More stories

  • in

    Special counsel pushes to use Pence against Trump in 2020 election case

    Special counsel prosecutors intend to make Donald Trump’s vice-president Mike Pence and his efforts to recruit fake electors the centerpiece of his criminal prosecution against the former president, according to a sprawling legal brief that was partly unsealed on Wednesday.The redacted brief, made public by the presiding US district judge Tanya Chutkan, shows prosecutors are relying extensively on Trump’s pressure campaign against Pence to support the charge that Trump conspired to obstruct the January 6 certification of the election results.And prosecutors used an equally voluminous portion of the 165-page brief to express their intent to use evidence of Trump trying to get officials in seven key swing states to reverse his defeat to support the charges that he conspired to disenfranchise American voters.The brief’s principal mission was to convince Chutkan to allow the allegations and evidence buttressing the superseding indictment against Trump to proceed to trial, arguing that it complied with the US supreme court’s recent ruling that gave former presidents immunity for official acts.As part of the ruling, the court ordered Chutkan to sort through the indictment and decide which of the allegations against Trump should be tossed because of the immunity rules and which could proceed to trial.The brief was the first round of that process that could take months to resolve and involve hearings to decide what allegations should be kept. Chutkan has the power to decide how much of the indictment can be kept and what evidence can be presented by prosecutors as she makes her decision.According to the redacted brief, prosecutors want to use Trump’s conversations with Pence in the lead-up to the January 6 Capitol attack, interactions between Trump and Pence and other private actors, as well as interactions between White House aides and private actors.The bottom line from prosecutors was that each of the episodes reflected Trump acting not as president but as a candidate for office, which meant the default presumption that conversations between Trump and Pence were official could be rebutted.For instance, prosecutors argued that evidence of Trump using personal lawyers Rudy Giuliani or John Eastman to pressure Pence should be permitted, since using private actors to commit a crime would not be an official act of the presidency or infringe on the functioning of the executive branch.At the White House on 4 January 2021, prosecutors wrote, Trump deliberately excluded his White House counsel from attending a meeting with Pence – meaning the only attorney in the room was Eastman.“It is hard to imagine stronger evidence that the conduct is private than when the president excludes his White House counsel and only wishes to have his private counsel present,” the brief said.View image in fullscreenAnd on a 5 January 2021 phone call, prosecutors wrote, Trump and Eastman were the only ones on the line to make a final effort to pressure Pence to drop his objections and agree not to count slates of electors for Joe Biden when he presided over the congressional certification the next day.“For the defendant’s decision to include private actors in the conversation with Pence about his role at the certification makes even more clear that there is no danger to the executive branch’s functions and authority, because it had no bearing on any executive branch authority,” it said.Prosecutors added that the conversations between Trump and Pence that they wanted to present at trial should be allowed because there was nothing official about them discussing electoral prospects as candidates for office.Referencing previously undisclosed evidence, prosecutors showed that Pence at various points suggested that “the process was over” and that Trump consider running again in 2024 – key evidence that Trump was on notice from his own running mate that he had lost the election.And prosecutors reiterated that charging the most damning evidence that Trump’s lawyers knew they were violating the law – emails where Eastman asked Pence’s counsel Greg Jacob to consider one more “minor violation” of the Electoral Count Act – did not impact the functioning of the executive branch.The expansive brief also included prosecutors asking to take to trial evidence of Trump’s effort to pressure state officials to reverse the results and his effort to then rely on fake slates of electors.The response from Trump’s lawyers is almost certain to be that Trump was calling state officials because he was executing the clause in the US constitution that the president has a duty to ensure the general election was run without interference or fraud.But prosecutors included a pre-emptive rebuttal: “Although countless federal, state, and local races also were on the same ballots … the defendant focused only on his own race, the election for president, and only on allegations favoring him as a candidate in targeted states he had lost.” More

  • in

    Underwhelming Walz and a more presentable Vance: the VP debate – podcast

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

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

  • in

    JD Vance is trying hard not to be weird – and it’s making him seem more menacing still | Emma Brockes

    The overriding and at times darkly comic impression, watching JD Vance’s exchange with Tim Walz in the vice-presidential debate on Tuesday night, was that Vance’s top-line imperative was to demonstrate to America just how extravagantly not-weird he is. Nothing to see here! Just a guy with a placid expression, nice manners, a noble desire to find “common sense, bipartisan solutions”, and a lovely little quiff. His affect was so relaxed, so urbane, that at points during the debate he could have been twirling a cane and slinking around a corner like Top Cat.And while the event itself is unlikely to move the election needle, the performance of the two contenders for vice-president was a useful measure of where each campaign thinks its weaknesses lie. Both men were required to perform sincerity, a tough call in such a rehearsed and high-pressure setting, but only Vance was tasked with having to perform normality – which he did, up to a point. Walz, meanwhile, had to struggle to back up his charm with something steelier and more purposeful than relatability. Whereas a candidate for president can be all flamboyance and jazz hands, it is the role of the vice-president to be a sober voice in the room – and for 90 minutes, both men tried to out-grownup each other.The result was, to some extent, a gratifyingly low-drama exchange in which each man was lavishly courteous to the other. When Walz mentioned his son had witnessed a shooting at a community centre, Vance absolutely nailed a tone he customarily struggles with – being recognisably human – and immediately offered his sympathy. Walz, meanwhile, was conciliatory on the subject of how to prevent another school shooting and allowed that his opponent was, at least in principle, broadly against the murder of small children. For Walz, however, the debate was a harder proposition from the get-go, given just how low the expectations were for his rival.And in the first instance Walz did seem to fluff things. He is, he has said, not a natural debater, happier charming voters while buying a doughnut or holding a cat than facing someone on stage. Vance, by contrast, is absolutely the champion debater you remember from college, right down to his dead shark little eyes and his resting smug face. (Walz’s resting face ranged from gimme-a-break incredulity to full blown oh-god-we’re-all-going-to-die fright eyes, and by the end of the debate, the corners of his mouth drooped so heavily he looked like Marlon Brando in The Godfather.)Given the biases we bring to the party at this stage, I tried, for the sake of argument, to allow for the possibility that Vance’s reasonable air connotes a reasonable outlook and to see Walz’s under-energised performance through the eyes of those sympathetic to Trump. Maybe Walz’s folksy charm is a smokescreen for something more mercenary? Maybe Vance isn’t as bad as he has seemed until now? But then he got going on how restricting abortion is a way of “giving women more options” and I thought: “You creepy little putz,” and was back to square one.This is the crux of the matter with politicians such as Vance, whose job it is to put a civilised face on Trumpist extremism. In calm, measured tones he defended creating the conditions in which, denied adequate healthcare in their locality, miscarrying women die while travelling across state lines. Pleasantly, he suggested that school shootings in the US might be countered by making the “doors” and “windows” of schools “stronger”. He argued that the real victims of the US immigration crisis are the border patrol agents “who just want to be empowered to do their job”.And when Walz asked him point blank if he believed Trump lost the 2020 election, he dodged the question entirely. “I’m pretty shocked,” Walz said, and he looked it. There is something arguably weirder about presenting fanatical, life-endangering positions in the urbane tones of someone offering us all a great deal, and yet, at times during the debate, the more superficial oddness of Vance was still visible. I laughed out loud when he described Usha, his wife, as a “beautiful woman who’s an incredible mother to our three beautiful kids and also a very, very brilliant corporate litigator”. The bottom line? Vance really is creepy.He is also, of course, dangerous. There was a single, fleeting moment when I thought Vance dropped his mask, and that was 30 minutes in, when Walz mentioned Springfield, Ohio, in reference to Vance’s lie about Haitian immigrants eating pets. Walz, playing the more-gracious-than-thou game, allowed that Senator Vance is genuinely interested in solving the immigration problem, but that, “by standing with Donald Trump” he was only making it worse. It was as close to accusing the man of stark, self-interested, near-psychopathic venality as the tone of the exchange would allow. A flash of anger crossed Vance’s face before the banality of his demeanour returned.

    Emma Brockes is a Guardian columnist More

  • in

    Middle East escalation, hurricane and strikes could cause Harris triple trouble

    “100” was spelled out in giant numbers on the White House north lawn on Tuesday. It was a birthday tribute to the former US president Jimmy Carter, who served only one term after being buffeted by external events such as high inflation and a hostage crisis in Iran.The current occupant of the White House, Joe Biden, must know the feeling as he fights three fires at once. Iran has launched at least 180 missiles into Israel, six US states are still reeling from Hurricane Helene, and ports from Maine to Texas shut down as about 45,000 dockworkers went on strike.Unlike Carter, Biden already knows his fate: he is not seeking reelection next month. But what remains uncertain is whether the trio of troubles will drag down his vice-president and would-be successor, Kamala Harris. Certainly her rival, Donald Trump, smells an opportunity to tar her with the same brush of chaos.“The World is on fire and spiraling out of control,” he said in a written statement. “We have no leadership, no one running the Country. We have a non-existent President in Joe Biden, and a completely absent Vice President, Kamala Harris, who is too busy fundraising in San Francisco.”Will it stick? No one can be sure. Democrats must again be breathing a sigh of relief that they jettisoned Biden after his miserable debate performance in June. The president steeped in foreign policy is running at one catastrophe a year: the botched Afghanistan withdrawal of 2021, the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the deadly Hamas attack on Israel in 2023.He has tried and failed to wield influence over the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, in Gaza. Last week Biden told reporters about a plan for a 21-day ceasefire in Lebanon and seemed to think Netanyahu was on board; a day later, a massive Israeli airstrike killed Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah. It looked like a case study in presidential impotence and the limits of American power.Now, after the Iranian missile assault, Israel has vowed to retaliate and Republicans are ready to pounce. Nikki Haley, a former US ambassador to the UN, told Fox News: “You look at the time under Trump, there were no wars, there were no conflicts, and the reason is at least our allies knew where we stood. With Biden and Harris, they never know where we stand.”This talking point – a world in disarray under Biden, in contrast to years of glorious peace under Trump – should come with plenty of caveats, not least Trump’s decision to tear up the Iran nuclear deal and strike a deal to end the war in Afghanistan. It is also harder to make now that Biden has made way for Harris.The vice-president has spent her candidacy pursuing a Goldilocks principle: not too hot on Biden, not too cold on Biden, but displaying just-right loyalty. She heaps praise on the president and delivered an address at the Democratic national convention that channelled Biden on US leadership in the world. But she is also the candidate of “turn the page” and “a new way forward” who will never let the phrase “Bidenomics” pass her lips again.Current events are again testing where Harris the vice-president ends and Harris the candidate begins. Activists on the left are eager for any hint that she will give Palestinians a more sympathetic ear and take a harder line on Netanyahu. The Uncommitted National Movement has declined to endorse her, citing her unwillingness to shift on unconditional weapons policy.At the White House press briefing, one reporter was eager to know what her engagement had been like during the Iranian attack on Israel. Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, was at pains to say that Harris had joined the president in the situation room.“She was there,” Jean-Pierre said. “She was alongside him in getting that update, and she many times has been in the room or, as you just said, has called in when it’s come to really important, critical national security issues.”Later Harris herself made an unplanned public appearance to address the Middle East escalation – reaffirming her commander-in-chief credentials in a way she would not have felt obliged to do four months ago. She took care to note that she had been in the situation room and promised: “My commitment to the security of Israel is unwavering.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSimilarly, both candidates are racing to put their stamp on Hurricane Helene, which crashed ashore in Florida last Thursday with a wind field stretching 350 miles from its centre. It has killed at least 150 people and wiped out hundreds of homes and businesses. The homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, described it as being of “an historic magnitude”.Trump travelled to Georgia on Monday and falsely claimed that Biden had not spoken to its governor, Brian Kemp. Harris will travel to Georgia on Wednesday and to North Carolina in the coming days. The stakes are high: administrations have long been haunted by the failed response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005.But it is the third crisis that could have the biggest electoral impact of all. The first dockworkers’ strike since 1977 could snarl supply chains and cause shortages and higher prices if it stretches on for more than a few weeks. That would be a political gift to Trump, whose polling lead on the economy has been eroded by Harris. Both are vying for trade union support.Trump, who has previously praised Elon Musk for firing workers who go on strike, said in a statement: “The situation should have never come to this and, had I been President, it would not have … Americans who thrived under President Trump can’t even get by because of Kamala Harris – this strike is a direct result of her actions.”All this and it was still only 1 October. The only surprise now would be if there are no more October surprises to come. More

  • in

    Wednesday briefing: What Iran’s attack on Israel means for the Middle East

    Good morning.Iran launched a wave of ballistic missiles at Israel on Tuesday evening in retaliation for a series of attacks against its proxies. Officials in Tehran cited the assassinations of top Hezbollah and Hamas commanders – including Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed on Friday – and the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.It is Iran’s second attack on Israel this year, although this one is widely considered to have been more aggressive and is likely to be more consequential.Guardian reporters in Jerusalem witnessed dozens of missiles darting through the sky towards the country’s coastal cities. Most of the missiles were intercepted by Israel’s air defences, supported by western allies, but there have been multiple images of craters in central and southern Israel.Two people have reportedly been wounded in Tel Aviv. Elsewhere, the only reported fatality was Sameh al-Asali, a 37-year-old Palestinian from Gaza living in the occupied West Bank, who was killed by falling shrapnel.Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said Iran has “made a big mistake tonight, and will pay for it”, although US officials have said that Israel has not made a decision yet on the scope or timeframe of this reprisal.Meanwhile, overnight, the Israeli military continued to pound Lebanon’s capital, Beirut, with at least five strikes hitting the city’s southern suburbs.Today’s newsletter takes you through the last 24 hours in the Middle East, as the crisis intensifies. That’s right after the headlines.Five big stories

    US election | JD Vance refused to say whether Donald Trump lost the 2020 election and sidestepped questions over whether he would certify a Trump loss this autumn, bringing out sharp attacks by his Democratic opponent, Tim Walz, during the vice-presidential debate last night.

    Surveillance | UK government ministers have been warned not to resurrect Conservative plans to tackle welfare fraud by launching mass algorithmic surveillance of bank accounts. Rights and privacy groups fear the government is poised to deliver a “snooper’s charter” using automation and possibly AI to crack down on benefit cheating and mistakes that cost £10bn a year.

    UK news | A 14-year-old girl was left with potentially life-changing injuries while a 16-year-old boy was in hospital after a substance – believed to be acidic – was thrown at them by a male who approached them on the street outside their London school, police have said.

    Lucy Letby | A senior doctor said he was “ashamed” he failed to stop the nurse Lucy Letby from harming babies and that police should have been contacted a year earlier. John Gibbs told a public inquiry that doctors received “very firm pushback” from senior nurses when they raised growing suspicions about Letby in early 2016.

    Space | A comet that has not been seen from Earth since Neanderthals were alive has reappeared in the sky, with astronomers saying it might be visible to the naked eye.
    In depth: Israel readies for reprisal as ‘forces of restraint’ weakenView image in fullscreenIran’s surprise attack lasted for just under an hour and came after its supreme national security council (SNSC) chair, Ali Akbar Ahmadian, declared that Iran was at war. Around 180 ballistic missiles were launched, just hours after the US warned that Iran was preparing an imminent attack.To bolster Israel’s defence, US forces shot down Iranian missiles. President Joe Biden later said that the attack appears to have been “defeated and ineffective”, and Israel said that most of the missiles were intercepted.Iranian officials, however, announced that 90% of its missiles successfully hit their targets. The extent of the damage caused by the missiles remains unclear.The order to launch the strike was made by Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, with the backing of the SNSC and the Iranian defence ministry. Iran has said the attack was a “legal, rational and legitimate response to the terrorist attacks of the Zionist regime”.This attack is far more aggressive than Iran’s one in April, which was largely considered a symbolic strike. Iran gave several days’ notice then and the main target was a military base in the underpopulated Negev desert. This time, the missiles themselves seem to be much faster and the targets appear to have included dense cities.The Guardian’s defence and security editor Dan Sabbagh has useful insight into Iran’s military strategy now: “Firing so many ballistic missiles in a few minutes also represents a serious effort to overwhelm or exhaust Israel’s air defences. Because they are sophisticated, the interceptor missiles are expensive – and their stocks uncertain,” he writes.Why did Iran do this?In late September, Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, insisted that the country does not “wish to be the cause of instability in the region.” It seems the impending threat of war has lost its deterrent power, with the spokesperson of the parliament’s national security and foreign policy commission saying that Iran is “not afraid of going to war. We are not warmongers, but we are ready for any war.”Iran’s risky and unprecedented retaliation “reflects a growing consensus inside the Iranian elite that its decision not to mount a military reprisal after the assassination of [Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh] in Tehran in July was a strategic mistake”, Patrick Wintour writes.The perceived inaction has led to a growing frustration among some hardliners in Iran that Tehran has become “passive” in the face of Israeli aggression. Instead of placating Israel, they say, it has emboldened Netanyahu to mount further attacks and has weakened its image as the leader of the “axis of resistance”.Iran held off from ordering a reprisal for the assassination of Haniyeh, who was killed in Tehran in July, because of US assurances that a ceasefire deal in Gaza was imminent and restraint from Iran would be key in making sure it happens. (Israel has not claimed responsibility for Haniyeh’s death). No such deal materialised. Early last month, Pezeshkian accused the US of lying, adding that Israel’s actions would not go “unanswered”.Iranian officials were also alarmed by Netanyahu’s announcement last weekend that Israel’s latest actions are steps towards changing “the balance of power in the region for years to come”. To show restraint after the series of escalations would, they believed, put them in an even weaker strategic position.What’s next?Leaders across Europe condemned Iran’s attack and the UK prime minister Keir Starmer said that Britain stands with Israel and recognises “her right to self-defence in the face of this aggression”.The UN secretary general, António Guterres, condemned “escalation after escalation” in the region. “This must stop. We absolutely need a ceasefire,” he said.Israel has already launched attacks in Yemen, Lebanon and Syria this week, indicating its willingness to keep fighting on all fronts. Analysts have noted that Israel has a much freer hand to respond more comprehensively and aggressively. What little “forces of restraint” there were in the Middle East are “weakening with every passing day,” Julian Borger writes in his analysis. “Politically speaking, the Biden administration cannot be seen as tying Israel’s hands in the face of an Iranian attack on Israeli cities.”The looming fear of this deepening conflict has been a direct confrontation between Tehran and Washington, which gets closer with each attack.As Israel readies for a reprisal and Iran’s leadership vows that any retaliation would be met with a “more crushing and ruinous” response, the cries for peace continue to go unheeded.For the latest news on the region, follow the Guardian’s liveblog.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhat else we’ve been readingView image in fullscreen

    Barbara Walker has created beautiful, ceiling-to-floor sized charcoal portraits of victims of the Windrush scandal, which will go on show this week at the Whitworth in Manchester. Amelia Gentleman spoke to her about the physical and emotional toll of making – and then destroying – her political, personal art. Jason Okundaye, assistant editor, newsletters

    The Guardian’s foremost expert on gambling (and author of the excellent book Jackpot), Rob Davies, has profiled Denise Coates. The Bet365 mastermind is Britain’s richest woman but, asks Rob, what’s the human cost of her mammoth fortune? Hannah J Davies, deputy editor, newsletters

    Some men went to a (cancelled) Last Dinner Party show in Lincoln and felt they were profiled by security and treated like “perverts”. Laura Snapes is brilliant and balanced on the state of high alert that women and minority fans are often put in when attending gigs. Jason

    George Monbiot is on top form as he questions why Just Stop Oil protesters were handed such long sentences for throwing soup at a Van Gogh (or rather, at the protective glass in front of it). Hannah

    Collagen peptides, dandelion root, vitamin C, creatine, magnesium – will the cult of self-optimisation through supplements ever end? Joel Snape takes on the latest craze, electrolytes, and what they mean for your kidneys – and your bank account. Jason
    SportView image in fullscreenFootball | First-half goals from Kai Havertz and Bukayo Saka gave Arsenal a 2-0 win over PSG in the Champions League group stage. Manchester City claimed a regulation 4-0 win against Slovan Bratislava with James McAtee scoring his first goal for the club.Formula One | Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has indicated Liam Lawson has an opportunity to make his case to replace Sergio Pérez and line up alongside Max Verstappen for the team, potentially as early as next season.Tennis| Third-ranked Carlos Alcaraz’s athleticism was again on show as he advanced to the men’s final of the China Open, with a 7-5, 6-3 victory over Daniil Medvedev on Tuesday.The front pagesView image in fullscreen“Israel vows to retaliate after Iran launches missile attack” says the Guardian’s splash headline this morning. “Middle East erupts” – that’s the Times while the Daily Express has “US threatens ‘severe’ response as Iran attacks Israel”. “Revenge from above” says the Mirror describing it further as Iran’s retaliation for Israel’s incursion into Lebanon. A dramatic front page of the Daily Mail says “The Iron Dome holds firm against Iran’s 200-missile blitz … now Israel vows vengeance”. The Telegraph says simply “Iran attacks Israel” while the i leads with “Iran missile attack on Israel sparks fears of new war”. Business coverage is displaced on the Financial Times’ front in favour of “Iran fires missile barrage against Israel”. The Metro calls it “Iran’s new blitz at Israel”.Today in FocusView image in fullscreenWho were England’s 2024 rioters?Racist chants rang out, and homes, businesses and hotels housing asylum seekers were attacked – for a week this summer English towns and cities seemed on the brink of chaos. Josh Halliday reports on what we know so far about the people at the centre of the violenceCartoon of the day | Martin RowsonView image in fullscreenThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badView image in fullscreenCommunal eating is on the menu in the culinary hotspot of Copenhagen, where pulling up a chair alongside strangers is now all the rage, as Shanna McGoldrick writes. At Absalon, a church turned community centre, McGoldrick sampled tomato and lentil soup and fried potatoes in a creamy fennel and chive sauce, as well as breaking bread – quite literally – with a group of Danish nurses, all for the affordable price of 60DKK (about £6.75). “All around us, people are chatting in English and Danish, and though everyone looks very at ease, I’m fairly sure we’re not the only tourists here,” writes McGoldrick of the fællesspisning dinner. “It’s a pragmatic kind of welcome, with all diners expected to get stuck in: at the end of the meal, we all stack our plates neatly and file happily back over to the kitchen.” Adds Ivonne Christensen, one of the nurses: “It’s a wonderful idea … you don’t have to cook, you can come here when you’re tired; it’s easy.”Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.

    Quick crossword

    Cryptic crossword

    Wordiply More

  • in

    Trump tells rally Kamala Harris ‘wouldn’t have won The Apprentice’

    Donald Trump reprised his role of a reality TV character during a rally in Waunakee, Wisconsin, on Tuesday, telling voters in the key swing state that his Democratic rival Kamala Harris wouldn’t have succeeded on his business competition show.“Kamala, you’re fired!” the ex-president said, invoking his contestant-eliminating tagline from The Apprentice after he urged voters to support him. “Get out of here!”“The Apprentice … she wouldn’t have won The Apprentice,” the GOP candidate said.His speech was intended to focus on the economy, which along with immigration has been a top concern among voters. Trump did discuss the economy, vowing to eliminate taxes on tips and overtime, and promised to help Americans with languishing purchase-power, saying: “Inflation, we can solve it.”Trump’s speech was also punctuated by self-praise, with boasts about his crowd size and closeness to Elon Musk. He also indulged in fearmongering about the Middle East conflict, noting Iran’s missile strike on Israel, and alarmism about migrants.“These people are grossly incompetent,” Trump said of Joe Biden and Harris’s handling of the US military. “And now we have them in charge of potentially world war three. World war three – it’s going to be like no other if it happens, because of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction that nobody’s ever seen before.”Trump also claimed that migrants were “taking over our small towns and cities they’re taking over our big cities too”, and seemed to voice support for New York City’s Democratic mayor, Eric Adams, who last week was charged with allegedly accepting bribes from the Turkish government.“If you fight it, you get indicted,” Trump said, echoing Adams’s claim that he was being politically targeted for clashing with the Biden administration over the migrant crisis. “The mayor of New York … he was appalled at what was happening and they indicted him, and I predicted it.”Trump’s comments comes as he continues to hammer Harris on her economic policies, and just hours before vice-presidential contenders JD Vance and Tim Walz were scheduled to debate. Voters have said that they want to hear both VP picks speak about immigration and the economy on Tuesday evening, according to a CBS News/YouGov poll.In a Harris poll conducted for the Guardian, a majority of those surveyed, 66%, said that the cost of living was among their biggest economic concerns. Democrats are confronted by continued pressure on American consumers who have seen their purchasing power plummet after inflation hit 9.1% in summer 2022 – a 40-year high – under Biden’s administration.Americans’ concerns over prices extend far beyond grocery-store shelves and gasoline pumps but the very places they call home. Democrats fear that housing costs could tilt key swing states such as Nevada; in Las Vegas, the median home price ballooned from $345,000 in August 2020 to $480,000 in August 2024.Inflation has decreased, and Harris has introduced numerous proposals to lower housing costs, and increase access to home ownership, in her economic platform agenda. But Trump and his surrogates have used economic challenges to double down on an integral campaign motif: Americans lives got worse under Democratic leadership.At a recent rally in Newton, Pennsylvania, Vance alleged – without evidence – that Harris had a hand in worsening the economy, and then tied financial concerns to immigrants by claiming their arrival contributed to increasing housing costs.“The problem with Kamala Harris is that she’s got no substance,” Vance said. “The problem with Kamala Harris is that she’s got no plan. And the problem with Kamala Harris is that she has been the vice-president for three and a half years and has failed this country.”While Trump’s camp is doing everything possible to sully Harris’s economic prowess, the poll for the Guardian indicates that Americans prefer her policies. The survey asked Americans about twelve economic policies – six from Trump, six from Harris – without being told which were from whom.The most popular idea, from Democrats, was a federal prohibition on the price-gouging of groceries and food. Some top economists have criticized this idea, but 44% of those survey agreed that it would boost the economy. More

  • in

    Biden reaffirms US support for Israel amid Iran’s missile attack

    Joe Biden has reaffirmed US support for Israel after Iran’s ballistic missile attacks, describing the barrage as “defeated and ineffective” and ordering the US military to aid Israel’s defense against any future assaults.“The attack appears to have been defeated and ineffective, and this is a testament to Israeli military capability and the US military,” the US president told reporters on Tuesday after Tehran launched an unprecedented salvo of 180 high-speed ballistic missiles.US destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean Sea destroyed several Iranian missiles, US defense officials said. Vessels currently in the region include the USS Arleigh Burke, USS Cole and USS Bulkeley. Additional destroyers are in the Red Sea.“Make no mistake, the United States is fully, fully, fully supportive of Israel,” Biden said.Initial reports suggested that Israeli air defenses intercepted many of the incoming missiles, although some landed in central and southern Israel, and at least one man was killed in the West Bank by a missile that fell near the town of Jericho.Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that the missile attack was conducted in retaliation for Israel’s killings of the Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, and Iranian Revolutionary Guard deputy commander Abbas Nilforoushan.The White House National Security Council said that Biden and Kamala Harris were monitoring the Iranian attack on Israel from the White House situation room and were receiving regular updates from their national security team.Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan hailed the response to the attack, which he described as “defeated and ineffective”.But before the missile barrage had even ended, Donald Trump, on his own social media platform, Truth Social, described the current conflict in the Middle East as “totally preventable” and claimed it would never have happened if he were president.In a lengthy statement, the former president and current Republican nominee attacked Biden and Harris, saying the world was “spiraling out of control” and asserting that the US had “no leadership” and “no one running the country”.“When I was President, Iran was in total check,” Trump added. “They were starved for cash, fully contained, and desperate to make a deal.”It remains unclear how the escalating tensions in the Middle East will play into the US election on 5 November.Iran’s attack on Israel comes just hours before the highly anticipated US vice-presidential debate on Tuesday night, 38 days from the US presidential election, and as the conflict in the Middle East appears to continue to escalate.A poll conducted by CNN shortly after the presidential debate between Harris and Trump in September found that more voters who watched the debate viewed Trump as a stronger candidate when it came to handling the role of commander in chief.Lindsey Graham, the Republican senator from South Carolina, wrote in a statement that the missile attacks against Israel on Tuesday “should be the breaking point and I would urge the Biden Administration to coordinate an overwhelming response with Israel, starting with Iran’s ability to refine oil.“These oil refineries need to be hit and hit hard because that is the source of cash for the regime to perpetrate their terror,” he added.In another statement, Graham said that he had spoken with Trump, who he described as “determined and resolved to protect Israel from the threats of terrorism emanating from Iran.“While I appreciate the Biden administration’s statement, we cannot forget that when President Trump left office, Iran was weak economically, and he sent the regime the ultimate message with the elimination of Soleimani,” Graham said.Graham continued: “The only thing the Iranian regime understands is strength. Now is the time to show unified resolve against Iran, the largest state sponsor of terrorism.“We need decisive action, not just statements,” he added.On Twitter/X, Marco Rubio, also a Republican senator, described the attack as a “large scale (not symbolic) missile attack from Iranian regime against Israel” and added that “a large scale Israeli retaliatory response inside Iran is certain to follow”.Bob Casey, a Democrat senator for Pennsylvania, wrote in response to the attacks that he stands “with Israel and unequivocally condemn Iran’s missile strikes”.“The United States must continue doing everything it can to intercept Iran’s missiles and help our ally defend itself,” Casey added.Jerry Nadler, a Democratic representative, condemned the attack in a post on X, adding that his thoughts were “with the Israeli people at this time”. More

  • in

    US looks unable to talk Netanyahu out of planned invasion of Lebanon

    The Biden administration is losing influence over whether Benjamin Netanyahu launches a ground invasion into southern Lebanon or not.For more than a year, Joe Biden and his senior advisers have managed to forestall an Israeli ground incursion into Lebanon in fear of a larger war that could envelop the entire Middle East.In the days after the 7 October attack, Biden phoned Netanyahu to talk him out of a massive retaliation against Hezbollah, which had begun firing guided rockets against Israeli positions following the Hamas raid.In April this year, Biden also told Netanyahu that the US would not support Israel in an offensive war against Iran after Tehran launched dozens of loitering munitions, cruise missiles and drones toward Israel.But on Monday, US outlets reported that Netanyahu’s administration had told White House officials they were planning a limited ground incursion into Lebanon, essentially escalating a conflict with Hezbollah and its backer Iran to a level that Biden and his team have tried desperately to avoid.The Washington Post reported that Israel was planning a limited campaign – smaller than its 2006 war against Hezbollah – that nonetheless would mark a drastic escalation with Hezbollah and Iran. The New York Times suggested US officials believed they had talked Israel out of a full invasion of Lebanon, but that smaller incursions into southern Lebanon would continue.But Yoav Gallant, the Israeli defence minister, has briefed a meeting of local council heads in northern Israel on Monday, according to the Times of Israel. “The next stage in the war against Hezbollah will begin soon … We will do this. And as I said here a month ago [that] we will shift the center of gravity [to the north], this is what I say now: we will change the situation and return the residents home.”Earlier that day, he had told Israel Defense Forces soldiers that to return some 60,000 Israelis to their homes in the country’s north, we “will use all the means that may be required – your forces, other forces, from the air, from the sea, and on land”.The plan to attack comes at a unique moment – with war hawks dominating domestic Israeli politics at the same time as a lame duck Biden administration appears increasingly unable or unwilling to intervene in the conflict. And, according to analysts, Netanyahu believes he has a limited window around the US elections to attack Iranian proxies across the region.With just a month left until the US presidential elections, the Biden administration has launched a tepid effort at a ceasefire that Netanyahu appears to have chosen to ignore – or simply to wait out until US elections that could bring in a Trump administration that would do even less to restrain him than the current one has.“Netanyahu made a calculation, and the calculation was that there was no way that the Democrats between now and November 5th [election day] could do anything that would criticise, let alone restrain him from that,” said Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who focuses on US foreign policy and the Middle East.“You saw [vice-president Kamala] Harris’s statement, you saw the White House statement, you saw the Democrat and Republican consensus on the killing of Nasrallah and what the Israelis have done there,” he said. “And since Iran is involved in this, unlike in Gaza, the toxicity of animus against Iran in this town is so intense that the Republican party, which is now the ‘Israel can do no wrong’ party, is just winging for the administration.”Until recently, prominent US officials have thought they still had a chance to conclude a ceasefire and prevent the war from escalating further. Last week, US and French officials along with dozens of other countries called for a ceasefire in Lebanon. US officials briefed on the matter said they believed the “time was right” and that Israel would sign up.A western official last week told the Guardian that the Israeli threat to invade northern Lebanon was probably “psyops” largely designed to force Hezbollah and Iran to the negotiating table.But, at the same time, the official said, the situation in the region was extremely volatile, and could be upset by as little as a single drone strike against a sensitive target.One day later, a massive airstrike launched by the Israeli air force killed the Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, upending security calculations in the region and potentially emboldening Israeli officials to believe they could fundamentally change the security dynamics in the region.“I understand, and happen to be very understanding of the administration position, because I spent almost 30 years inside knowing full the constraints of how to get anything done in this region, which is very hard,” Miller said. “But the notion that a US-French proposal for a three-week ceasefire in the middle of all this could work, I mean, it was, it was simply not well thought out.” More