World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 213 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      A debt default would be catastrophic for the US – and Biden’s re-election chances | Walter Shapiro

      by

      The favored metaphor on the left is to compare the trumped-up debt-ceiling crisis to hostage-taking by the House Republicans.But in a true hostage situation, both sides have something major to lose. The perpetrators risk not getting a payoff or, worse, spending decades in prison. For the families of the victims and the police, the danger is that the hostages will be killed during the negotiations or in the midst of a botched rescue mission.For Kevin McCarthy and the defaulters (which, incidentally, is a promising name for a band), there is no downside. If Joe Biden ultimately hands over his sword in surrender, the Republican incendiaries will be lionized as conquering heroes from the Fox News green room to the dining room at Mar-a-Lago.Sure, the reviled liberal media will grumble if Republican intransigence forces America into default, guaranteeing higher interest for years to come, and jeopardizing the world economy. But that crazed toughness would prove that the House speaker is not a “Republican In Name Only” (Rino) squish like his deal-making predecessor John Boehner, who at the last minute helped avert default in 2011.Marching off the fiscal cliff like lemmings will also inoculate House Republicans against a rightwing primary challenge – which, in Republican circles, is a fate worse than death. And since members of Congress can trade stocks, every smart Republican can personally prosper during the coming cataclysmic economic downturn by adroitly shorting the Dow Jones Average.In contrast, the consequences of debt-ceiling brinkmanship are dire for Joe Biden. In the best conceivable case – one that will prompt dismay among liberals – the president would reluctantly agree to tight spending caps that will limit his domestic agenda and penalize the poor. But, at least, that option would avert default.At the end of his Sunday press conference in Hiroshima, Biden publicly acknowledged the devastating political consequences for him if America were unable to pay its bills. Channeling the thought process of House Republican zealots as they head towards the abyss, Biden said: “Because I am president, and presidents are responsible for everything, Biden would take the blame. And that’s one way to make sure Biden is not re-elected.”Sad, but true.A default might well mean that Biden would be running for reelection with the economy in a Republican-created tailspin. And it wouldn’t matter politically that, as Biden said, “On the merits, based on what I’ve offered, I would be blameless.”But if Democrats believe that they can win the messaging wars about a default, they’re deluding themselves.An Associated Press/NORC poll, released last week, found that only 20% of Americans say that they understand the debate over the debt ceiling “extremely” or “very well.” That number is significant because it is often hard for political insiders to remember that most Americans do not watch cable TV news or obsessively follow political machinations in Washington. The danger for Democrats is that many of these low-information voters will be persuaded by the implicit one-sentence Republican message: America defaulted because Biden wouldn’t agree to cut government spending to deal with the national debt.In order to appreciate the folly of that glib Republican argument, a voter both has to understand the draconian nature of the Republican budget proposals and to grasp that raising the debt ceiling merely authorizes borrowing rather than new spending. Good luck making that complex case to anyone who doesn’t devotedly read the New York Times or listen to National Public Radio.In an era of streaming and thousands of channels, Biden does not have the option of commanding national attention with an old-fashioned Oval Office address. Moreover, there is no guarantee that Biden, with his rambling asides and workmanlike delivery, would convince anyone with a televised speech. To illustrate that point, here is the awkward way Biden highlighted the dangers of the Republican budget plan in his Sunday press conference: “I’m not going to agree to a deal that protects, for example, a $30bn tax break for the oil industry, which made $200bn last year – they don’t need an incentive of another $30bn – while putting healthcare of 21 million Americans at risk by going after Medicaid.”The harsh reality is that Biden has little choice but to grub for the best deal he can. While there is a strong legal argument that the debt ceiling is unconstitutional under the 14th amendment, no one at the treasury department or anywhere else knows how the global markets would react if Biden thumbed his nose at Kevin McCarthy and his wingnut caucus.With the continuing danger that Donald Trump’s comeback tour will end in the Oval Office, there are more important matters on the table than punishing Kevin McCarthy for his hostage-taking. In fact, the best revenge would be a sweeping Biden reelection that brings with it a Democratic House majority. Then, in 2025, without a presidential election on the horizon, Biden would be free to blow up the dangerously irrational debt-ceiling law.
      Walter Shapiro is a staff writer for the New Republic and a lecturer in political science at Yale More

    • 225 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Tim Scott says ‘I’m running for president of the United States’ in announcement speech – as it happened

      by

      From 5h agoTim Scott has said the magic words.“Joe Biden and the radical left are attacking every single rung of the ladder that helped me climb and that’s why I’m announcing today I’m running for president of the United States of America,” the senator said to applause and cheers in his kick-off speech in North Charleston, South Carolina.He began the speech by recounting his upbringing from poverty and downplaying the impacts of racial disparities in the economy, saying “I’m living proof that America is the land of opportunity and not a land of oppression.”When it comes to policy, the senator is outlining familiar conservative priorities.“On my first day as commander in chief, the strongest nation on earth will stop retreating from our southern border,” he said.He embraced the conservative demand to deploy the military against drug traffickers, and vowed to restart construction of the border wall pioneered by Donald Trump.“When I am president, the drug cartels using Chinese labs and Mexican factories to kill Americans will cease to exist. I will freeze their assets, I will build the wall and I will allow the world’s greatest military to fight these terrorists. Because that’s exactly what they are.”Republican senator Tim Scott threw his hat into the ring with a speech in South Carolina where he promised to pursue a more compassionate form of conservatism, while advocating for hardline border security policies and downplaying the effects of racial inequality on American society. The GOP’s presidential field is crowded and set to become more packed on Wednesday when Ron DeSantis makes his campaign official, but can anyone defeat the final boss of Republican politicians, Donald Trump? We’ll see.Here’s what else has happened today:
      Joe Biden and Kevin McCarthy will meet at 5.30pm to (hopefully) resolve the debt ceiling standoff.
      The NAACP issued a travel advisory for Florida over policies DeSantis has pursued as governor, and which he will likely try to sell voters on in his presidential campaign.
      Mandatory water cuts were avoided in the west after the Biden administration and several states agreed to a deal regarding management of the Colorado river.
      Trump and fellow South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham both wished Scott well on his presidential bid.
      Speaking of Trump, federal prosecutors have evidence that he was warned he could not hold onto classified documents, the Guardian has confirmed.
      We’re 10 days away from 1 June, the estimated date when the US government, fresh out of cash and prohibited by the legal debt ceiling from borrowing more money, will default on its obligations for the first time in history.Joe Biden and Kevin McCarthy are in the midst of negotiations over a deal to raise the limit, likely in exchange for spending cuts or the enactment of conservative priorities that the GOP has demanded. But it’s coming awfully close to the deadline, particularly since it takes several days for Congress to consider and vote on legislation, and there’s no telling who might object to whatever deal the Democratic president reaches with the Republican speaker of House.The Associated Press took a look at what might happen if Washington does the unthinkable and actually defaults, and reached a grim verdict:
      The repercussions of a first-ever default on the federal debt would quickly reverberate around the world. Orders for Chinese factories that sell electronics to the United States could dry up. Swiss investors who own U.S. Treasurys would suffer losses. Sri Lankan companies could no longer deploy dollars as an alternative to their own dodgy currency.
      “No corner of the global economy will be spared” if the U.S. government defaulted and the crisis weren’t resolved quickly, said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.
      Zandi and two colleagues at Moody’s have concluded that even if the debt limit were breached for no more than week, the U.S. economy would weaken so much, so fast, as to wipe out roughly1.5 million jobs.
      And if a government default were to last much longer — well into the summer — the consequences would be far more dire, Zandi and his colleagues found in their analysis: U.S. economic growth would sink, 7.8 million American jobs would vanish, borrowing rates would jump, the unemployment rate would soar from the current 3.4% to 8% and a stock-market plunge would erase $10 trillion in household wealth.
      Biden and McCarthy are set for a 5.30pm meeting at the White House for further talks on a debt limit agreement.In major news for western US states grappling with drought, the Guardian’s Oliver Milman reports that the Biden administration has agreed to a deal that will see them use less water from the Colorado river and ward off the prospect of mandatory water cuts:A deal has been struck by Joe Biden’s administration for California, Arizona and Nevada to take less water from the drought-stricken Colorado River, in a bid to prevent the river dwindling further and imperiling the water supplies for millions of people and vast swaths of agricultural land in the US west.The agreement, announced on Monday, will involve the three states, water districts, Native American tribes and farm operators cutting about 13% of the total water use in the lower Colorado basin, a historic reduction that will probably trigger significant water restrictions on the region’s residents and farmland.In all, 3m acre-feet of water is expected to be conserved over the next three years – an acre-foot is 326,000 gallons, or enough water to cover an acre of land, about the size of a football field, one foot deep. A single acre-foot is enough to sustain two average California households for a year.Of these savings, 2.3m acre-feet will be compensated by the federal government, with $1.2bn going to cities, tribes and water districts. The rest of the savings will be voluntary, uncompensated ones to be worked out between the states.The agreement averts, for now, the prospect of the Biden administration imposing unilateral water cuts upon the seven states – California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming – that rely upon the river, a prospect that has loomed since last summer when the waterway’s two main reservoirs, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, hit perilously low levels.In the run-up to the presidential campaign announcement he’s expected to make on Wednesday, Florida’s governor Ron DeSantis has overseen an effort by the state government to restrict what students can learn about race and diversity. That has prompted one of the country’s best-known civil rights groups to issue an unusual warning against visiting the state, the Guardian’s Gloria Oladipo reports:The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has issued a travel advisory for the state of Florida, calling the state “actively hostile” to minorities as Florida’s conservative government limits diversity efforts in schools.In a Saturday press release, the civil rights organization better known as the NAACP said the travel warning comes as Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, “attempts to erase Black history and to restrict diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in Florida schools”.“Before traveling to Florida, please understand that the state of Florida devalues and marginalizes the contributions of, and the challenges faced by African Americans and other communities of color,” the advisory said.While much of Monday’s political focus has been on the expanded field of 2024 Republican presidential candidates, Texas’s US senator Ted Cruz has drawn unflattering headlines from some quarters for announcing an investigation into the maker of Bud Light as his state is gripped by major crises.Cruz, along with fellow Republican US senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, on Wednesday sent a letter to the beer industry’s regulatory body questioning whether Anheuser-Busch violated guidelines “prohibiting marketing to underage individuals” when transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in April posted a video of herself on Instagram holding a custom Bud Light can with her face on it.Rightwing media outlets and consumers reacted to Mulvaney’s video by calling for a boycott of Bud Light, which reported a 23% drop in sales for the final week of April as compared to the same period during the previous year, according to CBS News.Meanwhile, as Business Insider noted, Cruz’s home state has experienced five of the 10 deadliest mass shootings in recent US history but has offered little in the way of solutions to that. He’s also hardly weighed in as Covid asylum limits known as Title 42 recently expired, giving way to new, arguably tougher immigration policies.The rush to the US-Mexico border in Texas and other parts which preceded the expiration of Title 42 has brought extraordinary pressure to immigration officials, and politicos on both sides of the aisle have so far mostly just bused migrants to different cities rather than devise substantial solutions.“Beer marketing, however – thanks to Cruz – has all the attention of the state’s top leaders” on Capitol Hill, as Insider put it.Of Cruz’s latest culture war entry, Vanity Fair added: “No, he doesn’t have anything better to do.”Tim Scott was announcing his presidential campaign on Monday, when a technical glitch left the 57-year-old senator in silence.“Joe Biden and the radical left are attacking every rung of the ladder that helped me climb. And that is why I am announcing today that I am running for president of the United States of America,” Scott told a cheering crowd at Charleston Southern University in his home state of South Carolina. “Our nation, our values, and our people are strong, but our president is weak,” he added.At that point, the sound cut out. Here’s that moment, if you missed it earlier today:Now that Tim Scott has announced his run for the presidency, my colleague Nick Robins-Early has pulled together 10 things you need to know about the newest Republican hopeful.He writes:Scott is a 57-year-old senator from South CarolinaScott grew up in South Carolina, attending a Baptist university and owning an insurance company before becoming involved in politics. He entered politics in the mid-1990s as a Charleston, South Carolina, city council member before running for Congress.Scott was first elected to Congress in 2010Scott staked his political claim amid a wave of conservative opposition to Barack Obama’s presidency. As a member of the hardline conservative Tea Party movement, he was endorsed at the time by the former Alaska governor Sarah Palin and became a rising star of the party. After two years as a congressman, he was chosen in 2012 to replace the Republican senator Jim DeMint and appointed to the Senate.Scott is the sole Black Republican senatorScott is the only Black Republican senator, and was the first Black Republican elected to the US House of Representatives from South Carolina in over a hundred years. He has previously talked about his unique role as a Black Republican and the discrimination he has faced from authorities, but has claimed that liberals use race as a way to divide voters. He faced heated criticism from Black activists in 2021 after declaring “America is not a racist country” in response to a speech from President Joe Biden that condemned racism following a white supremacist mass shooting.Here’s the full explainer:Politicos and voters of South Carolina who support both US senator Tim Scott and former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley have been handed a dilemma now that they have both declared their candidacies for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.As the Associated Press pointed out Monday, Scott and Haley have a lengthy history and were even allies earlier in their careers. Both were members of South Carolina’s state House. And in 2012, while she was serving as governor of South Carolina, Haley appointed Scott to a state Senate seat in 2012.Scott, who is the US Senate’s only Black Republican and formally launched his presidential campaign Monday, told the AP that he doesn’t consider the situation a dilemma and expressed his belief that he and Haley would remain friends despite their competing interests.Meanwhile, the AP said Haley declined to comment when asked about Scott.Others in the Republican field who have already declared include Donald Trump – who appointed Haley to her UN role during his presidency – as well as former Arkansas governor Asa Hutchinson and Woke, Inc author Vivek Ramaswamy. Florida’s Republican governor Ron DeSantis is widely expected to formally announce his presidential campaign in the coming days.As for the Democrats, Joe Biden has announced that he will campaign for a second term in the Oval Office after defeating Trump in the 2020 presidential race. Biden’s declared Democratic challengers so far include self-help author Marianne Williamson and anti-vaccine activist Robert Kennedy Jr.Republican senator Tim Scott threw his hat into the ring with a speech in South Carolina where he promised to pursue a more compassionate form of conservatism, while advocating for hardline border security policies and downplaying the effects of racial inequality on American society. The GOP’s presidential field is crowded and set to become more packed on Wednesday when Ron DeSantis makes his campaign official, but can anyone defeat the final boss of Republican politicians, Donald Trump? We’ll see.Here’s what else has happened today:
      Joe Biden and Kevin McCarthy will meet at 5.30pm to (hopefully) resolve the debt ceiling standoff, which, by all indications, remains ongoing.
      Trump and fellow South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham both wished Scott well on his presidential bid.
      Speaking of Trump, federal prosecutors have evidence that he was warned he could not hold onto classified documents, the Guardian has confirmed.
      And here’s what Donald Trump has to say about Tim Scott throwing his hat into the presidential ring:
      Good luck to Senator Tim Scott in entering the Republican Presidential Primary Race. It is rapidly loading up with lots of people, and Tim is a big step up from Ron DeSanctimonious, who is totally unelectable. I got Opportunity Zones done with Tim, a big deal that has been highly successful. Good luck Tim!
      For those unfamiliar with Trump’s latest batch of zingers: Ron DeSanctimonious is the ex-president’s erstwhile ally Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor who is expected to announce his presidential campaign on Wednesday.Senator Tim Scott is now the second South Carolinian vying for the Republican presidential nomination, after former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley.The state’s other senator, Republican Lindsey Graham, has already made public his endorsement of Donald Trump. He nonetheless reserved kind words for Scott in a statement released after his campaign’s official kick off:
      Congratulations to my good friend Senator Tim Scott on his announcement that he is running for President of the United States.
      Tim makes South Carolina proud, and he is one of the most talented and hard-working public servants I’ve ever known.
      He will have an optimistic vision for the future of conservatism and America, and I know he will acquit himself well.
      The anti-abortion group Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America welcomed Senator Tim Scott’s formal entry into the 2024 Republican presidential primary today.“We are encouraged by his commitment to sign the strongest achievable protections for life should he be elected president,” said the group’s president, Marjorie Dannenfelser. “We welcome Scott and all presidential contenders further outlining their pro-life vision and policy platform.”Scott has vowed to sign “the most conservative, pro-life legislation” that could pass Congress if he becomes president, but he has refused to specify his preferred time frame for a potential federal abortion ban.When asked about his preferred cut-off point for banning the procedure, Scott told NBC News last month: “I’m not going to talk about six or five or seven or 10 [weeks].”Dannenfelser said today, “The pro-life movement is seeking a national defender of life who will boldly advocate a minimum national standard to protect unborn children at least by 15 weeks when they can feel pain, and who will work tirelessly to build consensus and gather the votes necessary in Congress.”In his presidential campaign announcement speech, Tim Scott recounted his upbringing from poverty, discounted the impact of racial inequality on Americans’ lives and restated conservative policy goals, from cutting taxes to building a wall along the US border with Mexico.As he wrapped up his address, he vowed to promote on the campaign trail a friendlier form of conservatism.“This can’t be another presidential campaign. We don’t have time for that. We need a president who persuades not just our friends and our base,” he said. “We have to have a compassion for people who don’t agree with us.”He closed with these words: “I am living proof that God and a good family and the United States of America can do all things, if we believe. Will you believe it with me?”In the months to come, we’ll find out if Republican voters share his faith.Tim Scott has said the magic words.“Joe Biden and the radical left are attacking every single rung of the ladder that helped me climb and that’s why I’m announcing today I’m running for president of the United States of America,” the senator said to applause and cheers in his kick-off speech in North Charleston, South Carolina.He began the speech by recounting his upbringing from poverty and downplaying the impacts of racial disparities in the economy, saying “I’m living proof that America is the land of opportunity and not a land of oppression.”When it comes to policy, the senator is outlining familiar conservative priorities.“On my first day as commander in chief, the strongest nation on earth will stop retreating from our southern border,” he said.He embraced the conservative demand to deploy the military against drug traffickers, and vowed to restart construction of the border wall pioneered by Donald Trump.“When I am president, the drug cartels using Chinese labs and Mexican factories to kill Americans will cease to exist. I will freeze their assets, I will build the wall and I will allow the world’s greatest military to fight these terrorists. Because that’s exactly what they are.”Tim Scott may be the lone Black Republican in the Senate, but his message to Republican voters downplays the impact of racial inequality in America.“For those of you who wonder if America is a racist country, take a look at how people come together,” Scott said. “We are not defined by the color of our skin. We are defined by the content of our character.” More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Mayor pushes plan to force homeless New Yorkers with mental illness to seek help

      by

      New York mayor Eric Adams has warned that there are “more Jordan Neelys out there”, invoking the name of the unhoused man who was killed on the subway earlier in May as the Democratic mayor pushed his idea to force people with mental illness to access help.In an interview with MSNBC on Sunday, Adams called a dearth of such services – particularly for the city’s unhoused population – “a very real issue”.Neely, 30, died after 24-year-old Daniel Penny put him in a chokehold. Penny, who previously served in the marines, has been charged with manslaughter despite his claims of self-defense in a case that has inflamed racial tensions nationwide because he is white and Neely was Black.Adams said: “The case is now in the hands of the district attorney. I have a lot of confidence in DA [Alvin] Bragg.“I am clear on this. I can’t control the outcome of the case but I can control how we continue to address a very real issue,” Adams said. New York saw street protests demanding Penny’s arrest for Neely’s death.Adams alluded to earlier remarks that he had made calling for the “involuntary removal to the hospitals of those who are unable to take care of basic needs and they are [a] danger to themselves”.In November, Adams announced plans for authorities and emergency services to more aggressively hospitalize mentally ill people involuntarily, even if they do not pose any active threat to others.At the time of the announcement, Adams said his directive was an attempt to clear up a “gray area where policy, law and accountability have not been clear”, and he said that it was an “moral obligation to act” in response to a “crisis we see all around us”.Adams’s announcement faced swift backlash from civil rights organizations, unhoused people and their advocates, with the New York Civil Liberties Union accusing Adams of “playing fast and loose with the legal rights of New Yorkers and … not dedicating the resources necessary to address the mental health crises”.During Sunday’s interview, Adams urged the codification of involuntary removals, saying: “We need state health to codify what the courts have already ruled. That is the real issue. There are more Jordan Neelys out there.“And when I’m in the subway system speaking with them trying to get them into care, we know that we have to have help on a state level to codify this law.”Last year, the mayor, a former police officer, also announced a new subway safety plan and promised the expansion of outreach teams consisting of clinicians and police officers, which critics also condemned as cracking down against people experiencing mental illness and homelessness.Prior to his death, Neely had been a Michael Jackson impersonator. He had dealt with various mental health problems, including schizophrenia and post-traumatic stress disorder after his mother was murdered by an abusive partner when Neely was 14.According to police, Neely had over 40 prior arrests, and he had previously been accused of punching a fellow subway passenger. He also had over a dozen mental health encounters with police but had apparently not received mental health support.On the day of his death, Neely boarded a train and pleaded to passengers that he was hungry, homeless and thirsty. Penny placed him in a chokehold for several minutes.After Neely’s killing, Republicans have been swift to embrace Penny as he contests charges of second-degree manslaughter. More than $1m has been raised for Penny’s legal defense, largely through the Christian fundraising website GiveSendGo. The site also hosted fundraising efforts for US Capitol attack participants and Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot two racial justice demonstrators dead in Wisconsin and was acquitted of murder charges by claiming self-defense.During Neely’s funeral at a Harlem church on Friday, the civil rights activist and pastor Al Sharpton called for more support for people living with mental illnesses.“A Good Samaritan helps those in trouble. They don’t choke him out,” Sharpton said. “People keep criminalizing people that need help.“They don’t need abuse – they need help.” More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trans girl denied graduation ceremony after US school’s dress-code ruling

      by

      A transgender girl in Mississippi did not participate in her high school graduation ceremony on Saturday because school officials told her to dress like a boy and a federal judge did not block the officials’ decision, an attorney for the girl’s family said.Linda Morris, staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project, said the ruling handed down late on Friday by federal judge Taylor McNeel in the Mississippi city of Gulfport “is as disappointing as it is absurd”.“Our client is being shamed and humiliated for explicitly discriminatory reasons, and her family is being denied a once-in-a-lifetime milestone in their daughter’s life,” Morris said. “No one should be forced to miss their graduation because of their gender.”The ACLU confirmed that the 17-year-old girl – listed in court papers only by her initials, LB – would skip the Saturday ceremony for Harrison Central high school in Gulfport, about 160 miles (260km) south of Jackson and 80 miles (129km) east of New Orleans.The student “has met the qualifications to receive a diploma”, according to the local public school district’s attorney, Wynn Clark.The ACLU sued the district on Thursday on behalf of the student and her parents after Harrison Central principal Kelly Fuller and school district superintendent Mitchell King told LB that she must follow the boys’ clothing rules. Graduating boys are expected to wear white shirts and black slacks, and girls are expected to wear white dresses.LB had selected a dress to wear with her cap and gown. The lawsuit said LB had worn dresses to classes and extracurricular events throughout high school, including to a prom last year, and she should not face discriminatory treatment during graduation.King told LB’s mother that the teenager could not participate in the graduation ceremony unless LB wears “pants, socks, and shoes, like a boy”, according to the lawsuit.Clark wrote in court papers on Friday that taking part in a graduation ceremony is voluntary and not a constitutionally protected right for any student.Mississippi is among the US states that have pursued a barrage of restrictions pertaining to transgender youth medical care, sports participation and bathroom use. Earlier this year, the state’s conservative governor, Tate Reeves, signed into law a legislative bill which prohibits health professionals from providing both hormone treatments and surgical procedures to transgender minors.Such gender-affirming care is medically necessary and potentially lifesaving for children and adults diagnosed with gender dysphoria.At the time the bill was signed, Reeves said the law indicated to children they are “beautiful the way they are” and do not need to “take drugs and cut themselves up with expensive surgeries in order to find freedom from depression”. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Martin Luther King, founding father: Jonathan Eig on his epic new biography

      by

      Jonathan Eig’s new biography of Martin Luther King Jr was only published last week but it has already been hailed by the Washington Post as “the most compelling account of King’s life in a generation”. The documentarian Ken Burns described it as “kind of a miracle” and the New York Times declared it “supplants David J Garrow’s [Pulitzer-winning] 1986 biography, Bearing the Cross, as the definitive life of King”.In a remarkable act of generosity, Garrow opened his files to Eig and acted as his consultant. Garrow now agrees with other critics, calling Eig’s book “a great leap forward in our biographical understanding” and “the most comprehensive and original King biography to appear in over 35 years”.Eig is a former Wall Street Journal reporter who has written five other highly regarded books, including bestselling biographies of Lou Gehrig and Muhammad Ali. This week, Eig chatted about how his book on King came about and what he hopes readers will take from it.The Guardian: I read somewhere that the new book came out of your work on Ali.Eig: Yeah, it was completely organic. I was interviewing people who knew both of them and every time they would start talking about King, I would just get more curious. So I felt like I already had their phone numbers. I could call them back and get another meeting and this time talk about King. And I could do that before they got any older.The Guardian: When I wrote The Gay Metropolis I started with the oldest people I could find. Did you do that?Eig: 100%. It was like actuarial tables: factor for age and health and go after those who are the most frail. I hate to be crude about it, but that’s exactly what I did. Basically I was calling everybody all at once.The Guardian: How long did this one take?Eig: This one was six years. That’s full-time work, like 60 hours a week for six years.The Guardian: You had access to thousands of FBI files that weren’t available to previous biographers. How did that come about?Eig: I got somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 new documents. Donald Trump signed an order to release documents that were gathered during congressional hearings on JFK’s assassination. And I think accidentally that also led to the release of all the MLK FBI stuff, because the Church committee [a 1975-76 Senate panel on government intelligence activities] investigated them both.I really think Dave Garrow was the only one who went through every file. I went through a lot of them and Garrow was kind of like the first reader and he would tell me what was important and I, of course, looked through a lot on my own. But I don’t really know that too many other people were out there looking at this stuff.The Guardian: You did more than 200 interviews. Why were there so many people who knew King who were much more forthcoming than they had been before?Eig: Because they were older and because Coretta [Scott King, King’s wife] was gone. They were more comfortable saying things that they wouldn’t have said before. Certainly when it came to talking about Dorothy Cotton [one of King’s mistresses], people were really reluctant to say anything while Coretta was alive.The Guardian: I always tell my young friends writing a great book is all about what you leave out. Do you agree?Eig: (chuckling) Yeah. Even at 600-something pages! I left out a lot. At one point – I’ll be honest – I asked Colin Dickerman [his original editor] if I could do a three-volume work. I wanted to do one from childhood to Montgomery and then from Montgomery to maybe Selma and then Selma to death. Wisely, Colin disabused me of that idea. I’m trying to give the reader not just a good book but a readable book. I told my wife, I want people to cry at the end of this book – and they’re not gonna cry if I’ve put them to sleep!The Guardian: What do you know now that you didn’t know when you wrote your first book, about Lou Gehrig?Eig: It took me a couple of books to figure out that journalists’ archives are really valuable … When you find a good interview a journalist did with one of your subjects, go to his archives and see if the notes are there, see if the tapes are there.I got David Halberstam’s notes from his interview with King and he describes King taking his kids to the swimming pool and his daughter falls and scrapes her knee. And King grabs a piece of fried chicken and rubs it on her knee and says, “You know, chicken is the best thing for a cut.” It’s just a sweet little moment that didn’t make Halberstam’s story. But it was in his notebook.The Guardian: You describe King as one of America’s founding fathers. I’d never seen that before.Eig: Yeah. It was my idea. It was inspired somewhat by reading some of the 1619 Project. They talk about the idea that Black activists were seeking to force the country to live up to the words of the founding fathers. And that’s what kind of triggered it for me. I think you can make an argument that King more than anyone else is a founding father. He’s trying to create the nation as it was meant to be.The Guardian: The great Texas journalist Molly Ivins said something similar: “There’s not a thing wrong with the ideals and mechanisms outlined and the liberties set forth in the constitution of the US. The only problem is the founders left a lot of people out of the constitution. They left out poor people and Black people and female people. It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our constitution to everyone in America.”Eig: Yeah, I, I like that.The Guardian: What would you most like people to feel from reading your book?Eig: I hope people see King as a human being and not this two-dimensional character we’ve made him into since he became a national holiday and monument. [They should know] he had feelings and suffered and struggled and had doubts, because I think that makes his heroism even greater.I certainly want people to appreciate just how radical he was. A lot of people reduce him to this very safe figure who was all about peace, love and harmony. But he was challenging us in ways that made a lot of people uncomfortable, which is partly why the FBI came down on him the way they did.The Guardian: The thing that I think is probably most forgotten about him is that he was as anti-materialism as he was anti-militarism. Would you agree?Eig: That’s right. And it drove Coretta crazy because he would never even buy nice stuff for the house. And of course he left no money behind when he died. So he took it really seriously.
      King is published in the US by Farrar, Straus and Giroux More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Vigilante fears as Texas Republicans push for special unit to detain migrants

      by

      A new Texas bill could soon establish a taskforce using civilians that would have the authority to “arrest, apprehend or detain persons crossing the Texas-Mexico border unlawfully”, raising concerns around state-sponsored vigilantism.House Bill 20, authored by Republican state representative Matt Schaefer, seeks to create a new “border protection unit” that would deter migrants from unlawfully entering Texas using non-deadly force. It could include civilians with prior military experience among its members – such as national guards or former border patrol agents – who would be granted some immunity from prosecution for actions they carried out as members of the force.The HB20 bill itself was killed last week in the Texas legislature but then quickly resurrected as HB7 – a slightly different amendment to existing immigration legislation. The proposed unit was renamed the “Texas border force” and put under the command of the Texas ranger division.With a Republican majority in both the state house and senate, the fresh bill seems likely to pass.Bernardo Cruz, an attorney for the Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told the Guardian: “It’s really an unlawful action or exercise by the state government. We are really afraid it’s going to lead to more racial profiling of current migrants, and also that it affects everyone who lives across the border and the states.”Although immigration law and enforcement on the US border is under federal jurisdiction, border states like Texas argue they have the right to protect themselves if the federal government fails to do so, as per the “invasion” clause of the US constitution.Such a drastic move by a state to enforce federal immigration law is likely to end up in court.Schaefer, one of the Texas legislature’s most conservative members, said in a statement: “Enough is enough. If [Joe] Biden won’t defend this country, we will.”The news of the bill comes shortly after the expiration of Title 42, the pandemic-era policy that gave US officials authority to turn away migrants who came to the US-Mexico border claiming asylum in order to prevent the spread of Covid-19.Immigration and civil rights activists have condemned the legislation and said its potential passage was “disheartening”. These critics of the bill, such as the non-profit Human Rights Watch, say it will embolden state-sponsored vigilantism.Testifying in front of the Texas house state affairs committee in April, Bob Libal of Human Rights Watch said the border protection unit would lead to the “codification and expansion of a border policing, court and jailing system that has to date resulted in injuries, deaths, racial discrimination, abusive detention conditions, and a chilling effect on freedoms of association and expression.”The unit would be overseen by the Texas public safety department and would controversially give its officers broad authority to make arrests, build border barriers and search vehicles they deem suspicious.Rochelle Garza, president of the Texas Civil Rights Project, told the Dallas Morning News that she was “appalled by this dangerous and unconstitutional proposal designed to violate federal law at the expense of the border community I call home”.She added: “Not only does this bill mobilize a new military force under the governor, it also allows the head of the force to deputize almost anyone to enforce federal immigration law, including vigilante groups that have targeted Texas border communities.”The ACLU’s Cruz said the unit would be an extension of Operation Lone Star, another state effort to secure the US border with Mexico, launched by the rightwing Republican governor, Greg Abbott, in March 2021.Operation Lone Star is a joint operation between the public safety department and the Texas national guard. It was established during an increase of migrants at the state’s border for which Abbott issued a disaster declaration.“Texas does not have the authority to enforce immigration law,” Cruz said. “There’s clear both federal law and supreme court precedent that establishes that the appropriate entity to enforce immigration laws in this country are federal law enforcement agencies.”Like Operation Lone Star, Cruz said the new border protection unit would lead to racial profiling.In a federal complaint filed in July last year, the Texas ACLU, along with the Texas Civil Rights Project, alleged state troopers excessively pull over Latinos as part of Operation Lone Star. The complaint also said at least 30 people were killed in state police car chases connected to Texas’s expansive border security operation.“We really afraid it’s going to lead to more racial profiling of migrants and also that it affects everyone who lives across the border and the states. There’s nothing in the language it just narrows it to specific area of Texas. So this really is an extremely broad attempt by the state of Texas, to really just militarize communities.“And that, of course, impacts everyone’s day-to-day life in a negative way.” More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Trump’s not a good sport’: Chris Cillizza on presidents at play

      by

      From The Big Lebowski to Alice on The Brady Bunch, depictions of bowling abound in American pop culture. The sport’s real-life adherents included Richard Nixon, who installed bowling lanes in the White House and was known to play between seven to 12 games late at night. Characteristically, he played alone. This is one of many athletic accounts from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in a new book, Power Players: Sports, Politics, and the American Presidency, by the longtime political journalist Chris Cillizza.Bowling solo personified “Nixon the loner”, Cillizza says. “He didn’t play tennis or golf with friends. He did enjoy bowling by himself. It’s a powerful image, a telling image.”Tricky Dick’s love of bowling also helped with a crucial voting bloc: “Nixon viewed it as the sport of the Silent Majority – white, blue-collar men who sort of made up his base. He was very aware of this.”A Washington journalist for four decades, most recently for CNN, Cillizza pitched the book as about “the sports presidents play, love, spectate, and what it tells us about who they are and how they govern. That was the germ of the idea, the seed going in.”Power Players surveys 13 presidents of the modern era, from Dwight Eisenhower to Joe Biden. Some of its narratives are well-known – think Ike’s extensive golf-playing, John F Kennedy’s touch football games or Barack Obama’s pickup basketball on the campaign trail. The book explores less-remembered sides of these stories, including a scary moment on the links for Eisenhower.While golfing in Colorado in 1955, he fielded multiple stressful phone calls from his secretary of state, John Foster Dulles. After eating a hamburger with onions and getting yet another call from Dulles, Ike felt too angry to keep playing. Chest pains followed that night. The White House initially claimed indigestion but an electrocardiogram found something more serious – a heart attack. At the time, there was no 25th amendment specifying the chain of command if a president became incapacitated. Fortunately, Ike never lost consciousness during the episode.Golf was a popular sport for many presidents, as reflected in a previous book about White House athletics, First Off the Tee by Don Van Natta Jr, whom Cillizza interviewed. Yet the list of presidential pastimes is long and diverse, from Nixon’s bowling to Jimmy Carter’s fly fishing to George HW Bush’s horseshoes. Yes, horseshoes. In addition to Bush’s well-known prowess on the Yale University baseball team, he was a pretty good horseshoes player who established his own league in the White House, with a commissioner and tournaments. The White House permanent staff fielded teams; Queen Elizabeth II even gifted Bush a quartet of silver horseshoes.In the greatest-presidential-athlete discussion, Cillizza lands in Gerald Ford’s corner.“No debate, he’s the best athlete ever, I think, with [George HW] Bush a distant second, among modern presidents.”Ford sometimes lived up to the bumbling stereotypes made famous by Chevy Chase and Bob Hope – including when he accidentally hit people with golf balls. Yet he was an All-American center on the national-champion University of Michigan football team and received contract offers from two NFL squads, the Detroit Lions and Green Bay Packers.In addition to the sports presidents play, Cillizza’s book examines how presidents use sports to connect to the public.Calling sports “a common language that lots and lots and lots of Americans speak”, Cillizza says: “I think politicians are forever trying to identify with the average person … I think sports is a way into that world for a lot of presidents.”There’s the practice of inviting championship teams to the White House, which Cillizza traces to Ronald Reagan, although instances date back decades. While not much of a sports fan, Reagan came from a sports radio background, played the legendary Gipper in the film Knute Rockne, All American and understood the importance of proximity to winners, Cillizza says.There’s also the tradition of presidential first pitches at baseball games, arguably the most iconic thrown by George W Bush at Yankee Stadium during the 2001 World Series, in the wake of the September 11 terror attacks. Cillizza notes Dubya’s baseball pedigree as president of the Texas Rangers, and that he reportedly contemplated becoming commissioner of Major League Baseball.Of the presidents surveyed, Cillizza says George HW Bush had the most sportsmanship, thanks to early lessons about fair play from his mother, Dorothy Walker Bush, a strong tennis player herself. The least sportsmanlike, according to the author? Lyndon Johnson and Donald Trump. Cillizza cites an account of Trump’s time on the Fordham University squash team. After a loss to the Naval Academy, he drove to a department store and bought golf equipment. He and his teammates vented their frustration by hitting golf balls off a bluff into the Chesapeake Bay, then drove away, sans clubs.“That’s Trump, in a lot of ways,” Cillizza says. “He’s not a good sport who’s going to be genteel.”The author notes similar behavior throughout Trump’s career, including bombastic performances in World Wrestling Entertainment storylines and a whole recent book about his alleged cheating at golf, as well as a recent news item about the former president going to Ireland to visit one of his courses.“He hit a drive, and said Joe Biden could never do this,” Cillizza recalls. “It went 280ft right down the middle of the fairway. He talks about his virility, his health, through the lens of sports.”Not too long ago, two ex-presidents from rival parties teamed up as part of a golf foursome. George HW Bush joined the man who beat him in 1992 – Bill Clinton – en route to an unlikely friendship. Rounding out the foursome were the broadcasting legend Jim Nantz and NFL superstar Tom Brady.“It’s remarkable what sports can do to bring presidents together,” Cillizza says. “This day and age, it’s hard to consider … I don’t think Donald Trump and Joe Biden will be playing golf together anytime soon.”
      Power Players is published in the US by Twelve More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      FBI broke own rules in January 6 and BLM intelligence search, court finds

      by

      FBI officials repeatedly violated their own standards when they searched a vast repository of foreign intelligence for information related to the January 6 insurrection and racial justice protests in 2020, according court order released Friday.FBI officials said the thousands of violations, which also include improper searches of donors to a congressional campaign, predated a series of corrective measures that started in the summer of 2021 and continued last year. But the problems could nonetheless complicate FBI and justice department efforts to receive congressional reauthorization of a warrantless surveillance program that law enforcement officials say is needed to counter terrorism, espionage and international cybercrime.The violations were detailed in a secret court order issued last year by the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court, which has legal oversight of the US government’s spy powers. The Office of the Director of the National Intelligence released a heavily redacted version on Friday in what officials said was the interest of transparency.“Today’s disclosures underscore the need for Congress to rein in the FBI’s egregious abuses of this law, including warrantless searches using the names of people who donated to a congressional candidate,” said Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU’s National Security Project.“These unlawful searches undermine our core constitutional rights and threaten the bedrock of our democracy. It’s clear the FBI can’t be left to police itself.”At issue are improper queries of foreign intelligence information collected under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which enables the government to gather the communications of targeted foreigners outside the US.That program, which is set to expire at the end of the year, creates a database of intelligence that US agencies can search. FBI searches must have a foreign intelligence purpose or be aimed at finding evidence of a crime. But congressional critics of the program have long raised alarm about what they say are unjustified searches of the database for information about Americans, along with more general concerns about surveillance abuses.Such criticism has aligned staunch liberal defenders of civil liberties with supporters of Donald Trump, who have seized on FBI surveillance errors during an investigation into his 2016 campaign. The issue has flared as the Republican-led House has been targeting the FBI, creating a committee to investigate the “weaponization” of government.In repeated episodes disclosed on Friday, the FBI’s own standards were not followed. The April 2022 order, for instances, details how the FBI queried the section 702 repository using the name of someone who was believed to have been at the Capitol during the January 6 6 riot. Officials obtained the information despite it not having any “analytical, investigative or evidentiary purpose”, the order said.The court order also says that an FBI analyst ran 13 queries of people suspected of being involved in the Capitol riot to determine if they had any foreign ties, but the justice department later determined that the searches were not likely to find foreign intelligence information or evidence of a crime.Other violations occurred when FBI officials in June 2020 ran searches related to more than 100 people arrested in connection with civil unrest and racial justice protests that had occurred in the US over the preceding weeks. The order says the FBI had maintained that the queries were likely to return foreign intelligence, though the reasons given for that assessment are mostly redacted.In addition, the FBI conducted what’s known as a batch query for 19,000 donors to an unnamed congressional campaign. An analyst doing the search cited concern that the campaign was a target of foreign influence, but the justice department said only “eight identifiers used in the query had sufficient ties to foreign influence activities to comply with the querying standard”.Officials said the case involved a candidate who ran unsuccessfully and is not a sitting member of Congress, and is unrelated to an episode described in March by congressman Darin LaHood, an Illinois Republican, who accused the FBI of wrongly searching for his name in foreign surveillance data.Senior FBI officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to reporters under ground rules set by the government, attributed the majority of the violations to confusion among the workforce and a lack of common understanding about the querying standards.They said the bureau has made significant changes since then, including mandating training and overhauling its computer system so that FBI officials must now enter a justification for the search in their own words than relying on a drop-down menu with pre-populated options.One of the officials said an internal audit of a representative sample of searches showed an increased compliance rate from 82% before the reforms were implemented to 96% afterward. More