World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Revealed: supporters of Trump’s big lie work as election officials across Georgia

      by

      Revealed: supporters of Trump’s big lie work as election officials across GeorgiaOfficials in at least seven counties of crucial swing state found to have promoted falsehood that 2020 election was stolen by Biden The effort to install local election officials who promote Donald Trump’s lie that the 2020 election was stolen has seen particular success in the crucial swing state of Georgia, where at least eight county election officials are promoters of the falsehood, a Guardian investigation has found.The officials span the state, from suburban counties outside Atlanta to rural counties near the Tennessee and Alabama borders. All have substantial power over the administration of local, state and national elections in their counties, often with little oversight beyond scantly attended public meetings and small-town newspapers.They include: one election official who has posted in support of a discredited election conspiracist who believes the alleged presence of bamboo in paper ballots is proof they came from Asia, and thus show interference from China; two officials who tried, on the basis of bogus fraud allegations, to decertify the results of the January 2021 runoff that resulted in the election of the state’s first Black senator; one official who insisted that Georgia’s election laws needed to change if Republicans were going to “have a shot” at winning future elections.All continue to serve in their appointed positions as county election board officials in Floyd, Forsyth, Gwinnett, Hall, Jackson, Lumpkin and Spalding counties. None responded to requests for comment from the Guardian.The investigation looked at seven counties out of 159, meaning the number of election officials who support election conspiracy theories could be much higher.“These disturbing facts bring to light what we’ve known for a while: support for the big lie is growing – the result of powerful political actors stoking a dangerous fire,” the voting rights group New Georgia Project said in a statement.“There is absolutely no place on our boards of elections, or in any of our elected offices, for leaders who refuse to accept the results of fair and certified elections.”Election boards have access to voter rolls, and make rules about polling places, ballots and voter registration. They also make determinations on ballots in which the voters’ intention is unclear.The boards seat between four and five members, usually split evenly between the two main parties with a tie-breaking, “non-partisan” member often chosen by the county commission or a local judge.With 159 counties, Georgia therefore has hundreds of county election board officials, creating and changing election policy on a weekly basis with little other than local activists and press to track them.Among them is Dottie Krull, a 79-year-old Republican on the Lumpkin county election board, located a little over an hour north of Atlanta. Shortly after the 2020 election, Krull began posting about the big lie on her personal Facebook page.“I guess we all know why Biden stayed in his basement and didn’t campaign,” Krull quoted a friend as saying. “He knew he didn’t need to.”In Forsyth county, elections board member Joel Natt was present on a conference call with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and other election officials when he blamed unspecified election “irregularities” as a reason why Georgians of both parties were becoming “less and less trusting” of Raffensperger’s office.In Floyd county, Pam Peters was described by an election conspiracy theorist who spoke to the Washington Post as an “investigative partner.” Days before election day, Peters volunteered for Trump in Rome, Georgia.In Hall county, elections board member Tom Smiley said he took issue with claims that the 2020 election saw no fraud, saying he would amend it to “NO FRAUD DISCOVERED”.Perhaps no elections board official has been the subject of as much controversy as Alice O’Lenick, chair of the Gwinnett county board of registration.O’Lenick has been a vocal supporter of restrictions to poll access and voting rights, her critics say. In 2016, O’Lenick opposed the use of Spanish-language ballots. (The county was eventually forced to include them by the US Census Bureau under the Voting Rights Act.)She has also supported the abolition of so-called “no excuse” absentee voting, in which only the elderly or infirm would be allowed to fill out an absentee ballot; opposed the use of drop boxes, alleging spurious claims of ballot harvesting; served on a task force that recommended sweeping changes to voting rights so Republicans could “at least have a shot” at winning elections; and alleged without providing direct evidence that Gwinnett county saw an uptick in attempted voting by undocumented immigrants.In Spalding county, election board chair Ben Johnson continues to post prolifically about a wide variety of far-right conspiracy theories, including those involving alleged ballot harvesting and Dominion voting machines. In late April, Johnson shared a photo from a Canadian news outlet that had been altered to proclaim that conspiracy theorists “keep getting things right”.In Jackson county, Republican election board officials Larry Ewing and Jeff Hughes, following a campaign by the national conservative group True the Vote, forced an investigation into 211 people who had voted after recently changing their address, in the unsubstantiated belief that up to 2,000 Jackson county residents who had recently changed their addresses could have voted illegally.The pair also refused to certify the runoff election of Raphael Warnock, the state’s first Black senator, until the 211 names were passed on to the secretary of state for further investigation. The results were eventually certified with their dissent.“I can’t stress enough how widespread the election fraud lies have taken hold in the area,” said Pete Fuller, chair of the Jackson county Democratic party. “It’s very disconcerting how effective the misinformation has been.”TopicsDonald TrumpGeorgiaRepublicansUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Capitol attack panel subpoenas five Republicans in unprecedented step

      by

      Capitol attack panel subpoenas five Republicans in unprecedented stepChair Bennie Thompson says panel has been ‘forced to take this step’ as Kevin McCarthy complains investigation ‘not legitimate’ The House select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol has issued unprecedented subpoenas to five Republican members of Congress, seeking to compel their cooperation with the inquiry into Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Biden marks imminent ‘tragic milestone’ of 1m US Covid deaths in address to global summit – liveRead moreThe select committee empowered the chairman, Bennie Thompson, to move ahead with subpoenas to the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, Jim Jordan of Ohio, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Andy Biggs of Arizona and Mo Brooks of Alabama.The five congressmen flatly refused to accept invitations to provide voluntary assistance to the investigation, sources said.Thompson said: “Before we hold our hearings next month, we wished to provide members the opportunity to discuss these matters with the committee voluntarily. Regrettably, the individuals receiving subpoenas today have refused and we’re forced to take this step to help ensure the committee uncovers facts concerning January 6th.”The subpoena letters indicate that the select committee is seeking testimony from the five House Republicans about some of the most sensitive details about Trump’s unlawful efforts to overturn the election, including their contacts with Trump.The Guardian reported earlier this week that the panel was moving closer to issuing subpoenas to Republicans in Congress, appalled at their refusal to assist in any way despite prima facie connections to the events of 6 January.What changed for members of the committee, according to sources familiar with internal deliberations, was that they could no longer ignore what appeared to be deep involvement in Trump’s unlawful schemes to overturn the 2020 election results.After the announcement, McCarthy told reporters that “I have not seen a subpoena” and repeated his previous attacks on the committee. “They’re not conducting a legitimate investigation,” he said. “Seems as though they just want to go after their political opponents.” Meanwhile, Perry called the investigation a “charade”.The voluntary cooperation letters outlined in damning detail the reasons that the select committee wanted to depose the five Republicans, as House investigators prepare to wrap up their work ahead of public hearings in June.From McCarthy, the select committee said it wanted to learn more about his communications with Trump before, during and after January 6, including a conversation in which the former president admitted he was partly at fault for the Capitol attack.The panel is keenly interested in what McCarthy believes prompted Trump to make such an admission, the sources said, since it could offer evidence that the former president had a guilty conscience for a possible future justice department criminal investigation.From Biggs, the former chairman of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, the select committee said it wanted to learn more about meetings House Republicans had with Trump at the White House in the days and weeks leading up to January 6.The panel is focusing on a 21 December 2020 meeting that took place in the Oval Office with Trump, the letter indicated, since those attending appeared to strategize ways to unlawfully delay or stop Joe Biden’s certification from taking place and return Trump to power.The select committee also wants to depose Jordan to learn more about that meeting with Trump and other communications he had with the former president, his letter said.In the letter to Perry, the select committee said he was directly involved with efforts to corrupt the justice department and install a pro-Trump DoJ official, Jeffrey Clark, as acting attorney general if he opened investigations into baseless claims of election fraud.The panel also subpoenaed Brooks since he spoke at the “Save America” rally at the Ellipse that preceded the Capitol attack, where he notably wore a bulletproof vest under his shirt, and has spoken publicly about Trump pressuring him to “rescind” his election loss.One notable and unexplained exception from the list was congressman Ronny Jackson, Trump’s former White House doctor, whose name surfaced in text messages among members of the Oath Keepers militia group that stormed the Capitol, some of whom were indicted for seditious conspiracy.Biggs’ possible contacts with far-right activist Ali Alexander are of special interest to the investigation, sources said.The committee is trying to untangle claims by Alexander that he “schemed up putting maximum pressure on Congress while they were voting” with Brooks, Biggs and Paul Gosar, another Arizona Republican, and his testimony that he spoke to Biggs’s staff and the congressman himself.Alexander obtained a permit to hold a rally at the Capitol on 6 January but that event never took place. Alexander was instead filmed going up the Capitol steps in a “stack” formation with members of the Oath Keepers militia.Thompson said the panel wanted to ask Biggs about his efforts to pressure legislators to create “alternate” slates of electors for Trump in states he lost, as well as an alleged request he made to Trump for a pardon in the days after the Capitol attack.TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansUS politicsDonald TrumpUS elections 2020newsReuse this content More

    • 263 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Crystal Mason on a ruling that could change her life: 'I know this is not over’ | The fight to vote

      by

      Crystal Mason on a ruling that could change her life: ‘I know this is not over’ A court in Texas must reconsider its decision to sentence Mason to five years for a voting error – how does she feel?Hello Fight to Vote readers,Every Tuesday night for the last year or so, Crystal Mason has had trouble sleeping.On Wednesday mornings, the Texas court of criminal appeals, the state’s highest criminal court, usually issues its ruling. And since March of last year, Mason has been waiting for a ruling from the court that could change her life. She’s been appealing a five-year prison sentence for voting a provisional ballot in 2016. Mason was ineligible to vote at the time because she was on federal supervised release – which is like probation – for a tax felony. Texas prohibits anyone from voting while they are serving a criminal sentence, but she says – and probation officials have confirmed – that no one told her she was ineligible.Yesterday, Mason, who is 47-years-old and raised seven kids and has six grandchildren, got the phone call she’s been anxiously waiting for. In an 8-1 ruling, the court told a lower court it had to reconsider the case to determine whether Mason actually knew she was ineligible to vote when she cast a ballot. It was a partial, but far from final, victory for Mason.I’ve been following Mason’s case for the last few years, and on Wednesday, I spoke with Mason hours after the ruling. We talked about about her case and why she thinks it’s struck a nerve across the US.How are you feeling, and what was it like to get the news this morning?I was at work and Kim [Mason’s lawyer] called me … She said the decision came in. I just started to panic, I started to sweat, like nervous, like, ‘What’s going on, Kim?’She let me know that it’s going back to the second court of appeals and they have to prove intent. Like where I really knew that I was committing a crime. And I feel like that’s a good step. That’s a good step right there.If you go off facts and facts alone, Sam, you know that the supervised release officer testified on the stand and said no one told me [I couldn’t vote] in the supervised release office. Then I received paperwork in my judgment and commitment, and in black and white, it’s not there. And then you can see it in my supervised release information, it was not there.Texas court ordered to reconsider decision to uphold prison sentence for woman who votedRead moreI think that the criminal court of appeals asked them something very important. That needs to be … that’s the whole case, right there. I’m very happy that they did that. But I know this is not over.You were never told, never had any idea, being on federal supervised release, that you couldn’t vote in Texas?Absolutely not. I was never told that. I never had any paperwork stating that. I was going by all my conditions of being on supervised release, and I did not see that at all. I do know that as a felon you still have the right to vote. I had no idea that being on supervised release took that right away from me.There’s no way … I’m on track. I got a good job. I’m making decent money. I’m in school. I’m back with my family, my kids, my grandbabies. You wouldn’t have ever taken a chance, if there was even a grey line, of me thinking that I was ineligible to vote. I just wouldn’t have did that. You just don’t.This has been a disaster for me. The jobs that I have lost. Me going back to prison [Mason was ordered to return to federal prison for 10 months for being convicted of a crime while on supervised release], leaving my kids. Me fighting to try to maintain everything. It’s been a disaster for me.There have been very significant consequences for you and your family. Can you walk me through what some of those consequences have been?I had to go back to prison. I had three jobs taken away from me. I fought to maintain my house and everything. And I am the provider for my family.You were not a political person in 2016.Not at all.And since then you’ve become political. Can you tell me a little bit about what you’ve been doing and what made you get more politically active?If you go back to my first interviews, you’ll hear me say ‘I’ll never vote again. I’ll never vote again.’ And that was it. And I realized that’s exactly what they wanted me to do. That’s exactly what they wanted me to say.I realized that no, I have to let everybody know that what I had done was an innocent mistake. And I am being prosecuted for an innocent mistake and that is not right. And then I had to let everybody know how important it is to go vote. Because the people that did this to me – the judge, the DA, the prosecutor – they’re all elected officials. So this is the reason why it’s so important that we get out and vote.And what has your group, Crystal Mason ‘The Fight’, been focused on? Has it been teaching people about their rights eligibility? Encouraging them to vote? All of the above?All of the above. Educating them on the different types of ballot. We’re getting ready to do a town hall. And that’s where we’re asking different candidates running for different positions to come to my venue and speak to the community. And let us know: who you are and what do you plan on doing if you get the seat you’re running for.I’ve traveled across the country, and almost everywhere I go, people have heard of that woman in Texas who was sentenced to five years in prison for trying to vote. I’m curious why you think your case has resonated so much and caused so much outrage?I think the people see the wrongness. The people that’s in the court system, the people that’s in a position to do something about it has turned a blind eye on it. I feel that people who hear the story and just really see, they know that I did nothing wrong. I did nothing wrong. Nothing at all.I filled out a provisional ballot. I’m being sentenced for illegally voting and I never voted. I mean that’s wrong right there.There are some people who have said your case is an example of intimidation. Sending a message to Black people, and people who have felony convictions in their past, that you better be really sure you can vote before you try. Do you see it as intimidation? Have you heard from other people who are not going to vote because they heard about what’s happened to you?I have heard that. That’s because people are scared. They’re listening to me, and I tell them ‘yep, I’m right here but I’m fighting and it’s very wrong.’ But people don’t want to take a chance.And yes, I do feel like my case is sending a message to the Black and the brown [people]: ‘If you dare come to the polls, this could happen to you’. So yes, I do feel like it’s sending a message. It is a scare tactic. And that’s not right, that’s not right at all. So that’s the reason I’m out here speaking to people and telling people how important it is to vote.And actually you voted in the primary, a couple months ago [Mason’s supervised release expired last year, allowing her to vote in Texas]. What was that like for you to go back to the voting booth and cast a ballot when you were eligible?It was very exciting. I was with my family, and the things that I didn’t know [before], I knew. So once I finished up with my ballot, I automatically went to go help my mother. And of course I got stopped and they said, ‘Oh no, you can’t.’I told her … I can help her. I had to fill out a form, and they notarized it and everything. I turned around and I went to help my mom and I helped my niece. So I felt real good about being knowledgable about being able to help them through that ballot.Is there anything you hope people take away from your case? What do you hope people will learn from your case and take away from it.The importance of voting. Everybody that has something to do with my case are elected officials.TopicsUS newsFight to voteTexasUS politicsUS voting rightsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats lose Senate vote to codify abortion rights

      by

      Democrats lose Senate vote to codify abortion rightsFinal tally was 49-51, with all Republicans and one conservative Democrat, Joe Manchin, voting against the measure The US Senate on Wednesday failed to advance legislation that would codify the right to an abortion into federal law, after it was blocked by Republicans.It was a largely symbolic vote by Democrats to mobilize Americans around the issue ahead of a likely supreme court decision striking down the protections enshrined by Roe v Wade. Pro-choice states rush to pledge legal shield for out-of-state abortionsRead moreThe Senate roll call was a stark reflection of the partisan divide over abortion rights, with all Republicans and one conservative Democrat, Joe Manchin of Virginia, voting against the measure. The final tally was 49-51, well short of the 60 votes necessary to overcome a filibuster in the Senate.Kamala Harris, the first woman and woman of color to serve as vice-president, presided over the vote.“Sadly the Senate failed to stand in defense of a women’s right to make decisions about her own body,” Harris told reporters, after stepping off the dais. Pointing to the onslaught of laws restricting abortion access in Republican-led states, she said “the priority should be to elect pro-choice leaders at the local, the state and the federal level”.Democrats moved quickly to hold the doomed vote after a leak last week of a draft opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito in February and confirmed as authentic, indicated that the court’s conservative majority had privately voted to strike down Roe and subsequent rulings. The extraordinary disclosure ignited protests around the country, pushing reproductive rights to the center of the political debate six months before the congressional midterms. A final ruling from the court is expected this summer.Ahead of the vote, a group of House Democratic women marched across the Capitol to protest against the end of Roe, chanting: “My body, my decision.”Democrats, under intensifying pressure to act, saw a political opportunity in forcing Republicans to vote against a bill protecting abortion at a moment when the threat to access is urgent and polls show a majority of Americans want the procedure to remain legal in all or some cases.They hope to use the Republican blockade as a data point in their midterm message to voters: that the GOP has become a party of “ultra-Maga” extremists, on the cusp of fulfilling a decades-long goal to strip women of their reproductive rights.It is an issue Democrats hope will energize young voters disenchanted by the Biden administration and persuade Republican-leaning suburban women to back them again this cycle.“If we do not take a stand now to protect a woman’s right to choose, then mark my words, it will be open season, open season on our God-given freedoms,” the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said in a floor speech ahead of the vote. He called “one of the most consequential we will take in decades”.If passed, the bill would have codified Roe v Wade into federal law, ensuring the right of healthcare providers to perform abortions and the right of patients to receive them. But it would also go further, in some cases invalidating state-level restrictions on abortion access enacted after the Roe decision in 1973.As such, Republicans cast the bill as a “radical” attempt to expand reproductive rights that goes far beyond Roe and would legalize “abortion on demand”.“We will stand with the American people, stand with innocent life, and block the Democrats’ extreme bill,” the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, said on Wednesday.Republicans are betting the economy will take precedence over abortion this November. Polling shows Republicans are well positioned to make significant gains in the midterm elections, buoyed by historical headwinds, discontent with the party in power and widespread concern over the rising cost of gas, food and rent.But there are signs that Republicans do worry about a potential political backlash if Roe is overturned and states move swiftly to outlaw abortion, as many are preparing to do.A day ahead of the vote, McConnell sought to tamp down conservative calls for a nationwide ban on abortion if they take control of the chamber in November, telling reporters: “Historically, there have been abortion votes on the floor of the Senate. None of them have achieved 60 votes.”The two Senate Republicans who support abortion rights, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, opposed the bill, instead urging support for an alternative measure that they say is tailored to reflect the landscape of abortion rights. But many Democrats see their proposal, which is not expected to receive a vote, as too weak.“Unlike some far-left activists, Senator Murkowski and I want the law today to be the law tomorrow,” Collins said on Wednesday, objecting to the lack of protections for religious exemptions in the Democrats’ bill.0In a dramatic shift, one of the only other Democrats in Congress with conservative views on abortion rights, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, said he would support the measure and voted in favor of advancing it. In a statement citing the leaked supreme court ruling, Casey said the “circumstances around the entire debate on abortion” had changed since the last time the Senate voted on the measure.Without a clear legislative path forward, Democrats are turning to the fall elections, urging Americans to elect them as the “last lines of defense” against the end of Roe.Abortion is also likely to be a major issue in races for governor and state offices, as the battle lines shift to the states.The show vote on Wednesday only intensified calls from progressives and abortion rights groups for Democrats to eliminate the filibuster. The long-simmering debate has divided the party, which does not have enough votes to end the rule. It has also energized efforts to reform the supreme court, including controversial proposals such as expanding the number of justices on the bench or imposing term limits.TopicsUS SenateAbortionRoe v WadeUS politicsDemocratsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in World Politics

      India Looks to Finland for an Effective Educational Model

      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

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US inflation rate slows but remains close to 40-year high

      by

      US inflation rate slows but remains close to 40-year highConsumer price index reveals costs rising by a monthly rate of 0.3% in April, down from 1.2% in March, the first fall since August 2021 Price rises slowed in the US in April but the annual inflation rate remained close to a 40-year high, leaving many Americans struggling to afford necessities including food, shelter and fuel.The latest consumer price index (CPI) figures – which measure a broad range of goods and services – showed prices rising by a monthly rate of 0.3% in April, down from 1.2% in March, the first fall since August 2021.But it is still too early to say whether inflation has peaked. At 8.3% the annual rate of inflation in April was down from 8.5% in March but remains at a level unseen since the 1980s. Over the year the CPI’s food index increased 9.4%, the largest 12-month increase since April 1981. The so-called core-price index – which excludes the volatile categories of food and energy – increased 0.6% on the month, up from March’s 0.3% gain.The figures come as the Federal Reserve is moving to sharply increase interest rates in an attempt to bring prices back under control. The pace of rate rises, and fears that they may trigger a recession, have spooked investors and sent stock markets reeling.Soaring demand and a lack of supply thanks to the pandemic have led to price rises across a broad swath of goods and services. Air fares are up 40% over the last three months. A booming house market has made housing unaffordable for many Americans, especially people of color, and 49% of people recently told Pew Research that affordable housing is a large problem in their community.Randall Kroszner, an economics professor at the University of Chicago and former Fed governor, said the sharp rise in core inflation would worry the Fed. “That is where you look for evidence that inflation is becoming entrenched,” he said.Kroszner said global issues including the war in Ukraine and China’s Covid woes had combined with rising rates to deliver a “one-two punch” to the US economy. He believes the chances of the US entering a recession have risen and that the housing and jobs markets may be the next to suffer.“I’m generally an optimist but this is challenging,” he said.The rising cost of living has become a leading political issue as the US prepares for November’s midterm elections. Rising prices have battered Joe Biden’s approval ratings. This week an Investors Business Daily/TIPP poll found that Biden’s approval had fallen to 39%, approaching his previous record low of 38% set in February, and confidence in the US economy was close to an eight-year low.On Tuesday, Biden said his administration was doing all it could to tackle inflation. “I want every American to know that I’m taking inflation very seriously,” he said in remarks from the White House. “It’s my top domestic priority.The Biden administration has made attempts to bring down prices. In March the White House announced plans to release up to 1m barrels of oil a day from the strategic reserve, in an attempt to dampen high gasoline prices exacerbated by the war in Ukraine. But gas prices remain elevated at a national average of $4.37 a gallon compared with $2.96 a year ago, according to AAA.Republicans have blamed Biden’s stimulus programs for rising prices, a claim he disputes. ​​ The president said his policies had “helped not hurt” the nation’s economic outlook.MIT economics professor Kristin Forbes said the US recovery had shown the US economy lacked skilled workers in industries where demand for jobs was high, pushing up wages – a problem that also afflicted the UK in the wake of the pandemic.The former Bank of England policymaker told a committee of MPs in the UK parliament that she expected inflation in the US to fall, especially once increases in borrowing costs feed through into more expensive mortgages and loans.However, she said the UK faced an acute inflationary spiral that would continue into the autumn because Britain was the only country affected by all six drivers of global inflation. Inflation is running at 7% in the UK, but is forecast by the Bankto exceed 10% later this year. She highlighted the impact on the UK of higher energy prices, a falling exchange rate, trade restrictions that pushed up goods prices, a decade of modest inflation going into the pandemic, expectations among businesses and consumers of much higher inflation in a year’s time and a tight labour market, forcing wages higher.“The UK is the only country to tick every box with inflation pressures coming from all six areas,” she said.TopicsUS economyInflationEconomicsUS politicsBiden administrationnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in World Politics

      The Tories Get a Thumping in Local UK Elections

      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

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      A Sacred Oath review: Mark Esper on Trump, missiles for Mexico and more

      by

      A Sacred Oath review: Mark Esper on Trump, missiles for Mexico and more The ex-defense secretary’s memoir is scary and sobering – but don’t expect Republican leaders or voters to heed his warningMark Esper was Donald Trump’s second defense secretary. Like James Mattis, his predecessor, he fell from Trump’s grace. Six days after the 2020 election, the 45th president fired him, via Twitter. Unlike Mattis, Esper now delivers a damning tell-all.This Will Not Pass review: Trump-Biden blockbuster is dire reading for DemocratsRead moreA Sacred Oath pulls no punches. It depicts Trump as unfit for office and a threat to democracy, a prisoner of wrath, impulse and appetite.Over 752 pages, Esper’s Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense During Extraordinary Times are surgically precise in their score-settling. This is not just another book to be tossed on the pyre of Trump-alumni revenge porn. It is scary and sobering.Esper is a West Point graduate and Gulf war veteran. No one confuses him with Omarosa Manigault Newman, Cliff Simms or Chris Christie. Esper ignores Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway and barely mentions Melania Trump. He is complimentary toward Jared Kushner.In general, Esper disliked what he saw. Trump’s fidelity to process was close to nonexistent, his strategy “narrow and incomplete”, his “manner” coarse and divisive. The ends Trump “often sought rarely survived the ways and means he typically pursued to accomplish them”.The book captures Trump’s rage when advised that Gen Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, lacked command authority over the active-duty and national guard troops Trump wanted to deploy against protesters in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd.“‘You are losers!’ the president unloaded. ‘You are all fucking losers!’”In addition to Esper, Milley and William Barr, the attorney general, Trump also targeted Mike Pence.Esper writes: “He repeated the foul insults again, this time directing his venom at the vice-president as well, who sat quietly, stone-faced, in the chair at the far end of the semi-circle closest to the Rose Garden.“I never saw him yell at the vice-president before, so this really caught my attention.”Esper explains why he didn’t resign: “I didn’t think it was the right thing to do for our country.”His wife, Leah, framed it this way: “As your wife, please quit. As an American citizen, please stay.”The government attempted to censor A Sacred Oath, as it did The Room Where It Happened, a memoir by John Bolton, Trump’s third national security adviser. Fortunately, the powers that be buckled after Esper filed suit in federal court. Here and there, words are blacked out. The core of the story remains.At one point, Trump proposed launching “missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs”. The then-president said: “No one would know it was us.” He would simply deny responsibility. Esper looked at Trump. He was not joking.According to reports, the censors found this inflammatory. They did not, however, deny its veracity. Confronted with the story, Trump issued a “no comment”. Donald Trump Jr asked if his father’s scheme was “a bad thing”. Hunter Biden isn’t the only troublesome first son.Trump’s reliance on underlings who put their boss ahead of country distressed Esper too. Mark Meadows, Stephen Miller, Robert O’Brien and Ric Grenell all receive attention. Little is good.Esper found their bellicosity grating. After a meeting with Trump’s national security council, Esper commented to Milley about its lack of military experience and eagerness for war with Iran.“We couldn’t help but note … the irony that only two persons in the room that had ever gone to war were the ones least willing to risk doing so now.”Esper offers a full-throated defense of Trump’s decision to kill Qassem Suleimani. The Iranian general had American blood on his hands and was planning an attack on US diplomats and military personnel.Esper also writes about the state of the union.“I was worried for our democracy,” he says. “I had seen many red flags, many warnings, and many inconsistencies. But now we seemed on the verge of crossing a dark red line.”In the summer of 2020, the unrest that followed the murder of Floyd transported Trump to a Stygian realm. In the run-up to the election, Esper feared Trump would seek to use the military to stay in office.Esper met Milley and Gen Daniel Hokanson, the general in charge of the national guard, in an attempt to avert that outcome.“The essence of democracy was free and fair elections, followed by the peaceful transition of power,” Esper writes.Ultimately, Trump did not rely on the military to negate election results – a path advocated by Mike Flynn, his first national security adviser. Instead, the drama played out slowly. By early January 2021, Milley was telling aides the US was facing a “Reichstag moment” as Trump preached “the gospel of the führer”.On 6 January, Trump and his minions unleashed the insurrection.“It was the worst attack on the Capitol since the war of 1812,” Esper writes. “And maybe the worst assault on our democracy since the civil war.”The Presidency of Donald Trump review: the first draft of historyRead moreYet Trump and Trumpism remain firmly in the ascendant. In Ohio, in a crucial Senate primary, Trump’s endorsement of JD Vance proved decisive. In Pennsylvania, his support for Mehmet Oz may prove vital too.Down in Georgia, Herschel Walker, Trump’s choice, is on a glide path to nomination. Walker’s run-ins with domestic violence and death threats pose no problem for the faithful. Even Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, has bought in.Days ago, Esper told the New York Times Trump was “an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be in the position of public service”.Most Republicans remain unmoved. Esper is only an author. Trump spearheads a movement.
      A Sacred Oath is published in the US by William Morrow
      TopicsBooksPolitics booksDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS national securityUS militaryUS foreign policyreviewsReuse this content More