More stories

  • in

    Italy, Europe, and the World Needed Super Mario to Stay On

    The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

  • in

    Big Oil V the World review – how can these climate crisis deniers sleep at night?

    Big Oil V the World review – how can these climate crisis deniers sleep at night?This shocking documentary series reveals the lies oil lobbyists told to undercut democracy, prevent action against global heating – and bring our planet to the brink Al Gore described it as “in many ways the most serious crime of the post-world war two era, whose consequences are almost unimaginable”. Can you guess which one the former vice-president meant? Genocide in the former Yugoslavia? Genocide in Rwanda? The attack on the twin towers? The oxymoronic “war on terror” that produced – rather than eliminated – terrorism? The nuclear arms race? The invasion of Ukraine? The crimes of Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot? Or other ones I haven’t the space to cite?Gore is in fact referring to a very specific moment that occurred on 25 July 1997. That day, the US Senate voted by 95-0 for the Byrd-Hagel Resolution, ruling that the US should not sign a climate treaty that would become known as the Kyoto protocol – despite the Clinton administration’s desire for the US to be a world leader in the fight to cut greenhouse gas emissions. It meant that Clinton would only be allowed to take action when developing countries – particularly India and China – were bound by the same strictures.‘What we now know … they lied’: how big oil companies betrayed us allRead moreThe worry, touted by purported experts (many of whom were briefed and funded by US oil companies), was that Kyoto would be a disaster for the US. Imposing strict emission controls on the US – while industrialising nations such as India and China were not similarly constrained – would cost the US upwards of 5,000 jobs, put more than 50 cents on a tank of gas, whack up electricity bills 25% to 50% and put the struggling US economy at a competitive disadvantage in international markets. Or so it was claimed.Jane McMullen’s excellent and shocking first instalment of a three-part series, Big Oil V The World (BBC Two) reveals another reason for senators Robert Byrd and Chuck Hagel’s resolution. For many years, the big oil lobby had poured scorn on the growing scientific orthodoxy that humanity is hurtling towards a climate catastrophe and that the leading reason is the rise in emissions of greenhouse gases.What I didn’t know, and this documentary helpfully explains, is that the US’s largest oil company, Exxon, had labs filled with researchers who had produced detailed reports showing the reality of the climate crisis. That research, though, was suppressed.The bitter irony, clinched by one of the company’s former climate scientists, Ed Garvey, was that Exxon could have been part of the solution rather than the problem. Garvey worked on Exxon’s carbon dioxide research programme from 1978 to 1983, when it was closed because falling gas prices made it seem an expendable luxury.Garvey also recalls that there were scientists at Exxon developing alternatives to fossil fuels such as solar power and lithium batteries. But their work was shelved. The future of the planet, Garvey suggests, was deemed less important than Exxon’s short-term profit.Although the Clinton administration in which Gore served had from the outset committed itself to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990 levels by 2000, and leaders of industrial nations such as the British prime minister, John Major, called for even deeper cuts, the Senate resolution effectively destroyed the president and his vice-president’s hopes of the US leading the world. Instead, the US, through its inaction, helped hasten the climate catastrophe we now live in.To clinch this rhetorical point, the programme repeatedly cuts from talking heads to scenes more hellish than those imagined by Dante or Milton. Floods in China, a fiery hellscape in California, storms lashing Louisiana and, in one shot, battering an Exxon gas station.After seeing such images, I wonder how Hagel, who sponsored that 1997 Senate resolution and went on to become defence secretary, sleeps at night. He was among the climate crisis deniers this documentary catches up with to hear them repent. Off-screen, the excellent interviewer asks Hagel if he feels he was misled, given that Exxon, whose execs lobbied him before the Senate vote, was making a concerted effort throughout the 1990s to cast doubt on the reality of the climate emergency and the role of human activity in increasing global temperatures – even though their own scientists were telling them that the science was sound.“We now know about some of these large oil companies … they lied,” says Hagel. “Yes I was misled. Others were misled. When they had evidence in their own institutions that countered what they were saying publicly – they lied.” If the truth had been told to Hagel and other climate crisis-denying senators, would the situation be different? “Oh absolutely,” says Hagel. “I think it would have changed the average citizen’s appreciation of climate change and mine. It would have put the United States and the world on a different track. It has cost this country and it’s cost the world.”Last August, the UN secretary general António Guterres said the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) working group’s report confirming the link between human activity and rising greenhouse emissions is “a code red for humanity”. That Senate resolution, McMullen’s film argues, contributed to our climate emergency.No one in this programme explores the hideous political ramifications of this terrible state of affairs, namely that the virus of capitalism (in the form of big oil) undercut democracy through a sustained campaign of disinformation. How easy it proved for corporations to sucker politicians such as Hagel to subvert not just the will of the people but the wellbeing of the planet. If McMullen’s film has a moral, it’s that democracy must be healthy enough to resist commercial lobbying, so that we don’t get fooled again. In 2022, that seems an unlikely scenario.TopicsTelevision & radioTV reviewTelevisionDocumentaryClimate crisisFactual TVOilOil and gas companiesreviewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Joe Biden tests positive for Covid and has ‘mild symptoms’, White House says

    Joe Biden tests positive for Covid and has ‘mild symptoms’, White House saysPress chief says Biden, 79, who has had two boosters, is taking antiviral Paxlovid, while first lady Jill Biden has tested negative Joe Biden tested positive for Covid on Thursday, underscoring the persistence of the highly contagious virus as new variants challenge the nation’s efforts to resume normalcy after two and a half years of pandemic disruptions.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that Biden was experiencing “mild symptoms” and has begun taking Paxlovid, an antiviral drug designed to reduce the severity of the disease.Biden to unveil $37bn proposal to tackle crime, including 100,000 more policeRead moreShe said Biden “will isolate at the White House and will continue to carry out all of his duties fully during that time.“He has been in contact with members of the White House staff by phone this morning, and will participate in his planned meetings at the White House this morning via phone and Zoom from the residence.”Biden, 79, is fully vaccinated, after getting two doses of the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine shortly before taking office, a first booster shot in September and an additional dose March 30.In a letter released by the White House, Kevin O’Connor, the president’s physician, described Biden’s symptoms as mild.“Mostly rhinorrhea (or runny nose) and fatigue, with an occasional dry cough, which started yesterday evening,” O’Connor wrote. He noted that he anticipates that “he will respond favorably” to Paxlovid, as “most maximally protected patients do”.First lady Jill Biden has tested negative, according to her office. The first lady is in Detroit for an event at a local school. Before the event started, Biden briefly addressed news of her husband testing positive for Covid.“My husband tested positive for Covid. I talked to him just a few minutes ago. He’s doing fine, he’s feeling good,” she said. “I tested negative this morning. I am going to keep my schedule.”The president was scheduled to deliver a speech on gun violence in Pennsylvania on Thursday. That trip has been cancelled, and he is expected to stay at his home in Wilmington, Delaware, for the weekend.While this is Biden’s first bout of coronavirus, multiple members of his administration have contracted the virus. Vice-president Kamala Harris had Covid in April, and Xavier Becerra, the secretary of health and human services, and Antony Blinken, the secretary of state, both tested positive in May.Coronavirus cases in the United States have been on the rise once again as the contagious BA.5 variant has become the dominant strain. The US has been recording as many as 150,000 new Covid cases a day, according to Johns Hopkins University.In her statement, Jean-Pierre said that the White House will provide a daily update on Biden’s status “as he continues to [work] in isolation”.TopicsJoe BidenUS politicsCoronavirusnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    January 6 hearings return to recount 187 minutes of chaos at the Capitol

    January 6 hearings return to recount 187 minutes of chaos at the CapitolCapitol attack committee plans to provide detailed account of insurrection and suggests this will not be final hearing The January 6 committee is returning to primetime. The House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection will hold its eighth and final – for now, at least – public hearing on Thursday night.Like the first hearing, Thursday’s event will take place in the evening, as the panel seeks to capture the widest possible audience for its presentation. The first hearing, which was held last month, was watched by at least 20 million people.The eighth hearing will detail the 187 minutes that passed between the start and the end of the insurrection on that winter afternoon in 2021, as a mass of Donald Trump’s more extreme supporters overran the US Capitol in a vain attempt to disrupt the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the November 2020 presidential election.Democrat Elaine Luria, who will co-lead the Thursday hearing with fellow panel member and Republican Adam Kinzinger, said the committee will provide a “minute-by-minute” account of the insurrection, as Trump failed to quell the violence that left several people dead.“He didn’t act. He had a duty to act. So we will address that in a lot of detail,” Luria said Sunday. “And from that, we will build on the information that we provided in the earlier hearings.”One central committee member, Democratic chair Bennie Thompson, will not be attending the hearing in person. Thompson tested positive for coronavirus on Monday, but will chair the hearing remotely, a committee aide said.Two former Trump White House aides who resigned shortly after January 6, Matthew Pottinger and Sarah Matthews, are expected to testify on Thursday.Pottinger served in the Trump administration for four years and resigned as a deputy national security adviser, while Matthews was a White House press aide.When she announced her resignation last year, Matthews expressed dismay about the events of January 6, and she has continued to criticize Trump.After former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson appeared before the select committee last month, Matthews came to her defense, even as some of Trump’s allies dismissed the shocking testimony as “hearsay”.“Anyone downplaying Cassidy Hutchinson’s role or her access in the West Wing either doesn’t understand how the Trump [White House] worked or is attempting to discredit her because they’re scared of how damning this testimony is,” Matthews said on Twitter at the time.Anyone downplaying Cassidy Hutchinson’s role or her access in the West Wing either doesn’t understand how the Trump WH worked or is attempting to discredit her because they’re scared of how damning this testimony is.— Sarah Matthews (@SarahAMatthews1) June 28, 2022
    Hutchinson’s testimony is expected to feature prominently in the Thursday hearing. In her appearance before the committee, Hutchinson, a former adviser to Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows, painted a damning picture of an increasingly chaotic White House led by a president determined to hold on to power, even after he was repeatedly told he had fairly lost the election, including by his own attorney general, William Barr.According to Hutchinson, Trump was aware that some of his supporters were armed on January 6, yet he still encouraged them to march to the Capitol after he spoke at a rally near the White House.Hutchinson also provided a secondhand account of Trump grabbing for the steering wheel of a vehicle in a desperate attempt to go to the Capitol with his supporters, having said at the rally “I’ll be there with you”. Instead he returned to the White House.01:42Some of Hutchinson’s testimony relied on comments she heard from Pat Cipollone, Trump’s former White House counsel. Cipollone privately spoke to the January 6 investigators shortly after Hutchinson testified, and the committee is expected to show more of his interview during the Thursday hearing.The committee had also hoped to gather more information from the US Secret Service before the Thursday hearing, about Trump and Pence’s movements on the day, but that effort is proving far more difficult than anticipated. After receiving a subpoena for all agency communications on January 5 and 6, the Secret Service turned over just one text message to the select committee, an aide to the panel confirmed.The committee has promised to continue collecting information from important witnesses as it works to compile a comprehensive report on the Capitol attack by this fall, and additional hearings are still possible later in the summer.“There is no reason to think that this is going to be the select committee’s final hearing,” a committee aide said Wednesday. “The multi-step plan, overseen and directed by the former president, to overturn the results of the election and block the transfer of power couldn’t be clearer from the information that we’ve laid out. We expect that [the panel] is going to continue telling that story.”TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpJoe BidennewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Trump as tyrant and Cheney’s cliffhangers: key moments from the January 6 hearings

    Trump as tyrant and Cheney’s cliffhangers: key moments from the January 6 hearingsFrom Trump’s lack of concern about armed rioters to possible witness tampering, the revelations have been startling The hearings of the House January 6 committee have presented some extraordinary testimony about Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election and his supporters’ deadly assault on the US Capitol. Ahead of the primetime TV hearing on Thursday night, here are some of those pivotal moments so far.Hutchinson’s bombshellsSome said that in Cassidy Hutchinson the committee had found its John Dean, the White House counsel who turned on Richard Nixon during Watergate.01:42Hutchinson, a former aide to Mark Meadows, Donald Trump’s chief of staff, delivered her dramatic testimony with notable calm. She made headlines by describing how Trump struggled physically with a Secret Service agent who would not let him march to the Capitol himself, and how the president, furious, hurled his dinner at the White House wall.More importantly, Hutchinson described how Trump knew some in the crowd who heard him speak on January 6 were armed – and told them to march on the Capitol anyway. Many observers said such testimony could be crucial to establishing criminal intent, and therefore central to any criminal charges against Trump.Van Tatenhove’s warningJason van Tatenhove, a former spokesperson for the far-right group the Oath Keepers, testified about links between Trump and the far right. Van Tatenhove said the president attempted to mount “armed revolution”. He also said the Oath Keepers leader once asked him to create a deck of cards showing key targets, among them Hillary Clinton.01:10“People died [on 6 January 2021],” Van Tatenhove said. “Law enforcement officers died, there was a gallows set up in front of the Capitol.“This could have been the spark that started a new civil war, and no one would have won there. That would have been good for no one.”Cheney’s cliffhangersLiz Cheney has been the star of the hearings. A hardline Wyoming Republican nonetheless at odds with her party, she has offered successive cliffhangers, each setting up the next session. One was about Trump advisers and allies in Congress seeking pardons. But what she said about possible witness tampering made, perhaps, the biggest impact. In the Hutchinson hearing, Cheney revealed that Trump associates had contacted a witness to say the former president would be watching the hearings and reading transcripts. The witness turned out to be Hutchinson. After the hearing on far-right links to Trump, Cheney said Trump himself had attempted to call another witness, not yet seen.Trump’s enablersThe committee’s reconstruction of an 18 December 2020 meeting at the White House between Trump’s official and unofficial advisers was for the ages. Witnesses including Trump’s White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, described shouts and threats from members of so-called “Team Crazy”, which included Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell and Michael Flynn.Giuliani remembered calling the White House advisers “pussies”. Powell said it was the official aides who were crazy, for not backing a scheme to seize voting machines. She also drank a lot of Dr Pepper.Eric Herschmann, a former Trump Organization lawyer who testified by video in front of a baseball bat with “justice” written on it, said Flynn, a retired general, “screamed at me that I was a quitter and kept standing up and turning around and screaming at me. I’d sort of had it with him so I yelled back, ‘Either come over or sit your fucking ass back down.’” More

  • in

    ‘The world is counting on us’: Biden vows to tackle climate ‘emergency’ – as it happened

    Biden has concluded his remarks in Massachusetts, where he spoke at the site of a former coal-fired power plant in Somerset that will be turned into a cable manufacturing facility for the offshore wind industry. “This Congress, not withstanding the leadership of that men and women that are here today has, failed in its duty,” Biden said. “So let me be clear: climate change is an emergency. And in the coming weeks I’m going to use the power I have as president to turn these words into formal, official government actions for the appropriate proclamations, executive orders and regulatory power that the president possesses.”“Again, it sounds like hyperbole, our children and grandchildren are counting on us,” he continued. “If we don’t keep it below 1.5 degrees centigrade, we lose it all. You don’t get to turn it around. And the world is counting on us.”Declaring “the world is counting on us,” President Joe Biden announced actions to address climate change and blamed Republicans in Congress for not doing their part to keep temperatures from rising to even more disastrous levels. At the Capitol, lawmakers heard an address from Ukraine’s first lady asking for more weapons to fight off the Russians, while senators are weighing a bill to codify same-sex and interracial marriage rights.Here are some of the highlights from today:
    A bipartisan group of senators announced a deal on reforming loopholes in the electoral college that Donald Trump tried to exploit in the lead-up to the January 6 insurrection.
    Rudy Giuliani, an attorney to Trump, has lost his appeal against a subpoena from a Georgia grand jury.
    Trump called a top Republican lawmaker in Wisconsin recently and pressed him to decertify the results of the 2020 election in the state.
    Rusty Bowers, the speaker of Arizona’s House of Representatives who testified before the January 6 committee last month, has been kicked out of the Republican party.
    John Fetterman, the Democratic nominee for Senate in Pennsylvania, gave his first interview since suffering a stroke.
    As he described his experience with pollution during the speech in Massachusetts, Biden made a surprising allusion to having cancer, which he hasn’t mentioned in the past.Biden was describing growing up near petroleum refineries, and how his mother would have to use her car’s wipers to get oil off the windshield when the weather would get cold. “That’s why I and so damn many other people I grew up have cancer”, Biden said. At 79 years old, questions about Biden’s fitness to serve as president are not new, and he’s followed his predecessors’ practice in sharing health updates from his doctor. In the most recent summary from November of last year, there was no indication Biden had cancer or any other major health issues. The closest it came was noting that “several localized non-melanoma skin cancers” were removed before he became president.The White House has outlined the steps Biden plans to take to fight climate change, which do not include the emergency declaration some of his Democratic allies have called on him to make.These include the creation of the first-ever Wind Energy Area in the Gulf of Mexico, which would cover 700,000 acres and generate enough electricity for three million homes, as well as steps to spur further wind developments off the Atlantic coast and Florida’s Gulf Coast. The Federal Emergency Management Agency will also spend $2.3 billion on infrastructure to make Americans more resilient to heat waves, floods, droughts, wildfires and other climate-driven disasters. There are also plans to help people pay for cooling costs.Biden has concluded his remarks in Massachusetts, where he spoke at the site of a former coal-fired power plant in Somerset that will be turned into a cable manufacturing facility for the offshore wind industry. “This Congress, not withstanding the leadership of that men and women that are here today has, failed in its duty,” Biden said. “So let me be clear: climate change is an emergency. And in the coming weeks I’m going to use the power I have as president to turn these words into formal, official government actions for the appropriate proclamations, executive orders and regulatory power that the president possesses.”“Again, it sounds like hyperbole, our children and grandchildren are counting on us,” he continued. “If we don’t keep it below 1.5 degrees centigrade, we lose it all. You don’t get to turn it around. And the world is counting on us.”Biden has taken Republicans in Congress to task for failing to pass legislation to fight climate change.“My message today is this: since Congress is not acting as as it should, and these guys here are,” he said, gesturing to Democratic lawmakers in attendance, before continuing, “We’re not getting many Republican votes. This is an emergency, an emergency, and I will look at it that way.”He repeated his pledge to “use my executive power to combat climate crisis in the absence of congressional action.”Republicans have indeed been unreceptive to his administration’s attempts to fight climate change and spur investment in green technology. However, Democrats were hoping to use their dominance in the House and the Senate’s reconciliation procedure to pass some proposals fighting climate change unilaterally – until Joe Manchin said last week he wouldn’t support them.President Joe Biden has started his speech in Massachusetts, where he’s set to announce measures to fight climate change after his legislative agenda to address US emissions stalled.“I come here today with a message,” Biden said as his speech began. “As president, I have a responsibility to act with urgency and resolve when our nation faces clear and present danger. And that’s what climate change is about. It is literally, not figuratively, a clear and present danger. The health of our citizens and our communities is literally at stake.”The January 6 committee will hold its last scheduled hearing tomorrow, though its investigation continues. The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports on the latest development in the Secret Service’s allegedly accidental deletion of text messages from the time of the attack:The Secret Service turned over just one text message to the House January 6 committee on Tuesday, in response to a subpoena compelling the production of all communications from the day before and the day of the US Capitol attack, according to two sources familiar with the matter.The Secret Service told the panel the single text was the only message responsive to the subpoena, the sources said, and while the agency vowed to conduct a forensic search for any other text or phone records, it indicated such messages were likely to prove irrecoverable.House investigators also learned that the texts were seemingly lost as part of an agency-wide reset of phones on 27 January 2021, the sources said – 11 days after Congress first requested the communications and two days after agents were reminded to back up their phones.Secret Service turned over just one text message to January 6 panel, sources sayRead moreA bipartisan group of senators has just announced a deal to reform the procedure for counting electoral votes in order to prevent the sort of meddling that former president Donald Trump tried to pull off on January 6.The lawmakers have agreed to two bills that would reform the Electoral Count Act of 1887, which governs how electoral votes are counted following a presidential election. Citing ambiguities in the law, Trump and his attorneys pushed his vice president Mike Pence to disrupt the counting of electoral votes that showed he lost the 2020 election, sparking calls for the 135-year-old law to be reformed.“Through numerous meetings and debates among our colleagues as well as conversations with a wide variety of election experts and legal scholars, we have developed legislation that establishes clear guidelines for our system of certifying and counting electoral votes for President and Vice President. We urge our colleagues in both parties to support these simple, commonsense reforms,” the group of 16 senators said in a joint statement.The first bill is called the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act, and would fix ambiguities in the existing law while clarifying when an incoming administration can access federal resources.The Enhanced Election Security and Protection Act is the second proposal, and would up criminal penalties against people convicted of intimidating or threatening candidates, voters and poll workers, require election records to be preserved, help the US Postal Service deal with mail-in ballots and reauthorize for five years a commission that works with states to improve their voting practices.“The prospect of large-scale violence in the near future is entirely plausible,” warns a new study that looks into the chances of political violence. Ed Pilkington digs into it:One in five adults in the United States, equivalent to about 50 million people, believe that political violence is justified at least in some circumstances, a new mega-survey has found.A team of medical and public health scientists at the University of California, Davis enlisted the opinions of almost 9,000 people across the country to explore how far willingness to engage in political violence now goes.They discovered that mistrust and alienation from democratic institutions have reached such a peak that substantial minorities of the American people now endorse violence as a means towards political ends. “The prospect of large-scale violence in the near future is entirely plausible,” the scientists warn.A hardcore rump of the US population, the survey recorded – amounting to 3% or by extrapolation 7 million people – believe that political violence is usually or always justified. Almost one in four of the respondents – equivalent to more than 60 million Americans – could conceive of violence being justified “to preserve an American way of life based on western European traditions”.Most alarmingly, 7.1% said they would be willing to kill a person to advance an important political goal. The UC Davis team points out that, extrapolated to US society at large, that is the equivalent of 18 million Americans.One in five US adults condone ‘justified’ political violence, mega-survey findsRead moreJohn Fetterman, the Pennsylvania lieutenant governor and Democratic candidate for US Senate, has said he has “nothing to hide” about his health after suffering a stroke, and expressed confidence he can beat the celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz in a race key to deciding control of the chamber in November.“I would never be in this if we were not absolutely, 100% able to run fully and to win — and we believe that we are,” Fetterman told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in his first interview since suffering the stroke in May.The Post-Gazette reports: “Mr Fetterman, 52, said he has ‘no physical limits’, walks four to five miles every day in 90-degree heat, understands words properly and hasn’t lost any of his memory. He struggles with hearing sometimes, he said, and may ‘miss a word’ or ‘slur two together’, but he said it doesn’t happen often and that he’s working with a speech therapist.”Fetterman enjoys consistent poll leads over Oz and has dramatically outraised him, despite Oz attracting the endorsement of Donald Trump.You can read the interview here.Pete Buttigieg fended off a Republican who used a transportation hearing to ask if Joe Biden’s cabinet had discussed using the 25th amendment to remove the president from office, saying: “I’m glad to have a president who can ride a bicycle.”The transportation secretary was appearing in front of the House transportation committee on Tuesday. Amid discussion of policy, the Texas representative Troy Nehls decided to go in a more partisan direction.“We now see the mainstream media questioning President Biden’s mental state, and for good reason,” Nehls said. “Sadly, he shakes hands with ghosts and imaginary people, and he falls off bicycles. Even at the White House Easter celebration, the Easter Bunny had to guide him back into his safe place.”Aides stood behind Nehls, showing blown-up pictures.Biden, 79, fell off his bike in Delaware last month, to considerable glee on the right.He told reporters: “I’m good.”But with the president beset by domestic and international crises, some compared his awkward moment with one in 1979, when Jimmy Carter, who would turn out to be a one-term Democratic president, was attacked by a rabbit while fishing from a boat.Nehls asked: “Have you spoken to cabinet members about implementing the 25th amendment on President Biden?”Buttigieg, a keen cyclist himself, said: “First of all, I’m glad to have a president who can ride a bicycle. And, I will look beyond the insulting nature of that question and make clear to you that the president of the United States …”Nehls interrupted.Buttigieg said, “Of course not,” then said Biden was “as vigorous a colleague or boss as I have ever had the pleasure of working with”.‘Glad to have a president who can ride a bicycle’: Buttigieg dismisses Republican claims about Biden’s healthRead moreWe’re expecting a major speech from Joe Biden soon on his efforts to fight climate change, which Congress lacks the votes to deal with. That doesn’t mean lawmakers aren’t busy; they’ve heard an address from Ukraine’s first lady asking for more weapons to fight off the Russians, and senators are weighing a bill to codify same-sex and interracial marriage rights.Here’s what has happened today so far:
    Rudy Giuliani, an attorney to former president Donald Trump, has lost his appeal against a subpoena from a Georgia grand jury.
    Trump called a top Republican lawmaker in Wisconsin recently and pressed him to decertify the results of the 2020 election in the state.
    Rusty Bowers, the speaker of Arizona’s House of Representatives who spoke to the January 6 committee last month, has been kicked out of the Republican party.
    Former president Donald Trump’s legal adviser Rudy Giuliani will have to talk to a Georgia grand jury sometime next month after his legal challenge against a subpoena failed, the Associated Press reports.Earlier this month, the grand jury in Fulton county, which includes Atlanta, subpoenaed Giuliani and other members of Trump’s legal team as part of their probe into his campaign’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in the state, where voters chose Joe Biden.Giuliani challenged the subpoena, but as the AP reports, he didn’t seem to put much effort into the appeal, failing to show up for a court hearing where he could explain why he shouldn’t have to testify.The grand jury has also summoned Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator from South Carolina, who has been challenging his subpoena.Georgia grand jury subpoenas Trump lawyers over effort to overturn electionRead moreGetting the Respect for Marriage Act through the Democratic-led House of Representatives is one thing, but could it pass the Senate? From what reporters on Capitol Hill are saying today, it doesn’t seem impossible.The bill won the votes of all Democrats as well as 47 Republicans when it passed Congress’s lower chamber yesterday. Assuming Democrats unanimously support it in the Senate, it would need the support of 10 Republicans to overcome the inevitable filibuster blocking its passage. According to CNN, several Republican senators have already said they’d vote for it:Thom Tillis, GOP senator from NC, told me he “probably will” support bill to codify same-sex marriage. Bill might get 60 votes, GOP senators say. Vote timing in Senate is unclear.— Manu Raju (@mkraju) July 20, 2022
    Thune told me he will take a “hard look” at bill“But if and when (Schumer) brings a bill to the floor we’ll take a hard look at it. As you saw there was pretty good bipartisan support in the House yesterday and I expect there’d probably be the same thing you’d see” in Senate— Manu Raju (@mkraju) July 20, 2022
    Asked about some of his fellow Republicans saying a vote on same-sex marriage is just a messaging exercise, Rob Portman told me: It’s an “important message,” and said: “I think this is an issue that many Americans, regardless of political affiliation, feel has been resolved.”— Manu Raju (@mkraju) July 20, 2022
    Congress is working on a lot of bills at the moment as the Democratic majority tries to make the most of the time remaining before November’s midterm elections, in which they could lose control of one or both chambers. Yesterday, Lois Beckett reports that the House passed a measure to codify same-sex and interracial marriage rights – which are currently protected by a supreme court ruling that could be overturned:The US House has passed a bill protecting the right to same-sex and interracial marriages, a vote that comes amid concerns that the supreme court’s overturning of Roe v Wade could jeopardize other rights.Forty-seven House Republicans supported the legislation, called the Respect for Marriage Act, including some who have publicly apologized for their past opposition to gay marriage. But more than three-quarters of House Republicans voted against the bill, with some claiming it was a “political charade”.All 220 House Democrats supported the bill, which is expected to be blocked by Republican opposition in a politically divided Senate.US House passes bill to protect right to same-sex and interracial marriageRead more More

  • in

    Ivana Trump funeral: Donald Trump and children attend ‘wonderful send-off’

    Ivana Trump funeral: Donald Trump and children attend ‘wonderful send-off’Donald Jr, Ivanka and Eric – Ivana’s three children with her ex-husband – gather for memorial at Catholic church in Manhattan Ivana Trump, the businesswoman who helped her husband build an empire that launched him to the presidency, was celebrated at a funeral mass in New York City on Wednesday.Ivana Trump: a life in picturesRead moreAt St Vincent Ferrer Roman Catholic Church on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, Ivana’s three children with the former president Donald Trump – Donald Jr, Ivanka and Eric – arrived with family members just before 1.40pm, before the gold casket was taken into the church.Donald Trump, Melania, and their son, Barron, entered the church through the side door.Tiffany Trump, the daughter of the former president and Marla Maples, for whom Donald Trump divorced Ivana, also attended the service. So did family friends including the Fox News host Jeanine Pirro, and Charles Kushner, a real estate developer and the father of Ivanka Trump’s husband. The fashion designer Dennis Basso, a longtime friend of Ivana Trump, was also among the mourners.“It was an elegant and wonderful send-off for Ivana Trump,” said publicist R Couri Hay, an attendee. “The church was blanketed in red flowers, red roses – Ivana’s favorite flowers. It was majestic, it was sober.“I would say that the church was drenched in tears,” Hay also said.The Trump family announced last week that Ivana, who was 73, died at her Manhattan home. Authorities said the death was an accident, blunt impact injuries to the torso the cause.Ivana and Donald Trump were married from 1977 to 1992. In the 1980s they were a power couple and she became well known in her own right, instantly recognizable with her blond hair in an updo and glamorous look.Ivana Trump took part in her husband’s businesses, managing one of his Atlantic City casinos and picking out some of the design elements in New York City’s Trump Tower.Their divorce was ugly but in recent years they were friendly. Ivana Trump was an enthusiastic supporter of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, and said they spoke on a regular basis.On Wednesday, press congregated across the street from the church, in the Lenox Hill section of the Upper East Side. Several secret service agents were positioned in front of the building. Police set up metal barricades.Some passersby paused to take in the activity. Marilyn Greeley, who lives nearby, said she had not known Ivana, but she saw her in a movie theater years ago.“It’s sad,” Greeley said. “Obviously, you think about how she died.”A woman who identified herself as Elaine was walking south on Lexington Avenue.“I think it’s very sad,” she said. “She fell down the stairs.”Marie-Noelle Levin, who said she met Ivana several times, came to a corner across from the church to pay her respects.“It’s very hard for me to cry, but here I am crying,” Levin said, wiping a tear.Michael Powers, a neighborhood resident, said: “I think it’s really sad that she died the way she did. She was beloved by New York City.”At about 3.30pm, Ivana’s casket was carried out of the church. Her three children, grandchildren, Donald Trump, Melania, Barron, as well as other relatives, exited the church. They left shortly thereafter.TopicsDonald TrumpNew YorkDonald Trump JrUS politicsIvanka TrumpnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Statehood or independence? Puerto Rico’s status at forefront of political debate

    Statehood or independence? Puerto Rico’s status at forefront of political debateUS lawmakers introduced a bill to determine the island’s status but how Puerto Rico should pave its path toward decolonization is the root of the debate Luz Rivera Sotomayor spent most of her days in church praying for her family’s health before she was diagnosed with dystonia in 2020. Two years after her diagnosis with the muscular system disorder, Rivera became bedridden at 59 and survives in Puerto Rico on what little she gets from a temporary program for low-income families.Because she lives in the US territory, Rivera is one of the thousands of Puerto Ricans who doesn’t qualify for the federal supplemental security income benefits intended to help people with disabilities in US states. In April, the supreme court reaffirmed in United States v Vaello-Madero that Congress is constitutionally allowed to treat territorial residents differently when extending federal benefits.“My sister has been blessed because someone in the community always comes around with what she needs,” said Jaqueline Rivera Sotomayor, who regularly takes care of Rivera Sotomayor, who lost her ability to speak. “But I can’t imagine what other people go through just to get by.”The consequences of Puerto Rico’s status has been on the forefront of political debates on the island in recent weeks, with a clash in opinions on whether the territory should become a US state, independent, or fall under a free association agreement.On Friday, US lawmakers introduced a bill that proposes a binding plebiscite – or direct electoral vote – to determine the island’s status. The draft was announced in May by the House majority leader, Steny Hoyer; Puerto Rico’s resident commissioner, Jenniffer González-Colon; and Representative Nydia Velázquez.The Puerto Rico Status Act would not include as an option the island’s current commonwealth status, a system that has lost support since the federal government established an unelected fiscal board in 2016, with authority to commandeer the local political branches, after the island entered bankruptcy.“In the aftermath of Puerto Rico’s bankruptcy, there appears to be a far-reaching consensus that the island’s colonial condition must come to an end,” said Rafael Cox Alomar, a law professor at the University of the District of Columbia, who has done research and analysis focused on Puerto Rico’s status and history. “The idea that Puerto Rico ceased to be a colony in 1952 after the inauguration of its own constitution no longer stands.”But exactly how Puerto Rico should pave its path toward decolonization is the root of the island’s debate. The bill, which is highly unlikely to advance in the Senate, proposes the plebiscite take place in November 2023. Puerto Rico’s current administration, led by Governor Pedro Pierluisi Urrutia, believes becoming the 51st state would eradicate the island’s colonial status.Some statehood supporters believe the bill is redundant, since the island held a referendum in November 2020 and ended with 53% of the votes in favor of statehood. However, only about half of registered voters participated, and the referendum was not approved by the US Department of Justice under the Trump administration even before the vote took place.The opposing party to the island’s current administration, which has traditionally supported Puerto Rico’s commonwealth formula, is quickly losing support within the island and among its own members. The decades-old Popular Democratic party is expected to hold a meeting later this year to determine whether it supports the island’s territorial status or the option of free association, which puts into question the party’s future.“If you’re going to deal with colonialism, all sides have to agree the status quo is not the solution,” said Representative Raúl Grijalva of Arizona, chairman of the US House of natural resources committee, which oversees affairs in US territories. After presenting the bill on Friday, Grijalva expects the committee to vote on it as soon as Wednesday.In June, Grijalva and other federal legislators held a public forum in Puerto Rico and heard dozens of testimonies from political party members, community advocates and interest groups to help legislators revise the proposed measure.Puerto Rican groups dedicated to mobilizing communities around the need for legislation that resolves the status issues were present in these discussions. The group Boricuas Unidos en la Diáspora suggested better defining the economic and cultural consequences of statehood, while others advocated for the formation of a citizens’ assembly to determine the island’s future instead of the bill.“The people of Puerto Rico must be the protagonists of their process, it can’t be prewritten by someone else,” said Javier Smith, special projects coordinator at Vamos Puerto Rico, a community organizing group. “If we’re going to keep the same subordinate political and economic structures, we’re not really changing anything.”The forum came before the UN special committee on decolonization approved a draft resolution recognizing Puerto Rico’s right to self-determination and independence for the fortieth time. Dozens of independence supporters for Puerto Rico protested near the United Nations’ headquarters in New York later that day.Rivera Sotomayor, who is taking care of her sister in Adjuntas, said she welcomes any process that solidifies Puerto Rico’s status in relation to the US, one way or another. For now, she is relying on their mother’s Social Security benefits to help cover the costs of her sister’s medications.“This is terrible,” said Rivera Sotomayor. “When you have a loved one, bedridden like this and in need of medication and diapers, the situation gets frustrating.”TopicsPuerto RicoUS politicsAmericasfeaturesReuse this content More