is retiring in January. It is also notable that none of the six is seeking the Republican presidential nomination.While Cornyn has said the talks are serious, he has not joined the chorus of Democrats saying the outlines of a deal could be reached by the end of this week. He told reporters on Wednesday that he considered having an agreement before Congress begins a recess in late June to be “an aspirational goal”. The House bill stitches together a variety of proposals Democrats had introduced before the recent shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde. The suspects in the shootings at Uvalde elementary school and the Buffalo supermarket were both 18, authorities say, when they bought the semiautomatic weapons used in the attacks. The bill would increase the minimum age to buy such weapons to 21. “A person under 21 cannot buy a Budweiser. We should not let a person under 21 buy an AR-15 weapon of war,“ said Ted Lieu, a California Democrat. Republicans have noted that a US appeals court ruling last month found California’s ban on the sale of semiautomatic weapons to adults under 21 was unconstitutional. “This is unconstitutional and it’s immoral. Why is it immoral? Because we’re telling 18, 19 and 20-year-olds to register for the draft. You can go die for your country. We expect you to defend us, but we’re not going to give you the tools to defend yourself and your family,” said Thomas Massie of Kentucky. The House bill also includes incentives designed to increase the use of safe gun storage devices and creates penalties for violating safe storage requirements, providing for a fine and imprisonment of up to five years if a gun is not properly stored and is subsequently used by a minor to injure or kill themselves or another individual. It also builds on executive actions banning fast-action “bump stock” devices and “ghost guns” that are assembled without serial numbers. The White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, hailed the House bill, tweeting: “We continue to work hard with both parties to save lives and stand up for families.” Five Republicans voted for the bill: Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio, Chris Jacobs of New York, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Fred Upton of Michigan. Only Fitzpatrick is seeking re-election. On the Democratic side, Jared Golden of Maine and Kurt Schrader of Oregon were the only no votes. Schrader lost his re-election attempt in the Democratic primary. Golden faces a competitive election in November. The House is also expected to approve a bill on Thursday that would allow families, police and others to ask federal courts to order the removal of firearms from people who are believed to be at extreme risk of harming themselves or others. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia currently have such “red flag laws”. Under the House bill, a judge could issue an order to temporarily remove and store the firearms until a hearing can be held no longer than two weeks later to determine whether the firearms should be returned or kept for a specific period.TopicsUS gun controlHouse of RepresentativesUS school shootingsTexas school shootingUS politicsBuffalo shootingUS CongressnewsReuse this content More