More stories

  • in

    Senators to meet security officials amid questions over Trump’s decision to attack Iran – US politics live

    Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. My name is Tom Ambrose and I will be bringing you all the latest news lines.Senators are set to meet with top national security officials Thursday as many question president Donald Trump’s decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites — and whether those strikes were ultimately successful.The classified briefing, which was originally scheduled for Tuesday and was delayed, also comes as the Senate is expected to vote this week on a resolution that would require congressional approval if Trump decides to strike Iran again, AP reported.Democrats, and some Republicans, have said that the White House overstepped its authority when it failed to seek the advice of Congress and they want to know more about the intelligence that Trump relied on when he authorized the attacks.“Senators deserve full transparency, and the administration has a legal obligation to inform Congress precisely about what is happening,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, who said Tuesday that it was “outrageous” that the Senate and House briefings were postponed. A similar briefing for House members was pushed to Friday.CIA director John Ratcliffe, secretary of state Marco Rubio and defense secretary Pete Hegseth are expected to brief the senators on Thursday. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was scheduled to be at the Tuesday briefing, but will not be attending, according to a person familiar with the schedule.In other news:

    Trump weighed in on Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York, saying Mamdani was a “100% Communist Lunatic” and saying he and other progressive politicians were signs that “our Country is really SCREWED”.

    Trump has lit into journalists who are reporting on the doubts in the intelligence community that the US bombs actually decimated the Iranian nuclear sites. He has called for a CNN journalist to be fired over her reporting. CNN defended its journalist, Natasha Bertrand, and its stories on the matter.

    Emil Bove, a judicial nominee and justice department official, was grilled by a Senate committee and denied allegations in a whistleblower report about ignoring judicial orders and said claims of a quid pro quo for New York City mayor Eric Adams were false.

    Speaking of Eric Adams, he is expected to formally announce his mayoral run tomorrow. He is running as an independent. And he went on Fox and called Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for mayor, a “snake oil salesman”.

    Mamdani, meanwhile, gathered congratulations (sometimes muted) from prominent Democrats after his upset win in the mayoral primary. On the right, Stephen Miller has cast Mamdani’s win as a symptom of “unchecked migration”.

    The Working Families Party called Mamdani’s win a “seismic shift” and shows that “voters are thoroughly fed up with the status quo”.

    Health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr’s new vaccine advisory panel is meeting today for the first time. More

  • in

    Trump slams Zohran Mamdani as Republicans go on attack after New York mayoral primary – live

    Donald Trump has weighed in on Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York, saying: “the Democrats have crossed the line”. He called Mamdani “a 100% Communist Lunatic”.“He looks TERRIBLE, his voice is grating, he’s not very smart, he’s got AOC+3, Dummies ALL, backing him, and even our Great Palestinian Senator, Cryin’ Chuck Schumer, is groveling over him,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Yes, this is a big moment in the History of our Country!”In a second post, he said, presumably in jest, that Democrats should nominate “Low IQ Candidate, Jasmine Crockett, for President” to get back in play, and put “AOC+3” – his term for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other progressive Squad members – in Cabinet positions.
    Added together with our future Communist Mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani, and our Country is really SCREWED!”
    The Harvard University researcher and Russia-born scientist who spent months in Ice custody after being accused of smuggling frog embryos into the US now faces additional criminal charges.A federal grand jury indicted Kseniia Petrova, a cancer researcher for Harvard Medical School, on Wednesday on one count of concealment of a material fact, one count of false statement and one count of smuggling goods into the United States, the Associated Press reports.She was returning from a vacation earlier this year in France, where she had stopped at a lab specializing in splicing superfine sections of frog embryos to obtain a package of samples for research. She was questioned about the samples while passing through a US Customs and Border Protection checkpoint at Boston Logan international airport, and told after an interrogation that her visa was being canceled.Federal officials accused her of lying about “carrying substances” into the country and alleged that she planned to smuggle the embryos through customs without declaring them. Petrova has said she didn’t realize the items needed to be declared.Petrova faces a sentence of up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 if convicted of smuggling and a sentence of up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on the charges of concealment of material fact and false statements.Let’s round up what’s been happening since this morning:

    Trump weighed in on Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York, saying Mamdani was a “100% Communist Lunatic” and saying he and other progressive politicians were signs that “our Country is really SCREWED”.

    Trump has lit into journalists who are reporting on the doubts in the intelligence community that the US bombs actually decimated the Iranian nuclear sites. He has called for a CNN journalist to be fired over her reporting. CNN defended its journalist, Natasha Bertrand, and its stories on the matter.

    Emil Bove, a judicial nominee and justice department official, was grilled by a Senate committee and denied allegations in a whistleblower report about ignoring judicial orders and said claims of a quid pro quo for New York City mayor Eric Adams were false.

    Speaking of Eric Adams, he is expected to formally announce his mayoral run tomorrow. He is running as an independent. And he went on Fox and called Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic nominee for mayor, a “snake oil salesman”.

    Mamdani, meanwhile, gathered congratulations (sometimes muted) from prominent Democrats after his upset win in the mayoral primary. On the right, Stephen Miller has cast Mamdani’s win as a symptom of “unchecked migration”.

    The Working Families Party called Mamdani’s win a “seismic shift” and shows that “voters are thoroughly fed up with the status quo”.

    Health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr’s new vaccine advisory panel is meeting today for the first time.

    A Senate subcommittee held a hearing this afternoon called “Enter the Dragon – China and the Left’s Lawfare Against American Energy Dominance,” attempting to tie lawsuits from local governments against big oil over climate issues to China.

    Maryland man Kilmar Ábrego García, who was deported to El Salvador by mistake and then returned to the US, will be released from a Tennessee jail today, then taken into immigration custody.

    US congresswoman LaMonica McIver pleaded not guilty to federal charges of assaulting, resisting and impeding immigration officers in New Jersey while on a congressional oversight visit to a detention facility.

    Dozens of cities and states have in recent years sued big oil over its climate-warming pollution and history of allegedly spreading climate disinformation. Those lawsuits are advancing the agenda of the Chinese communist party, Republicans argued in a hearing on Wednesday.Titled “Enter the Dragon – China and the Left’s Lawfare Against American Energy Dominance”, the hearing in the Senate judiciary oversight subcommittee aimed to show that climate advocates want to weaken the US energy sector, giving China the upper hand.It came as Washington DC temperatures neared 100 degrees, and as Republicans are working to gut clean energy credits in reconciliation bill negotiations.“The agenda of the Chinese Communist Party and the agenda of Senate Democrats are identical: Both China and the Democrats want to bankrupt the American energy industry,” said committee chair Ted Cruz, the senator from Texas. He went on to claim that “left wing groups funded by Communist China”.Among the expert witnesses invited by Republicans was Kansas attorney general Kris Kobach, chair of the Republican Attorneys General Association, which has been backed by oil and gas interests. In his testimony, he called on Congress to amend the Clean Air Act to block states from regulating greenhouse gas emissions.This month, Kobach was among 16 Republican attorneys general who signed a letter to the Justice Department calling on the Trump administration to quash climate lawsuits and provide fossil fuel companies with immunity from current and future litigation.David Arkush, a director at climate and consumer advocacy nonprofit Public Citizen, who was invited to testify by Democratic senators, pushed back on the premise of the hearing.“Right now, there’s a brutal heatwave afflicting half the United States, energy costs and insurance premiums are skyrocketing, and we’re sitting here in the US Senate talking about Chinese communist conspiracy theories,” he said. “I don’t think this is the right priority.”CNN has responded to Trump’s outburst about its reporter, Natasha Bertrand, defending her journalism. The media company noted that Bertrand and other journalists who reported on the intelligence assessment specifically noted that this was an initial finding, and the network has also covered Trump’s skepticism of the intelligence report.“However, we do not believe it is reasonable to criticize CNN reporters for accurately reporting the existence of the assessment and accurately characterizing its findings, which are in the public interest,” CNN said in a statement.Donald Trump has weighed in on Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York, saying: “the Democrats have crossed the line”. He called Mamdani “a 100% Communist Lunatic”.“He looks TERRIBLE, his voice is grating, he’s not very smart, he’s got AOC+3, Dummies ALL, backing him, and even our Great Palestinian Senator, Cryin’ Chuck Schumer, is groveling over him,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Yes, this is a big moment in the History of our Country!”In a second post, he said, presumably in jest, that Democrats should nominate “Low IQ Candidate, Jasmine Crockett, for President” to get back in play, and put “AOC+3” – his term for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other progressive Squad members – in Cabinet positions.
    Added together with our future Communist Mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani, and our Country is really SCREWED!”
    Donald Trump wants CNN to fire its journalist who has been reporting on the intelligence that casts doubt on whether the US bombs sent to destroy Iran’s nuclear sites actually obliterated them, as Trump has claimed.Natasha Bertrand has reported in the last few days about intelligence assessments that show the “bunker buster” bombs may not have destroyed key parts of Iran’s nuclear program and could have only set the country back months in creating nuclear weapons.During Trump’s press conference at the Nato summit, he and defense secretary Pete Hegseth lashed out at reporters who questioned whether the US had destroyed the sites and claimed they weren’t respecting the military members who conducted the strikes. In a post on Truth Social earlier today, he railed against CNN and the New York Times for reporting on the intelligence concerns, saying they “tried to demean” the pilots.Now, he’s making the criticism more pointed, singling out Bertrand in a post this afternoon:
    Natasha Bertrand should be FIRED from CNN! I watched her for three days doing Fake News. She should be IMMEDIATELY reprimanded, and then thrown out “like a dog.” She lied on the Laptop from Hell Story, and now she lied on the Nuclear Sites Story, attempting to destroy our Patriot Pilots by making them look bad when, in fact, they did a GREAT job and hit “pay dirt” — TOTAL OBLITERATION! She should not be allowed to work at Fake News CNN. It’s people like her who destroyed the reputation of a once great Network. Her slant was so obviously negative, besides, she doesn’t have what it takes to be an on camera correspondent, not even close. FIRE NATASHA!
    Chris Murphy, the Democratic senator from Connecticut who has emerged as a leading voice on the left, congratulated Zohran Mamdani on his win, saying it offered “important lessons” for Democrats.“Focus on shifting economic power. Relentlessly. Have big ideas on how to do it,” Murphy wrote on X. “Be joyful and authentic. Even if your ideas aren’t considered ‘mainstream’ by elites. The elites have little idea what’s actually mainstream.”His comments are an echo of what he told the Guardian two weeks ago for where the Democratic party should move after the harsh 2024 loss. He told David Smith that the party claims to be the party of poor people, but poor people don’t vote for Democrats any more.
    There’s a lot of conservative poor people out there who think that our party is way too judgmental. We’ve got to become a bigger tent party when it comes to a lot of social and cultural and hot button issues and then we’ve got to become an aggressively populist party.
    A mediator between Donald Trump and Paramount, which owns CBS News, has suggested the media company settle a lawsuit from the president for $20m, the Wall Street Journal is reporting.Trump’s lawsuit came after a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, which Trump alleged was election interference because of how the interview was edited. CBS has defended its work, saying it edited a response to make it more succinct, a common practice for journalists.The suit is one of several Trump has filed against media companies, a way to intimidate the press and draw their resources into settlements or lengthy court battles. Paramount is also in the middle of a merger, which plays into its willingness to get on the Trump administration’s good side. The lawsuit has roiled CBS, with high-profile departures from its news operations who see a settlement as damaging to journalism.Trump wanted $20bn in damages; Paramount had previously offered $15m to settle, but Trump wanted upward of $25m, according to the Journal. The mediator’s $20m proposal would include $17m for Trump’s foundation or museum, plus money for legal fees and public-service announcements against antisemitism, the Journal says. But, it notes, “Settlement talks are still fluid and an agreement may not be reached.”A few updates on some immigration issues we’ve been covering:

    Kilmar Ábrego García, the Maryland man who was deported to El Salvador by mistake and then returned to the US, is expected to be released from a Tennessee jail today. He will then be taken into immigration custody, the Associated Press reports. He was charged by the US with two counts of human smuggling.

    Separately, the US representative who was charged after a congressional visit to an immigration detention center pleaded not guilty today, according to the AP. US congresswoman LaMonica McIver faces federal charges of assaulting, resisting and impeding immigration officers in New Jersey. Outside the courthouse, she said: “They will not intimidate me. They will not stop me from doing my job.”

    And in Maryland, the Trump administration has taken the unusual step of filing a lawsuit against federal judges over an order they made that blocks removals for detained immigrants who request a court hearing.

    Eric Adams, the New York City mayor, is expected to make a “major announcement” and “formally announce” presumably a run to keep his office midday tomorrow.Adams’s campaign said in a press release today that Adams “will make a major announcement about the future of his re-election campaign” on the steps of New York city hall at noon Thursday.“With the Democratic primary now behind him, this pivotal moment will set the stage for the next phase of the 2025 mayoral race,” the release says.Adams ran for mayor as a Democrat but has said he would run as an independent in the general election.Democratic senators have repeatedly pressed Emil Bove about his involvement in the decision to drop corruption charges filed under Joe Biden’s administration against Eric Adams, alleging the decision was a quid pro quo to win the New York mayor’s cooperation on immigration enforcement.“In order to get Mayor Adams to cooperate with President Trump’s immigration policy, you were prepared to drop the charges against him?” asked Dick Durbin, the Senate judiciary committee’s top Democrat.“That’s completely false,” Bove replied.Durbin went on to allege that a federal judge “foiled your plans” by dismissing the charges with prejudice – meaning they could not be refiled, and Adams would have no incentive to cooperate. “You could no longer have the mayor on a leash making sure that he follows the president’s immigration policies,” the senator said.“There’s objective evidence in the record in that case that completely refutes the claim you just made,” Bove replied. Durbin went on to ask whether the justice department attorneys who signed the brief dropping the charges were either threatened or rewarded, which Bove said did not happen.Republican senators have thus far signaled no opposition to confirming Bove to a seat on the third circuit court of appeals, which covers New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and the US Virgin Islands. In their questioning, they gave Bove the opportunity to strenuously deny Democrats’ allegations.“I want you to look me in the eye and swear to your higher being when you answer this question, did you make a deal, a political deal, to dismiss the charges against Mayor Adams?” asked senator John Kennedy.“Absolutely not,” Bove replied. More

  • in

    Usha Vance: husband’s pick as Trump running mate came ‘like a bolt of lightning’

    Usha Vance learned her husband, JD, had been selected to be Donald Trump’s running mate “maybe five minutes” before the news was made public – and just about an hour before he was formally nominated.“It really was like a bolt of lightning,” Vance said during an interview on Meghan McCain’s podcast, Citizen McCain. Nearly a year later, seated in the vice-president’s residence on the grounds of the US naval observatory, Vance reflected on how significantly her life has changed in ways big and small. “People call you ma’am,” she said. “No one’s ever called me ma’am before this.”Until last summer, Vance, the daughter of immigrants and a one-time Democrat, worked as a lawyer at a progressive law firm, raising her three young children in Ohio. Now, as second lady, she is escorted by Secret Service and can’t leave a gym class without being recognized in Washington.During the nearly hour-long interview, Vance was not asked to weigh in on the political or policy agenda of the Trump administration – the president’s decision to strike Iran, the immigration raids that have roiled her native California or the crackdown on colleges and law firms.Instead, Vance spoke about how the second couple is working to create a sense of normalcy for their three young children, and how she hopes to use her role to “make things just a little bit better for other people”. She talked about missing Ohio, trying to keep her kids off screens, her husband’s love for baking, and losing “that sense of being anonymous in public”.Asked about being a first – Vance is the nation’s first south Asian and Hindu second lady – she said it has “not been something that people are hyper-focused on”.“Maybe we’ve just sort of moved beyond trying to count firsts of everything,” she said, while also noting that many people have told her “how proud they are and how excited they are for this”.“That does give me a little bit of a sense of purpose,” she said.At the end of the interview, McCain, a former host of The View and daughter of the late Republican senator John McCain, raised what she called the “elephant in the room” and asked whether Vance had considered the prospect “that you could be our first lady in a few years”.“I’m not plotting out next steps or really trying for anything after this,” Vance said. “In a dream world, eventually, I’ll be able to live in my home and kind of continue my career and all those sorts of things. And if that happens in four years, I understand. If that happens at some other point in the future, I understand. [I’m] just sort of along for the ride and enjoying it while I can.”Vance so far refrained from choosing a single social cause or project to champion, as her predecessors have done, worried that the response would be to “attribute some kind of political motive or start to polarize around it”. Still, she offered a glimpse of the issues that she may want to focus on in her role. Her office is hosting the “Second Lady’s 2025 Summer Reading Challenge”, which she described as “the first of many small attempts” to encourage reading and help draw “children into the world of things and not of devices”.At one point in the conversation, McCain revealed that she was expecting a third child – a boy – and asked Vance to “share with me and women in America why having three kids is good”. Vance congratulated McCain warmly, and described how her children operated as a “pack”, playing together and taking care of each other. She assured McCain that the transition from two to three children was “shockingly, the easiest of all”. More

  • in

    Union leaders’ exit from DNC exposes ‘mind-boggling’ tensions inside Democratic party

    As the Democratic party fights to rebuild from a devastating election defeat, the abrupt exit of the presidents of two of the nation’s largest labor unions from its top leadership board has exposed simmering tensions over the party’s direction.Randi Weingarten and Lee Saunders quit the Democratic National Committee, saying it isn’t doing enough to “open the gates” and win back the support of working-class voters. Ken Martin, the new DNC chair, and his allies told the Guardian that the party was focused on doing exactly that.Weingarten, president of the 1.8-million-member American Federation of Teachers, resigned after Martin did not renominate her to serve on the DNC’s important rules committee. In her resignation letter, Weingarten wrote that education, healthcare and public service workers were in “an existential battle” due to Donald Trump’s attacks and that she did not “want to be the one who keeps questioning why we are not enlarging our tent”.Saunders, the long-time president of the 1.3-million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, also issued a critical statement. “These are new times. They deserve new strategies,” he said. “We must evolve to meet the urgency of the moment. This is not a time to close ranks or turn inward … It is our responsibility to open the gates [and] welcome others.”View image in fullscreenSeveral DNC officials asserted that the two departures were a “tempest in a teapot”, insisting that Martin is working to have the DNC welcome more people and battle against Trump. Weingarten and Saunders evidently felt sore that their candidate for DNC chair, Ben Wikler, the head of Wisconsin’s Democratic party, lost to Martin, the officials suggested.Steve Rosenthal, former political director of the AFL-CIO, the main US labor federation, said the resignations were an inarguable blow to the DNC.“When something like this becomes public, there’s clearly a spotlight on it,” he said. “Giving the longstanding leadership role that Randi and Lee have played in the Democratic party, and at a time when the party is trying to desperately improve its image with working-class voters and remake itself in a lot of ways, this is really unacceptable.”In an interview, Weingarten said she wished the DNC was conducting an all-out nationwide mobilization to defeat the Trump/GOP budget bill, which would throw an estimated 11 million Americans off health insurance, cut food stamps to millions of families and cause the federal debt to soar by over $3tn.DNC chair Martin told the Guardian that, under his leadership, the DNC was already doing what Weingarten and Saunders were calling for. “I’ve always called myself a pro-labor progressive,” Martin said, noting that he had been a union member and labor organizer. “My family grew up on programs that would be cut if Trump’s tax scam passes. Winning back the working class and stopping Trump from harming families is exactly where our focus is.”Martin added that in his nearly five months as DNC chair, the committee has held 130 town halls and launched an “aggressive war room” to take on Trump. “My first action as DNC chair was pledging to have strong labor voices at the table,” Martin said. “Our job is to win in 2025, 2026 and beyond.”But their resignation statements signal that Weingarten and Saunders have a very different view from Martin of what the DNC is doing on his watch. Several DNC officials said the pair might not be up to date with the DNC’s activities across the 50 states.Weingarten told the Guardian that Martin and the DNC are not showing nearly enough urgency in opposing the Trump/GOP budget bill. “The number one issue in the next two weeks is: how do we help fight the GOP budget bill that faces almost two-to-one public opposition,” she said, adding that the DNC should be going all out to help House and Senate Democrats torpedo the bill.“We can be the voice and be out there with stories about how the budget bill will hurt, and the DNC is a perfect place for doing that,” Weingarten said. “You got to win hearts and minds now, not in October 2026. That’s the kind of thing that we’ve been looking for since January. We have to be a party that wins on the ground.”Artie Blanco, a union activist and DNC vice-chair, said that under Martin, the DNC had been fighting hard against the budget bill.“There are over 16,000 Democratic volunteers making phone calls across the country in targeted congressional districts about the GOP budget, and how it will be devastating to working people,” Blanco said.Weingarten voiced dismay about not being renominated for the rules committee. “It was definitely a sign that my input was not sought any more and [not] appreciated,” she said, stressing that the AFT “will continue to be a leader in electing pro-public education, pro-working family candidates” and planned to be “especially engaged” in the 2025-26 elections.Jane Kleeb, president of the Association of State Democratic Committees, said that Weingarten’s and Saunders’s “claims that Ken and the DNC are not standing up for working people and not standing on the side of unions and union members is laughable”.“Ken has been on the front line to bring unions back to our party,” added Kleeb, who is also chair of the Nebraska Democratic party. “He has appointed more union leaders than any other [DNC] chair” – and put unions at the forefront while chair of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor party, before he assumed the DNC’s helm, she said.Stuart Appelbaum, the DNC’s labor chair, and president of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, took issue with the statements Weingarten and Saunders made about Martin.“I am thrilled that Ken Martin is prioritizing the importance of having labor at the table and has ensured that there is strong labor representation in every part of the DNC,” Appelbaum said. He added that Martin “understands that working people are the backbone of the party”.Michael Podhorzer, a political strategist and former AFL-CIO political director, said the Democratic party has for decades not focused enough on working-class voters. He said Democrats would have a tough battle winning back blue-collar voters. “The experience of many American working people is they feel left off the radar,” Podhorzer said.Democrats, Podhorzer noted, have suffered the greatest loss of support in communities that were “gutted” after the 2008-09 recession; from the signing of Nafta, a trade deal with Canada and Mexico; and from normalized trade relations with China. Nafta and normalized trade with China were ratified under President Clinton, a Democrat.Arlie Russell Hochschild, a sociologist who has studied Trump’s success in wooing working-class voters, said the decline of US labor unions over the past 50 years has necessarily meant that unions have less sway in the Democratic party.Rosenthal, the former AFL-CIO official and also a former DNC deputy political director, called on the DNC and Democrats to work far more closely with unions.“Among working-class voters, support for unions is through the roof, and the Democratic party and the Republican party have no credibility with working-class voters,” he said. “They don’t trust the parties, but they trust the labor movement. It’s incumbent on the party to build bridges and put the labor movement front and center in everything it does.”“From that standpoint,” he continued, the tension that led to Weingarten and Sauders quitting “is mind-boggling”. Several labor leaders said Martin should have done more to keep prominent and powerful union leaders like Weingarten and Saunders satisfied and on the DNC, even if they backed one of his opponents for DNC chair.Responding to Weingarten and Saunders’ concerns, Martin said: “The DNC and our partners are leading the fight against Trump’s budget bill, investing unprecedented dollars into states so Democrats can win elections from the ground up, and reaching out to voters in working-class districts.”Martin told the Guardian that he’s trying hard to build bridges with the broader labor movement, and increase its role in the DNC and in the Democrats’ efforts. “Winning back the working class and stopping Trump’s budget bill isn’t a political goal, it’s personal,” he said. “Labor runs through my family’s veins.” More

  • in

    Zohran Mamdani offered New Yorkers a political revolution – and won | Bhaskar Sunkara

    Zohran Mamdani’s triumph in New York City’s Democratic primary represents more than just an electoral upset. It’s a confirmation that progressive politics, when pursued with discipline, vision, and vigor, can resonate broadly – even in a city known for its entrenched power structures.This was no ordinary primary. Andrew Cuomo, a former governor whose political fall from grace seemed irreparable only a few years ago, had positioned himself as the overwhelming favorite. Backed by millions from corporate interests, super PACs, and billionaire donors such as Michael Bloomberg and Bill Ackman, Cuomo relied heavily on institutional inertia and top-down endorsements. Yet Tuesday night, it became clear that this alone couldn’t carry him across the finish line.Mamdani, a 33-year-old legislator from Queens, ran a relentlessly disciplined campaign built around cost-of-living issues, zeroing in on essentials such as housing, transport, childcare and groceries. Repeated attempts to define Mamdani as merely a “Muslim socialist” with radical ideas, to force divisive identity politics to the fore, or to make the election a referendum on Israel, failed.But it wasn’t simply messaging discipline that made Mamdani successful. Mamdani has a political talent rooted in genuine charisma. His fluency with language, clarity of purpose, and authenticity allowed him to speak convincingly to voters from many different backgrounds. He wasn’t just another activist-politician; he proved himself to be a natural leader – someone capable of communicating moral truths without sounding moralistic.Meanwhile, Cuomo’s attempt to reinvent himself in New York City politics was flawed from the outset. His candidacy was perceived by many voters as an arrogant power grab, a rehabilitation project rather than a serious commitment to addressing the city’s challenges. He neglected to engage seriously with New York’s relatively new ranked-choice voting system, stubbornly isolating himself rather than building coalitions, even among centrist figures.The difference in campaign styles was stark and instructive. Mamdani’s campaign was fundamentally grassroots, driven by committed volunteers, including young activists from the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). It was also modern and intelligent, recognizing that an ever-growing share of the electorate forms its opinions through social media and finding innovative ways to communicate policy proposals. Remarkably, almost one quarter of the early vote in this primary came from first-time voters in New York elections.Yet the results make clear that his voting base wasn’t limited to young, college-educated voters most engaged by his campaign. Notably, Mamdani succeeded in neighborhoods like Bay Ridge, Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights, Sunset Park, and Brighton Beach — all areas that swung rightward in the 2024 presidential election.This was a reward for his consistent efforts to reach out to young, working-class voters who felt alienated by the Democratic party; Mamdani’s first viral video of this campaign came in November, when he interviewed New Yorkers who had voted for Trump about their cost-of-living frustrations. In the face of a skeptical public, Mamdani was even able to communicate democratic socialism as a universal politics rather than a niche identity or a dangerous ideology.Yet coalition-building factored in just as much as political resolve. Crucial to Mamdani’s broad success was the principled support of progressive figures like Comptroller Brad Lander. Lander advocated for himself as the person best suited to be mayor but accepted the nature of rank-choice voting and the imperative of defeating Cuomo by cross-endorsing Mamdani. Lander’s approach helped forge a coherent, united front — something increasingly rare in fractious progressive circles — and it proved decisive.Voters, for their part, proved that they were ready for change. They refused to succumb to cynical fearmongering about a supposed tide of crime and antisemitism that would come from a Mamdani victory. Instead, they took a clear-eyed look at their lives, assessed the failings of the Democratic party, and chose something fresh, new, and fundamentally different over a failed political establishment.Still, Tuesday’s results carry deeper questions about the future. Mamdani’s victory in this primary, significant as it is, must now be tested against Eric Adams and likely Cuomo again in the November election. Beyond that lies a far more challenging test: governing. Progressives across America have watched closely as Chicago’s Brandon Johnson, another promising left-wing mayor, has stumbled against entrenched opposition and due to his own administrative failings. Mamdani will need to navigate obstacles better if elected.Historical precedent may offer some reassurance for those who wish New York’s mayoral frontrunner well. The tradition of successful municipal socialism in America, including in cities like Milwaukee under the “sewer socialists” and, more recently, in Burlington under Bernie Sanders serve as real examples of socialist governance marked by competence, effectiveness and popularity. Sanders’s legacy in Burlington, especially, stands as a template Mamdani could follow: pragmatic yet deeply principled governance that steadily builds broader legitimacy among skeptics and opponents.New York mayors have traditionally been considered men who come from nowhere and go nowhere, politically speaking. But Mamdani could break that mold, following Sanders’s trajectory from effective municipal leadership to becoming a durable voice in national politics.However, to succeed, Mamdani must trust his own judgment — one that has already proved incisive and strategically sound. He must maintain independence from two city establishments: the corporate one, which opposed him at every turn, and the NGO-driven progressive establishment, whose political instincts failed them in recent election cycles.Mamdani’s platform, which couples a supply-side focused “abundance agenda” with demands for equitable redistribution and expansive public-sector investment, offers precisely the kind of social-democratic governance model New York desperately needs. There’s nothing fundamentally radical about these demands; rather, what’s genuinely radical is the excitement they have inspired among voters, including many who previously disengaged from local politics altogether.Tonight, Mamdani has undoubtedly delivered a major victory in America’s largest city. But we must be sober about the challenges ahead. Electoral wins are meaningful only if they translate into tangible improvements in people’s lives, and political momentum can dissipate quickly if governance falls short. Mamdani faces an enormous responsibility – not only to his immediate constituency but also to a broader progressive movement watching closely from across the country and the world.

    Bhaskar Sunkara is the president of The Nation, the founding editor Jacobin, and the author of The Socialist Manifesto: The Case for Radical Politics in An Era of Extreme Inequalities More

  • in

    Trump is angry with a world that won’t give him easy deals | Rafael Behr

    It was as close as Donald Trump might get to a lucid statement of his governing doctrine. “I may do it. I may not do it,” the president said to reporters on the White House lawn. “Nobody knows what I’m going to do.”The question was about joining Israeli air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Days later, US bombers were on their way. Some expected it to happen. Others, including Keir Starmer, had gone on record to say they didn’t. No one had known. The unpredictability doctrine wouldn’t have been violated either way.It applies also in economic and domestic policy. Trump’s boast of inscrutability could have been made about tariff rates, or a decision to deploy marines against US citizens who defy his immigration agency.Volatile inconsistency is a trait of the presidential personality, but also a learned management technique. Keeping everyone around you guessing, lurching from charm to menaces, swapping and dropping favourites on a whim – these are methods of coercive control. They generate disorientation and vulnerability. People who are braced for sudden mood swings must hang on the leader’s every word, looking for cues, awaiting instruction. Individual agency is lost, dependency is induced. It is something cult leaders do.A method that works with a quasi-monarchical entourage is poorly suited to international affairs. Foreign leaders are not White House courtiers. They might seek the US president’s favour in trade or fear his military wrath, but always with competing national interests in the background. On the world stage, Trump will never feel the unalloyed devotion he gets from worshippers at a Maga rally, which is one reason why he hates to travel.That tension is palpable at this week’s Nato summit in The Hague. Trump makes no secret of his disdain for European democracies. He resents their reliance on the Pentagon for security. He is unconvinced that defending their continent, especially the corner of it under violent assault from Russia, is the US’s problem. The threat he briefly made in his first term to pull out of Nato if other members didn’t start paying their way still hangs over the alliance. European leaders must strive to keep Trump onside while contingency planning for the day he decides to abandon them.Matthew Whitaker, the US’s permanent representative at Nato, tried to be reassuring on that point at the summit, declaring that it “has never been more engaged”. But he also conceded ignorance of what Trump might actually do. “I don’t want … to claim to be able to read his mind and know what he’s going to say.”That is the doctrine: nobody knows. This forces Nato members into an awkward dance, performing for Trump’s benefit while also working around him. They want to impress him with their financial ambition, pledging to spend 5% of their national GDP on defence by 2035. But they know also not to expect any reciprocal commitment, or none that can be trusted.War in the Middle East ramps the uncertainty up to new heights. European leaders need to stay focused on Ukraine and the prospect of Russia turning its territorial aggression on some other portion of Nato’s eastern flank. Vladimir Putin sees no legitimacy in borders that were drawn by the collapse of the Soviet Union. He has also geared Russia’s economy, political apparatus and propaganda machinery to assume perpetual war with the west. One lesson from Ukraine’s plight is to assume that when Putin says he is going to fight, he means it. Another is that, while deterrence is expensive, it is cheaper than the war that comes when the Kremlin feels confidently undeterred.These calculations keep Europeans up at night, but not Trump. He doesn’t recognise Russia as the aggressor in Ukraine and would happily see the war end on terms that leave Nato humiliated and Putin emboldened, and signal an epoch-defining shift in the balance of global power away from democracy.But framing the choice in grand geostrategic terms obscures pettier motives, which are often the salient ones with Trump. He doesn’t want to take Kyiv’s side because that is what Joe Biden did. It isn’t his cause and so he thinks it is dumb.This is not the case with Iran. US allies are required, in public at least, to judge Trump’s military intervention as though it were made according to a conventional diplomatic and strategic calculus: the prospect of Tehran wielding powers of nuclear apocalypse is truly abhorrent; negotiation was not bearing fruit. Maybe there was reason to dispute US intelligence assessments that said the threshold of weapons-readiness was not imminent. Maybe the time to act really was at hand.But those are rationalising arguments, retrofitted to a choice that Trump made as much from vanity as any more sophisticated motive. He was bounced into war by Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli prime minister appears to have gamed the US president’s aversion to looking weak and his limitless appetite for glory. Early Israeli success – an extraordinary feat of military intelligence that took out senior Iranian commanders and assets – offered Trump the prospect of climbing aboard a winning operation and grabbing credit for victory.Hints that regime change was on the agenda may have prodded Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, towards a ceasefire on the basis that early capitulation with some power retained, while unpalatable, is preferable to assassination. Senior White House officials insisted the war aims were limited to containment of the nuclear threat, but since they hadn’t even known a war was coming their authority on the matter is questionable.Trump’s supporters say this is proof that his volatile style works. In strategic studies it is known as the “madman theory”. Discarding guardrails, looking ready to do something irrational, forces an enemy to choose caution. The obvious risk is that it also teaches the rest of the world the merit of madness. Iran’s rulers will be more convinced than ever that only nuclear weapons can guarantee their sovereignty. (That view would persist through regime change, since none of the viable scenarios result in a flowering of pro-western democracy in the region. Tehran’s atomic ambitions may be set back by years, but the cause of negotiated, multilateral non-proliferation is also in tatters.)That doesn’t interest Trump. He thinks in terms of easy wins, not complex consequences. Hence his palpable irritation with Israel and Iran for violating the ceasefire and generally not knowing “what the fuck they’re doing”. He is aware that he looks played by Netanyahu, much as he once showed a flicker of frustration with Putin for “tapping” him along in negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. He promised US voters deals. He gets cross when the world withholds them from him.This is a natural function of the unpredictability doctrine. Telling other countries they can never know what you’ll do makes them less responsive to diplomacy; less biddable to the whim of a US president. A vicious cycle then begins. Trump relies on his volatile persona to assert control in situations that he doesn’t understand, generating chaos that exposes his impotence, which in turn provokes him to tug in more arbitrary fury at his levers of power.For European democracies this is debilitating. It is hard to coordinate defence against external threats when the paramount power in your alliance is the origin of so much instability. But Nato leaders will get no respite from the uncertainty as long as Trump sits in the White House. The thing they most need from him – reliability – is the one thing he is destined by personality and doctrine never to provide.

    Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist More

  • in

    Judge blocks Trump from withholding EV charger funds awarded to 14 states

    A US district judge has blocked the Trump administration from withholding funds previously awarded to 14 states for electric vehicle charger infrastructure.Seattle-based judge Tana Lin, who was appointed to the bench by Joe Biden in 2021, granted a partial injunction to the states that filed suit against Trump’s Department of Transportation.She ruled that the states’ lawsuit – led by attorneys general in California, Colorado and Washington – would likely succeed. Her ruling did not apply to the District of Columbia, Minnesota and Vermont, which she found did not provide evidence that they would suffer immediate harm. The injunction will go into effect on 1 July, unless the Trump administration files an appeal blocking it.In February, the Trump administration ordered states not to spend $5bn in funds allocated under the Biden administration as part of the national electric vehicle infrastructure (Nevi) program.The program provided up to 80% of eligible project costs to deploy electric vehicle charges. Currently, 16 states have at least one operational EV station, according to EV States Clearinghouse.“The new leadership of the Department of Transportation … has decided to review the policies underlying the implementation of the Nevi formula program,” Emily Biondi, associate administrator for planning, environment and realty at the transportation department’s Federal Highway Administration, wrote in a memo.“As result of the rescission of the Nevi formula program guidance, the FHWA is also immediately suspending the approval of all state electric vehicle infrastructure deployment plans for all fiscal years. Therefore, effective immediately, no new obligations may occur under the Nevi formula program until the updated final Nevi formula program guidance is issued and new state plans are submitted and approved,” she added.In May, the Government Accountability Office found that the Trump administration violated the law when it withheld the funding. The administration “must continue to carry out the statutory requirements of the program”, it said.The White House challenged those findings, which it called “wrong and legally indefensible”, and ordered the transportation department to ignore them. The department is expected to release a draft of its updated electric vehicle guidance this month.During a hearing before the Seattle judge earlier this month, Leah Brown, of Washington’s attorney general’s office said, “This passing reference to revised guidance and to changed priorities is simply insufficient to override congressional intent.” She added that the states aren’t “challenging the ability to revise guidance, but we are arguing that doing so simply is not a sufficient explanation for the actions that they’ve taken,” the Washington State Standard reported.“The agency has no intent to withhold funds from the states,” justice department attorney Heidy Gonzalez said. “It just wants the opportunity to review past guidance and to promulgate guidance that comports with the current administration’s policies and priorities.”During his campaign for the presidency, Donald Trump voiced a hatred for electric vehicles that ran counter to his growing friendship with Tesla CEO Elon Musk.At one point in the campaign, Trump said supporters of the vehicles should “rot in hell” and that Biden’s support of EVs would bring a “bloodbath” to the US’s automotive industry.Although he later appointed Musk to serve as head of the “department of government efficiency”, Musk and Trump have since parted ways. More

  • in

    US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites only set back program by months, Pentagon report says

    An initial classified US assessment of Donald Trump’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities over the weekend says they did not destroy two of the sites and likely only set back the nuclear program by a few months, according to two people familiar with the report.The report produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency – the intelligence arm of the Pentagon – concluded key components of the nuclear program, including centrifuges, were capable of being restarted within months.The report also found that much of Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium that could be put to use for a possible nuclear weapon was moved before the strikes and may have been moved to other secret nuclear sites maintained by Iran.The findings by the DIA, which were based on a preliminary battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command, which oversees US military operations in the Middle East, suggests Trump’s declaration about the sites being “obliterated” may have been overstated.Trump said in his televised address on Saturday night immediately after the operation that the US had completely destroyed Iran’s enrichment sites at Natanz and Fordow, the facility buried deep underground, and at Isfahan, where enrichment was being stored.“The strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,” Trump said in his address from the White House.While the DIA report was only an initial assessment, one of the people said if the intelligence on the ground was already finding within days that Fordow in particular was not destroyed, later assessments could suggest even less damage might have been inflicted.Long regarded as the most well-protected of Iran’s nuclear sites, the uranium-enrichment facilities at Fordow are buried beneath the Zagros mountains. Reports have suggested that the site was constructed beneath 45-90 metres (145-300ft) of bedrock, largely limestone and dolomite.The White House disputed the intelligence assessment, which was first reported by CNN. “The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.The US vice-president, JD Vance, admitted on Sunday that Washington did not know where Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranian was, saying: “we are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel”.Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Monday that the IAEA could no longer account for Iran’s stockpile of 400kg of uranium enriched to 60% purity.The Guardian revealed last Wednesday that top political appointees at the Pentagon had been briefed at the start of Trump’s second term that the 30,000lb “bunker buster” GBU-57 bombs meant to be used on Fordow would not completely destroy the facility.In that briefing, in January, officials were told by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency at the Pentagon that developed the GBU-57 that the bombs would not penetrate deep enough underground and only a tactical nuclear weapon would wipe out Fordow.The US strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities involved B2 bombers dropping 12 GBU-57s on Fordow and two GBU-57s on Natanz. A US navy submarine then launched roughly 30 Tomahawk missiles on Isfahan, US defense officials said at a news conference Sunday.Defense secretary Pete Hegseth repeated Trump’s claim at the news conference that the sites had been “obliterated”, but the chair of the joint chiefs of staff, Gen Dan Caine, who helped oversee the operation, was more measured in his remarks.Caine said that all three of the nuclear sites had “sustained severe damage and destruction” but cautioned that the final battle-damage assessment for the military operation was still to come. More