More stories

  • in

    Auto workers strike after contract talks with US car giants fail

    Auto workers have launched a series of strikes after their union failed to reach agreement with the US’s three largest manufacturers over a new contract, kicking off the most ambitious industrial labor action in decades.The deadline for talks between Ford, General Motors, Stellantis and the United Auto Workers (UAW) expired at midnight on Thursday, with the sides still far apart on the union’s new contract priorities.The strike – which marks the first time all three of the Detroit Three carmakers have been targeted by strikes at the same time – is being coordinated by UAW president Shawn Fain. He said he intended to launch a series of limited and targeted “standup” strikes to shut individual auto plants around the US.The strikes kicked off at midnight at a General Motors plant in Wentzville, Missouri, a Stellantis plant in Toledo, Ohio, and a Ford assembly plant in Wayne, Michigan.They involve a combined 12,700 workers at the plants, which are critical to the production of some of the Detroit Three’s most profitable vehicles including the Ford Bronco, Jeep Wrangler and Chevrolet Colorado pickup truck.“This is our defining moment,” said Fain during a livestream on Thursday night, less than two hours before the strike was set to begin.Fain said he would join the picket line at the Wayne plant when the action began at midnight and did not rule out broadening the strikes beyond the initial three targets. “If we need to go all out, we will.”The UAW has a $825m strike fund that is set to compensate workers $500 a week while out on strike and could support all of its members for about three months. Staggering the strikes rather than having all 150,000 members walk out at once will allow the union to stretch those resources.A limited strike could also reduce the potential economic damage economists and politicians fear would result from a widespread, lengthy shutdown of Detroit Three operations.Stellantis has more than 90 days worth of Jeeps in stock, and has been building SUVs and trucks on overtime, according to Cox Automotive data.But a week-long shutdown at Stellantis’ Jeep plant in Toledo could cut revenue by more than $380 million, based on data from the company’s financial reports.“If the negotiations don’t go in a direction that Fain thinks is positive, we can fully expect a larger strike coming in a week or two,” said Sam Fiorani, a production forecaster at Auto Forecast Solutions.He estimated the limited action would stop production of about 24,000 vehicles a week.Among the union’s demands are a 40% pay increase, an end to tiers, where some workers are paid at lower wage scales than others, and the restoration of concessions from previous contracts such as medical benefits for retirees, more paid time off and rights for workers affected by plant closures.Workers have cited past concessions and the big three’s immense profits in arguing in favor of their demands. The automakers’ profits jumped 92% from 2013 to 2022, totaling $250bn. During this same time period, chief executive pay increased 40%, and nearly $66bn was paid out in stock dividends or stock buybacks to shareholders.The industry is also set to receive record taxpayer incentives for transitioning to electric vehicles.Despite these financial performances, hourly wages for workers have fallen 19.3%, with inflation taken into account, since 2008.The Biden administration is reportedly considering emergency aid for smaller supply firms to the automaker manufacturers due to the strike, and president Biden spoke to Fain on the status of negotiations on Thursday.Ford said in a statement the UAW’s latest proposals would double its US labor costs. A walkout could mean that UAW profit-sharing checks for this year will be “decimated,” the company said.GM and Stellantis declined to comment ahead of the midnight strike deadline.However in an earlier video GM’s top manufacturing executive Gerald Johnson said that the UAW’s wage and benefits proposals would cost the automaker $100 billion, “more than twice the value of all of General Motors and absolutely impossible to absorb.” He did not detail how the union proposals would result in that cost, or over what time frame.And in an appearance on CNBC on Thursday evening, Ford CEO Jim Farley also criticized the union, claiming, “there’s no way we can be sustainable as a company,” if they met the union’s wage demands.GM CEO Mary Barra also said in a letter to employees about the status of negotiations and the company’s latest offer to the union, “Remember: we had a strike in 2019 and nobody won.”The contract fight has garnered significant support from the public and US labor movement. Drivers represented by the Teamsters have pledged not to cross the picket line, halting deliveries of vehicles from the automakers throughout the strike. Several labor unions, environmental, racial and social justice groups have publicly announced support for the UAW in their fight for new contracts. More

  • in

    Georgia judge allows key pair be tried separately from Trump and 16 others

    A Georgia judge has ruled that Donald Trump and 16 others will be tried separately from two defendants who are set to go to trial next month in the case accusing them of participating in an illegal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election.Lawyers Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro had filed demands for a speedy trial, and the Fulton county superior court judge Scott McAfee had set their trial to begin on 23 October. Trump and other defendants had asked to be tried separately from Powell and Chesebro, with some saying they could not be ready by the late October trial date.The Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, last month obtained an indictment against Trump and the 18 others, charging them under the state’s anti-racketeering law in their efforts to deny Democrat Joe Biden’s victory over the Republican incumbent.Willis had been pushing to try all 19 defendants together, arguing that it would be more efficient and fairer. McAfee cited the tight timetable, among other issues, as a factor in his decision to separate Trump and 16 others from Powell and Chesebro.“The precarious ability of the court to safeguard each defendant’s due process rights and ensure adequate pre-trial preparation on the current accelerated track weighs heavily, if not decisively, in favor of severance,” McAfee wrote. He added that it might be necessary to further divide them into smaller groups for trial.The development is likely to be welcome news to other defendants looking to avoid being tied by prosecutors to Powell, who perhaps more than anyone else in the Trump camp was vocal about publicly pushing baseless conspiracy theories linking foreign governments to election interferences.Another defendant in the Atlanta case, Rudy Giuliani, has sought to distance himself from Powell and spoke at length about her in an interview with special counsel Jack Smith’s team in Washington, according to a person familiar with his account who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.Also, Trump-aligned lawyer Eric Herschmann, who in 2020 tried to push back against efforts to undo the election, told the congressional committee investigating the riot at the US Capitol on January 6 that he regarded Powell’s ideas as “nuts”.Chesebro and Powell had sought to be tried separately from each other, but the judge denied that request.Chesebro is accused of working on the coordination and execution of a plan to have 16 Georgia Republicans sign a certificate declaring falsely that Trump won and declaring themselves the state’s “duly elected and qualified” electors. Powell is accused of participating in a breach of election equipment in rural Coffee county.The nearly 100-page indictment details dozens of alleged acts by Trump or his allies to undo his 2020 loss in Georgia, including suggesting the secretary of state, a Republican, could help find enough votes for Trump to win the battleground state; harassing an election worker who faced false claims of fraud; and attempting to persuade Georgia lawmakers to ignore the will of voters and appoint a new slate of electoral college electors favorable to Trump.Further explaining his decision to separate the others from Powell and Chesebro, McAfee said he was skeptical of prosecutors’ arguments that trying all 19 defendants together would be more efficient. He noted that the Fulton county courthouse does not have a courtroom big enough to hold 19 defendants, their lawyers and others who would need to be present, and relocating to a bigger venue could raise security concerns.Prosecutors also had argued that because each defendant is charged under the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or Rico Act, the state plans to call the same witnesses and present the same evidence for any trial in the case. They told the judge last week that they expect any trial would take four months, not including jury selection.But McAfee pointed out that each additional defendant increases the time needed for opening statements and closing arguments, cross-examination and evidentiary objections. “Thus, even if the state’s case remains identical in length, and the aggregate time invested by the court is increased, the burden on the jurors for each individual trial is lessened through shorter separate trials,” he wrote.The judge also noted that to satisfy the demands by Powell and Chesebro for a speedy trial, he will try to have a jury seated by 3 November. “With each additional defendant involved in the voir dire process, an already Herculean task becomes more unlikely,” he wrote.McAfee also pointed to the fact that five defendants are currently seeking to move their cases to federal court and litigation on that issue is ongoing. If they were to succeed midway through a trial in the state court, it is not clear what the impact would be, McAfee wrote. More

  • in

    Google accused of spending billions to block rivals as landmark trial continues

    The court battle between the US justice department and Google has entered its second day, as the United States government seeks to prove that the tech behemoth illegally leveraged its power to maintain a monopoly over internet search engines. The trial is a major test of antitrust law and could have far-reaching implications for the tech industry and for how people engage with the internet.The question at the heart of the trial is whether Google’s place as the search engine for most Americans is the result of anti-competitive practices that gave internet users no other choice but to use its services.On the first day of the trial, attorneys for the justice department and the dozens of states that have joined in the suit accused Google of shutting out competition through billion-dollar agreements with companies such as Apple and Samsung.The justice department lawyer Kenneth Dintzer alleged Google spends $10bn a year in deals to ensure it is the default search engine on devices such as the iPhone, effectively blocking meaningful competition and positioning Google as the gatekeeper of the internet.“They knew these agreements crossed antitrust lines,” Dintzer said.Google’s opening statement gave a window into how the company and its lead attorney, John Schmidtlein, plan to defend against the accusations. Schmidtlein argued that Google has achieved its dominance over online search – the government estimates it holds about a 90% market share – because it is simply a better product than alternatives such as Microsoft’s Bing search engine. Consumers are free to switch default settings with “a few easy clicks” and use other search engines if they please, Schmidtlein told the court on Tuesday.The justice department called its first witness, Google’s chief economist Hal Varian. Over the course of two hours, Dintzer presented Varian with internal memos and documents dating back to the 2000s that showed him discussing how search defaults could be strategically important. One internal communication from Varian warned over antitrust issues that “we should be careful about what we say in both public and private”.On Wednesday, the justice department called the former Google executive Chris Barton, who had worked in partnerships and was an employee from 2004 to 2011. The department questioned Barton about the value of those partnerships in establishing dominance over the market.“As we recognized the opportunity for search on mobile phones, we began to build a product team,” Barton said, according to Reuters.As with the first day of the trial, the government has tried to show that Google saw the importance early on of making deals and securing its position as the default search engine on devices. The documents and witnesses it has brought up have so far been from over a decade ago, when the government says Google was first beginning to forge agreements that helped it monopolize search.The justice department has also alleged that Google was aware of possible antitrust violations and has consciously tried to obscure its actions. The government presented a document in court from an internal Google presentation on antitrust, which warned employees to avoid mentioning “market share” or “dominance”.The trial is set to last 10 weeks and feature numerous witnesses, as well as internal Google documents that the justice department hopes will show that monopolizing search has long been a top priority at the company. Judge Amit Mehta will decide the case, and there is no jury in the trial. More

  • in

    Trump lobbying key Republicans over attempt to impeach Joe Biden

    Donald Trump has been in discussions with influential House Republicans over the party’s long-shot attempt to impeach Joe Biden over unproven corruption allegations relating to his son Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings.Trump was in contact with Elise Stefanik, the third most senior Republican in the House of Representatives, ahead of Tuesday’s announcement of an official impeachment inquiry by the speaker, Kevin McCarthy, Politico reported.The news outlet said Trump and Stefanik have been speaking weekly, and talked again shortly after the announcement was made.“I speak to President Trump a lot, I spoke to him today,” Stefanik, from New York, told reporters.Stefanik has been at the fore in Republican moves to push ahead with impeachment hearings despite the lack of evidence that Biden committed wrongdoing, let alone the “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” required under the US constitution.The New Yorker has been flagged as a possible vice-presidential running mate for Trump should he win the Republican nomination to face Biden next year.Trump has also been reaching out to the hard right of the party, which has been waging a fierce pressure campaign to force McCarthy into calling an impeachment inquiry by threatening a government shutdown over federal spending levels.Politico revealed that the former president dined with Marjorie Taylor Greene, the extreme rightwing representative from Georgia, at his New Jersey golf club two nights before McCarthy’s announcement.Greene told the New York Times she briefed Trump on her vision for an impeachment inquiry. She said she told him she hoped it would be “long and excruciatingly painful for Joe Biden”.Trump’s behind-the-scenes lobbying of prominent House Republicans tallies with his increasingly shrill public calls for impeachment. The twice impeached former president posted on Truth Social last month: “Either IMPEACH the BUM, or fade into OBLIVION. THEY DID IT TO US.”Trump was impeached first for seeking dirt on opponents in Ukraine, then for inciting the deadly attack on Congress on 6 January 2021. Retaining sufficient Republican support in the Senate, he was acquitted both times.News of Trump’s interventions is likely to stoke White House complaints that the impeachment inquiry is merely designed to damage Biden’s approval ratings as the 2024 presidential election gets under way. A White House spokesperson denounced the investigation as “extreme politics at its worst”.McCarthy is also facing blowback over his decision to convene an inquiry without a vote of the full House, in a sharp reversal of his previous public statements.In 2019 he wrote to the then House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, arguing that if she went ahead with the impeachment inquiry that led to Trump’s first impeachment relating to Ukraine the process would be “completely devoid of any merit or legitimacy”.McCarthy repeated his pledge to hold a formal impeachment inquiry only in the outcome of a full House vote as recently as this month, in an interview with Breitbart.McCarthy’s U-turn in his decision to proceed with an investigation without a vote appears to have been motivated by the tight spot he finds himself in.On the one hand, he is facing an increasingly militant hard-right group including Greene that is holding him hostage over raising the debt ceiling to avoid a government shutdown.On the other, several House Republicans have spoken publicly about their skepticism over an impeachment inquiry, citing the absence of credible evidence of Biden’s wrongdoing. They include staunch conservatives such as Ken Buck of Colorado, who has called Greene’s intense desire to impeach Biden “absurd”.“The time for impeachment is the time when there’s evidence linking President Biden, if there’s evidence linking President Biden to a high crime or misdemeanor, that doesn’t exist right now,” Buck told MSNBC on Sunday. More

  • in

    Christine Blasey Ford to release memoir detailing Kavanaugh testimony

    Christine Blasey Ford, the psychology professor who accused Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, pitching the then conservative US supreme court nominee into huge controversy, will release a memoir next year that she sees as a call for people to speak out about wrongdoing.Publisher St Martin’s Press said Ford’s book would share “riveting new details about the lead-up” to her Senate testimony and “its overwhelming aftermath”, including receiving death threats and being unable to live in her home.The publisher also said Ford would discuss “how people unknown to her around the world restored her faith in humanity”. The book, to be called One Way Back, will be published in March.In a statement, Ford said: “I never thought of myself as a survivor, a whistleblower, or an activist before the events in 2018.“But now, what I and this book can offer is a call to all the other people who might not have chosen those roles for themselves, but who choose to do what’s right. Sometimes you don’t speak out because you are a natural disrupter. You do it to cause a ripple that might one day become a wave.”Kavanaugh, a former Republican operative, was the second of Donald Trump’s three nominees to the supreme court, tilting the court decisively in favor of conservatives and leading to rightwing rulings including the removal of the right to abortion.Ford is a professor at Palo Alto University and Stanford University School of Medicine.In September 2018, she told the Senate judiciary committee Kavanuagh sexually assaulted her at a high-school party in the 1980s.He pinned her on a bed, she said, pressing his hand over her mouth while trying to remove her clothes.In prepared testimony, Ford said: “I believed he was going to rape me. I tried to yell for help … I thought Brett was accidentally going to kill me.”Ford escaped when a friend of Kavanaugh jumped on the bed, she said, famously telling senators: “Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter. The uproarious laughter between the two. They’re having fun at my expense.”The assault, Ford said, “drastically altered my life. For a very long time, I was too afraid and ashamed to tell anyone the details”. She told “very few friends” and her husband, she added.Kavanaugh angrily denied the accusation, and others about alleged drunken behaviour which roiled confirmation proceedings in a way not seen since the scandal over Clarence Thomas’s alleged sexual harassment of Anita Hill, in 1991.Backed by Republicans on the committee vociferously including the then chair, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Kavanaugh was confirmed to the court by 50 votes to 48. Only one Republican, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, declined to support him. More

  • in

    McCarthy ‘doing Trump’s bidding’ by backing Biden impeachment inquiry, president’s campaign spokesperson says – live

    From 3h agoA spokesperson for the Biden-Harris 2024 campaign released a statement in response to House speaker Kevin McCarthy’s announcement backing a formal impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden.McCarthy has “cemented his role as the Trump campaign’s super-surrogate by turning the House of Representatives into an arm of his presidential campaign”, the statement by Ammar Moussa reads.
    11 days ago, McCarthy unequivocally said he would not move forward with an impeachment inquiry without holding a vote on the House floor. What has changed since then?
    The Biden-Harris campaign added:
    Several members of the Speaker’s own conference have come out and publicly panned impeachment as a political stunt, pointing out there is no evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden as Republicans litigate the same debunked conspiracy theories they’ve investigated for over four years.

    The speaker of the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, announced that Republicans would open an impeachment investigation into Joe Biden over unproven allegations of corruption in his family’s business dealings. House Republicans have so far have not produced hard evidence linking the business dealings of Hunter Biden and his father.
    The announcement by McCarthy kicks off what are expected to be weeks of Republican-led hearings intended to convince Americans that the president profited from the business dealings of his son Hunter Biden and other family members. While impeachment can be the first step to removing a president from office, that appears unlikely to happen.
    A spokesperson for the Biden-Harris 2024 campaign said McCarthy has “cemented his role as the Trump campaign’s super-surrogate by turning the House of Representatives into an arm of his presidential campaign”. Donald Trump has been weighing in behind the scenes in support of the House GOP push to impeach his successor, according to a report.
    Ian Sams, the White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations, described McCarthy’s announcement as “extreme politics at its worst”, adding that House GOP members had uncovered “no evidence of wrongdoing” in the months-long investigation into Joe Biden.
    It is unclear if the GOP has the evidence to substantiate the long-running claims, or even the votes for impeachment. McCarthy plans to convene House GOP members behind closed doors this week to discuss the Biden impeachment.
    James Comer, the chair of the House oversight committee leading the impeachment inquiry into Biden, spent “eight months of abject failure” in trying to prove the president guilty of wrongdoing, a watchdog released earlier this week said. The report by the Congressional Integrity Project offers an anatomy of a fake scandal, detailing a series of exaggerated assertions that have shriveled under scrutiny.
    Vladimir Putin described the recent indictments of Donald Trump as “political persecution” as the Russian leader waded back into a US presidential campaign for the third consecutive election cycle. “I believe that everything happening at the moment is good. Because it demonstrates the rottenness of the American political system,” Putin remarked during an economic forum in the far eastern Russian city of Vladivostok.
    The tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang, who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, has “had conversations” with No Labels, a group considering launching a third-party candidate in the 2024 election. Names linked to a No Labels candidacy have included Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, and Larry Hogan, a former Republican governor of Maryland.You can read the full report on the impeachment inquiry here:
    Almost all the Republicans running for the presidential nomination have endorsed the impeachment inquiry.Donald Trump is notably the only one who’s called impeachment outright. Ron DeSantis, Tim Scott, Mike Pence, Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy have all expressed support for the inquiry.Meanwhile, Chris Christie said he supports investigations, but noted, “I think we’re cheapening impeachment by doing that kind of thing.”Will Hurd, meanwhile said an investigation was warranted, but warned that if no evidence is found “I worry Republicans are walking into a political trap.”Women who say they were denied abortions in medical emergencies have taken legal action in Idaho, Oklahoma and Tennessee, in the latest attempt to challenge abortion bans that, abortion patients and doctors say, prevent people from getting care even when their health is in danger.The lawsuits in Idaho and Tennessee, along with a federal complaint against a hospital in Oklahoma, were filed on Tuesday by the Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed a similar lawsuit on behalf of women in Texas earlier this year. Tuesday’s filings were first reported by the Washington Post.“I can’t stop bad things from happening to people’s pregnancies,” Jennifer Adkins, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit filed in Idaho, told the Post. “But I want other Idahoans to feel safe and cared for.”After the supreme court overturned Roe v Wade last year, states across the south and midwest enacted near-total abortion bans, many of which only allow abortions in cases of medical emergencies. However, doctors have repeatedly said that these bans, which contain non-medical language drafted by politicians, are too vague for medical providers to interpret. Instead, they are forced to wait until their patients get sick enough for them to intervene.Read more:It’s been a busy Tuesday so far. Here’s where things stand:
    The speaker of the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, announced that Republicans would open an impeachment investigation into Joe Biden over unproven allegations of corruption in his family’s business dealings. House Republicans have so far have not produced hard evidence linking the business dealings of Hunter Biden and his father.
    The announcement by McCarthy kicks off what are expected to be weeks of Republican-led hearings intended to convince Americans that the president profited from the business dealings of his son Hunter Biden and other family members. While impeachment can be the first step to removing a president from office, that appears unlikely to happen.
    A spokesperson for the Biden-Harris 2024 campaign said McCarthy has “cemented his role as the Trump campaign’s super-surrogate by turning the House of Representatives into an arm of his presidential campaign”. Donald Trump has been weighing in behind the scenes in support of the House GOP push to impeach his successor, according to a report.
    Ian Sams, the White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations, described McCarthy’s announcement as “extreme politics at its worst”, adding that House GOP members had uncovered “no evidence of wrongdoing” in the months-long investigation into Joe Biden.
    It is unclear if the GOP has the evidence to substantiate the long-running claims, or even the votes for impeachment. McCarthy plans to convene House GOP members behind closed doors this week to discuss the Biden impeachment.
    James Comer, the chair of the House oversight committee leading the impeachment inquiry into Biden, spent “eight months of abject failure” in trying to prove the president guilty of wrongdoing, a watchdog released earlier this week said. The report by the Congressional Integrity Project offers an anatomy of a fake scandal, detailing a series of exaggerated assertions that have shriveled under scrutiny.
    Vladimir Putin described the recent indictments of Donald Trump as “political persecution” as the Russian leader waded back into a US presidential campaign for the third consecutive election cycle. “I believe that everything happening at the moment is good. Because it demonstrates the rottenness of the American political system,” Putin remarked during an economic forum in the far eastern Russian city of Vladivostok.
    The tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang, who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, has “had conversations” with No Labels, a group considering launching a third-party candidate in the 2024 election. Names linked to a No Labels candidacy have included Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, and Larry Hogan, a former Republican governor of Maryland.
    Donald Trump has been weighing in behind the scenes in support of the House GOP push to impeach Joe Biden, including regularly speaking with a member of leadership in the lead up to Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s announcement on Tuesday, according to a Politico report. Trump has been speaking on a weekly basis with House GOP conference chair Elise Stefanik, who was the first member of Republican leadership to come out in support of impeachment, the report says.The former president had dinner on Sunday night with the far-right congresswoman, Marjorie Taylor Greene, at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, where the topic of impeachment was discussed, the report says.Two Ron DeSantis hats put up for auction at a Republican dinner in Florida at the weekend received precisely no bids, according to local party officials, suggesting his presidential campaign in his home state is going as badly as it is nationwide.Details come in this story by Newsweek, which says nobody signed up to bid on either of the red and white caps at the St Johns county GOP founders dinner in Ponte Vedra Beach on Saturday. St Johns is where the Florida governor was born.A photo of the barren sign-up sheets was posted to X, formerly Twitter, by Republican fundraiser Caroline Wren, the image taken two and a half hours after the event began.Blake Paterson, chair of the county’s Republican party, confirmed to Newsweek that the hats had attracted no bidders, though he characterized the event as a giveaway in exchange for donations rather than an auction.Those in attendance at the dinner appeared to be overwhelmingly supporters of Donald Trump, DeSantis’s rival for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. They included Florida congressman Byron Donalds, a vocal Trump acolyte, and extremist conspiracy theorist Kari Lake, failed candidate for governor of Arizona in last year’s election.Speaker Kevin McCarthy plans to convene House GOP members behind closed doors this week to discuss the Biden impeachment, amid uncertainty over whether he even has the support of rank-and-file Republicans behind him.McCarthy is launching the impeachment inquiry on his own and without a House floor vote, as he may not have enough support from his slim GOP majority, AP reported.Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has warned House Republicans off the effort, but on Tuesday he said:
    I don’t think Speaker McCarthy needs advice from the Senate.
    Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer called the impeachment inquiry “absurd”. He told reporters:
    The American people want us to do something that will make their lives better, not go off on these chases and witch hunts.
    House GOP members have found an “overwhelming” amount of evidence showing Joe Biden “lied to the American people about his knowledge and participation in his family’s influence peddling schemes”, according to a joint statement by James Comer, Jim Jordan and Jason Smith.Comer, Jordan and Smith chair the three committees expected to take the lead in the impeachment inquiry into the president. They are: the House committee on oversight and accountability, committee on the judiciary, and the committee on ways and means.The statement says the investigation into Biden uncovered “bank records, suspicious activity reports, emails, texts, and witness testimony” that showed the president “allowed his family to sell him as ‘the brand’ around the world”.
    Based on the evidence, we support the opening of an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. The House Committees on Oversight and Accountability, Judiciary, and Ways and Means, will continue to work to follow the facts to ensure President Biden is held accountable for abusing public office for his family’s financial gain. The American people demand and deserve answers, transparency, and accountability for this blatant abuse of public office.
    House Republicans have so far have not produced hard evidence linking the business dealings of Hunter Biden and the president.Senate Republicans are unhappy with House speaker Kevin McCarthy’s decision to open an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden and concerned that it will backfire on the party, according to the Hill.A Senate Republican, speaking on condition on anonymity, told the newspaper that even if the House did vote to impeach Biden after an inquiry, there is no way the Democrat-controlled Senate would vote to convict. Reports indicate McCarthy does not yet have enough votes in support of impeaching Biden.“It’s a waste of time. It’s a fool’s errand,” the GOP senator was quoted as saying.
    We know how this is going to end. It just creates tumult within the conference. I can see it already how people are going to react when they send a message over if they go that far.
    They noted that all the internal polling they had seen suggested GOP primary voters do not see impeachment as a priority. The senator added:
    It seems like we’re spending a lot of time on things that matter to them that don’t matter to the people I want to have a positive opinion of Republicans next November … This is not driving [general election] turnout.
    “They’re all acting like children,” the GOP senator added.Here’s a statement from Jamaal Bowman, a Democratic congressman from New York, who accused House speaker Kevin McCarthy of announcing a “sham” impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden in order to “bring attention away from the failures of House Republicans to be able to pass a budget and avoid a government shutdown”.The statement reads:
    Speaker McCarthy and the dysfunctional Republican party are wasting time with their comical impeachment inquiry into President Biden instead of focusing on passing appropriations bills. We’re just 3 weeks away from a government shutdown where millions of government employees won’t get paid, small businesses won’t be able to apply for federal loans, the NIH has to shut down most medical research, and more. We should be focused on doing our job by helping the American people & funding critical services, not forcing a shutdown & plotting baseless impeachment inquiries.
    It goes on:
    This is yet another example of Republican dysfunction and continues to show why many across the country do not want to trust or participate in our government.
    Ken Buck, a Republican congressman for Colorado and House Freedom caucus member, has previously expressed skepticism about an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden.On Sunday, Buck said any evidence linking the president to any high crime or misdemeanor “doesn’t exist right now”. His recent comments against the House GOP’s investigative efforts and track record of bucking his own party have put a target on his back, according to a CNN report.A serious effort is now under way to find a candidate to mount a primary challenge against Buck in his eastern Colorado seat, the news channel reported, citing sources.Marjorie Taylor Greene, the far-right congresswoman from Georgia and ally of House speaker Kevin McCarthy, told the channel there is an “unbelievable” level of frustration with Buck inside the House GOP. Greene added that she didn’t think he should remain in his role on the House judiciary committee or the GOP whip’s team.“This is the same guy that wrote a book called ‘Drain the Swamp’, who is now arguing against an impeachment inquiry,” Greene said.
    I really don’t see how we can have a member on Judiciary that is flat out refusing to impeach … It seems like, can he even be trusted to do his job at this point?
    A spokesperson for the Biden-Harris 2024 campaign released a statement in response to House speaker Kevin McCarthy’s announcement backing a formal impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden.McCarthy has “cemented his role as the Trump campaign’s super-surrogate by turning the House of Representatives into an arm of his presidential campaign”, the statement by Ammar Moussa reads.
    11 days ago, McCarthy unequivocally said he would not move forward with an impeachment inquiry without holding a vote on the House floor. What has changed since then?
    The Biden-Harris campaign added:
    Several members of the Speaker’s own conference have come out and publicly panned impeachment as a political stunt, pointing out there is no evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden as Republicans litigate the same debunked conspiracy theories they’ve investigated for over four years.
    A Virginia Democrat running in a closely contested legislative election has denounced reports that she and her husband engaged in sex acts livestreamed on an online platform in exchange for “tips”.Susanna Gibson, a nurse practitioner and a first-time candidate seeking a seat in Virginia’s house of delegates, shared the videos on a platform called Chaturbate.The videos, which were first reported by the Washington Post and then confirmed by the Associated Press, show Gibson urging viewers to provide tips in the form of Chaturbate tokens in exchange for her performance of specific sex acts with her husband. The videos were archived in 2022, though it is unclear when the live streams occurred.According to the Post’s report, a Republican operative first alerted the newspaper to the existence of the videos, which had been archived on another site. In a statement, Gibson denounced the report as a form of “gutter politics” and “an illegal invasion of my privacy designed to humiliate me and my family”.“It won’t intimidate me and it won’t silence me,” Gibson said.
    My political opponents and their Republican allies have proven they’re willing to commit a sex crime to attack me and my family because there’s no line they won’t cross to silence women when they speak up.
    A lawyer representing Gibson, Daniel P Watkins, told the Post that the videos may have violated Virginia’s revenge porn law, adding: “We are working closely with state and federal law enforcement.”Gibson’s district, located just north-west of Richmond, is considered one of just a handful of competitive seats in the race to control Virginia’s house of delegates. In the last legislative session, Republicans narrowly controlled the chamber, while Democrats maintained a slim majority in the state senate.Peter Navarro’s contempt of Congress conviction has “everybody in that frigging White House” feeling as if they are grappling with “massive legal bills and … prison time”, the ex-Donald Trump administration official said on Monday.Navarro’s remarks came in an interview with the far-right media outlet Newsmax in which he used the term “SOBs” – short for sons of bitches – to refer to the US justice department prosecutors who secured a guilty verdict against him last week.Lamenting that prosecutors had pushed to “stick me in leg irons … [and] with half a million dollars of legal bills”, Navarro pledged to seek a reversal of his conviction from an appellate court. Navarro told the host Eric Bolling:
    We’re gonna win this fight – that’s why God created the appeals court.
    Navarro served as a senior trade adviser during Trump’s presidency, which ended in the Republican’s defeat to Joe Biden in the 2020 election. Congress subpoenaed him in February 2022 to answer questions about why Trump supporters attacked the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, temporarily delaying certification of Biden’s electoral victory.A House committee convened to investigate the attack suspected Navarro had more information about any connection between false claims of voter fraud in that election which Trump allies had pushed and the assault on the Capitol. But Navarro refused to testify while also declining to turn over any emails, reports or notes.Navarro’s attorney argued that the defendant asked the committee to talk to Trump to see what information he wanted protected under executive privilege, which never happened. Prosecutors countered that Navarro should have handed over the materials he had while labeling those he believed were privileged.On Thursday, a jury convicted Navarro of two misdemeanor charges of contempt of Congress, each of which is punishable by between 30 days and a year in prison. His sentencing has tentatively been scheduled for 12 January. More

  • in

    Rudy Giuliani ‘mob scene’ turned Elon Musk off seeking advice, new book says

    Elon Musk backed away from a plan to recruit Rudy Giuliani as a political fixer to help him turn PayPal into a bank in 2001 after he and an associate found the then New York mayor “surrounded by goonish confidantes” in an office that felt “like a mob scene”.“This guy occupies a different planet,” Musk, who would become the world’s richest man, said of Giuliani, then approaching the peak of his fame.Giuliani left office at the end of 2001 after leading New York through the 9/11 attacks, then ran for the Republican nomination for president in 2008, a campaign which soon collapsed.He became an attorney and ally to Donald Trump but missed out on a cabinet appointment when Trump won the presidency in 2016.Trump’s first impeachment was fueled by Giuliani’s work in Ukraine, seeking political dirt on opponents. Now 79, Giuliani has pleaded not guilty to 13 criminal charges of racketeering and conspiracy, regarding his work to advance Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia.The irony of the former mayor and New York US attorney being indicted on charges often used against figures in organised crime has been widely remarked. As a prosecutor, Giuliani made his name chasing down mafia kingpins.The latest picture of Giuliani as gangster is included in Elon Musk, a new biography of the 52-year-old Tesla, SpaceX and X (formerly Twitter) owner and sometime world’s richest man, by Walter Isaacson, whose other subjects include Leonardo Da Vinci and Steve Jobs.Isaacson’s book was widely excerpted in the US media before publication on Tuesday.The brief meeting between Musk and Giuliani came about, Isaacson writes, as Musk sought to turn PayPal, the online payments company he co-founded, into “a social network that would disrupt the whole banking industry” – a vision he now harbours for Twitter, which he bought in October 2022 and renamed as X this year.“We have to decide whether we are going to aim big,” Musk told those who worked for him, Isaacson writes, adding that some “believed Musk’s framing was flawed”.Describing stymied attempts to rebrand, Isaacson writes: “Focus groups showed that the name X.com … conjured up visions of a seedy site you would not talk about in polite company. But Musk was unwavering and remains so to this day.”Such discussions, Isaacson reports, led Musk and an investor, Michael Moritz, to go to New York, “to see if they could recruit Rudy Giuliani, who was just ending his tenure as mayor, to be a political fixer and guide them through the policy intricacies of being a bank.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“But as soon as they walked into his office, they knew it would not work.“It was like walking into a mob scene,” Moritz says. Giuliani “was surrounded by goonish confidantes. He didn’t have any idea whatsoever about Silicon Valley, but he and his henchmen were eager to line their pockets.”“They asked for 10% of the company, and that was the end of the meeting. ‘This guy occupies a different planet,’ Musk told Moritz.”Giuliani succeeded in lining his pockets after leaving city hall, making millions as a lawyer and consultant and giving paid speeches around the world.That picture has also changed. Faced with spiraling legal costs arising from his work for Trump and other cases including a $10m lawsuit from a former associate who alleges sexual assault, lawyers for Giuliani have said he is struggling to pay his bills. In New York, his luxury apartment was put up for sale. More

  • in

    ‘We have to come to grips with history’: Robert P Jones on The Hidden Roots of White Supremacy

    How did Donald Trump win the 2016 presidential election despite the Access Hollywood tape? How did he gain even more votes in 2020 despite an administration of chaos, lies and pandemic blunders? How can he be running neck and neck with Joe Biden for 2024 despite four indictments and 91 criminal charges?Future historians will surely debate such questions and why so many Americans saw themselves in a tawdry tycoon and carnival barker. One of the most persuasive theories is captured in a single word: race.Trump won white voters without a college degree by 32 points in 2020. A glance at his rallies shows the lack of diversity in his notorious “base”. His signature slogan, “Make America great again”, is a thinly disguised appeal to nostalgia for postwar suburbia.In his books The End of White Christian America and White Too Long, Robert P Jones has steadily built the argument that this movement is animated by shifting demographics. He points out that in 2008, when Barack Obama, the first Black president, was elected, 54% of Americans identified as white and Christian. By the end of Obama’s second term, that share had fallen to 47%. Today it is 42%.“It’s just a continued slide,” says Jones, 55, sitting at his desk at the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), where he is founder and president, in downtown Washington. “Most importantly, moving from majority to decisively non-majority white and Christian has set off a kind of ‘freak out’ moment among many white Christians.”In The Hidden Roots of White Supremacy and the Path to a Shared American Future, effectively the third book in an unofficial trilogy, Jones traces the roots of Trumpism back more than 500 years.He explains: “Go back and understand they really do believe that this country was divinely ordained to be a promised land for European Christians.“That idea is so old and so deep it explains in many ways the visceral reactivity. Why are we fighting today about AP African American history? Arkansas’s banned it, Florida’s been fighting it, and it’s because it tells this alternative story about the country that’s not just settlers, pioneers – a naive mythology of innocence.”Jones examines that mythological origin story and its promised land. He spotlights the “Doctrine of Discovery”, a little-known or understood series of 15th-century papal edicts asserting that European civilisation and western Christianity are superior to all other cultures, races and religions. For Jones, it is “a kind of Rosetta Stone for understanding the deep structure of the European political and religious worldviews we have inherited in this country”.The initial edict, issued by Nicholas V in 1452, granted the Portuguese king Alfonso V the right to “invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens [Muslims] and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery”.Jones says: “Then there’s a series of these documents that get issued between 1452 and 1493, each of which build on this idea but essentially all say the same thing: that if the land is not occupied by Christian people – and that Christian identity is the thing that determines whether you have your own human rights or not – then the Christian kings and queens have the right to conquer those lands and take possession of everything that they can in the name of the state and the church.”This provided convenient theological justification for the first European powers that came into contact with Native Americans to seize lands and exploit resources. Spreading the gospel by the sword was married with huge economic incentives.From this perspective, the enslavement of Africans was not America’s original sin but a continuation of genocide and dispossession justified by papal doctrine. The New York Times’s 1619 Project was a long-overdue corrective to established narratives but it was not the final word.Jones reflects: “The 1619 Project was very important culturally in the US because it at least did move us out of this room with white people gathered around a table like you see on the postage stamp or the paintings of the beginning of the country and took us back to a different story: the story of enslaved people in the country.“But if we really want to understand our present we have to go back and tell the whole story and that’s European contact with Indigenous people before it is enslavement and the transatlantic slave trade. That all comes from the same source. It is this cultural idea that there is a kind of superiority to European culture that’s justified by Christianity that sets up, in the Doctrine of Discovery, this entire project.”Jones sees connections between the murder of 14-year-old Emmett Till in the Mississippi Delta in 1955 and the killing and expulsion of Choctaws forced to walk the Trail of Tears, starting in 1831; between the lynching of three Black circus workers in Duluth in 1920 and the mass execution of 38 Dakota men in Minnesota in 1862.When history is put in silos, he contends, such threads are missed. “You don’t get a society that tortures and kills a 14-year-old boy in Mississippi on the basis of whistling at a white woman without this sense of entitlement, of superiority and permissive violence stemming from the Doctrine of Discovery. That was the thing that pushed people into the Mississippi territory, forcibly removing Choctaw Creek Native Americans from their lands, killing many, forcibly removing the others.“If you don’t understand that history, you end up with this shocking, ‘Well, how could a society be this way that this would happen, and then they [Roy Bryant and JW Milam, the white men who killed Till] would get acquitted by their peers, who deliberated for only an hour after the trial?’ But when you understand this longer history, that becomes a little bit less of a mystery.”When Jones visited these sites of trauma, he found communities working across racial lines to seek the truth, build memorials and museums and commemorate their histories in ways unthinkable in the last century. The US is currently in a great “Age of Re-evaluation”, according to Scott Ellsworth, a scholar of the Tulsa race massacre.Jones comments: “For all of these what I thought was fairly remarkable is how recent these moves are in the US to try to tell a different story, a more inclusive story about what happened. In none of these cases do they predate 2000. It’s all in the last 20 years that any of these movements have happened.“If you had driven down through the Delta in Mississippi in 2000, you would not have come across any signs or anything. Even though the whole world knows the story of Emmett Till, you would not have known that it happened in Tallahatchie county, in the Delta. There was nothing there on the ground. A group of citizens about 20 years ago got together and said, ‘No, we should change this, and we should try to tell the truth about the story.’”Till’s casket is displayed at the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture; his story was told in the 2022 film Till; and in July, Joe Biden signed a proclamation designating an Emmett Till and Mamie Till-Mobley national monument in Illinois and Mississippi.The 46th president urged America to face its history with all its peaks and troughs, blessings and blemishes. He told an audience in the White House grounds: “We can’t just choose to learn what we want to know. We have to learn what we should know. We should know about our country. We should know everything: the good, the bad, the truth of who we are as a nation. That’s what great nations do, and we are a great nation.”Biden added, a little bleakly: “We got a hell of a long way to go.”Jones believes that Biden gets it. “He’s been fairly remarkable on these issues of racial justice. He, for example, has been one of the only presidents who has used the words ‘white supremacy’ consistently in addresses – and not just before Black audiences. If you look at Biden’s speeches and you search for ‘white supremacy’, he’s not just talking about that in Tulsa during the commemoration speech.“He’s using it, and understands it as one of the deep problems of American history that we currently have to wrestle with. He’s been very clear and seems very genuine about that being something that he’s leaving as part of his legacy. It’s also part of why he made the pronouncement about the Emmett Till national monument, so this becomes a permanent part of the story that we tell about ourselves.”Trump, however, has a polar opposite worldview that Jones says explains why history has become the new frontline in the culture wars. Just over a third of self-identified Democrats are white and Christian; about 70% of self-identified Republicans are. PRRI polling finds that two-thirds of Democrats say America’s culture and way of life has changed for the better since the 1950s; two-thirds of Republicans believe it has changed for the worse.Jones writes how white Christians can “sense the tectonic plates moving” in the demographics of their neighbourhoods, the food in their grocery store, the appearance of Spanish-language local radio and roadside billboards, and the class photos on the walls of their public schools.He says: “I’ve always thought that, in Trump’s Maga slogan, the most powerful word is not about America being great; it’s the ‘again’ part. It’s this nostalgia tinged with loss. What have we lost and who’s the ‘we’ that have lost something? If you just ask those questions, it’s pretty clear. It’s the formerly dominant white Christians who were culturally dominant, demographically dominant, politically dominant and are no longer.“It’s that sense of loss and grievance that Trump has been so homed in on and so astute at fuelling and setting himself up. You hear him say things like, ‘I am your voice’, ‘I alone can fix it’, ‘If you don’t elect somebody like me, we’re not going to have a country any more’. Those kinds of phrases tell you what he’s appealing to.“If we look at the insurrection at the Capitol, it’s so chilling the last frame that the January 6 House select committee showed in their video has two people – it looks like something out of Les Mis – up on a barricade and they’ve got two flags. One is a Trump flag and the other is a Christian flag that they’re flying on the barricades.”Jones has skin in the game. Growing up a Southern Baptist in Jackson, Mississippi, he went to church five times a week and earned a divinity degree. His family Bible, printed in 1815, has generations of births and deaths and marriages handwritten between the Old and New Testaments. Some online genealogical research revealed slave-owners among his ancestors.“My grandfather was a deacon at a church in Macon, Georgia, and one of his jobs on Sunday morning was to make sure no Black people entered the sanctuary. He was literally a bouncer on the outside of the church to keep non-white people out. That was an official role as a deacon in the church. It wasn’t like some wink, wink, nod, nod – that was his assignment for Sunday morning.“It’s been tough, but, on the other hand, one of the things you hear often with these anti- so-called critical race theory bills and with ‘woke’ is ‘not making white people uncomfortable’. But I would rather know the truth, even if it’s an uncomfortable truth, then be ignorant and comfortable.”He quotes James Baldwin, the transcendent and trenchant African American writer: “All that can save you now is your confrontation with your own history … which is not your past, but your present. Your history has led you to this moment, and you can only begin to change yourself by looking at what you are doing in the name of your history.”Jones comments: “There’s a kind of liberation, freedom and growth that can come from facing this history and moving somewhere better together. That’s the invitation, and the reason for doing the work isn’t at all just to feel bad or beat yourself up over what your family did or whatever.“If we really want to live up to this promise of being a truly pluralistic, multi-religious, multiracial democracy, it’s going to take us coming to terms with that history and putting into place something different than we’ve had in the past. There’s no way we can do that if we don’t even understand why we’re in the dilemmas we’re currently in.”Another of his favourite Baldwin quotations describes “white people as the slightly mad victims of their own brainwashing”.Jones continues: “Such a great line, and if you think about this impossibly innocent history that we have told ourselves, that we were always upstanding, that we always treated other peoples with dignity and respect, it just isn’t true. In order, again, to right the ship and come to a new place together, we have to have to come to grips with that history.”Only then, Jones says, can America, a nation that likes to claim exceptionalism, be sincere about its unique experiment.“Our current generation is the first that has been asked whether we truly believe what we often claim: that we are a pluralistic democracy.“Before, many white Christian Americans who are part of the dominant culture could pay lip service to that, knowing that they had enough numbers at the ballot box, knowing that they had enough control on business, enough control of local institutions, that they still had a lock on power. This is the first generation where that’s not true.“The question is called in a way that’s new and that’s why there’s so much visceral reaction, because there’s a way in which we’ve never honestly had to answer the question. But now it’s being put in a way that we’re going to have to answer it.”
    The Hidden Roots of White Supremacy: And the Path to a Shared American Future is published in the US by Simon & Schuster More