World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      These companies are as complicit as the far right in threatening US democracy | Robert Reich

      by

      Boeing, GM, FedEx: these are as complicit as the far right in threatening US democracyRobert ReichCorporations are underwriting the thuggery of Trump and his allies – all because they want to pay as little tax as possible In 2016, when clashes with taxi drivers broke out in 2016 in Paris, Uber’s then-chief executive Travis Kalanick texted fellow executives that “violence guarantees success” in what was a key market for the company.Uber leveraged the violence against its drivers to win sympathy from regulators and the public, as it also did in South Africa where Uber drivers were burned when their cars were set on fire. (This look inside Uber’s internal deliberations came from records Uber lobbyist Mark MacGann turned over to the Guardian.)John Bolton says he ‘helped plan coups d’etat’ in other countriesRead moreI’ve been thinking about Uber’s capitalist thuggery in light of the corporations underwriting Trump’s thuggery, which includes violent groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, who led the attack on the US Capitol.Tuesday’s hearing of the January 6 committee added more grim details, such as numerous connections between these violent groups and Trump confidants Roger Stone, Michael Flynn.Trump’s thuggery continues. A phone message received by White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson just before she testified before the January 6 committee warned that someone “let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know he’s thinking about you. He knows you’re loyal. And you’re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition.”If this sounds like a gangster threat, that’s the point.During Hutchinson’s earlier depositions before the committee, her legal counsel was paid for by Trump’s “Save America Pac” (the Pac paid the legal expenses of other panel witnesses, too.) When she realized “she couldn’t call her attorney to say, ‘Hey, I’ve got more information’” because the attorney “was there to insulate the big guy”, according to a friend, she secured free counsel who would not inhibit her. Now, after testifying in public, Hutchinson is in hiding.Meanwhile, the “big guy” continues to stir up his mob with lies about stolen elections and secret plots – fueling a new wave of threats against committee members.Several have increased their personal security. Committee chair Bennie Thompson, co-chair Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger have security details; other members have requested them.Kinzinger, one of the panel’s two Republican members alongside Cheney, says he’s received “constant” death threats. “There is violence in the future, I’m going to tell you,” Kinzinger told ABC. “And until we get a grip on telling people the truth, we can’t expect any differently.”Kinzinger has announced he will not be seeking re-election. Cheney has paused participating in public events in part because of safety concerns.Does any of this remind you of Hitler’s Brown Shirts or Mussolini’s Blackshirts?At the least, it should raise questions about the wealthy individuals and corporations that continue to bankroll this thuggery – among them, billionaires Peter Thiel, Rebecca Mercer, Charles Koch, Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus, ex-casino mogul Steve Wynn, and shipping magnate Richard Uihlein.Funding is also coming from Boeing, Koch Industries, Home Depot, FedEx, General Dynamics, Toyota, AT&T, Valero Energy, Lockheed Martin, UPS, Raytheon, Marathon Petroleum, GM and FedEx.In April alone, the most recent month for which data is available, Fortune 500 companies and trade organizations gave more than $1.4m to members of Congress who voted not to certify the election results. AT&T led the pack, giving $95,000 to election objectors.Toyota is even funding Trump ally Andrew Biggs, a fervent devotee of the big lie who refuses to comply with a congressional subpoena to testify before the committee. Six congressmen who have refused to testify have raked in more than $826,000 from corporate donors since the assault on the Capitol.Why are these wealthy individuals and corporations doing this? Presumably because they want to pay as little in taxes as possible and believe Trump and his Republicans will deliver even more tax cuts than they did before.But how is this capitalist thuggery in pursuit of profits different from Uber’s thuggery? And is it more excusable than the political thuggery it’s enabling?To state the question in historical terms, how different is their behavior from the wealthy European industrialists who quietly backed the fascists in the 1920s and 1930s?These billionaire and corporate funders are as complicit as are the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers in threatening American democracy.
      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionDonald TrumpUS economycommentReuse this content More

    • 213 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden in Israel as poll shows support for re-election bid at new low – as it happened

      by

      More bad news for Joe Biden on the polling front, where a mere 18% of respondents to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll said he should run for re-election in 2024 and 64% said he should step back in favour of another Democratic candidate.Among Democrats, 41% said Biden should not run again, against 35% who still wanted him as president. The result was worse than the same poll in May, when 25% of respondents said Biden should run for a second term. Among Democrats then, the figure was 49%.Biden’s favourability rating remains stuck in the mid- to upper-30s – not good by any measure.The Yahoo/YouGove poll also contained bad news for Biden’s vice-president, Kamala Harris, who was supported by just 19% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents to run in Biden’s stead – behind doubty campaigners “someone else” (20%) and “not sure” (30%).Biden has said he will run again but he is already the oldest president ever inaugurated and will turn 82 shortly after the 2024 election. He has also faced his fair share of crises in his short time in office, from the economic and physical effects of the coronavirus pandemic to the threat to democracy posed by his Republican opponents, and from the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its effects on gas prices, food supplies and more.Such a roster of challenges would, it seems fair to say, challenge most non-Biden candidates the Democrats might be able to find.Here’s Ross Barkan with more:Joe Biden is deeply unpopular. But can Democrats find an alternative for 2024? | Ross BarkanRead morePresident Joe Biden is in Israel, where he reaffirmed Washington’s commitment to one of its top allies. Meanwhile, back home, another month of sky-high inflation data rocked the Democratic leadership and caused a key senator to warn he may not be on board for big spending bills as long as prices keep increasing.Here’s what else happened today:
      Biden saw support for his re-election plummet in a poll that said a mere 18 percent of respondents would back him in 2024.
      A suspect was arrested in the case of a girl who had to travel from Ohio to Indiana for an abortion after being raped, refuting the doubts of Ohio’s Republican attorney general.
      The main Senate candidates in Georgia brought in boatloads of money last quarter, though Democrat Raphael Warnock raised the most.
      Michigan’s Democratic governor moved to stop other states from trying to arrest people who travel there for abortions.
      The chair of the January 6 committee dropped more hints of its cooperation with the department of justice, which could potentially charge former president Donald Trump with a crime.
      Shortly after the supreme court overturned Roe v. Wade last month, the story of a 10-year-old girl who was forced to travel from Ohio to neighboring Indiana for an abortion after being raped went viral.Ohio was one of the states whose law greatly restricting access to abortions took effect after the court ruling, and news of the girl’s ordeal sparked outrage over its consequences. However, the story had its doubters, chief among them the state’s Republican attorney general Dave Yost, whom the Columbus Dispatch reports gave interviews questioning whether the story happened at all.It did indeed, the Dispatch reported today, with police arresting a 27-year-old man who confessed to twice raping the child. From their story:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Gershon Fuentes, 27, whose last known address was an apartment on Columbus’ Northwest Side, was arrested Tuesday after police say he confessed to raping the child on at least two occasions. He’s since been charged with rape, a felony of the first degree in Ohio.
      Columbus police were made aware of the girl’s pregnancy through a referral by Franklin County Children Services that was made by her mother on June 22, Det. Jeffrey Huhn testified Wednesday morning at Fuentes’ arraignment. On June 30, the girl underwent a medical abortion in Indianapolis, Huhn said. While Yost had plenty to say when the story first broke, the Dispatch reported he kept his comments following the arrest brief:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost questioned the validity of the account during an appearance on Fox News this week.
      Yost, a Republican, told Fox News host Jesse Watters that his office had not heard “a whisper” of a report being filed for the 10-year-old victim.
      “We have regular contact with prosecutors and local police and sheriffs — not a whisper anywhere,” Yost said on the show.
      Yost doubled down on that in an interview with the USA TODAY Network Ohio bureau on Tuesday, saying that the more time passed before confirmation made it “more likely that this is a fabrication.”
      “I know the cops and prosecutors in this state,” Yost said. “There’s not one of them that wouldn’t be turning over every rock, looking for this guy and they would have charged him. They wouldn’t leave him loose on the streets … I’m not saying it could not have happened. What I’m saying to you is there is not a damn scintilla of evidence.”
      On Wednesday, once news of the arraignment of the Columbus man accused in the child’s rape came, Yost issued a single sentence statement:
      “We rejoice anytime a child rapist is taken off the streets.”10-year-old rape victim forced to travel from Ohio to Indiana for abortionRead moreThe Associated Press reports a third arrest has been made related to allegations officials mishandled election equipment in a Colorado county after the 2020 election.The case centers around Tina Peters, the clerk of Mesa county who last month lost her bid to be the Republican nominee for the position of top election official in Colorado. The AP reports that her election manager turned herself in earlier this week.Here’s more from the report:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Sandra Brown, who worked for Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, turned herself in Monday in response to a warrant issued for her arrest on suspicion of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation and attempting to influence a public servant, said Lt. Henry Stoffel of the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office. The arrest was first reported by The Daily Sentinel newspaper.
      Peters and her chief deputy, Belinda Knisley, are being prosecuted for allegedly allowing a copy of a hard drive to be made during an update of election equipment in May 2021. State election officials first became aware of a security breach last summer when a photo and video of confidential voting system passwords were posted on social media and a conservative website.
      Peters, who has become a hero to election conspiracy theorists, following the lead of former President Donald Trump, lost her bid to become the GOP candidate for Colorado secretary of state last month.
      Peters is charged with three counts of attempting to influence a public servant, criminal impersonation, two counts of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, one count of identity theft, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty and failing to comply with the secretary of state.The Guardian’s Sam Levine has previously covered the saga around Peters:Election denier Tina Peters loses Colorado primary for top poll officialRead moreJill Biden’s questionable phrasing during a speech earlier this week has resulted in an apology from the first lady, Erum Salam reports:Jill Biden has apologized for remarks in a speech to the civil rights and advocacy organization UnidosUS in which she likened the diversity of Latino Americans to breakfast tacos.Speaking in Texas on Monday, the first lady said: “The diversity of this community – as distinct as the bodegas of the Bronx, as beautiful as the blossoms of Miami and as unique as the breakfast tacos here in San Antonio, is your strength.”Amid condemnation of the statement, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists said: “We are not tacos. Our heritage as Latinos is shaped by various diasporas, cultures and food traditions. Do not reduce us to stereotypes.”Biden’s press secretary, Michael LaRosa, responded: “The first lady apologizes that her words conveyed anything but pure admiration and love for the Latino community.”Republicans, however, were quick to seize on the remarks.The Texas governor, Greg Abbott, tweeted: “Breakfast tacos? This is why Texas Hispanics are turning away from the Democratic party.”‘We are not tacos’: Jill Biden criticized over Latino Americans remarkRead moreThe Guardian’s David Smith has the latest on whether the January 6 committee’s hearings will lead to Trump facing a criminal prosecution:Donald Trump is facing growing legal peril as the House January 6 committee lays out a case that appears increasingly geared to making a criminal prosecution all but inevitable.The panel’s seventh hearing on Tuesday argued that Trump instigated an attack on the US Capitol that was premeditated rather than spontaneous and that he cannot hide behind a defence of being “willfully blind”.The committee also sought to show an explosive convergence between Trump’s interests and those of far-right extremist groups, although critics said the case fell short of direct collusion.Even so, the late revelation that Trump had tried to contact a person talking to the committee about potential testimony – raising the prospect of witness tampering – was only likely to compound pressure on the Department of Justice to investigate the former president.Trouble for Trump as committee makes case Capitol attack was premeditatedRead moreChair of the January 6 committee Bennie Thompson has revealed a bit more about the body’s interactions with the justice department as it turns up more and more evidence of potentially criminal misconduct by Donald Trump around the time of the 2020 election.At yesterday’s hearing, the House committee revealed that Trump had contacted a former witness who was working with the panel. Here’s what Thompson had to say about that:CNN’s @mkraju on Trump calling witnesses: “Is it your opinion that there’s enough evidence to say that there was an attempt to intimidate these witnesses?”1/6 Cmte Chair Thompson (D-MS): “It’s highly unusual … that’s why we …put that in the hands of the Justice Department.” pic.twitter.com/hizi9wi4Wa— The Recount (@therecount) July 13, 2022
      He also talked about what of the committee’s evidence the justice department was most interested in:Bennie Thompson told us that DOJ is only interested in J6 panel’s witness testimony over fake electors issue. He said they are in talks with DOJ over establishing a process for them to come in and review the records. “That’s right,” he said when it was just about fake electors— Manu Raju (@mkraju) July 13, 2022
      President Joe Biden is in Israel right now but in an interview with the country’s Channel 12 broadcaster filed at the White House before his departure, he weighed in on the issues facing one of Washington’s top allies in the Middle East.The president kept the door open to using military force to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, but said that would only be done as a “last resort”:EXCLUSIVE @POTUS interview with @N12News: committed to keeping IRGC on the foreign terrorist organizations list even if it kills the deal; willing to use force “as last resort” pic.twitter.com/jWjLO0SVQz— Yonit Levi (@LeviYonit) July 13, 2022
      He also drew a line between himself and fellow Democrats who criticize aid to Israel and claim it’s an apartheid state:More from exclusive @POTUS interview with @N12News: voices in the Democratic Party calling Israel an apartheid state are “few, and they are wrong” pic.twitter.com/CkX3XRkRSL— Yonit Levi (@LeviYonit) July 13, 2022
      Biden will on Friday travel to Saudi Arabia, but he made clear he does not expect that country to normalize relations with Israel anytime soon:Normalisation between Israel and Saudi Arabia “will take time” @POTUS to @N12News: pic.twitter.com/4GBnv92B0A— Yonit Levi (@LeviYonit) July 13, 2022
      Steve Bannon, a former top advisor to Donald Trump, has tried again and again to delay his trial on contempt of Congress charges for ignoring a subpoena from the January 6 committee.The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports that his latest bid has failed:New: Former Trump strategist Steve Bannon makes new motion to delay his contempt of Congress trial date of July 18 — noting Jan. 6 committee’s mention of him at hearing yesterday. Judge Nichols though said he could seat jury and then assess if trial needed to be delayed.— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) July 13, 2022
      A brief look at Bannon’s attempts to stay out of the courtroom:Bannon suffers setback as judge rejects delaying contempt of Congress trialRead moreCongress held two hearings today on the impact of last month’s landmark supreme court decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion, in which advocates for and against the procedure made their case to House and Senate lawmakers.Here are some highlights:A Missouri lawmaker worried the state’s regulations would mean doctors and women alike would face jail for seeking out the procedure:MI State Sen. @MalloryMcMorrow (D) on impact of Roe’s reversal if a 1931 law making abortion a felony “with no exception for age, rape, or incest” goes into effect:“Not only would doctors and medical professionals be sent to jail, but so too would countless women and girls.” pic.twitter.com/obFeJBkjLv— The Recount (@therecount) July 13, 2022
      And a Georgia state representative said the burden of abortion bans would hit Black women and racial minorities the hardest:“Our criminal legal system is really good at locking up Black and brown folks and … will likely believe Karen, but not believe Keisha when she says she had a miscarriage.”— Georgia State Rep. Shannon (D) on women who have miscarriages mistakenly being prosecuted for abortions pic.twitter.com/Wb7SlDKXbi— The Recount (@therecount) July 13, 2022
      Anti-abortion lawyer Erin Hawley, wife of Republican senator Josh Hawley, batted away pro-abortion talking points:Sen. Josh Hawley’s (R-MO) wife Erin Hawley, who worked with the state of Mississippi on Dobbs v. Jackson, asked how the anti-abortion movement is pro-women:“Babies can be female as well, so it’s definitely pro-women in that sense.” pic.twitter.com/4GPzNbvQUR— The Recount (@therecount) July 13, 2022
      As did Roger Marshall, Kansas’s Republican Senator:“Members will imply today that carrying a baby to term is more dangerous than an abortion. So, using their logic, should we abort every baby? Should we stop all childbearing?”— Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) during hearing on abortion rights following Roe v. Wade reversal pic.twitter.com/R194o94XJo— The Recount (@therecount) July 13, 2022
      More bad news for Joe Biden on the polling front, where a mere 18% of respondents to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll said he should run for re-election in 2024 and 64% said he should step back in favour of another Democratic candidate.Among Democrats, 41% said Biden should not run again, against 35% who still wanted him as president. The result was worse than the same poll in May, when 25% of respondents said Biden should run for a second term. Among Democrats then, the figure was 49%.Biden’s favourability rating remains stuck in the mid- to upper-30s – not good by any measure.The Yahoo/YouGove poll also contained bad news for Biden’s vice-president, Kamala Harris, who was supported by just 19% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents to run in Biden’s stead – behind doubty campaigners “someone else” (20%) and “not sure” (30%).Biden has said he will run again but he is already the oldest president ever inaugurated and will turn 82 shortly after the 2024 election. He has also faced his fair share of crises in his short time in office, from the economic and physical effects of the coronavirus pandemic to the threat to democracy posed by his Republican opponents, and from the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its effects on gas prices, food supplies and more.Such a roster of challenges would, it seems fair to say, challenge most non-Biden candidates the Democrats might be able to find.Here’s Ross Barkan with more:Joe Biden is deeply unpopular. But can Democrats find an alternative for 2024? | Ross BarkanRead moreJoe Biden has said the US is committed to Israel’s security, on arriving in Tel Aviv for the first leg of a three-day visit to the Middle East, a trip focused on deepening the majority Jewish state’s ties with the Arab world as the region faces a common foe in Iran.The president was greeted by the Israeli president, Isaac Herzog, and caretaker prime minister, Yair Lapid, on Air Force One’s arrival at Ben Gurion airport on Wednesday afternoon, fist-bumping rather than shaking hands with Israeli officials on the tarmac over what the White House said was concern over rising Covid cases.Ahead of Biden’s trip, senior Israeli officials briefed reporters that the two countries will issue a broad-ranging communique titled the “Jerusalem Declaration”, which will take a tough stance on Iran’s nuclear programme, and reaffirm Israel’s right to defend itself.In his opening remarks, Biden recalled that his first visit to the country had been as a young senator in 1973, just a few weeks before the Yom Kippur war with Egypt and Syria broke out. At that time, Israel and imperial Iran were still allies, and Egypt and Jordan were still hostile to the majority Jewish state.“We’ll continue to advance Israel’s integration into the region and the relationship between the US and Israel is deeper and stronger in my view than it’s ever been,” the president said.Air Force One will make a first direct flight from Israel to Saudi Arabia amid efforts to build a relationship between the Jewish state and the conservative Gulf kingdom, which does not officially recognise Israel’s existence.Full story:Biden commits to Israel’s security as he embarks on Middle East tourRead moreAnother sentence has been handed down against a January 6 rioter, in this case a Maryland man who pled guilty to charges related to striking a police officer with a lacrosse stick that had a Confederate battle flag attached.He was ordered to serve five months in prison, according to the AP: .css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper also sentenced David Alan Blair, to 18 months of supervised release after his prison term and ordered him to pay $2,000 in restitution, said William Miller, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia.
      Federal prosecutors recommended sentencing Blair to eight months in prison followed by three years of supervised release.
      Blair’s attorney, Terrell Roberts III, asked for a sentence of probation.
      Blair, 27, left his home in Clarksburg, Maryland, and started driving to Washington, D.C., after the riot erupted at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Shortly before 6 p.m., Blair encountered a line of Metropolitan Police Department officers on the Capitol’s West Lawn and refused to heed their commands to leave the area, prosecutors said.
      A police officer’s body camera captured Blair walking in front of the police line and yelling, “Hell naw. Quit backing up. Don’t be scared. We’re Americans.”
      Blair was arrested after he pushed his lacrosse stick against an officer’s chest.
      The officer responded to the push by striking Blair three times in the head with a baton, drawing blood and giving him a concussion, according to Blair’s attorney.The race for the Senate seat in Georgia currently occupied by Democrat Raphael Warnock is among those considered pivotal to deciding who controls the chamber following November’s midterm elections, and the incumbent seems to be prevailing, at least when it comes to money.As the Associated Press reports, Warnock raised $17.2 million in the second quarter running from April through June, much more than the $6.2 million Republican Herschel Walker brought in.From the AP’s report:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The dueling Senate campaign numbers underlined two truths. Georgia is again going to be one of the most expensive races to run for office in 2022, and Democrats are building a strong fundraising advantage.
      Like Warnock, Democrat Stacey Abrams heavily outraised incumbent Republican Brian Kemp in the race for governor, collecting almost $50 million compared to the $31 million Kemp has brought in over a longer period. Abrams and Warnock plan to run closely linked campaigns, echoing many of the same themes.
      Warnock is one of several Democratic Senate incumbents in swing states who is trying to cling to their seat amid President Joe Biden’s deep unpopularity. Republicans had long dominated statewide races until Georgia helped elect Biden to the presidency and enabled Democrats to control the Senate by electing Warnock and fellow Democrat Jon Ossoff in a January 2021 runoff. More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trouble for Trump as committee makes case Capitol attack was premeditated

      by

      Trouble for Trump as committee makes case Capitol attack was premeditatedCriminal prosecution appears increasingly likely as January 6 committee strengthens case against former president00:45Donald Trump is facing growing legal peril as the House January 6 committee lays out a case that appears increasingly geared to making a criminal prosecution all but inevitable.The panel’s seventh hearing on Tuesday argued that Trump instigated an attack on the US Capitol that was premeditated rather than spontaneous and that he cannot hide behind a defence of being “willfully blind”.Biden in Israel as poll shows support for re-election bid at new low – liveRead moreThe committee also sought to show an explosive convergence between Trump’s interests and those of far-right extremist groups, although critics said the case fell short of direct collusion.Even so, the late revelation that Trump had tried to contact a person talking to the committee about potential testimony – raising the prospect of witness tampering – was only likely to compound pressure on the Department of Justice to investigate the former president.Trump and his supporters have long claimed that the riot at the Capitol on 6 January 2021 was a peaceful protest against his election defeat that spun out of control in the heat of the moment. Nine deaths are linked to the attack and its aftermath.But Tuesday’s hearing revealed evidence that the president planned in advance to send supporters, who he knew were armed, marching on the Capitol.The panel showed a draft tweet, obtained from the National Archives, calling on supporters to arrive early for a rally and to expect crowds.“March to the Capitol after. Stop the Steal!” the draft tweet said.There were also fresh details about planning for Trump’s rally on the Ellipse outside the White House as aides scrambled to set up a second stage outside the Capitol complex, across the street from the supreme court.In a 4 January text message from rally organiser Kylie Kremer to Trump ally Mike Lindell, the MyPillow chief executive, Kremer explained: “This stays only between us, we are having a second stage at the supreme court again after the Ellipse. [Trump] is going to have us march there/the Capitol.”Kremer warned that if the information got out, others would try to sabotage the plans and she would “be in trouble” with the National Park Service and other agencies. “But Potus [Trump] is going to just call for it ‘unexpectedly,”’ Kremer wrote.Stephanie Murphy, a Democratic member of the House committee, said: “This was not a spontaneous call to action, but rather was a deliberate strategy.”The hearings have inflicted greater political damage on Trump than many expected. In opening remarks on Tuesday, Liz Cheney, vice-chair of the committee, noted how Trump loyalists have changed their approach to argue that he was manipulated by outsiders and “incapable of telling right from wrong”.Believed to be one of the strongest advocates for a criminal prosecution, Cheney appeared to pre-empt a possible defence when she insisted: “President Trump is a 76-year-old man, he is not an impressionable child. Just like everyone else in our country, he is responsible for his own actions, and his own choices … and Donald Trump cannot escape responsibility by being willfully blind.”Democrats and other critics said a potential DoJ case against Trump was stronger than ever and again adopted legal terms such as “premeditated”.Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state defeated by Trump in 2016, tweeted: “Trump was crystal clear about his wishes in the lead-up to January 6. What happened that day was not an accident or a coincidence. It was organized, deliberate, and premeditated.”Norm Eisen, a former special counsel to the House judiciary committee, including for the impeachment and trial of Trump, wrote: “Yesterday’s hearing further established Trump’s violent intent. They’re moving from evidence of likely crime to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”Tuesday’s session focused in part on December 2020, a period when many Republicans were moving on from the November election Trump lost to Joe Biden.There was testimony about an “unhinged” six-hour Oval Office meeting on 18 December that ran beyond midnight, in which, amid shouting and screaming, Trump resisted objections from White House lawyers to a plan to seize voting machines. The plan was eventually discarded.As night turned to morning, Trump tweeted a call for supporters to come to Washington on January 6, when Congress would tally electoral college results.“Be there. Will be wild,” Trump wrote.This “call to arms” ricocheted around online echo chambers of Trump’s fanbase. The panel showed graphic and violent text messages and played videos of rightwing figures vowing that January 6 would be the day they would fight for the president. It would be a “red wedding”, said one, a reference to a mass killing in the TV series Game of Thrones. “Bring handcuffs.”Some former Trump officials denied that the committee had tied him directly to extremist groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. But calls for Merrick Garland, the attorney general, to prosecute Trump for the crime of encouraging the commission of crimes of violence are gathering momentum.Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law professor at Harvard University, said of the latest hearing: “It greatly strengthens the case, particularly with respect to Trump’s direct involvement in fomenting the violence of the insurrection itself.“The evidence that emerged was very powerful, indicating that [the riot] was anything but spontaneous, that he was fully aware at the time the unhinged meeting at the White House ended at around midnight on 18 December that his only remaining alternative was essentially to pull the trigger and issue the tweet at 1.42 in the morning, which included the dramatic call to action.”This was predictably interpreted by the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers and other violent white nationalist militia and Christian militia groups as the call to arms, Tribe said.“So the former president’s direct responsibility for the riot, for the insurrection, is now much easier to prove and it would be increasingly problematic for the attorney general not to authorise a full-blown investigation into the president’s direct responsibility for the federal offence that involves.”TopicsDonald TrumpJanuary 6 hearingsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in World Politics

      Biden’s Hyperbolic Fawning Before the CIA

      by

      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

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      John Bolton says he ‘helped plan coups d’etat’ in other countries

      by

      John Bolton says he ‘helped plan coups d’etat’ in other countriesFormer national security adviser to Donald Trump says US Capitol attack was not a coup because it was not carefully planned John Bolton, a former national security adviser to Donald Trump and before that ambassador to the United Nations under George W Bush, said on Tuesday he helped plan coup attempts in other countries.January 6 testimony tells chilling tale of democracy hanging by a threadRead moreSpeaking to CNN after the day’s January 6 committee hearing, Bolton said it was wrong to describe Trump’s attempt to stay in power after the 2020 election as a coup.He said: “While nothing Donald Trump did after the election, in connection with the lie about the election fraud, none of it is defensible, it’s also a mistake as some people have said including on the committee, the commentators that somehow this was a carefully planned coup d’etat to the constitution.“That’s not the way Donald Trump does things. It’s rambling from one half-vast idea to another plan that falls through and another comes up.”His host, Jake Tapper, said: “One doesn’t have to be brilliant to attempt a coup.”Bolton said: “I disagree with that, as somebody who has helped plan coups d’etat, not here, but you know, other places. It takes a lot of work and that’s not what [Trump] did. It was just stumbling around from one idea to another.“Ultimately, he did unleash the rioters at the Capitol, as to that there’s no doubt, but not to overthrow the constitution, to buy more time to throw the matter back to the states to try and redo the issue.“And if you don’t believe that you’re going to overreact, and I think that’s a real risk for the committee, which has done a lot of good work.”Jake Tapper: “One doesn’t have to be brilliant to attempt a coup.”John Bolton: “I disagree with that. As somebody who has helped plan coup d’etat, not here, but other places, it takes a lot of work.” pic.twitter.com/REyqh3KtHi— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) July 12, 2022
      Tapper returned to Bolton’s remark about having helped plan coups.Bolton said: “I’m not going to get into the specifics.”Tapper asked: “Successful coups?”Bolton said: “Well, I wrote about Venezuela in in the book and it turned out not to be successful.“Not that we had all that much to do with it, but I saw what it took for an opposition to try and overturn an illegally elected president and they failed. The notion that Donald Trump was half as competent as the Venezuelan opposition is laughable.”Bolton devotes considerable space to Venezuela policy in The Room Where It Happened, his 2020 memoir of his work for Trump.In 2019, the US supported the Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido’s call for the military to back his ultimately failed attempt to oust the socialist president, Nicolas Maduro, arguing Maduro’s re-election was illegitimate.Before Bolton joined the Trump administration, it was widely reported that Trump wanted to use the US military to oust Maduro. In August 2017, Trump told reporters: “We have many options for Venezuela, this is our neighbour.”Among other gambits, Bolton’s book describes work with the British government to freeze Venezuelan gold deposits in the Bank of England.In his newsletter, The Racket, Jonathan M Katz, author of the book Gangsters of Capitalism, said: “The United States has indeed sponsored and participated in lots of coups and foreign government overthrows, dating back to the turn of the 20th century [and] Bolton was personally involved in many of the recent efforts – in Nicaragua, Iraq, Haiti and others”.But, Katz added: “Generally, officials do not admit that sort of thing on camera.”The Room Where It Happened review: John Bolton fires broadside that could sink TrumpRead moreKatz wrote: “Keep in mind that throughout the 2019 crisis, Bolton insisted that the Trump administration’s support for … Guaidó … was anything but a coup. He literally stood in front of the White House at the height of the affair and told reporters: “This is clearly not a coup!”In those remarks, in April 2019, Bolton said: “We recognize Juan Guaidó as the legitimate interim president of Venezuela.“And just as it’s not a coup when the president of the United States gives an order to the Department of Defense, it’s not a coup for Juan Guaidó to try and take command of the Venezuelan military.“We want as our principal objective the peaceful transfer of power but I will say again, as [Trump] has said from the outset, and Nicolas Maduro and those supporting him, particularly those who are not Venezuelan, should know, all options are on the table.”On CNN, Tapper said: “I feel like there’s like this other stuff you’re not telling me.”Bolton said: “I think I’m sure there is.”TopicsJohn BoltonDonald TrumpJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackUS politicsVenezuelaAmericasnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US military kills Islamic State leader in Syria airstrike

      by

      US military kills Islamic State leader in Syria airstrikeMaher al-Agal, said to be responsible for developing networks outside Iraq and Syria, was killed in a drone strike The US military killed a leader of the Islamic State on Tuesday in an airstrike in Syria, Joe Biden said.Maher al-Agal, identified by the Pentagon as one of the top five Islamic State leaders and the leader of the Islamic State in Syria, was killed in a drone strike in Jindayris in north-west Syria.“His death in Syria takes a key terrorist off the field and significantly degrades the ability of [the Islamic State] to plan, resource, and conduct their operations in the region,” the president said. “It sends a powerful message to all terrorists who threaten our homeland and our interests around the world. The United States will be relentless in its efforts to bring you to justice.”Suspected Islamist attack frees hundreds of prisoners in NigeriaRead moreUS Central Command said in a news release that an unidentified senior official in the Islamic State was also seriously injured in the strike that killed Agal.The Pentagon said an “initial review” indicated there were no civilian casualties, though it wasn’t possible to immediately confirm that information.Agal was “responsible for aggressively pursuing the development of Isis networks outside … Iraq and Syria”, according to US Central Command.The Islamic State at the height of its power controlled more than 40,000 sq miles stretching from Syria to Iraq and ruled over 8 million people.While the group’s territorial state collapsed in 2019, its leaders have turned to guerrilla tactics and been able to “efficiently restructure themselves organizationally”, according to the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a nonpartisan thinktank.The strike on Agal comes months after the leader of the Islamic State, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi, killed himself during a raid of his hideout by American special forces.The Pentagon said Qurayshi blew himself up along with members of his family.TopicsIslamic StateUS militarySyriaUS politicsJoe BidenReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk hits back at Trump and says ex-president should ‘hang up his hat’

      by

      Elon Musk hits back at Trump and says ex-president should ‘hang up his hat’Tesla chief tweets that ex-president should ‘sail into the sunset’ after Trump calls Musk a ‘bullshit artist’ over Twitter bid Stepping up an ongoing verbal clash between the two men, Elon Musk said Donald Trump should “hang up his hat” and is too old to run for the Oval Office in 2024, as a poll shows the former president is losing support among Republican voters.“I don’t hate the man, but it’s time for Trump to hang up his hat & sail into the sunset,” Musk tweeted late Monday, using the same social media platform that he first tried to buy and is now trying to walk away from. The billionaire businessman’s tweet came after Trump, at a public appearance in Alaska last weekend, called Musk a “bullshit artist” over the Twitter sale.Elon Musk may have to complete $44bn Twitter takeover, legal experts sayRead moreMusk further tweeted that Democrats – who hold seven of the nine seats on the congressional committee investigating the deadly January 6 attack on the Capitol by Trump’s supporters – “should also call off the attack”.“Don’t make it so that Trump’s only way to survive is to regain the presidency,” Musk wrote.Trump would be 78 when the 2024 presidential election is held. If he ignores Musk’s suggestion to hang it up and wins, Trump would be 82 at the end of his second presidential term.Musk on Friday filed notice to withdraw his $44bn bid to buy Twitter, after the company agreed in late April to sell to him. He argued that the platform had failed to provide promised information on fake and spam accounts, though many observers have noted that tech stocks have plummeted recently, making the sale price look much higher.It’s unlikely Musk will walk away easily. Twitter said Musk backing out was “invalid and wrongful” and is suing him to enforce a provision in the agreement that may compel him to go through with acquiring the platform, assuming he had the financing for it – which the businessman said in May that he had.Trump spoke up after Friday’s announcement, saying the Tesla and SpaceX chief’s deal with Twitter was “rotten” anyway.The Trump-Musk spat has gone on for a while: Musk said he was contemplating supporting Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, as the Republican candidate in the 2024 presidential race.In Alaska, Trump claimed Musk said he’d previously voted for him; Musk has denied it, though he has also criticized Twitter for banning Trump’s account on the platform after the Capitol attack.If Musk did vote for Trump, he isn’t alone in having a change of heart, a recent poll from the New York Times and Siena College found. Nearly half of Republican party primary voters are interested in supporting someone other than Trump in the 2024 election, and 16% even indicated that if he was the GOP nominee they would support president Joe Biden, vote for a protest candidate, abstain from voting or be unsure of what to do, according to the poll.That may not sound like much, but that number among Democrats if Biden were to face Trump was 8%, the poll said.TopicsElon MuskDonald TrumpUS elections 2024US politicsReuse this content More

    • 225 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats are certain to lose seats in the midterms. But how many – and why? | Musa al-Gharbi

      by

      Democrats are certain to lose seats in the midterms. But how many – and why?Musa al-GharbiThe outcome seems certain. How we get there is the question In the Abrahamic religions, there is a profound mystery in how to reconcile belief in free will with faith in divine providence. Similar mysteries lie at the heart of political science.For instance, over the past 45 years, every time there has been a change of party in the White House, the opposing party won the governorship of Virginia a year later.Over the past 45 years, the governorship of Virginia has moved countercyclically to the White House. pic.twitter.com/n5YMJCRzXE— Musa al-Gharbi (@Musa_alGharbi) July 11, 2022
      2021 was no exception. Democrat Joe Biden took the White House, Republican Glenn Youngkin became governor of Virginia. In media circles this outcome was widely described as a ‘shock.’ Given the electoral pattern over the past several decades, it shouldn’t have been.How Elise Stefanik rose from moderate Republican to Maga starRead moreThe outcome of that race was chalked up to debates over “critical race theory” in K-12 schools, among other things. While those narratives may not be wrong exactly, the historical pattern over nearly the last half-century suggests that even if these specific issues had not been salient, some other controversy would have risen to the fore, and the outcome for Democrats would have been roughly the same.Similar patterns hold at the national level. For instance, every time there is a change of party in the White House, the new incumbent party loses seats in the House of Representatives during the subsequent midterm elections. Here, we can go all the way back to the creation of the Democratic and Republican two-party system, and there are only two exceptions to the rule:From the foundation of the @TheDemocrats v. @GOP two-party rivalry, whenever there has been a change of party in the White House, the incumbent party virtually always loses seats in the House of Representatives during their inaugural midterms. pic.twitter.com/H8myMjWcDS— Musa al-Gharbi (@Musa_alGharbi) July 11, 2022
      Following the outbreak of the Great Depression, which FDR had been elected to fix, his party actually gained seats in the House and Senate. Likewise, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, with its unprecedented ‘rally around the flag’ effect in full bloom, George W Bush’s party gained seats in the House and held their ground in the Senate.In every other instance, the newly-elected party lost seats. It didn’t matter which party was in the White House. It didn’t matter if the economy was up or down or if there was war or peace. It didn’t matter if the president was popular or unpopular or what the big topics of contention were. All of that was immaterial to the basic outcome: the incumbent party experienced a net loss in the House regardless.The magnitude of those losses varied. At the low end, three seats changed hands. At the high end, 125.The pathways to those losses varied too: different demographics shifted in different cycles, apparently for different reasons. Different seats changed hands, driven by a wide range of factors. Yet, the net losses occurred like clockwork. The mean loss was 41 seats. The median loss was 26. The modal loss was between 10 and 20 seats.A majority in the House of Representatives requires 218 seats. Democrats currently have 220. Assuming all seats get filled by the end of this cycle, should Democrats lose more than 2 seats net in the upcoming elections, they will lose their majority in the House. Put another way, Democrats would have to outperform the Lincoln and Kennedy administrations in retaining their seats if they want to keep the chamber.It seems highly unlikely that they will be able to pull off such a feat. Joe Biden’s net favorability rating is lower than any president on record. Even most Democrats want Biden to retire when his term is over rather than seeking reelection. But it’s not just the president. In the generic ballot, the Democratic Party is also underwater. Democrats saw a slight boost after the supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, but the gains seem to have levelled off, and it’s unclear whether the small bump will sustain over the next four months. But even if it did, again, Democrats would still be net-negative going into the midterms.It is no wonder that both formal modeling and prediction markets put Republicans as the likely winners of the House by a ratio of nearly 9:1. The Senate is more of a toss-up. There’s a real chance for Democrats to hold that chamber, although it seems like that will be a steep climb too.If and when Democrats see significant losses in 2022, critics will certainly chalk them up to rising inflation, growing concerns about crime, Biden’s failure to pass most of his Build Back Better proposal, his lack of action on gun control or abortion, his reneging on campaign promises to broadly erase student loan debt, missteps related to Covid or foreign policy, his administration (and the Democrats more broadly) leaning too heavily into “identity politics”, a failure to appropriately leverage the January 6 committee findings against the Republicans, and more.While these narratives may not be exactly wrong, again, it is likely that the party would have seen losses even if Biden had passed Build Back Better, waived student debt, abstained from ‘woke’ identity politics, and so on. Something else would have worked against the party instead – including, perhaps, their own accomplishments.Although perceptions of being ineffective can lead to disillusionment, it can also be a liability if an administration is perceived as too effective. If a party rapidly passes a bunch of major legislation or otherwise implements dramatic changes, this often leads to even bigger blowback at the ballot box as Americans try to pump the brakes.There seems to be a sweet spot of tangible accomplishments that an administration can point to, promises fulfilled on issues that voters prioritize most – where the change is not perceived as too dramatic, or as too many changes happening too fast. Hitting that sweet spot while avoiding self-sabotage can help minimize losses. But it’s generally difficult to discern exactly where that sweet spot is. And again, even for administrations that really seem to get it right, they still see net losses in the House during their inaugural midterms, just smaller losses.As far as how the likely losses will come about in 2022:Independent and moderate voters aligned themselves with the Democrats to an unprecedented degree in 2020, playing a pivotal role in Biden’s victory. These voters have shifted dramatically towards Republicans since.Democrats have been seeing consistent attrition of non-white voters over the past decade. Polling and surveys suggest that these trends are likely to continue among Black, Hispanic and Asian voters.Democrats also saw significant declines in vote share among younger voters (18-29) in 2020 as compared to 2018. This alienation among young voters seems like it may persist or grow through the midterms as well – although recent supreme court rulings may blunt this a little.Democratic losses with working-class voters seem likely to continue apace.In the aftermath of the race, there will be all sorts of stories told about why these voters shifted to the right. Some of those stories may have a lot of truth to them. Many others will be nonsense. But even compelling narratives about the election should be taken with a grain of salt. Again, if these particular groups didn’t shift towards the GOP, other voters would likely have shifted instead. That is, even if they’d retained these voters, the outcome of the midterms may not have changed much.Losses are pretty much a guarantee for a party’s inaugural midterms. It doesn’t matter who is in charge or what they do, they will still lose seats in the House. How big the losses are, among whom, and why – which specific seats change hands, in which districts – these all remain to be determined by the specifics of the cycle. The broad outcome seems fixed, how we get there is not. In this, political science and theology seem to converge.
      Musa al-Gharbi is a Paul F Lazarsfeld fellow in sociology at Columbia University. His book We Have Never Been Woke: Social Justice Discourse, Inequality and the Rise of a New Elite is forthcoming with Princeton University Press. He is a Guardian US columnist
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionDemocratsJoe BidencommentReuse this content More