World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Ketanji Brown Jackson makes history as first Black woman confirmed to US supreme court

      by

      Ketanji Brown Jackson makes history as first Black woman confirmed to US supreme courtJackson confirmed 53 votes to 47, and will become first Black woman to serve in court’s more than 200-year history01:12Ketanji Brown Jackson, a liberal appeals court judge, was confirmed to the supreme court on Thursday, overcoming a rancorous Senate approval process and earning bipartisan approval to become the first Black woman to serve as a justice on the high court in its more than 200-year history.After weeks of private meetings and days of public testimony, marked by intense sparring over judicial philosophy and personal reflections on race in America, Jackson earned narrow – but notable – bipartisan support to become the 116th justice of the supreme court. The vote was 53 to 47, with all Democrats in favor. They were joined by three moderate Republicans, senators Mitt Romney of Utah, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, who defied deep opposition within their party to support Joe Biden’s nominee. Their support was a welcome result for the White House, which had been intent on securing a bipartisan confirmation.Ketanji Brown Jackson poised to make history as first Black female supreme court justice – liveRead moreJackson, who currently serves on the US court of appeals for the DC circuit, will replace Stephen Breyer, 83, the most senior member of the court’s liberal bloc. Breyer, for whom Jackson clerked early in her legal career, said he intends to retire from the court this summer.At 51, Jackson is young enough to serve on the court for decades. Her ascension, however, will do little to tilt the ideological balance of the high court, dominated by a 6-3 conservative majority. But it does mean for the first time in the court’s history that white men are in the minority.Kamala Harris, the first Black woman to serve as US vice-president, presided over the Senate vote as Jackson became the first Black woman to join the supreme court, underscoring the historic nature of her confirmation. Harris called for the final vote on Jackson’s nomination with a smile on her face, and the chamber broke into loud applause when the judge was confirmed.“Today, we are taking a giant, bold and important step on the well-trodden path to fulfilling our country’s founding promises,” Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer said just before the final vote. “This is a great moment for Judge Jackson. But it is an even greater moment for America as we rise to a more perfect union.”The White House has announced that Biden, Harris and Jackson will deliver remarks on Friday to celebrate the confirmation. Jackson and Biden watched the final Senate vote together in the Roosevelt Room of the White House.Biden shared a photo taken with Jackson at the White House, saying on Twitter: “Judge Jackson’s confirmation was a historic moment for our nation. We’ve taken another step toward making our highest court reflect the diversity of America. She will be an incredible justice, and I was honored to share this moment with her.”Judge Jackson’s confirmation was a historic moment for our nation. We’ve taken another step toward making our highest court reflect the diversity of America. She will be an incredible Justice, and I was honored to share this moment with her. pic.twitter.com/K8SAh25NL5— President Biden (@POTUS) April 7, 2022
      Assailing Jackson’s record, but acknowledging Republicans did not have the votes to stop her confirmation, minority leader Mitch McConnell implored the judge to embrace the textualist approach of conservative justices.“The soon-to-be justice can either satisfy her radical fan club or help preserve the judiciary that Americans need, but not both,” McConnell said ahead of the vote on Thursday. “I’m afraid the nominee’s record tells us which is likely, but I hope judge Jackson proves me wrong.”Her confirmation to the lifetime post represents the fulfillment of a promise Biden made to his supporters at the nadir of his 2020 campaign for president, when he vowed to nominate the first Black woman to the supreme court, if elected president and a vacancy arose. The opportunity presented itself earlier this year, at another low point for Biden, with momentous domestic and foreign challenges weighing on his presidency.During the public hearings, Jackson vowed to be an independent justice who would seek to ensure that the words inscribed on the marbled supreme court building – Equal Justice Under the Law – were a “reality and not just an ideal”. With her parents and daughters present, Jackson recounted for the Senate judiciary committee her family’s generational journey, as the daughter of public school teachers raised in the segregated south who would rise to become a justice on a court that once denied Black Americans citizenship.Yet any hope by the White House that Jackson’s historic nomination might defuse some of the bitter partisanship that senators lament has turned the process into a “circus” quickly evaporated.With an eye to the November midterm elections, Republicans led an aggressive campaign against the judge during her confirmation hearings and in conservative media, raising questions about her record in an effort to paint her as an “activist judge” who is soft on crime. They used the confirmation proceedings to air conservative grievances about past supreme court nominations and to wage culture war battles over critical race theory, crime and transgender women in sports.Couched in thinly coded appeals to racism and the far-right fringes with nods to the QAnon conspiracy theory, some Republicans accused Jackson of being too lenient on child sexual abuse offenders, claims she forcefully rebutted “as a mother and a judge”. Legal experts have said her decisions in such criminal cases were within the mainstream while independent factcheckers concluded that the attacks were misleading and a distortion of her record.Democrats, and the handful of Republicans who supported her, praised her qualifications and demeanor, and in particular the restraint she showed during some stinging exchanges with conservative senators. They sought to defend her record, noting that her sentencing record was within the mainstream of the federal judiciary, while emphasizing the support she had earned from within the legal community, including among conservative justices, and her endorsement from the Fraternal Order of Police, which cited her family’s law enforcement background.In a mark of just how polarizing the process of confirming a supreme court nominee has become, the Senate judiciary committee deadlocked along party lines over her nomination. The resulting tie prompted Democrats to execute a rare procedural maneuver to “discharge” her nomination from the committee to the floor, with a vote by the full Senate. The NAACP said the vote by 11 Republicans against Jackson’s nomination was a “stain” on the committee.The final Senate vote on her confirmation was among the closest in supreme court history.A graduate of Harvard and Harvard Law School, Jackson served on the independent US sentencing commission, an agency that develops sentencing guidelines, before becoming a federal judge.While she shares an elite background with the other justices, her work as a public defender sets her apart. The last justice with experience representing criminal defendants was Thurgood Marshall, the towering civil rights lawyer who became the first Black member of the supreme court.TopicsKetanji Brown JacksonUS supreme courtLaw (US)US politicsUS SenatenewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      House votes to hold Trump duo Navarro and Scavino in contempt of Congress

      by

      House votes to hold Trump duo Navarro and Scavino in contempt of CongressApproval of contempt resolution over months-long defiance of subpoenas sets pair on path towards criminal prosecution by DoJ The House voted on Wednesday to hold two of Donald Trump’s top advisers – Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino – in criminal contempt of Congress for their months-long refusal to comply with subpoenas issued by the House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack.The approval of the contempt resolution, by a vote of 220 to 203, sets the two Trump aides on the path toward criminal prosecution by the justice department as the panel escalates its inquiry into whether Trump oversaw a criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.Congressman Jamie Raskin, a member of the select committee who introduced the contempt resolution to the House floor, said the select committee needed the House to advance the measure in order to reaffirm the consequences for defying the January 6 investigation.January 6 panel receives Trump lawyer emails about plan to block Biden victoryRead moreCiting a ruling by a federal judge last week that Trump “likely” committed felonies to return himself to the Oval Office for a second term, Raskin said on the House floor that the panel wanted Navarro and Scavino’s cooperation because they engaged in trying to overthrow an election.But having refused to comply with their subpoenas in any form, Raskin said that “these two witnesses have acted in contempt of Congress and the American people; we must hold them in contempt of Congress and the American people”.The contempt citations approved by the House now head to the justice department and the US attorney for the District of Columbia, Matthew Graves, who is required by law to weigh a prosecution and present the matter before a federal grand jury.Should the justice department secure a conviction against the Trump aides, the consequences could mean up to a year in federal prison, $100,000 in fines, or both – though it would not force their compliance, and pursuing the misdemeanor charge could take months.The subpoena defiance by Navarro and Scavino meant the select committee was ultimately unable to extract information directly from them about Trump’s unlawful scheme to have then-vice president Mike Pence stop Joe Biden’s election win certification on 6 January.But the panel has quietly amassed deep knowledge about their roles in the effort to return Trump to office in recent weeks, and senior staff decided that they could move ahead in the inquiry without hearing from the two aides, say sources close to the inquiry.The determination by the select committee that Navarro and Scavino’s cooperation was no longer essential came when it found it could fill in the gaps from others, the sources said, and led to the decision to break off negotiations for their cooperation.The final decision to withdraw from talks reflected the panel’s belief that it was not worth the time – the probe is on a time crunch to complete its work before the November midterms – to pursue their testimony for potentially only marginal gain, the sources said.House investigators had sought cooperation from Navarro, a former Trump senior advisor for trade policy who became enmeshed in the effort to reverse Trump’s election defeat, for around a month until it became apparent they were making no headway.The select committee issued a subpoena to Navarro since he helped devise – by his own admission on MSNBC and elsewhere – the scheme to have Pence stop Biden’s certification from taking place as part of one Trump “war room” based at the Willard hotel in Washington.Navarro also worked with the Trump campaign’s legal team to pressure legislators in battleground states win by Biden to decertify the results and instead send Trump slates of electors for certification by Congress at the joint session in January 6.But when that plan started to go awry, Navarro encouraged then-Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to call political operative Roger Stone to discuss January 6, the panel said in its contempt of Congress report published last week.The former Trump aide, however, told the select committee – without providing any evidence – that the former president had asserted executive privilege over the contents of his subpoena and would therefore not provide documents or testimony.With Scavino, the select committee first issued Trump’s former deputy White House chief of staff for communications in September last year, since he had attended several meetings with Trump where election fraud matters were discussed, the panel said.But after the panel granted to Scavino six extensions that pushed his subpoena deadlines from October 2021 to February 2022, the former Trump aide also told House investigators that he too would not comply with the order because Trump invoked executive privilege.The select committee rejected those arguments of executive privilege, saying neither Navarro nor Scavino had grounds for entirely defying the subpoenas because either Trump did not formally invoke the protections, or because Biden ultimately waived them.At the business meeting last week where the select committee voted unanimously to recommend that the full House find Navarro and Scavino in contempt of Congress, Raskin delivered an emotional rebuke of the supposed executive privilege arguments.“This is America, and there’s no executive privilege here for presidents, much less trained advisors, to plan coups and organize insurrections against the people’s government in the people’s constitution and then to cover up the evidence of their crimes.“These two men,” Raskin said of Navarro and Scavino, “are in contempt of Congress and we must say, both for their brazen disregard for their duties and for our laws and our institutions.”Attending an event featuring Trump at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday night, Navarro made a point of appearing aloof to his impending referral to the justice department. “Oh that vote,” Navarro said dismissively, the Washington Post reported.TopicsDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressnewsReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican congressman Bob Gibbs retires, blaming redistricting ‘circus’

      by

      Republican congressman Bob Gibbs retires, blaming redistricting ‘circus’Six-term lawmaker from Ohio’s Amish country exits primary race that would have put him up against Trump-backed Max Miller Republican congressman Bob Gibbs announced his sudden retirement on Wednesday, declaring himself a casualty of “the circus” over Ohio’s still-unresolved congressional map.The six-term congressman from Amish country exits a primary race in north-eastern Ohio that, under new temporary maps, would have put him up against the Trump-backed Republican Max Miller.Early voting is already under way.US rightwing figures in step with Kremlin over Ukraine disinformation, experts sayRead moreMiller was initially recruited to defeat Anthony Gonzalez, who joined a handful of fellow Republicans who voted in favor of the former Republican president’s impeachment. Gonzalez has since retired.In a statement, Gibbs said “almost 90% of the electorate” in the new seventh congressional district where he would be required to run is new, with nearly two-thirds drawn in from another district “foreign to any expectations or connection” to the district he now serves.Trump weighed in to congratulate Gibbs on “a wonderful and accomplished career”. He called Gibbs a strong ally of his America first” agenda and the fight against “the Radical Left”.“Thank you for your service, Bob – a job well done!” Trump said in a statement.Calling the decision to retire difficult, Gibbs called it irresponsible “to effectively confirm the congressional map for this election cycle seven days before voting begins”.He appeared to be referencing a 30 March procedural ruling by the Ohio supreme court, which extended the briefing schedule for the legal challenge to Ohio’s congressional map well past this year’s primary.However, congressional districts for 2022 elections had actually been set since 2 March. That was when the Republican secretary of state, Frank LaRose, the state’s elections chief, ordered county boards of elections to reflect the Ohio Redistricting Commission’s second congressional map on ballots.Gibbs said he believed Ohio’s prospects were bright “despite the circus redistricting has become”.“These long, drawn-out processes, in which the Ohio supreme court can take weeks and months to deliberate while demanding responses and filings from litigants within days, is detrimental to the state and does not serve the people of Ohio,” he said.The high court’s bipartisan majority, comprising the Republican chief justice, Maureen O’Connor, and three Democrats, has been engaged in a protracted back-and-forth with the Republican-controlled redistricting commission for months.In response to lawsuits brought by voting rights and Democratic groups, justices have tossed four plans and counting for legislative and congressional lines, declaring each an unconstitutional gerrymander that unduly favors Republicans.Their face-off continues to escalate.As justices consider a request to hold mapmakers in contempt for their repeated failure to craft lines that meet constitutional muster, Republicans who control the state legislature are thinking hard about bringing impeachment proceedings against O’Connor.Gibbs is the 17th House Republican to say he won’t seek re-election, compared with 30 Democrats. His term runs through January 2023.TopicsRepublicansUS politicsOhionewsReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Ivanka Trump testifies before panel investigating Capitol attack

      by

      Ivanka Trump testifies before panel investigating Capitol attackDonald Trump’s eldest daughter, a former senior White House adviser, spoke via video to committee about events of January 6 Ivanka Trump testified before the January 6 committee on Tuesday, the special congressional panel investigating the insurrection at the US Capitol in 2021 in which extremist supporters of Donald Trump attempted in vain to overturn his defeat in the presidential election.‘I didn’t win the election’: Trump admits defeat in session with historiansRead moreThe Mississippi congressman Bennie Thompson, the committee’s chairman, said on Tuesday afternoon that she had been answering investigators’ questions on a video teleconference since the morning and was not “chatty” but had been helpful. “She came in on her own” and did not have to be subpoenaed, Thompson said.Ivanka Trump, who was with her father in the White House that day, is one of more than 800 witnesses the committee has interviewed as it works to compile a record of the attack, the worst on the Capitol in more than two centuries.She is the first of Trump’s children known to speak to the committee and one of the closest people to her father.Whether she gave the committee new information or not, her decision to cooperate was significant for the panel, which has been trying to secure an interview with her since late January.The nine-member panel is particularly focused on what the former president was doing as his supporters broke into the Capitol and interrupted the certification of Joe Biden’s victory for several hours as lawmakers and staff fled for their lives.The Guardian had earlier confirmed that former president Donald Trump’s oldest daughter, and former senior White House adviser, would speak to the panel virtually.Her testimony came after that of her husband and fellow former presidential adviser, Jared Kushner, who spoke to the panel for more than six hours last week.After Kushner’s testimony, Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat and a member of the committee, told the Guardian: “There’s a momentum to this process when there’s cooperation. When people see that others are doing the right thing, it gives them the courage to do the right thing.”A bipartisan Senate report linked seven deaths to the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, by supporters Donald Trump told to “fight like hell” in service of his attempt to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection but acquitted when enough Republican senators stayed loyal.The House’s January 6 committee includes two Republicans, Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois.As the Guardian reported this week, the committee has identified Ivanka Trump as a senior adviser who would have known her father’s attempt to block certification of electoral college results at the Capitol was unlawful.Referring to a law professor who presented the plan to block certification, a federal judge recently said it was “more likely than not that President Trump and Dr [John] Eastman dishonestly conspired to obstruct the joint session of Congress on January 6 2021”, and thereby committed multiple felonies.Also in Washington on Tuesday, Enrique Tarrio, a former leader of the far-right Proud Boys group, pleaded not guilty to felony charges including conspiracy to block the certification by Congress of electoral college results on January 6. The January 6 committee also hopes Ivanka Trump might help explain a more-than seven-hour gap in White House call logs for the day of the Capitol attack.Ivanka Trump’s role in her father’s administration has long been a lightning rod for controversy. On Monday, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Crew) said: “Here’s a question Ivanka Trump can answer: how did she and Jared make up to $640m while working ‘for free’ in the White House?”TopicsIvanka TrumpJared KushnerDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Sacramento: second suspect arrested over mass shooting that killed six

      by

      Sacramento: second suspect arrested over mass shooting that killed sixSmiley Martin, 27, brother of first suspect Dandrae Martin, facing gun-related charges but neither brother charged with homicide Police in Sacramento arrested a second person in connection with Sunday’s mass shooting in a bustling stretch of California’s capitol. Six people were killed in the shooting and at least 12 were injured.On Tuesday the department announced Smiley Martin, who was also injured in the shooting, would be booked in Sacramento’s county jail once his medical care is complete. Martin, 27, is facing charges of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person and possession of a machine gun. His brother Dandrae Martin, 26, was arrested on Monday and charged with assault and illegal firearm possession offenses.Neither have been charged with homicide as police say they are continuing to comb through hundreds of pieces of physical evidence as well as video footage and photos.01:19Detectives also were trying to determine if a stolen handgun found at the crime scene was connected to the shooting. The handgun was inspected and was converted to a weapon capable of automatic gunfire, authorities have said.More than 100 shots were fired early on Sunday in downtown Sacramento, creating a chaotic scene with hundreds trying desperately to get to safety. A day later police announced the arrest of Dandrae Martin as a “related suspect” on charges of assault with a deadly weapon and being a convict carrying a loaded gun. A court appearance was set for Tuesday.Detectives and Swat team members found one handgun during searches of three homes. The three women and three men killed were identified on Monday.The Sacramento county coroner identified the women killed as Johntaya Alexander, 21; Melinda Davis, 57; and Yamile Martinez-Andrade, 21. The three men were Sergio Harris, 38; Joshua Hoye-Lucchesi, 32; and De’vazia Turner, 29.The Sacramento mayor, Darrell Steinberg, read their names during a vigil on Monday evening attended by grieving relatives, friends and community members.Turner, who had three daughters and a son, was a “protector” who worked as the night manager at an inventory company, his mother, Penelope Scott, told the Associated Press. He rarely went out, and she had no reason to believe he would be in harm’s way when he left her house after he visited Saturday night.“I want people to know he is a great person and he loved his family,” Scott told KCRA, Sacramento’s NBC affiliate. “You took away somebody that meant a whole lot to a whole lot of community people. Our Facebook … everything is flooded with love.”Turner’s cousin Sergio Harris was also killed in the mass shooting. He had a wife and two young daughters. During a candlelight vigil on Monday, Harris’ cousin Jackie Henderson described him as “a great man”.“He had his life taken from him – shot in the back, unacceptable,” Henderson said, according to Sacramento’s local Fox affiliate. She also called for an end to the gun violence that ended the lives of the six victims.“The last time we had a mass shooting, we did the same thing, sat out here, held up our candles, talked about [how] the police are here for us now, the public officials are [here for us now] – they’re here for us. How are they here for us if we’re sitting here doing the same damn thing again?” Henderson continued.A friend of Melinda Davis said she was a “very sassy lady” who lived on the streets of Sacramento near the shooting site.Shawn Peter, a guide with the Downtown Sacramento Partnership, told the Sacramento Bee he’d known Davis for 15 years. She had been homeless and lived in the area on and off for a decade. “Melinda was a very eccentric individual, a very sassy lady,” he told the newspaper. “This was her world, 24/7.”Officials had helped her find housing before the pandemic began but she had returned to the downtown business district in recent months, Peter said. A small bouquet of purple roses with a note saying “Melinda Rest In Peace” was left on the street.The family of Martinez-Andrade say they are still looking for answers.“Trying to get to the bottom of things without nobody knocking on our door, letting us know what really happened and stuff is kind of frustrating,” said Frank Gonzales, Martinez-Andrade’s stepfather, to KCRA. “It’s been rough. We’re still going through a hard time right now. “Hopefully we’ll get through this.”Alexander, who was also killed in the early morning shooting, was described as headstrong by her father, who spoke to the same news outlet.“She was outgoing, headstrong, spoke her peace whether you liked it or you didn’t,” said John Alexander.A father used a ghost gun to kill his three daughters. It’s a sign of a growing crisisRead moreThis mass shooting comes less than six weeks after a man shot himself after killing his three daughters – ages nine, 10 and 13 – and a man who was supervising a visit between the girls and their father at a Sacramento-area church. He was banned from owning a gun because of a domestic violence restraining order but was able to skirt the prohibition by getting a ghost gun, a firearm that is ordered in parts and can be assembled in a few hours with the help of a YouTube tutorial. They lack serial numbers and can be bought without a background check, making them nearly impossible to trace through traditional means.Police have not named the exact tool or accessory used to convert the firearm into a machine gun, but under state law it is considered an illegal weapon. Though it has faced many legal challenges, California’ assault weapon ban has been in effect since 1994. The longstanding rule prohibits the manufacturing, purchase, and possession of firearms that are considered assault weapons, which includes a gun that can expel multiple rounds with one trigger pull. Police suspect this type of weapon was used in Sunday’s melee because more than 100 shell casings were found.California has more than 100 gun laws on the books that determine who can sell ammunition, where guns can be bought, and the number of rounds any single firearm can hold. And cities including San Francisco, San Diego and Oakland have banned ghost guns and lodged lawsuits against manufacturers of parts. Still, California lawmakers are continuing to create legislation, including a measure modeled after Texas’s abortion ban, that they hope will keep unregistered or illegally purchased guns out of people’s hands, cars and homes.But the longtime partisan stalemate and lack of a permanent head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) are making it more difficult for Biden to put his campaign promises into practice, leaving gun regulation mainly to states.On Monday, Senator Dianne Feinstein joined the chorus of officials calling on Congress to pass new gun legislation. “Of course, this isn’t an isolated event. It’s the latest in an epidemic of gun violence that continues to plague our country,” Feinstein said in a statement.“Enough is enough. We can no longer ignore gun violence in our communities. Congress knows what steps must be taken to stop these mass shootings, we just have to act.”TopicsCaliforniaGun crimeUS crimeUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Ivanka Trump to testify before panel investigating Capitol attack

      by

      Ivanka Trump to testify before panel investigating Capitol attackDonald Trump’s eldest daughter, a former senior White House adviser, to speak virtually to committee about events of January 6 Ivanka Trump will testify before the January 6 committee on Tuesday.‘I didn’t win the election’: Trump admits defeat in session with historiansRead moreThe Guardian confirmed that former president Donald Trump’s oldest daughter, and former senior White House adviser, will speak to the panel virtually.Her testimony will come after that of her husband and fellow former presidential adviser, Jared Kushner, who spoke to the panel for more than six hours last week.After Kushner’s testimony, Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat and a member of the committee, told the Guardian: “There’s a momentum to this process when there’s cooperation. When people see that others are doing the right thing, it gives them the courage to do the right thing.”A bipartisan Senate report linked seven deaths to the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, by supporters Donald Trump told to “fight like hell” in service of his attempt to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection but acquitted when enough Republican senators stayed loyal.The House’s January 6 committee includes two Republicans, Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois.As the Guardian reported this week, the committee has identified Ivanka Trump as a senior adviser who would have known her father’s attempt to block certification of electoral college results at the Capitol was unlawful.Referring to a law professor who presented the plan to block certification, a federal judge recently said it was “more likely than not that President Trump and Dr [John] Eastman dishonestly conspired to obstruct the joint session of Congress on January 6 2021”, and thereby committed multiple felonies.The committee also hopes Ivanka Trump might help explain a more-than seven-hour gap in White House call logs for 6 January.Ivanka Trump’s role in her father’s administration has long been a lightning rod for controversy. On Monday, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Crew) said: “Here’s a question Ivanka Trump can answer: how did she and Jared make up to $640m while working ‘for free’ in the White House?”TopicsIvanka TrumpJared KushnerDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More