World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas House reconvenes without quorum as Democrats flee state

      by

      Texas Democrats in the state legislature denied its speaker a legislative quorum Monday by leaving the state, forestalling plans proposed by the White House to redistrict Texas’s congressional lines to more greatly favor Republicans.When the legislature gaveled in at 3pm local time on Monday, Republicans fell short of a quorum by eight votes after Democrats fled to Illinois, a legislative conference in Boston, New York and elsewhere.In an extraordinary escalation, the state’s Republican governor, Greg Abbott, said he he had ordered the Texas department of public safety to “locate, arrest and return to the House chamber any member who has abandoned their duty to Texans”.“There are consequences for dereliction of duty,” Abbott said in a statement on Monday, after the Republican-dominated House issued civil arrest warrants in an attempt to compel the return of the members who fled. “This order will remain in effect until all missing Democrat House members are accounted for and brought to the Texas Capitol.”Democrats hold 62 of the 150 seats in the legislature’s lower chamber, so as long as at least 51 members remain out of Austin, the Texas legislature cannot move forward with any votes, including a plan to redraw the state’s congressional maps to give Republicans five more seats in Congress.The Texas speaker, Representative Dustin Burrows, adjourned the house until 1pm on Tuesday after issuing a call for absent lawmakers and threatening their arrest. He cited pending legislation on flood relief and human trafficking – and not the contentious redistricting proposal before the chamber – in his call for Democrats to return.“Instead of confronting those challenges, some of our colleagues have fled the state in their duty,” Burrows said. “They’ve left the state, abandoned their posts and turned their backs on the constituents they swore to represent. They’ve shirked their responsibilities under the direction and pressure of out-of-state politicians and activists who don’t know the first thing about what’s right for Texas.”Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, who fled his own impeachment hearings and refused a court order to release his travel records after speaking at the rally in Washington that preceded the January 6 insurrection, has described wayward Democratic legislators as “cowards”.Speaker Burrows said the house would not sit quietly. “While you obstruct the work of the people, the people of Texas are watching and so is the nation, and if you choose to continue down this road, you should know there will be consequences.”The Texas House Democratic Caucus said in response: “Come and take it.”“We are not fighting for the Democratic party,” state representative James Tallarico said in a video message recorded at an airport. “We are fighting for the democratic process, and the stakes could not be higher. We have to take a stand.”Most of the Democratic caucus absconded to Chicago, a city with a Democratic mayor and city council in a state with a Democratic governor and legislature.Illinois governor JB Pritzker, who owns the Chicago Hyatt hotel, announced on Monday he would provide free rooms to the Texas Democrats for as long as they are out of state.A special session of the Texas legislature lasts for 30 days, but Abbott can renew the call for a special session at will. Under new rules the Texas house adopted in 2021, each lawmaker will be fined $500 a day for each day they abscond from the state. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Marjorie Taylor Greene says Republican party has lost touch with its base

      by

      Marjorie Taylor Greene, historically one of the most prominent voices in Donald Trump’s Maga movement, has declared in an interview that she feels that the Republican party has lost touch with its base, but she said she has no plans to leave the party.After telling the Daily Mail this week she was questioning whether she still belongs in the Republican fold, the Georgia congresswoman told the Guardian she would not become independent or seek a third party option.“No – I’m urging my own party to support ‘America first’,” Greene said.Still, she made clear resounding frustration with GOP leadership and her place within the party’s planning.“I don’t know if the Republican party is leaving me, or if I’m kind of not relating to Republican party as much any more,” Greene said in the Daily Mail interview. “I don’t know which one it is.”Greene, who boasts 7.5 million followers on X and commands one of the largest social media audiences of any Republican woman, accused party leaders of betraying core conservative principles.She did not criticize Trump himself, instead preferring to express her ire for what she attempted to paint as political elites.“I think the Republican party has turned its back on America First and the workers and just regular Americans,” she said, warning that GOP leadership was reverting to its “neocon” past under the influence of what she termed the “good ole boys” network.The 51-year-old lawmaker, in the roughly six-month mark following Trump’s return to the White House, said she was particularly frustrated with the House speaker, Mike Johnson, saying: “I’m not afraid of Mike Johnson at all.”Her remarks reflect a broader pattern of voter dissatisfaction with traditional party structures. Americans appear to also be holding deeply unfavorable views of both major parties: a July Wall Street Journal poll found 63% view the Democratic party unfavorably, its worst rating in 35 years, while Republicans fare only marginally better in most surveys.Independent or independent-leaning Americans now account for nearly half the electorate, according to July Gallup polling, and public support has increasingly shifted toward Democrats through those leaners in recent months.On Monday, Greene used social media to criticize the lack of accountability over what she deems key issues to the base, sharing a table showing no arrests for the “Russian Collusion Hoax”, “Jan 6th”, and “2020 Election”.“Like what happened all those issues? You know that I don’t know what the hell happened with the Republican Party. I really don’t,” she said in the interview. “But I’ll tell you one thing, the course that it’s on, I don’t want to have anything to do with it, and I just don’t care any more.”Her recent bills have targeted unconventional Republican territory: preventing cloud-seeding, making English the official US language, and cutting capital gains taxes on homes. She is also the first Republican in Congress to label the crisis in Gaza a genocide, and has called for ending foreign aid and using the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) to cut down fraud and waste in the government.Greene acknowledged her isolation within the party, saying: “I’m going alone right now on the issues that I’m speaking about.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Legal cases could prise open Epstein cache despite Trump’s blocking effort

      by

      On the campaign trail, Donald Trump vowed that his administration would release a tranche of documents in the criminal investigation into disgraced late financier Jeffrey Epstein.But since Trump returned to the White House, his promises have fallen flat, with few documents released – and backtracking about releasing more records. The lack of disclosure has prompted not only dissatisfaction among those seeking information about Epstein’s crimes, but political flak Trump can’t seem to deflect, especially about his own relations with the convicted sex trafficker.But where political pressures have so far failed, legal pressures that have largely sailed under the radar of the fierce debate about Epstein’s crimes could yet succeed and bring crucial information in the public eye.Several court cases provide some hope that even if Trump’s justice department fails to make good on calls for transparency, potentially revelatory records about Epstein, his crimes and his links to some of the most powerful people in the US might still see the light of day.Moreover, it is possible that the justice department’s unusual request to unseal grand jury transcripts, in Epstein and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell’s criminal cases, could also undermine opposition to it releasing records.One lawsuit brought by the news website Radar Online and investigative journalist James Robertson stems from their April 2017 public records request for documents related to the FBI’s investigation of Epstein. This request came years after Epstein pleaded guilty to state-level crimes in Florida for soliciting a minor for prostitution – and before his 2019 arrest on child sex-trafficking charges in New York federal court.Radar and Robertson filed suit in May 2017 after the FBI did not respond to their request; the agency ultimately agreed that it would process documents at a rate of 500 pages per month, per court documents.“Despite the FBI identifying at least 11,571 pages of responsive documents, 10,107 of those pages remain withheld nearly 20 years after the events at issue,” according to court papers filed by Radar and Robertson.Although Epstein killed himself in custody awaiting trial, and Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence, the FBI is fighting release of more documents. The agency has invoked an exception to public records disclosure that allow for documents to be withheld if their release would interfere with law enforcement proceedings.The Manhattan federal court judge overseeing this public records suit sided with the FBI’s citation of these exemptions, but Radar is pursuing an appeal that could be heard in the second circuit court of appeals this fall.“In court, they insist that releasing even one additional page from the Epstein file would hurt their ability to re-prosecute Ghislaine Maxwell in the event the supreme court orders a new trial,” a spokesperson for Radar said.“It’s a flimsy rationale and we are challenging it head on in the court of appeals. Our only hope of understanding how the FBI failed to hold Epstein accountable for over a decade – and preventing future miscarriages of justice – is if the government releases the files.”It’s also possible that the justice department’s request to release grand jury transcripts in Epstein and Maxwell’s cases could bolster arguments for the release of records.“The DoJ’s core argument against disclosure for the past six years has been that it would jeopardize their ability to put – and keep – Ghislaine Maxwell in prison. They say that releasing even a single page could threaten their case,” the Radar spokesperson said. “Naturally, any support they offer to release material undermines their claims.”Separately, developments in civil litigation involving Epstein and Maxwell could also potentially lead to the disclosure of more documents surrounding their crimes.A federal judge in 2024 unsealed a cache of documents in the late Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre Roberts’s defamation case against Maxwell. Some documents were kept under seal, however, and journalists pursuing release of documents appealed against that decision.On 23 July, the second circuit decided that it found “no error in the district court’s decisions not to unseal or make public many of the documents at issue”, but it also ordered the lower court to review possibly unsealing them.Robert’s attorney Sigrid McCawley reportedly said she was “thrilled with the decision” and also said she was “hopeful that this order leads to the release of more information about Epstein’s monstrous sex trafficking operation and those who facilitated it and participated in it”, according to Courthouse News Service.Others who have represented Epstein victims have called for disclosure of public records – and voiced frustration about being stonewalled in their pursuit of documents.Jennifer Freeman, special counsel at Marsh Law Firm, who represents Epstein accuser Maria Farmer, previously told the Guardian she had made a public records request for information related to her client, with no success.Spencer T Kuvin, chief legal officer of GoldLaw and an attorney for several Epstein victims, hopes that public records battles could help pull back the veil on Epstein information.“I think that the Foia requests will absolutely assist in the disclosure of information. The DoJ has made blanket objections citing ongoing investigations, but through Foia litigation the courts can test those objections by potentially reviewing the information ‘in camera’,” Kuvin said. “This means that an independent judge may be appointed to review the information to determine whether the DoJ’s objections are accurate or just a cover.”Roy Gutterman, director of the Newhouse School’s Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University, cautioned that calls for disclosures – and even government requests to release some files – might not be a panacea for access to extensive documents.“This case is already complicated, and there were already too many cooks in the very crowded kitchen, and it’s getting more crowded as more public interest grows in the grand jury materials as well as the now-settled defamation case,” Gutterman said.But stonewalling could also continue. With the public records requests, it’s possible that US federal authorities could still successfully cite the investigation exemption and keep documents out of pubic view.“Using Foia for FBI and law enforcement materials related to this case, might be a creative newsgathering tactic, but the law enforcement exemption the government is citing might be legitimate because some of the materials are grand jury materials and some other materials might include private or unsubstantiated allegations,” Gutterman said.“The reporter in me thinks there is an important public interest in revealing these documents, but the law might end up keeping most material secret. Even with the widespread and growing public interest, it might be too big an ask to unseal a lot of this material.“Practically speaking, the DoJ might also be very selective in which materials it would want to release as well because of the political element involved here, too.” More

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Despite Trump, the US economy remains surprisingly resilient. But for how long? | Richard Partington

      by

      Chaotic and unpredictable, keeping up with Donald Trump’s volatile trade war – never mind his presidency – can be tough.Back in April after his “Liberation Day” tariff announcement, the talk was of the president crashing the global economy. Then, after a Wall Street backlash, the world learned the acronym “Taco”, which stands for “Trump Always Chickens Out”. Now, things are heating up again.The president’s decision to hit US trading partners – including Canada, Brazil, India and Taiwan – with new tariffs after his self-imposed 1 August deadline certainly reignites a threat to the world economy. Dozens of countries have been left reeling, and US consumers are expected to pay a heavy price.However, there is a sense that things could have been worse. Nowhere more clearly is this reflected than on Wall Street: despite the chaos of the president’s trade war, the stock market remains close to record levels.After the latest escalation on Friday, and some worrying US jobs numbers, share prices took a hit, sliding by about 1%. But this is a setback rather than a rout.A further slide could be ignited by this capricious president. Trump’s decision to fire the official in charge of labour market data and his war on the independence of the US Federal Reserve will make matters worse.But despite the warnings of untold economic damage from the US tariff war earlier this year, the American economy has proven surprisingly resilient in recent months.Last week, the president seized on US growth figures showing the economy had expanded at an annualised rate of 3% in the second quarter, far in excess of the 2.4% rate predicted on Wall Street. Could the “fake news” media have it wrong? Are tariff wars “good, and easy to win,” as Trump claims?While inflation has ticked up, from 2.4% in May to 2.7% in June, it is well below the peak that followed the height of the pandemic disruption and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and is far from hitting the levels feared.Back in April, in a country wrought with division, Democratic voters reckoned inflation was on track to hit 7.9% within a year, while Republicans said it would collapse to 0.9%.Butthere is good reason why the US economy has so far defied the prophecies of Armageddon. For starters, the hot-cold nature of Trump’s tariff war means investors still anticipate further deals will be done to avoid the worst threats from ever materialising. The toughest tariffs introduced on Friday are only just arriving, too, meaning any impact has yet to emerge.Most countries have not hit back with retaliatory measures, which would have dramatically worsened things by putting international trade into a deeper tailspin.Meanwhile, knowing full well the dangers of this erratic president, businesses have been planning for months to avoid the worst-case scenarios.US companies rushed to stockpile goods before the trade war, helping them to keep prices down for now. Some firms have taken a hit to profits, according to analysts at Deutsche Bank, reckoning this is better than testing struggling American consumers – worn out by years of high inflation – with further price increases.The tariff costs are also being spread by multinationals, by increasing prices across the markets they operate in. In one high-profile example, Sony has put up the price of its PlayStation 5 by as much as 25% in some markets, including the UK, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. But not in the US.Still, there are signs that consequences are coming. When US businesses exhaust their pre-tariff stockpiles, it is likely that prices will creep higher. Meanwhile, the uncertainty of an erratic president is hitting jobs and investment.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLast week’s US jobs market data has reignited fears over the resilience of the American economy. Tariffs are weighing on business confidence and steadily creeping into consumer prices.GDP growth of 3% might appear robust on the face of things, but this figure was heavily influenced by the 0.5% fall in output in the first quarter, when the surge in US firms rushing to beat Trump’s tariffs distorted activity. Growth in the first half averaged 1.25%, markedly slower than the 2.8% rate for 2024 as a whole.Part of the reason Wall Street remains sanguine about this is the continued belief that things could have turned out worse. Deals are still expected, with the pause in tariffs for key US trade partners Mexico and China suggesting this most clearly.The investor view is that rather than tariffs the president would prefer a string of box-office moments in front of the TV cameras with trade partners paying tribute to the court of Trump.However, it would be wrong to underestimate the self-described “tariff man’s” love of border taxes. And even though his most extreme threats will be negotiated down, the final destination will still be much worse than before. An economic hurricane might be avoided but a storm is still the last thing businesses and consumers need.Britain’s US trade deal is a case in point. A 10% US tariff on British goods has been welcomed as a big victory for Keir Starmer given the alternative, but it is still far worse than before.British cars will face a tariff rate four times higher than previously, costing jobs and growth in Britain while hitting American consumers in the pocket.For the US consumer, the average tariff had been close to 2% before Trump’s return to the White House. After his 1 August escalation, that figure leaps to about 15% – the highest level since the 1930s.Almost a century ago a similar wrong-headed protectionist approach in Washington made the Great Depression far worse: the Smoot-Hawley tariffs hit the US and triggered a domino effect among the main industrialised nations, ultimately leading to the second world war.In the unpredictability of Trump’s trade war, hope remains that similar mistakes can be avoided. But significant damage is still being done. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Durham disclosures further undermine Gabbard’s claims of plot against Trump

      by

      Tulsi Gabbard, the director of US national intelligence, hoped to uncover evidence that Barack Obama and his national security team conspired to undermine Donald Trump in a slow-motion coup.But if her crusade was aimed at proving that Obama embarked on a “treasonous conspiracy” to falsely show that Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential election to help Trump, Gabbard made a mistake. A previously classified annexe to a report by another special counsel, John Durham – appointed towards the end of Trump’s first presidency – has further undermined Gabbard’s case.It was a quixotic enterprise from the start.After all, the 2019 report from Robert Mueller, the original special counsel appointed to investigate the Russia allegations, and a bipartisan five-volume report the following year from the Senate intelligence committee – then chaired by Marco Rubio, now Trump’s secretary of state – both affirmed the offending January 2017 intelligence community assessment, which expressed “high confidence” in Russian interference.Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, seemed to validate the intelligence’s premise in 2018 when, standing beside Trump at a news conference in Helsinki, he admitted wanting him to win.The newly unclassified 29-page document from Durham, made public this week, contains a deflating conclusion for Gabbard. It confirms that Russian spies were behind the emails that were originally released as the result of a Russian cyber-hack of internal Democratic information channels and which Trump supporters believed showed the campaign of Hillary Clinton, his 2016 opponent, conspiring to accuse him of colluding with Moscow.“The office’s best assessment is that the July 25 and July 27 emails that purport to be from Benardo were ultimately a composite of several emails that were obtained through Russian intelligence hacking of the US-based thinktanks,” Durham writes. He is referring to Leonard Benardo, of the Open Society Foundation, funded by George Soros, a philanthropist and bete noire of Trump’s Maga base.One of the emails purportedly from Benardo proposes a plan “to demonize Putin and Trump” and adds: “Later the FBI will put more oil on the fire.”That message and others, including from a Clinton foreign policy aide, Julianne Smith, became part of the so-called “Clinton Plan intelligence”. Benardo and Smith disputed ever writing such emails.In his 2023 report annexe, released on Thursday in heavily redacted form, Durham at least upholds Benardo’s disavowal – concluding that it has been cobbled together from other individuals’ emails to produce something more incriminating than the actuality.For Gabbard, who is feverishly trying to prove the existence of a “deep state” determined to sabotage Trump, emails suspected to have been confected by Russia is hardly a brilliant look in her evidence package.Some former intelligence insiders find that unsurprising – dismissing the idea as a Trump-inspired fiction. “Trump is lying when he speaks of a ‘deep state’,” said Fulton Armstrong, a retired CIA analyst who served under Democratic and Republican administrations. “But if there were one, it would not be Democrat. The culture of that world is deeply Republican.”The national intelligence director – who has never served in the intelligence services or sat on its eponymous congressional committee when she was in the House of Representatives – is likely to see Durham’s finding as immaterial to her quest to put Obama officials on trial for “manufacturing” intelligence.But Gabbard’s insistence – echoing her boss’s view – on the existence of a plot to torpedo Trump was dismissed on Friday by John Brennan, the CIA director under Obama, who told the New Yorker that Obama issued instructions that intelligence showing Russian meddling to be kept hush-hush, at least until polling day, to ensure a fair election.“He made very clear to us [that] he wanted us to try to uncover everything the Russians were doing, but also not to do anything that would in any way interfere in the election,” Brennan said.Gabbard has cited a 2020 House of Representatives intelligence committee report – endorsed only by its Republican members – challenging the assertion that Putin wanted to Trump to win.However, Michael Van Landingham, one of the CIA authors of the 2017 intelligence assessment now in her crosshairs, said credible intelligence cast the Russian leader’s motives in an unambiguous light.“The primary evidence to get to Putin’s mindset was a clandestine source that said, essentially, when Putin realized that Clinton would win the election, he ordered an influence campaign against Hillary Clinton,” Van Landingham told PBS News Hour.“Then we saw a series of events that happened with the hacked US materials by the Russian special services or intelligence services to leak those materials similar to the information a clandestine source had provided. At the same time, we saw lots of members of the Russian media portraying Donald Trump in a more positive light.“There was other information … collected by the US intelligence community … over time, having a high-quality, clandestine source telling you that Putin was counting on Trump’s victory, having members of the Russian state saying Trump would be better to work with because of his views on Russia that don’t represent the US establishment, all of those things gave us high confidence that Putin wanted Trump to win.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      India to still buy oil from Russia despite Trump threats, say officials

      by

      Indian oil refineries will continue to buy oil from Russia, officials have said, before threatened US sanctions next week against Moscow’s trading partners over the war in Ukraine.Media reports on Friday had suggested India, a big energy importer, would stop buying cheap Russian oil. Trump later told reporters that such a move would be “a good step” if true.“I understand that India is no longer going to be buying oil from Russia,” he said. “That’s what I heard. I don’t know if that’s right or not. That is a good step. We will see what happens.”However, official sources in India, quoted by the news agency ANI, rebutted Trump’s claim, saying Indian oil companies had not paused Russian imports and that supply decisions were based on “price, grade of crude, inventories, logistics and other economic factors”.Trump’s remarks came a day after the White House announced tariffs of 25% on all Indian goods, along with a penalty for buying arms and energy from Russia amid the war in Ukraine.Trump has given an 8 August deadline for Vladimir Putin to stop the war or risk further sanctions on tariffs on countries that import Russian oil.Earlier this week, Reuters reported that Indian state-owned refineries had suspended Russian oil purchases amid the tariff threats and narrowing price discounts.But on Saturday, the New York Times cited two unnamed senior Indian officials who said there had been no change in Indian government policy related to importing Russian oil. One said the government had “not given any direction to oil companies” to cease buying oil from Russia.“These are long-term oil contracts,” one of the sources said. “It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight.”The sources cited by ANI said Indian oil refineries operated in full compliance with international norms, and that Russian oil had never been directly sanctioned by the US or EU. “Instead, it was subjected to a G7-EU price-cap mechanism designed to limit revenue while ensuring global supplies continued to flow.”They added: “India’s purchases have remained fully legitimate and within the framework of international norms.”The sources also noted that if India had not “absorbed discounted Russian crude combined with Opec+ production cuts of 5.8 mb/d [millions of barrels a day], global oil prices could have surged well beyond the March 2022 peak of US$137/bbl [a barrel], intensifying inflationary pressures worldwide”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionRussia is the top oil supplier to India, responsible for about 35% of the country’s supplies. India says that as a major energy importer it must find the cheapest supplies to protect its population against rising costs.On Friday, India’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal, said: “We look at what is available in the markets, what is on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances.”Jaiswal added that India had a “steady and time-tested partnership” with Russia.This partnership has been a point of contention for the White House, with Trump posting on Truth Social on 30 July that while India was “our friend”, it had always bought most of its military equipment from Russia and was “Russia’s largest buyer of ENERGY, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to STOP THE KILLING IN UKRAINE – ALL THINGS NOT GOOD!”In a second post, Trump added: “I don’t care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.”Ukraine’s military said on Saturday it had hit oil facilities inside Russia, including a refinery in Ryazan, causing a fire on its premises. The strike also hit an oil storage facility, a military airfield for drones and an electronics factory. More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      The US is complicit in genocide. Let’s stop pretending otherwise | Mehdi Hasan

      by

      Can we finally stop pretending that what we have been witnessing in Gaza over the past 22 months is a “war,” a “conflict,” or even a “humanitarian crisis”? Many of the world’s leading human rights and humanitarian groups – including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Doctors Without Borders – agreed months ago that what is being livestreamed to our phones on a daily basis is indeed a genocide.This week, Israel’s own leading human rights group announced that it had reached “the unequivocal conclusion that Israel is taking coordinated action to intentionally destroy Palestinian society in the Gaza Strip”. In other words, said B’Tselem, “Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip”.The debate over whether or not Gaza is a genocide is, effectively, over. So can we now also stop pretending that we are mere bystanders to this genocide? That our sin is one only of omission rather than commission? Because the inconvenient truth is that the US has not just looked the other way, as tens of thousands of Palestinians have been besieged and bombed, starved and slaughtered, but helped Israel pull the trigger. We have been complicit in this genocide, which is itself a crime under article III of the Genocide convention.As retired Israeli Maj Gen Yitzhak Brick acknowledged in November 2023: “All of our missiles, the ammunition, the precision-guided bombs, all the airplanes and bombs, it’s all from the US. The minute they turn off the tap, you can’t keep fighting. You have no capability … Everyone understands that we can’t fight this war without the United States. Period.”In fact, given Brick’s assessment, I would argue that what we have witnessed in Gaza from the US government is worse than complicity. It is active participation in an ongoing genocide.Donald Trump has given Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, and his far-right government not only the green light to “clean out” Gaza and “finish the job”, but also the arms, intel and funds to do so. When Netanyahu launched his blockade of all food and aid going into Gaza in March, he emphasized it was done “in full coordination with President Trump and his people”. “Over the past six months,” Axios reported in late July, “Trump has given Netanyahu an almost free hand to do whatever he wants in Gaza.” An Israeli official told the site: “In most calls and meetings Trump told Bibi: ‘Do what you have to do in Gaza.’”Trump’s Republican allies in the House and Senate are even more gung-ho. Forget complicity; Congress is filled with GOP cheerleaders for genocide, from Senators Tom “bounce the rubble in Gaza” Cotton to Lindsey “level the place” Graham. The newest member of the House, Randy Fine, a Republican representative of Florida, has called for the nuking of Gaza and said just days ago that Palestinians in Gaza should “starve away” until the Israeli hostages are all released. (A reminder that incitement to genocide is also a crime under Article III of the Genocide convention.)But we cannot let Democrats off the hook either. The first 16 months of this mass slaughter unfolded on a Democratic president’s watch. From the get-go, Joe Biden gave Netanyahu and his cabinet of génocidaires everything they needed – 2,000-lb bombs to drop on refugee camps filled with Palestinian children? Check. UN security council vetoes to prevent the passage of resolutions calling for a permanent ceasefire? Check. The burial of internal US government reports warning of war crimes and famine in Gaza? Check.It wasn’t just Biden. The vast majority of Democrats in Congress spent much of 2024 casting vote after vote to keep arming, funding and whitewashing the mass killing of Palestinian civilians. Even now, in the summer of 2025, seven high-profile Democratic senators were happy to take a smiling photo with Netanyahu, including the Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, who claims talk of genocide is antisemitic and says his job “is to keep the left pro-Israel”.Then there is the US media’s complicity in this genocide. It isn’t just the Radio Rwanda wannabes over at Fox, where the morning host Brian Kilmeade has said it was hard “to separate the Palestinians from Hamas” and the primetime host Jesse Watters has said “no one wants” Palestinian refugees and “demographically [Palestinians] are a threat”.There are also genocide enablers in the liberal media. Those who repeatedly insist Israelis have a right to defend themselves while never asking whether Palestinians do. Those who parrot Israeli government talking points while sanitizing the violence inflicted on Gaza. Palestinians, remember, are not killed by Israeli bombs or bullets; they just “die.”US newsrooms have bent over backwards to present “both sides,” even when one side has been deemed genocidal by some of the world’s leading scholars on genocide. The New York Times, per an internal memo obtained by the Intercept, instructed journalists covering Gaza to limit the use of the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” and to “avoid” using the phrase “occupied territory” when referring to the West Bank and Gaza.One study of media coverage, also published by the Intercept, found that “highly emotive terms for the killing of civilians like ‘slaughter’, ‘massacre’, and ‘horrific’ were reserved almost exclusively for Israelis who were killed by Palestinians, rather than the other way around”. Another study, published in the Nation, found that “with one exception the Sunday shows covered and debated [Gaza] for 12 months without speaking to a single Palestinian or Palestinian American”.Go beyond the media. Elite US institutions are also disgracefully complicit in the annihilation of Gaza, from the Ivy League universities that punished anti-genocide protesters on campus; to the white-shoe law firms that disqualified anti-genocide applicants for jobs; to the big tech companies accused by a UN special rapporteur of profiting from the genocide.Most Americans, of course, don’t want to believe that our country is helping commit one of the 21st century’s worst atrocities. But, again, we must stop pretending. Our complicity and collusion are clear. As my Zeteo colleague Spencer Ackerman has written: “This is an American genocide as much as it is an Israeli one.”The US supplied and then resupplied the bombs and bullets used to kill tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians; the US facilitated the destruction of homes and hospitals; the US signed off on the starvation of children. These are the undeniable facts.And so to the Biden and Trump administrations, to Democrats and Republicans in Congress, to the US media, I say this: history will judge you. For the bombs you sent, the votes you cast, the lies you told. This will be your shameful legacy when the dust finally settles in Gaza, when all of the bodies have been pulled from the rubble. Not defending your ally or fighting terrorism, but non-stop complicity in a genocide; aiding and abetting the crime of crimes.

      Mehdi Hasan is the founder, CEO and editor-in-chief of the media company Zeteo. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Good, mad and ugly: the US economy’s performance under Trump – in charts

      by

      According to Donald Trump’s White House, the US economy is booming, inflation is dead and jobs are surging. A blizzard of economic reports has cast a pall on such claims in recent days.This week’s data on Trump’s early economic record was mixed – good, mad and ugly – with jobs numbers so weak he reached for the catchphrase he once used to build himself into a reality TV star: you’re fired.The picture is chaotic, with robust headline growth in the world’s largest economy, wild swings in trade, and a remarkable slowdown in the labor market.For six months, Trump has staged an extraordinary campaign to overhaul the global economy and extract concessions from Washington’s allies and rivals by threatening and imposing steep tariffs on their US exports.But the unpredictable, erratic rollout of this strategy has already had bizarre consequences.Resilient-ish growthOn the surface, at least, this week’s deluge of data opened with good news: the US economy returned to growth in the second quarter, with gross domestic product (GDP) – a broad measure of economic health – expanding at a rate not seen since last summer.But this followed an unexpected contraction in the first quarter, and underlined some more concerning figures, such as a 15.6% drop in private domestic investment. Businesses have been struggling to keep up with the hour-by-hour jerks and jolts on sweeping economies policies.Yes, there was good growth in the last quarter but in the first six months, the US economy grew at a mediocre 1.2%. The Wall Street Journal called it “the weirdest GDP report ever”.Imports surge and plungeDelve a bit deeper, and you start to see how the US economy is grappling with a series of extraordinary forces as Trump hammers out his trade strategy.Firms spent much of the first quarter waiting for the president to reveal his plans for tariffs: which countries would be targeted, at what rates, and when. They stockpiled, triggering an unprecedented surge in imports that pushed growth into the red.In the second quarter, however, as Trump started to ramp up his economic attacks, imports tumbled at an equally astonishing pace. Net exports – how much a country exports more than it imports – boosted GDP.Interest rates on holdThis is Trump’s least favorite chart. Despite his many public demands, threats and attacks, the Federal Reserve has not yet cut interest rates this year.Why? Jerome Powell, the central bank’s chair, has repeatedly argued it should wait and see the impact of the president’s trade strategy before moving. Fed officials are worried that inflation – despite Trump’s claims that it has collapsed on his watch – has actually remained stubborn, and might rise as a result of his tariffs.This has gone down extremely poorly in the White House, where officials are counting down the weeks until Powell’s term as chair ends next May.Jobs growth stallsData released on Friday fundamentally changed the way US policymakers and politicians think about the economy. Until then, many inside the Fed thought everything was broadly ticking over nicely – and Trump administration officials claimed they were overseeing a boom in activity.But July’s employment report revealed far fewer jobs were created that month than economists had expected, and revised down estimates for May and June by an astonishing 258,000. Job creation has stalled.“Look, this jobs report isn’t ideal,” Stephen Miran, chairman of the White House council of economic advisers, told CNN, before suggesting that fading uncertainty around trade and fiscal policy would lead to significant improvement.“It’s all going to get much, much better from here,” he added. More