World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Joe Biden blames Trump for expected blocking of immigration bill – video

      by

      President Joe Biden accused Republicans of giving in to Trump’s ‘threats’ and opposing a bill to tighten immigration policy, which the party had demanded. The $118bn package would pair federal enforcement policy on the US-Mexico border with wartime aid for Ukraine, Israel and others, overhauling the asylum system with tougher enforcement and giving presidents new powers to expel migrants if border authorities deem themselves overwhelmed by the number of people requesting asylum. In his speech at the White House, Biden said the bill would help the country, but because it would not aid Trump’s bid for presidency, it wold not make it to the Senate floor to be debated More

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      House Republican leaders demand Senate reject immigration compromise; Haley joins opposition to deal – as it happened

      by

      In a just-released statement, the top Republicans in the House called on the Senate to vote down the bipartisan immigration policy legislation.“Any consideration of this Senate bill in its current form is a waste of time. It is DEAD on arrival in the House. We encourage the U.S. Senate to reject it,” speaker Mike Johnson, majority leader Steve Scalise, whip Tom Emmer and conference chairwoman Elise Stefanik said.They instead called on Congress’s upper chamber to pass the Secure the Border Act, a package of hardline policies the House approved last year – among them, restarting construction of Donald Trump’s border wall – that Democrats have rejected.“Because President Biden has refused to utilize his broad executive authority to end the border catastrophe that he has created, the House led nine months ago with the passage of the Secure the Border Act (H.R. 2). That bill contains the necessary components to actually stem the flow of illegals and end the present crisis. The Senate must take it up immediately,” they said.A bill to enact hardline immigration policies and send aid to Israel and Ukraine’s militaries is not even 24 hours old, but is already facing opposition that appears insurmountable. The House’s Republican leaders called on the Senate to reject the measure, and said that even if the chamber passes the bill, they will not hold a vote on it. Back in the Senate, an increasing number of Republican lawmakers say they will not support the legislation. But the worst news of all for the nascent proposal may have arrived from GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, who called it “horrendous”.Here’s what else happened today:
      Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s majority leader, said the chamber will vote on the immigration bill Wednesday.
      Joe Biden remains supportive of the immigration proposal, saying, “doing nothing is not an option”.
      The special election to replace George Santos in a New York swing district could turn into a proxy battle over immigration reforms.
      James Lankford, the Oklahoma Republican who was his party’s negotiator in the immigration talks, said voting down the proposal would amount to hypocrisy.
      Migrant aid groups as well as a major union spoke out against the immigration policy changes.
      The Senate’s Democratic majority leader Chuck Schumer said the chamber will vote on the bipartisan immigration policy bill Wednesday.The legislation also includes military aid for Ukraine and Israel, and is supported by Joe Biden, as well as the Senate’s Republican minority leader Mitch McConnell. But its prospects in the House appear dire, after speaker Mike Johnson said the legislation will not be considered. Meanwhile, a growing number of Senate Republicans as well as some Democrats have also spoken out against the bill.In a speech on the chamber’s floor, Schumer said Wednesday’s vote “will be the most important that the Senate has taken in a very long time”, and blamed attacks from Donald Trump and others for undermining the legislation’s prospects.“The $64,000 question now, is whether or not senators can drown out the outside noise, drown out people like Donald Trump who want chaos, and do the right thing for America,” Schumer said.“I urge senators of goodwill on both sides of the aisle to do the right thing and turn the chaos out. History is going to look over our shoulders and ask if the Senate rose to the occasion. We must, we must act.”Asked by reporters what he expected to happen next with the immigration policy bill, Joe Biden said: “Hopefully passage in the Senate.”The president is today in Las Vegas, where he met with unionized culinary workers. He’s heading back to Washington DC later in the day.Non-profits working with asylum seekers and migrants have also come out against the Senate’s immigration reform bill.Marisa Limón Garza, executive director of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, an El Paso-Texas based organization that provides legal services to migrants, said:
      Closing the border, creating a new ‘metering’ system, and debilitating our asylum laws will do nothing to address the underlying issues that force vulnerable children and families to flee their homes, seeking safety and a better life. Although the bill contains small silver linings, they come at too high a cost.
      Ayuda, which provides legal services to low-income immigrants in Washington DC and surrounding states, said:
      Amongst many of the draconian changes proposed, this legislation would create a new authority, with narrow exceptions, that would allow officials to summarily expel asylum seekers. It would also restrict screening standards for asylum seekers and expedite asylum claims to the extent that many will not be able to access counsel or adequately represent themselves.
      The Service Employees International Union opposed the bill as too extreme, with president Mary Kay Henry saying:
      Compromise is almost always necessary to achieve great goals, but the extreme Republicans who pushed this deal were never going to give up any of the items on their longstanding anti-immigrant wish list. From Trump on down, they have admitted that they see chaos as politically beneficial. We can support our international allies fighting for democracy without setting a dangerous precedent that does not reflect our values. Any Republican arguments to the contrary are in service of a political agenda and not of working people
      It’s not just members of Congress who are thinking about immigration. The Guardian’s Maanvi Singh reports that Latino voters in Nevada, a swing state where a Democratic senator is up for re-election in November, are also watching closely to see how Washington handles the issue:In East Las Vegas last week, there were few signs that Nevada was gearing up for the first presidential election contest in the western US, happening in mere days.The neighbourhood, the heart of the city’s Latino community, was bereft of lawn signs and campaign banners. There were no clipboard-wielding canvassers crowding its wide, palm-tree-lined streets. An occasional ad on the local Spanish-language radio station, encouraging listeners to vote, was one of the few signs that the presidential primaries were coming up.“Will I vote in the primaries? Yeah, maybe,” said Ruby Romero, 38, who owns a boutique in Vegas’s arts district. But, she admitted, she had almost forgotten about it.This week’s elections aren’t exactly competitive, and will inevitably move Joe Biden and Donald Trump toward a rematch in November.But in an election year that will determine the future of abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, the chances of meaningful climate action, the shape of the economy and perhaps even the fate of American democracy, voters here appeared particularly demoralised.Latinos make up one in five voters in the state, and in 2020 about 60% of Latino voters backed Joe Biden. It remains unclear, however, whether Democrats will be able to energise enough voters this year to replicate that feat.Former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley, the last major Republican presidential contender whose name is not Donald Trump, joined the ranks of the objectors to the Senate’s immigration proposal:Perhaps the most telling part of her comments is right at the beginning, where she says “I don’t think you wait till an election to pass a border deal because we need to get something done immediately.” Republicans have demanded tighter border security for years, but now that a presidential election is nine months away, Haley appears to be suggesting that the party is wise to turn down the deal and hope that one of their own is elected in November.The Republican senator for South Carolina Lindsey Graham has thanked James Lankford for his role in negotiating the border bill, and said he is looking forward to making the bill “stronger”.In a statement posted to social media, Graham said he is “open-minded” on steps on how to improve the bill, adding that “something this significant cannot be rushed and jammed through”. He added:
      I am hopeful that Senator Schumer will allow an open amendment process to occur. If not, then the bill will die because of process.
      Nikki Haley raised $16.5m in January, her biggest monthly fundraising total to date, her presidential campaign said on Monday.The former South Carolina governor and last major challenger to Donald Trump brought in 69,274 new donors and $11.7m from “grassroots supporters” last month, the campaign said.The influx of cash comes amid growing calls from fellow Republicans that she withdraw from the race in order for the party to unite around a single candidate.“While Donald Trump blows $50 million of his donors’ money on his legal cases, Nikki Haley has been focused on talking to voters and saving our country,” Haley spokesperson Olivia Perez-Cubas said in a statement, reported by the Washington Post.
      Hundreds of thousands of Americans are supporting Nikki’s campaign because they don’t want two grumpy old men and all their chaos, confusion, and grievances. They want a strong, conservative leader who will save this country.
      Democratic presidential challenger Dean Phillips defended continuing his longshot campaign despite a disappointing third-place finish in Saturday’s South Carolina primary, saying it was “a mission of principle”.The Minnesota congressman’s remarks about remaining in the race for the Oval Office came Sunday during an appearance on MSNBC’s The Weekend. Another guest on the show asked Phillips “what the hell are you doing” and “what’s being served here” with his presidential run, especially after Biden captured 96% of the votes cast in the previous day’s South Carolina primary. Phillips collected less than 2% of the vote and finished behind Williamson, a self-help author.“So what does your path look like at this point and why?” former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele said to Phillips. Steele said Phillips, 55, was also prolonging narratives about the 81-year-old Biden’s age.“I know tradition dictates that you always protect the incumbent,” Phillips replied. But Phillips said challenging Biden was “a mission of principle”. He added:
      Someone’s got to do it.
      Phillips said he was also concerned that Biden’s unpopularity with the electorate could cost the Democrats the White House if he is nominated for another term in the fall.“We’re dumbfounded,” Phillips said.
      Yes, he’s got a commanding lead in the primaries – I get it. But look at the numbers. He is in a terrible position.
      Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer has urged Speaker Mike Johnson to take up the border bill to the House floor.“I’m confident – hopeful is the right word,” Schumer told MSNBC this morning when asked about the bill’s chances of passing in the Senate.
      This is hard. And our Republican senators – we need a bunch of them – are under a lot of pressure from right-wing Trump part of the party.
      He insisted that the bill would pass if it were brought to a vote. He addressed Johnson directly, urging him to “do the right thing.” He said:
      You know what the right thing to do is. You know we need to fix our border. You know that it has to be bipartisan. The bill that you passed didn’t get a single Democratic vote in the House or the Senate. How are you going to get anything done?
      A bill to enact hardline immigration policies and send aid to Israel and Ukraine’s militaries is not even 24 hours old, but is already facing opposition that appears insurmountable. The House’s Republican leaders called on the Senate to reject the measure, and said that even if the chamber passes the bill, they will not hold a vote on it. Back in the Senate, an increasing number of Republican lawmakers are coming out against the legislation. But the worst news of all for the nascent legislation may have arrived from GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, who called it “horrendous”.Here’s what else has happened today:
      Joe Biden remains supportive of the immigration bill, saying, “doing nothing is not an option”.
      The special election to replace George Santos in a New York swing district could turn into a proxy battle over immigration reforms.
      James Lankford, the Oklahoma Republican who was his party’s negotiator in the immigration talks, said voting down the proposal would amount to hypocrisy.
      White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has called on Congress to pass the immigration policy compromise, noting that its passage is tied to approving aid to Ukraine and Israel:Joe Biden also supports the beleaguered bill. After its release on Sunday, he said:
      If you believe, as I do, that we must secure the border now, doing nothing is not an option. Working with my administration, the United States Senate has done the hard work it takes to reach a bipartisan agreement. Now, House Republicans have to decide. Do they want to solve the problem? Or do they want to keep playing politics with the border? I’ve made my decision. I’m ready to solve the problem. I’m ready to secure the border. And so are the American people. I know we have our divisions at home but we cannot let partisan politics get in the way of our responsibilities as a great nation. I refuse to let that happen. In moments like these, we have to remember who we are. We’re the United States of America and there is nothing, nothing beyond our capacity if we do it together.I urge Congress to come together and swiftly pass this bipartisan agreement. Get it to my desk so I can sign it into law immediately. More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Ilhan Omar speech proved to be mistranslated but outrage continues spread

      by

      A week after a mistranslated clip of Ilhan Omar sparked outrage online, some far-right House Republicans are still following through with calls for the progressive lawmaker to be censured. And the repercussions of the misinformation extend beyond the country.The Republican representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, has gone furthest in her response to the clip, calling Omar a “foreign agent in our government”. Greene, a leading supporter of Donald Trump, who also attempted to censure the Michigan Democrat Rashida Tlaib in November, called Omar a “terrorist sympathizer” on X last week, adding: “Somalian first. Muslim second. She never mentions America.”Greene said she would introduce a censure bill which could see the Minnesota Democrat removed from the remaining committees she serves, a year after Omar was forced out of the foreign affairs committee by Republicans for her criticism of Israel. The bill was on the House agenda Monday, though it is unlikely to move past political stunt.Omar, a Somali American congresswoman, had been filmed delivering a speech at a hotel in Minneapolis on 27 January where she addressed members of her constituency on a recent agreement reached between the breakaway Somali region of Somaliland and Ethiopia in early January, which bypassed Somalia’s federal government in Mogadishu.The preliminary deal, termed a memorandum of understanding, would see Somaliland lease Ethiopia a naval base on the Gulf of Aden and grant it widened access to its Berbera port. In exchange, Somaliland officials claim, Ethiopia would become the first country to recognise its independence unilaterally from Somalia.In an interview with the Observer, an adviser to Somalia’s president warned that Somalia was ready for war with Ethiopia if it doesn’t reverse course on the deal.A video of the speech was circulated soon after on X by Rhoda Elmi, Somaliland’s deputy foreign minister. The video’s translation wrongly claimed Omar had said she was “Somalian first and Muslim second”.Mocking the faulty translation, Omar pointed out that the demonym for someone from Somalia is Somali, not Somalian. “If you are gonna talk about us, at least try to get our ethnicity right,” she posted on X.The video, which has been viewed at least 4.5m times, also misquoted Omar as saying she would “liberate” Somali territories, which were “occupied” by neighbouring Kenya and Ethiopia, a polarising issue among Somalis, some of whom weren’t satisfied with the post-colonial settlement when the Horn of Africa was partitioned by Italy, France and the UK.Elmi, Somaliland’s deputy foreign minister, took umbrage at the Minnesota lawmaker’s purported remarks about her position on the memorandum and Somalia’s relations with its neighbours, accusing her of “ethno-racist rhetoric”.Omar defended her comments in the days that followed, saying the subtitles in the video were “not only slanted but completely off”, expressing her support for the government of Somalia, where she was born, as it finds itself embroiled in standoff with Ethiopia.Omar vowed to thwart the deal, which the US has also expressed concerns over, telling people at the gathering in Minneapolis: “For as long as I am in Congress, no one will take over the seas belonging to the nation of Somalia and the United States will not support others who seek to steal from us.”Several Somalis also posted on X about the errors in the subtitles, including the translator and author Aziz Mahdi, who objected to Omar’s remarks but said: “The translation offered fails to accurately convey the essence of her talk, leading to a distorted understanding of her message. So don’t cite it.”The Minnesota Reformer, a Minnesota-based news outlet, worked with two independent Somali translators who recorded Omar as saying: “We are people who know that they are Somali and Muslim”, not that she was “Somalians first” as the video suggested.Abdirashid Hashi, a former Somali government minister, called on Elmi to retract the video and issue an apology.Despite attempts to clarify Omar’s message, several Republicans and rightwing figures seized upon the video without verifying the misleading translation, to launch a fresh attack on Omar, including Elon Musk, whose own ties with third countries were questioned by Joe Biden. On his X account, Musk posted: “The United States or another country. Pick one.”Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor, called for Omar’s denaturalization and deportation, while Tom Emmer, the House majority whip, decried her comments as a “slap in the face” to her constituents and called for an ethics investigation into her remarks.The Greene censure bill could be a further thorn in the congresswoman’s side, but Omar shrugged it off on Thursday. “I truly do not care about what that insane woman does,” she said, according to Politico.And her party is standing behind her. Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, criticised the move as a “frivolous censure resolution, designed to inflame and castigate and further divide us”. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      John Fetterman: progressive senator perhaps not that progressive after all

      by

      There was a time when John Fetterman, the rough-and-ready Pennsylvania senator, was a budding star of the left.Endorsed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in his 2022 Democratic race, Fetterman had supported the democratic socialist Bernie Sanders for president in 2016. On the campaign trail, Fetterman said he would fight for an increased minimum wage, while he had previously suggested he wanted to see the implementation of universal healthcare.But in recent months, Fetterman has come under attack from the left for his enthusiastic support for Israel and continued US funding to its war in Gaza. The criticism has come alongside praise from Republicans for Fetterman’s chiding of some Democrats over what he has called a “crisis at our border”.The growing distance between Fetterman and the left of his party came to a head in December.“I’m not a progressive, I’m just a regular Democrat,” Fetterman wrote on X that same month.View image in fullscreenBut although Fetterman did not openly embrace the progressive designation in his 2022 Senate race, people on X noticed an inconsistency: Fetterman’s post was flagged with readers’ context pointing to his previous posts where he described himself as a “progressive Democrat”.In the years before he was elected, Fetterman offered enough evidence that he was to the left of the party to leave supporters feeling short-changed.As lieutenant governor of Pennsylvania – he was elected in 2018 after running as a progressive – he pushed for clemency in some cases where people had been sentenced to life imprisonment. When he was mayor of Braddock, the town of 2,000 people in western Pennsylvania, he defied state law by marrying same-sex couples in his home.That history, coupled with his frequent, fierce defenses of Pennsylvania’s election system on TV in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, inspired progressives to support him.View image in fullscreenFetterman never fully fitted all aspects of the progressive mantle. As a candidate in 2022, he spoke enthusiastically about his support for Israel, but his actions since the 7 October Hamas attacks, and Israel’s subsequent response, coupled with his adjustment on border issues, has brought political scrutiny.It has prompted gossip, too. Fetterman’s wife, Gisele Fetterman, who became a prominent surrogate for him during the Senate campaign after Fetterman had a stroke, deleted her social media accounts in January.Fetterman had spoken of his wife’s immigration story during his campaigns. Gisele Fetterman moved to the US when she was seven as an undocumented immigrant with her mother and brother, before acquiring a green card in 2004 and US citizenship in 2009.That backstory prompted rebuke after Fetterman told the rightwing New York Post “there is a crisis” of migration.“We have a crisis at our border, and it can’t be controversial that we should have a secure border,” he said last month.Gisele Fetterman has since returned to social media, explaining her absence by saying she was “bored of it” – and the pair have posted pictures of themselves together, but the critics have not stopped.View image in fullscreenThe events of January 26 didn’t help, when Fetterman appeared to mock people who were protesting against the killing of 26,000 people in Gaza by waving a giant Israel flag at them. (The New York Post gleefully reported that Fetterman, a “progressive-hating Democrat”, “never misses an opportunity to mock” the left.)There were always some distinctions between Fetterman and his more progressive colleagues, however.While he was endorsed by Ocasio-Cortez in his Senate race, he said during the campaign that he would not be a member of the “Squad”, the group of progressive Democrats in Congress. When he was running for Senate, he was praised by the left for his statements on reforming the criminal justice system, but criticized for pledging his support for fracking.He had given fair warning, too, about where he might stand on Israel.View image in fullscreen“Whenever I’m in a situation to be called on to take up the cause of strengthening and enhancing the security of Israel or deepening our relationship between the United States and Israel, I’m going to lean in,” Fetterman told Jewish Insider in 2022.Still, the apparent move away from being a perceived leftwing ally has plenty upset, and Fetterman is doing little to soothe his former supporters.As people have watched with increasing horror as Israel has bombarded Gaza, Fetterman told Semafor in January that “Israel is really a beacon of the kind of values, the American values and progressive ideals, that you want to see”.And as Republicans have called for severe restrictions on migrants crossing the border reform, Fetterman has defended working with the Republican party.If Fetterman was once a progressive, it seems that he definitely is not any longer. More

    • 225 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Being mean will only rally her fans’: Taylor Swift is winning whether she backs Biden or thumps Trump

      by

      The 2024 US presidential election campaign, lacking any defining story to tell and with a prevailing lack of enthusiasm in a rematch of candidates in their eighth and ninth decades, last week settled on Taylor Swift – and an endorsement she may or may not make – as its defining obsession.On one side, expectations emanating from the Biden re-election camp were that the 34-year-old superstar would cast her influence over tens of thousands of Swifties their way; on the other, furious Republicans who at first sought to denigrate and wrap her in conspiracy theories, and later thought better of the strategy.Rolling Stone reported that allies of Donald Trump were pledging a “holy war” against Swift if she sides with the Democrats in November. Some theorised that the National Football League is rigging games for Swift’s Kansas City Chiefs boyfriend, Travis Kelce, to sweeten the Democrats endorsement hopes.Fox News host Jesse Watters claimed that the Shake It Off hitmaker had been converted into a psychological operations asset four years ago. The Pentagon hit back, saying: “As for this conspiracy theory, we are going to shake it off.”However, not all Republicans are on board with the attacks on Swift. “I don’t know what the obsession is,” presidential candidate Nikki Haley told CNN. “Taylor Swift is allowed to have a boyfriend. Taylor Swift is a good artist. I have taken my daughter to Taylor Swift concerts. To have a conspiracy theory of all of this is bizarre. Nobody knows who she’s going to endorse, but I can’t believe that’s overtaken our national politics.”While many are preoccupied with whether Swift can cross nine time zones to make it back from an Eras Tour concert in Tokyo to see her boyfriend play in next weekend’s Chiefs-49ers Super Bowl in Las Vegas (she can), the intensity of political questions surrounding Swift mirrors the febrile nature of the election 10 months away.View image in fullscreenDoubtless, Swift could offer politicos lessons in values-based messaging, audience understanding and building genuine connections with fans or voters. Last week, Trump argued that he is more popular than her, even if the values-based narratives he presents are often more aligned with self-victimisation than self-empowerment.A survey last year by Morning Consult found 53% of American adults are Swift fans. There are almost as many men as women, almost as many Republicans as Democrats, including baby boomers, millennials, Gen Xers and young adults from Gen Z. In other words, a constituency that could make or break a national political campaign.The recent Republican primary in New Hampshire indicated Trump’s weaknesses with women, who make up much of Swift’s fanbase. But recent polling, too, has shown that Biden’s ratings and support among young voters has dropped and he’s now closely tied in the 18-34 demographic with Trump.“They’re not crazy about Biden,” says Democratic party consultant Hank Sheinkopf. “If they turn out at all, it may be to oppose Trump and with no intensity at all. But if you’re having trouble with younger people, and you need to do something, what better way to cure the problem, or at least show that you are sensitive to it, than to get Taylor Swift out?”David Allan, professor of marketing at Saint Joseph’s University in Philadelphia, who teaches a Swift-focused course, says the Republicans will have to navigate the singer.“Republicans need to be careful with Taylor because she’s extremely popular with all-demographic women and some men. You don’t want to appear to be mean because it will only rally her fans,” he says. Conversely, attacking Swift could bring its own counter-intuitive, culture/class war rewards.“You know she’s having some effect if Fox News is attacking her,” Allan says. “For Trump, having Taylor Swift against him gives him something to talk about.” A salient lesson comes from the Dixie Chicks – now the Chicks – who wrecked their careers before the Iraq war when singer Natalie Maines said from a London stage they were ashamed to be that President George Bush was from Texas.In Swift’s documentary,Miss Americana, her father fretted that an overt political position could put her in the same position as the Chicks. But Swift is now believed to be too big to be commercially vulnerable.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAs the music industry newsletter Hits Daily Double put it: “Her domination of the marketplace from every conceivable angle is next-level. But she just seems to get bigger, and to rule every area she enters – the rerecorded albums, the massive tour, the blockbuster movie of the tour, the NFL games where her mere presence changes the center of gravity.”Whether or not Swift goes two-feet in with Biden, Allan adds: “It’s getting to that point in the 60s that if Bob Dylan or Joni Mitchell didn’t speak out about the Vietnam war it would hurt them with their fans. If she doesn’t do something, even if just to help to get out the vote, it will hurt her authenticity.” In September, Vote.org reported more than 35,000 new political registrations, a 23% jump over last year, after Swift urged her 280 million Instagram followers to sign up.Swift, who was politically cautious until she endorsed Tennessee Democratic senate candidate Phil Bredesen in 2018 (he lost) and then Biden in 2020, has not shown any interest in being adopted by political factions. A 5,000-word New York Times essay that claimed her as more than just queer-friendly was criticised for making overreaching assumptions.View image in fullscreenBut US candidates often seek show business endorsements. “The tradition goes back at least 60 years when [John F] Kennedy brought out Sinatra, Sammy Davis Jr, Judy Garland and others to go stump for them, and country music stars, who have come out mostly for Republicans,” Sheinkopf notes.Other musical endorsements include the Allman Brothers Band and Lynyrd Skynyrd for Jimmy Carter. But musicians including Madonna, Bruce Springsteen and Lady Gaga couldn’t push Hillary Clinton over the line in 2016, and it hasn’t hurt Trump to use Village People’s gay paradise anthem YMCA as a walk-off song, which crowds greatly appreciate.Swift might not even need to formally endorse Biden, Sheinkopf adds. “Even to put it out as rumour makes Biden look less like he’s 81 years old and more like he’s listening to younger people, their subcultural desires and what they feel about things.”For Swift, he says: “She gets to become a decision-maker, and an even larger figure in American and international life. Her public persona becomes as important as her music and that means she’ll make a lot more money.” More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      US launches airstrikes on dozens of sites in Iraq and Syria, say officials – live

      by

      US Central Command has said its forces conducted airstrikes in Iraq and Syria against Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force and affiliated militia groups.The airstrikes were carried out at 4pm eastern time on Friday, it said.It said US military forces struck more than 85 targets including “command and control operations, centers, intelligence centers, rockets, and missiles, and unmanned aired vehicle storages, and logistics and munition supply chain facilities” belonging to militia groups and their IRGC sponsors.The US had warned it will carry out a series of reprisal strikes launched over more than one day in response to the drone strike over the weekend.The US defense secretary, Lloyd Austin, did not specify the timing or precise location of strikes during Pentagon press conference on Thursday, but said:
      We will have a multi-tier response and we have the ability to respond a number of times depending on the situation … We look to hold the people responsible for this accountable and we also seek to take away capability as we go forward.
      Austin insisted that a lot of thought in Washington had gone into ensuring that the US response did not trigger a major escalation.The secretary of defense stressed the US was not at war with Iran and Washington did not know if Tehran was aware of the specific drone strikes on Sunday mounted by what he described as the axis of resistance.Three rounds of airstrikes targeted Iranian militia positions in parts of Deir ez-Zor in eastern Syria, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.There have been casualties as a result, NBC reported that the organisation said.The US launched an air assault on dozens of sites in Iraq and Syria used by Iranian-backed militias, in an opening salvo of retaliation for the drone strike that killed three US service members in Jordan last weekend, officials have told Associated Press.The initial strikes by manned and unmanned aircraft were hitting command and control headquarters, ammunition storage and other facilities, according to AP.US officials have told Reuters that the strikes targeted facilities linked to Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and the militias it backs.The US has begun a wave of retaliatory airstrikes targeting militants in Iraq and Syria, according to reports, in response to a drone attack in northern Jordan which killed three American service personnel and wounded dozens more.The strikes, reported by Associated Press and Reuters, come as Joe Biden joined grieving families at Dover air force base in Delaware on Friday as they honored the three US military personnel killed in the drone attack in Jordan last weekend.The attack on Tower 22 was the first deadly strike against US troops since the Israel-Hamas war erupted in October.Responsibility was claimed by the Iranian-backed umbrella group Islamic Resistance, and the US has made no attempt to disguise its belief that Iran was ultimately responsible. Tehran has insisted it had nothing to do with the attack.Biden told reporters earlier this week that he held Iran responsible “in the sense that they’re supplying the weapons” to Kataib Hezbollah, the most powerful member of the Islamic Resistance group. However, the president added:
      I don’t think we need a wider war in the Middle East. That’s not what I’m looking for. More

    • 250 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Fani Willis criticizes ‘wild and reckless’ speculation in conflict of interest claims by former Trump staffer – as it happened

      by

      Despite allegations that prosecutor the Nathan Wade was overpaid for his work on the Georgia election subversion case, his pay was in line with his experience and the complexity of work he did, the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, writes in a court filing.And, contrary to any assertions otherwise, any pay Wade made in the case did not personally benefit Willis, she said. They don’t share any joint accounts or expenses. When they’ve traveled together, they’ve split costs “roughly evenly”.“Both are professionals with substantial income; neither is financially reliant on the other,” the filing says.Willis also says Wade’s employment complied with applicable state and local laws and payments received the proper approvals.The former Trump staffer Michael Roman’s filings alleging the personal relationship should disqualify Willis have engaged in “wild and reckless speculation” and attempts to subpoena a wide net of people connected to Willis and Wade for this purpose is an “extraordinary level of invasion of privacy”, Willis wrote.She wants the motions to disqualify her from the case to be denied by the court “without further spectacle”.Friday afternoon saw the public admission of a relationship between the Georgia prosecutor Fani Willis and the special prosecutor Nathan Wade, which will undoubtedly became a conservative rallying point to discredit the election subversion case against former president Donald Trump.Here’s what happened today:
      Willis and Wade confirmed for the first time on Friday that they had a romantic relationship, but denied any wrongdoing. Willis said she should not be disqualified from the case.
      The response comes after the former Trump staffer Michael Roman’s filings attempting to get Willis booted from the case based on what Willis called “wild and reckless speculation” and an “extraordinary level of invasion of privacy”.
      Trump responded on his social media platform, Truth Social, deflecting from the merits of the case against him: “THAT MEANS THAT THIS SCAM IS TOTALLY DISCREDITED & OVER!”
      Legal experts say the response from Willis and Wade, in which both say they did not share expenses and weren’t financially entangled, should go a long way toward staving off any removals from the case.
      But perceptions of conflicts of interest will play a role in how the case is viewed now, and conservatives will continue to bring up the relationship while the case continues.
      Separately, Willis has been subpoenaed by the chair of the House judiciary committee and Trump ally, Jim Jordan, to produce documents related to the use of federal grant money in prosecutions and the potential misuse of those funds.
      Outside the Willis/Wade/Trump issue, today’s news:
      A federal judge in DC postponed Donald Trump’s March trial on charges of plotting to overturn election as an appeal by Trump claiming immunity from prosecution for actions taken as president goes through the courts. No new date is set.
      The US jobs market defied fears of a downturn again in January with employers adding 353,000 new jobs over the month, the labor department announced on Friday.
      Joe Biden and his wife, Jill, honored the three US service members who were killed in a drone strike in northern Jordan.
      Stories to watch this weekend:
      The lead Democratic negotiator, Senator Chris Murphy, has confirmed that the text of the long-awaited border security bill will be released this weekend and voted on next week.
      The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, will travel to the Middle East from Sunday to Thursday to work for the release of hostages still held by Hamas and to secure a humanitarian pause, the state department said, according to Reuters.
      Democrats will hold their first official primary contest in South Carolina on Saturday, expected to be an easy win for Biden.
      One last bit of news on Trump’s trials this afternoon:A federal judge in DC postponed Donald Trump’s March trial on charges of plotting to overturn election, the Associated Press reports. No new date is set.Joe Biden and the first lady, Jill Biden, joined grieving families at Dover Air Force Base on a gray, chilly Friday to honor the three American service members killed in a drone attack in Jordan, the Associated Press reports.The Bidens met privately with the families before the roughly 15-minute solemn ritual, called a dignified transfer, that has become relatively uncommon in recent years as the US has withdrawn from conflicts abroad.An air force chaplain offered a short prayer before white-gloved members of the army carry team transferred the flag-draped cases holding the soldiers’ remains from a C-5 Galaxy military transport aircraft to a waiting vehicle. The carry team after placing the last of three cases in the vehicle offered a final salute to the soldiers. The US president, with his right hand over his heart, looked on somberly.The ceremony came as the US military prepared a response to the deadly drone attack that American officials say was carried out by the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, an umbrella group of Iran-backed militias that includes the group Kataib Hezbollah. The White House has said the retaliation will not be a “one-off” strike.The service members killed Sunday were all from Georgia – Sgt William Jerome Rivers of Carrollton, Sgt Kennedy Sanders of Waycross and Sgt Breonna Moffett of Savannah. Sanders and Moffett were posthumously promoted to sergeant rank.Democrats will kick off their primary calendar officially tomorrow, 3 February, with the South Carolina contest.Republicans aren’t holding their presidential election in the state until later this month, but that didn’t stop Nikki Haley, the Republican from South Carolina, from taking aim at the Democrats.Haley is running a mobile billboard in Orangeburg focused on vice-president Kamala Harris. Harris is not running for president, but the billboard calls attention to her position as second in line for the role.“We’re going to have a woman president,” the billboard says. “It will either be Nikki Haley, or it will be Kamala Harris. Trump can’t beat Biden, and Biden won’t finish his term.”Haley campaign spokesperson Olivia Perez-Cubas said the billboard highlights the choice between the two women, saying “a vote for Donald Trump is a vote for Kamala Harris”.The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, will travel to the Middle East from Sunday to Thursday to work for the release of hostages still held by Hamas and to secure a humanitarian pause, the state department said, according to Reuters.The trip will include stops in Israel, the West Bank, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Qatar, it said.Some legal experts say the affidavit from the special prosecutor Nathan Wade and filing from the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, where both say they did not share expenses and weren’t financially entangled, should go a long way toward staving off any removals from the case.But, as the Guardian’s Sam Levine has reported, there’s still an issue of a perception of conflict. Trump and his allies are sure to continue this line of attack on Willis and use it to discredit the case overall, regardless of any dismissals.The former president Donald Trump, the main target of the Georgia prosecutor Fani Willis’s extensive election subversion case, has commented on Willis’s admission that she had a personal relationship with prosecutor Nathan Wade.On social media platform Truth Social, Trump repeated the allegations that Willis’s hiring of Wade enriched her personally, a claim Willis has denied.“By going after the most high level person, and the Republican Nominee, she was able to get her ‘lover’ much more money, almost a Million Dollars, than she would be able to get for the prosecution of any other person or individual. THAT MEANS THAT THIS SCAM IS TOTALLY DISCREDITED & OVER!”In an affidavit included in Fani Willis’s court filing about the alleged conflict of interest motion, the prosecutor Nathan Wade detailed how he came on board to help with the Georgia election subversion investigation and his personal relationship with Willis.Wade said the role of special prosecutor paid well below his typical hourly rate – $250 an hour, with a capped number of hours, compared to his normal $550 an hour for previous government legal work. He said he initially tried to help Willis find other lawyers willing to do the work, but many had “concerns related to violent rhetoric and potential safety issues for their families”.None of the money he’s earned working the case has benefitted Willis, he wrote in the affidavit. They don’t share expenses and have never lived together.“At times I have made and purchased travel for District Attorney Willis and myself from my personal funds. At other times District Attorney Willis has made and purchased travel for she and I from her personal funds,” he wrote.Despite allegations that prosecutor the Nathan Wade was overpaid for his work on the Georgia election subversion case, his pay was in line with his experience and the complexity of work he did, the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, writes in a court filing.And, contrary to any assertions otherwise, any pay Wade made in the case did not personally benefit Willis, she said. They don’t share any joint accounts or expenses. When they’ve traveled together, they’ve split costs “roughly evenly”.“Both are professionals with substantial income; neither is financially reliant on the other,” the filing says.Willis also says Wade’s employment complied with applicable state and local laws and payments received the proper approvals.The former Trump staffer Michael Roman’s filings alleging the personal relationship should disqualify Willis have engaged in “wild and reckless speculation” and attempts to subpoena a wide net of people connected to Willis and Wade for this purpose is an “extraordinary level of invasion of privacy”, Willis wrote.She wants the motions to disqualify her from the case to be denied by the court “without further spectacle”.We’re reading through the court filing from Fani Willis, the Georgia prosecutor, now. The full document posted today can be found online here.Some interesting context:In the filing, Willis points out two interpersonal relationships between defense attorneys working for those charged in the sprawling Trump election case.The attorney for the defendant Ray Smith and the attorney for the defendant Kenneth Chesebro are “publicly known to be in a personal relationship”, the filing says. And the two counsels for Jenna Ellis are “married law partners”.The state didn’t try to make these relationships a conflict-of-interest issue in the case because these kinds of relationships don’t constitute a legal conflict. Until Michael Roman filed a motion alleging the relationship between Willis and Wade was worthy of disqualification, “the private lives of the attorney participants in this trial was not a topic of discussion”, the filing says.The Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, and Nathan Wade, a special prosecutor working on the case against Donald Trump and 14 other defendants, confirmed for the first time on Friday that they had a romantic relationship, but denied any wrongdoing and Willis said she should not be disqualified from the case.“In 2022, District Attorney Willis and I developed a personal relationship in addition to our professional association and friendship,” Wade wrote in an affidavit attached to a motion Willis filed in court on Friday. He was hired to work on the Trump case in 2021.Willis wrote in a filing she had no personal or financial conflict of interest that “constitutes a legal basis for disqualification”. She urged Judge Scott McAfee, who is overseeing the case, to dismiss a request to disqualify her without a hearing, which is scheduled for 15 February. She wrote:
      While the allegations raised in the various motions are salacious and garnered the media attention they were designed to obtain, none provide this Court with any basis upon which to order the relief they seek.
      Michael Roman, a seasoned Republican operative and one of the defendants in the wide ranging racketeering case against Trump and associates for trying to overturn the election, is seeking Willis’s disqualification. He alleges that Roman used money he earned from his work in Willis’s office on the case to pay for vacations for the two of them.The Biden-Harris campaign has said the strong job figures released today should be a reminder to Americans what the economy looked liked under his predecessor.Donald Trump “oversaw the worst jobs record since the Great Depression and his only economic ‘accomplishment’ was giving billionaires and corporations tax handouts at the expense of middle-class families”, the campaign’s rapid response director, Ammar Moussa, said in a statement.The statement continues:
      Now, [Trump is] rooting for the economy to crash because he thinks it’ll help him politically – but that’s exactly what will happen if he’s able to regain power. We know because that’s what happened last time.
      Joe Biden and his wife, Jill, have arrived at Dover air force base to honor the three US service members who were killed in a drone strike in northern Jordan.The Bidens arrived at the base to witness the transfer of the remains of the troops killed in Sunday’s assault. They have been named by the Pentagon as Sgt William Jerome Rivers, 46, Specialist Kennedy Sanders, 24, and Specialist Breonna Alexsondria Moffett, 23.Defense secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen CQ Brown, chair of the joint chiefs of staff, joined the president and first lady for the transfer in Dover.All three of the troops who died were army reservists from 926th Engineer Brigade, based in the US state of Georgia: Rivers was from Carrollton, Sanders from Waycross and Moffett from Savannah.The deaths marked the first time American military personnel have been killed by hostile fire in the Middle East since the start of the Israel-Hamas war on 7 October.Only a quarter of Americans say they feel the economy is starting to recover from the problems of the past few years, according to a new poll released as new figures show the US job market added 353,000 new jobs in January, defying fears of a downturn.The CNN poll released today shows 26% of Americans say they feel the economy is beginning to recover, up from 20% last summer and 17% in December 2022.But nearly half, 48%, say they believe the US economy is still in a downturn, citing inflation and the cost of living, as well as expenses such as food and housing.Overall, more than half, 55%, of Americans say they feel Joe Biden’s policies have worsened the country’s economic conditions. The poll found split views along partisan lines: of those who say the economy is recovering, nearly three-quarters say Biden policies have helped. Out of those who say things are getting worse, 83% blame the president’s policies.The lead Democratic negotiator, Senator Chris Murphy, has confirmed that the text of the long-awaited border security bill will be released this weekend and voted on next week.The Democratic congressman Dan Goldman has said he is “disgusted” by the news that the House judiciary committee has subpoenaed Fani Willis.A statement from the New York congressman reads:
      I am utterly disgusted but sadly not surprised by Chairman Jordan’s latest attempt to subvert our country’s rule of law by weaponizing Congress’s authority to interfere in an ongoing criminal prosecution for nakedly political purposes.
      In his blatant attempt to save Donald Trump, his party’s indicted criminal defendant presidential nominee, from legal peril, Chairman Jordan has yet again abused the authority of the Judiciary Committee to attempt to undermine a state prosecution.
      Make no mistake, this is the true ‘weaponization of the federal government,’ unlike Chairman Jordan’s Select Subcommittee of the same name in which he has wasted countless hours peddling baseless conspiracy theories to no avail.
      The back and forth between Jim Jordan and Fani Willis began last year with correspondence Jordan sent on 24 August, the day Donald Trump stood for a mugshot at the Fulton county jail.Jordan’s letter suggested Willis had subjected Trump to “politically motivated state investigations and prosecutions due to the policies they advanced as president”, and that any coordination her office had with federal prosecutors may have been an improperly partisan use of federal money.Willis’s scorching response in subsequent replies said the inquiry offends principles of state sovereignty and the separation of powers, that it interferes with a criminal investigation, that Trump is not immune to prosecution simply because he is a candidate for public office and that Jordan himself was “ignorant of the US constitution”.The Republican-led committee opened a formal investigation into the Fulton county prosecutor’s office in December.Willis has been under fire over the last month after allegations of an improper relationship with the special prosecutor Nathan Wade, whom she hired to work on the Trump case in Fulton county.Jordan sent a letter to Nathan Wade on 12 January, asking for his cooperation in his committee’s inquiry into “politically motivated investigations and prosecutions and the potential misuse of federal funds”. The letter notes Wade’s billings for meetings with the federal January 6 Committee, which the letter characterizes as partisan. The letter states:
      There are open questions about whether federal funds were used by [Fulton county] to finance your prosecution.
      Willis responded on Wade’s behalf twelve days later.“Your letter is simply a restatement of demands that you have made in past correspondence for access to evidence in a pending Georgia criminal prosecution,” she said in the reply.
      As I said previously, your requests implicate significant, well-recognized confidentiality interests related to an ongoing criminal matter. Your requests violate principles of separation of powers and federalism, as well as respect for the legal protections provided to attorney work product in ongoing litigation.
      The US House judiciary committee subpoenaed Fani Willis, the Fulton county district attorney, for records related to the use of federal grant money in prosecutions and the potential misuse of those funds.The subpoena escalates conflict between Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican representative, judiciary committee chairman and an ardent defender of Donald Trump, and Willis, whose office charged the former president and 18 others with 41 counts for interfering with a Georgia election and illegally attempting to undo Biden’s victory in Georgia.Willis responded to the subpoena on Friday:
      These false allegations are included in baseless litigation filed by a holdover employee from the prior administration who was terminated for cause. The courts that have ruled found no merit in these claims. We expect the same result in any pending litigation.
      She then went on to tout the office grant programs and said they are in compliance with Department of Justice requirements. More

    • 275 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      A message to Starmer from the US: ditching your £28bn climate plan isn’t just cowardly – it’s bad politics | Kate Aronoff

      by

      It’s hard, from the US, to feel all that confident about the state of our climate policies. The Inflation Reduction Act – the Biden White House’s trademark legislative achievement, which revolved around green investments – was a major accomplishment. Still, the US is breaking new records for its production and export of fossil fuels, last year extracting more oil and gas than ever before. Even more worrying is just how tenuous the country’s modest progress on the climate feels in advance of November’s presidential election: Donald Trump continues to lead Joe Biden in just about every poll.However, at the very least, the Biden administration has set a bar for the scale of green investment that centre-left parties should undertake. The same can’t be said of the Labour party, which has reportedly now scrapped its laudable £28bn green spending pledge in favour of some bizarre fealty to its leadership’s own strange idea of fiscal responsibility. So what can Labour learn from the Democratic president’s approach?To his great credit, Biden took seriously the need to win over progressive supporters of his main opponent in the Democratic primary in 2020. Bernie Sanders was an early adopter of the climate movement’s calls for a “green new deal”, laying out an expansive $16tn plan to tackle global heating and inequality. Biden’s $3.5tn Build Back Better agenda, produced with Sanders and his supporters in consultative roles, was decidedly not a green new deal. It did, however, reflect that platform’s most valuable components, positing climate action as a job creator and driver of 21st-century economic dynamism. Inherent in that was a willingness to spend lots of money, fast, on the things that matter.Almost as soon as Biden took office, however, climate advocates in the US watched the White House’s already too modest jobs and climate agenda get whittled down to what eventually became the Inflation Reduction Act’s roughly $400bn in new spending on climate and environmental priorities. It’s a shamefully slender programme, given how wealthy the US is, and its outsized historical responsibility for the climate crisis. But it’s also the best we might have hoped for, given the political influence of a fossil fuel industry that’s captured the Republican party virtually wholesale, along with key Democrats such as the West Virginia senator, Joe Manchin.Without the idiosyncrasies that weakened US climate policy, why do some members of the Labour party seem so keen to negotiate against themselves? The party’s £28bn a year green prosperity plan has now been dropped, thanks to the political cowardice of people such as the shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, who was already distancing herself from the policy in an interview with LBC earlier this week. The Labour veteran and podcast host Ed Balls suggested the problem with the plan was the number attached to it – urging Starmer and Reeves to “U-turn” away from it, so as to project fiscal responsibility and deflect repeated attacks from the right that Starmer would raise taxes to fund it. The party establishment is clearly spooked by the spectre of rightwing attacks, as Labour’s latest move so clearly shows.If the US can offer any lessons about how to deal with a right wing yammering on about how green policies allegedly hurt “ordinary people” while preaching painful austerity, it’s that it won’t give you a lick of credit for giving in to its ideas. Neither, moreover, will voters. The planet is even less forgiving. The costs of the climate crisis far outweigh the costs of acting on it. Under present policies, the climate crisis could cost the UK 3.3% of GDP a year by 2050. By 2100, that jumps to 7.4% of GDP a year; in today’s terms, that would be about £168bn.Labour needn’t look to the future, though, to make a straightforward case for going big on green spending. The Conservatives’ long-running war on good climate policy has already made life more expensive for working-class Britons. David Cameron’s bid to cut the “green crap” entailed doing away with a successful home insulation programme in 2013. And the average household could be paying gas bills of up to £400 lower if the Tories hadn’t axed the energy price guarantee scheme.While Labour’s green prosperity plan was designed with the Inflation Reduction Act in mind, there was an opportunity for Starmer to improve on it by emphasising the short-term benefits, such as the money households could save from national home insulation projects. Though it’s a hot topic among wonkish types in the US, UK and other parts of Europe, very few people here could tell you what the Inflation Reduction Act actually is. As of last August – a year on from the act’s passage – 71% of US residents said they knew “little or nothing” about it. Why is the White House’s high-profile accomplishment so far from most Americans’ minds? For one, the consultancy McKinsey has found that $216bn of the act’s $394bn in climate and energy-related tax credits will flow to corporations. Meanwhile, many benefits, such as incentives for pricey items such as electric vehicles and solar panels, are completely inaccessible to lower-income people and renters, who account for about 36% of US households.Driving investment in low-carbon energy and technologies makes a lot of sense: green industries grew four times faster than the rest of the British economy in 2020-21. But courting private-sector investment in green industries above all else – a sadly salient critique of the Inflation Reduction Act – threatens to leave voters in the dark about the benefits of climate action to their pockets. An active green industrial strategy should go hand in hand with an expansion of the public goods, services and planning capacities it will need to succeed. Upgrading public transit infrastructure and ensuring an abundant, affordable supply of low-carbon energy will be key to the success of the emerging green industries. More important, though, is that these can be the foundation on which Labour – should it ever choose to – builds both a broadly shared green prosperity and its electoral mandate for ever-stronger climate policies.The last few years of climate policymaking in the US point to at least one clear conclusion: Reeves and those who pushed to kill Labour’s green spending pledge are dead wrong. Labour should be sparing no expense on reducing emissions and improving livelihoods; if anything, £28bn a year is much too little. If party top brass can summon even an ounce of political courage they’ll make another U-turn away from disastrous, outdated economic orthodoxy and revive their more ambitious climate plans. Should that happen, the party can make voters acutely aware of the choice before them – to live a good, green life under Labour, or to let another Tory government take away more of their hard-earned money. Otherwise, the differences between Tory and Labour rule will keep getting harder and harder to spot.
      Kate Aronoff is a staff writer at the New Republic, a fellow at the Roosevelt Institute and the author of Overheated: How Capitalism Broke the Planet – And How We Fight Back More