ReportWire

Tag: 2020 presidential election

  • Biden raised $72 million in his first quarter of fundraising since announcing reelection bid | CNN Politics

    Biden raised $72 million in his first quarter of fundraising since announcing reelection bid | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden raised $72 million for his reelection effort and for the Democratic Party in his first quarter of fundraising since launching his reelection bid in April, his campaign announced Friday.

    The showing could help quell some concerns about the president’s ability to fundraise as he seeks a second term. His campaign boasted an average contribution of $39 from nearly 400,000 donors and said 97% of all donations were less than $200.

    Biden’s campaign, which has yet to open a headquarters and maintains a skeletal staff several months in, also boasted a sizable war chest, with $77 million in cash on hand at June 30, the end of the quarter.

    While the president’s fundraising haul is stronger than any other 2024 presidential contender, it falls short of the record-breaking $86 million raised in 2011 by President Barack Obama for his reelection campaign and the Democratic National Committee in his first quarter of fundraising after launching his second-term bid.

    Obama’s campaign also boasted 158,000 more individual donors in that quarter than Biden’s reported total. Donor contribution limits were lower in the 2012 cycle than they are now: Individual donors could give a maximum of $2,500 to Obama’s campaign when he ran for a second term. This cycle, the individual limit is $3,300. The disparity in maximum contributions between the two cycles is even higher when totaling the maximum allowed contribution to joint fundraising committees.

    Obama launched his campaign three weeks earlier in the second quarter of 2011 than Biden did this year, and as a result, Biden campaign officials noted that they raised more per day than Obama’s campaign did in that quarter.

    Responding to questions about the fewer number of individual donors for Biden compared with Obama’s first quarter of reelection fundraising, Biden campaign officials pointed to a “very different” political climate that has made grassroots fundraising more challenging across the board this year, with political fatigue setting in on both the right and the left.

    Still, the campaign officials said there were signs of enthusiasm, adding that 30% of campaign donors this past quarter had not previously donated to Biden’s 2020 campaign.

    A fundraising sweepstakes to meet the president was especially successful, raising nearly $2 million, campaign officials said. And campaign merchandise that embraced the “Dark Brandon” meme drove over half of the campaign store’s revenue, according to the officials.

    Biden campaign officials declined to disclose the breakdown between funds raised for the campaign versus those raised for the DNC and state parties that are participants in Biden’s joint fundraising operation, noting that Biden’s campaign is heavily integrated with those entities as part of its strategies. That breakdown will become available when the campaign files its report with the Federal Election Commission by Saturday’s deadline.

    In another point of comparison, in 2019, President Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee raised a combined $105 million in the second quarter, though Trump’s reelection operation had been well underway for more than two years at that point.

    “Let’s not forget the months of hype about then-President Trump’s “Death Star” his team spent all of 2019 building, which completely fell apart by summer 2020 while the Biden campaign’s rebel alliance surpassed them and then continued to break fundraising records until Election Day,” Biden campaign spokesman Kevin Munoz said in response to the comparison. “That’s not exactly the playbook we’re looking to replicate.”

    Trump’s 2024 campaign reported last week that the former president’s joint fundraising committee had raised more than $35 million in the second quarter of the year. Trump launched his comeback bid for the White House in November. The campaign of his chief rival for the GOP nomination – Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis – reported that it had raised $20 million through June 30 over the six weeks since he announced his candidacy in late May.

    Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez touted the latest fundraising totals as evidence of “incredible enthusiasm” for the president’s agenda and campaign.

    “We’ve seen incredible enthusiasm for President Biden and Vice President Harris’ agenda – including their commitment to restoring democracy, fighting for more freedoms and growing the economy by growing the middle class. While Republicans are burning through resources in a divisive primary focused on who can take the most extreme MAGA positions, we are significantly outraising every single one of them – because our team’s strength is our grassroots supporters,” Chavez Rodriguez said in a statement.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Anita Dunn, Biden’s brawler-in-chief, looks to 2024 | CNN Politics

    Anita Dunn, Biden’s brawler-in-chief, looks to 2024 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Anita Dunn saw an opportunity with “Dark Brandon.”

    The liberal meme, created by Joe Biden’s most online fans as a play on the right-wing “Let’s Go Brandon” code bashing the president, depicts a grinning Biden with red lasers shooting out of his eyes. After Dunn, Biden’s top messaging and communications adviser, became aware of the meme, she brought it to the president – and they jumped on an opportunity to go on the offensive in the never-ending social media meme wars.

    He’s nodded to Dark Brandon in official speeches, aides have shared the image on social media, and his 2024 campaign is selling $32 T-shirts emblazoned with his online alter-ego. While it’s a minor part of his repertoire, it shows how Dunn – a longtime Democratic operative and Biden confidante – has used her influence to engage in the kind of street brawling needed to combat perceptions of the aging president and the challenge ahead as he seeks a second term.

    “It fits well with who she is, which is a f**k-sh*t-up-brawler. It’s not a coincidence that the stuff that came behind Dark Brandon was very much in line with Anita’s way of seeing the world,” Rob Flaherty, the White House’s director of digital strategy, told CNN.

    CNN spoke to more than a dozen current and former White House and administration officials, lawmakers and Democratic strategists – many of whom requested anonymity to speak freely – who paint a picture of Dunn as a deeply loyal aide with a big-picture view of Biden’s strategy – with a hand in nearly all aspects of his political life.

    Her instincts for brawling are now directly intertwined with the president’s political fortunes, as she bolsters an already expansive role as a presidential adviser with steering 2024 messaging from the White House. For a president who relies on a very tight circle of trusted advisers, sources say Dunn has emerged as a powerful chief political communicator, a key strategist and someone who will fight on his behalf. She takes these responsibilities on with a combination of deep experience and Biden’s trust.

    While sources both inside and outside the White House say no communicator is better prepared for the moment than Dunn, her messaging task ahead is massive: A high-profile candidate of Biden’s age has never run before, and the president is facing low approval ratings after two years in the White House, which could be a drag on his reelection campaign. With Biden widely expected to face a familiar, but powerful, foe in former President Donald Trump, the mission facing Biden’s advisers is to find a message that can resonate enough with voters to beat Trump again.

    Just a third of Americans (33%) say that Biden winning in 2024 would be a step forward or a triumph for the country, per a May CNN poll conducted by SSRS. Voters also have serious questions about Biden’s age – he’s 80 now, and would be 86 at the end of a potential second term. Recent Washington Post/ABC News polling indicates that nearly two-thirds of respondents feel that Biden lacks the mental sharpness (63%) or is not in good enough physical health (62%) to serve effectively as president.

    Those poll numbers mean that Dunn’s most important task ahead is to help the president communicate to an unconvinced American public why he deserves a second term. And that has given her a White House portfolio that is virtually unparalleled.

    “The circle is small and isn’t exactly expanding anytime soon. That makes voices like Anita’s carry a significant amount of weight,” a Biden adviser said.

    Ostensibly, Dunn’s White House role centers around messaging, political strategy, oversight and crisis communication on the key issues facing the White House.

    “Like the rest of the senior staff, Anita works to act on the strategies and agenda President Biden assigns for her portfolio,” White House spokesman Andrew Bates said.

    She’s in close touch with Cabinet secretaries, members of Congress, outside groups and prospective candidates. A former Hill aide, Dunn is keenly aware of congressional dynamics, but her work inside the Obama White House has shaped her views on how to approach the daily challenges confronting the president.

    “She has this perch where she spans the overall strategic plan for (Biden) and for the White House, and also communicates outward with the political apparatus of the (Democratic National Committee) and the campaign and tries to keep the entire Joe Biden enterprise swimming in the same direction,” a White House aide said.

    She’s also playing an active role in Biden’s reelection campaign strategy, with multiple sources familiar with the dynamic indicating she is spearheading 2024 political messaging from the White House and coordinating with senior campaign staff.

    A former White House senior adviser put it more bluntly: When it comes to 2024, “she’s running everything.”

    Pressed in an interview with CBS News on how she will balance those two roles, Dunn declined to comment, citing the Hatch Act.

    “I’m going to be here at the White House serving the people,” she said. “I’m a White House employee, and I have a government job, and I will continue to do my government job.”

    For an incumbent president running for reelection, there is no commodity more valuable than time, especially time spent in front of the cameras, with an audience of critics looking for signs of fatigue. And with Biden officially jumping into the 2024 race, it’s expected that his current pace of activity will continue for the foreseeable future – using the bully pulpit to highlight key policies at the White House, visiting battleground states to showcase his accomplishments and traveling abroad to meet world leaders. That makes everything he says – and how and where he says it – part of an implicit reelection campaign.

    Dunn – in concert with a tight circle of aides, including White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, deputy chiefs of staff Jen O’Malley Dillon and Bruce Reed, senior adviser Mike Donilon, and counselor to the president Steve Ricchetti – is key to making those decisions and how to communicate them.

    For instance, Dunn was central to a recent decision to frame the president’s age as a sign of wisdom and experience.

    “It’s a legitimate thing to raise the question of age,” Biden told donors at a recent campaign fundraiser. “I hope what I’ve been able to bring to this job, and will continue to bring, is a little bit of wisdom.”

    His explicit use of that framing had Dunn’s fingerprints all over it – part of Bidenworld’s effort to mitigate a weakness by tying it to legislative accomplishments that supporters believe have little precedent over the past several decades.

    Multiple sources told CNN that Dunn has been a decision-maker for campaign issues such as staffing, announcement timing, headquarters location and selecting campaign leadership.

    She’s also recently been involved in strategically elevating the profile of Vice President Kamala Harris, making it clear internally that the West Wing needs to do a better job at bolstering Harris heading into the campaign, a source familiar with the dynamic said.

    Dunn is expected to remain in her White House role but continue to advise Biden on 2024 matters, multiple sources said, with campaign manager and former White House staffer Julie Chavez Rodriguez leading the charge from the campaign side.

    It’s a similar model to how former President Barack Obama’s top advisers coordinated between the West Wing and the campaign, and not unusual.

    “You want a strategist like Anita at the White House. Reelects are about organizing, ground game, targeting digital and ads and messages to particular audiences. It is a game of execution,” said Jennifer Palmieri, a longtime Democratic strategist who served as communications director during the Obama administration after Dunn.

    “The most important messaging that people will judge the president on is the job he is doing at the White House,” Palmieri said.

    Dunn’s deep loyalty and instinct to fight has also raised eyebrows outside the White House. TJ Ducklo, a 2020 Biden campaign aide who resigned from his White House role after privately threatening a reporter weeks into the administration, is expected to play a role in the 2024 campaign, a decision that has been publicly defended in a rare on-the-record statement from Dunn. (That reporter later called for Ducklo’s redemption.)

    “TJ made a mistake, took responsibility for it, and paid a price,” Dunn said in her statement – in her personal capacity – to Politico’s “West Wing Playbook” last month.

    One former senior White House adviser, however, called that an “unforced error” by Dunn. The former adviser asked for anonymity to speak freely without retribution.

    Her allegiance to Ducklo, the adviser said, “leaves the president vulnerable and exposed to unnecessary criticism and charges of hypocrisy.”

    “It’s in direct contradiction to the president’s own values and integrity and the standards that he himself demanded of everybody in the White House,” the former adviser said.

    A current White House aide fired back.

    “The president has values. Taking responsibility when you have done wrong means a lot. So does forgiveness,” that aide said.

    Dunn, 65, is one-half of a Washington power couple at the epicenter of Bidenworld – husband Bob Bauer is the president’s personal attorney and the lead attorney handling the special counsel investigation into classified documents found at Biden’s private office and residence. Yet she has risen from roles in the Jimmy Carter White House to the Senate to building public affairs powerhouse SKDK to the 2008 Obama campaign entirely on her own, sparked by her intense preparation.

    “She made preparation her friend,” said veteran Democratic operative Minyon Moore, who has known Dunn for decades.

    “Every time she walks in a room, she’s probably more prepared than most of her counterparts. And I think that’s how she was able to tackle the business very early, because they knew she had done her homework. They knew she could think through many layers. She was smart as heck. And so, you want a person like Anita in the room,” Moore said.

    Dunn operates largely behind the scenes – actively eschewing Washington’s social scene, social media and most television appearances.

    Her loyalty to Biden was cemented when she was among a small group of advisers working toward a potential 2016 presidential run, Biden wrote in his 2017 memoir, “Promise Me, Dad.” Though he ultimately decided against running, Dunn’s encouragement solidified a strong level of trust, multiple people close to her say.

    Dunn joined Biden’s 2020 campaign as a senior adviser and is widely credited for helping turn the tide of Biden’s political fortunes in that campaign’s Democratic primary after she was tapped to lead the operation following a fourth-place showing in the Iowa caucuses.

    She encouraged a sharper messaging posture from her desk in the center of the campaign “bullpen” workspace.

    When Biden arrived in the White House, Dunn briefly joined the administration as a senior adviser before returning to SKDK in August 2021, the temporary nature of her service allowing her to skirt disclosure of a cadre of investments and high-profile clients.

    She continued to advise Biden informally and rejoined the White House in May 2022 in a permanent capacity, a move requiring multimillion-dollar financial disclosures.

    Dunn’s omnipresence in Biden’s orbit has been just as clear in the period when she was out of the White House as when she’s been in. She was a constant presence on conference calls or in visits to the White House.

    “The president trusts her counsel – and there’s good evidence as to why,” one adviser said, pointing to her central role in his path to the presidency, loyalty during Biden’s 2016 deliberations and her work inside the West Wing.

    Over her career, Dunn has developed a reputation as an aggressive messaging tactician with strict discipline.

    She’s led White House messaging efforts on legislative accomplishments, seeking to highlight the legislation’s tangible impacts on real Americans, though some Democrats argue the White House has not done enough to sell those measures to the public.

    “What she tries to do is find the connective tissue,” said a senior administration official, who talks to Dunn regularly. “There’s nobody in government that has a better big picture perspective of what’s going on.”

    Multiple colleagues suggested Dunn can inspire a certain level of anxiety in her subordinates – demanding a high level of results and keeping the receipts – while also being seen as a supportive mentor. At the White House, Dunn is known for leading a weekly meeting known as “Fridays at 5,” a 5 p.m. in-person convening that is met with both eye-rolling (given its timing) and appreciation. It includes the entire communications staff, from interns to press assistants to the highest levels. Dunn will lead shout-outs at the beginning of each meeting, identifying achievements and often spotlighting junior staff.

    “It’s really emblematic of Anita,” the White House aide said. “The fact that she took it upon herself to establish this very expansive view of who’s on the communications team across the entire White House and set a weekly meeting where those people get direct exposure to her, as the senior adviser to the president, is really neat.”

    Dunn’s counsel isn’t only valued inside the White House walls – Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who ran against Biden for president in 2020, regularly seeks her advice.

    “She’s someone that you feel like you can trust and she’s going to have your back. And I think that’s why she’s been such a trusted adviser to President Biden,” the Minnesota senator told CNN, saying that Dunn has been a key messaging coordinator for her Senate colleagues in advancing Biden’s policies.

    That intense loyalty to the president is ultimately why Dunn has been given such a powerful role inside Biden’s political operation.

    “The people that were there and believed in him when he was counted out hold a unique bond and trust with the president. That relationship, with her obvious expertise, means she’s empowered to do what she needs to do,” a former colleague said.

    “Few people have the experience and discipline to keep their eye on the ball like she does. She’s not distracted, and she knows what messages are going to land, even if the pundits disagree,” the former colleague added.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here is the CNN polling director’s advice for reading polls | CNN Politics

    Here is the CNN polling director’s advice for reading polls | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story appeared in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.



    CNN
     — 

    Anyone who spends time following American politics is bound to encounter reports about polling.

    Done right, it can be valuable to figure out what’s motivating voters and which candidates are resonating. Done wrong, it’s misleading and counterproductive.

    That’s why for this newsletter I end up talking a lot to Jennifer Agiesta, CNN’s director of polling and election analytics, about which surveys meet CNN’s standards and how I can use them correctly.

    With the 2024 election just around the corner, it seemed like a good time to ask for her tips on what to look out for and avoid as the industry adapts to the changing ways Americans live and communicate. Our conversation, conducted by email, is below.

    WOLF: My impression is that polling seemed to miss the rise of Donald Trump in 2016 and then missed the power of Democrats at the national level in 2022. What’s the truth?

    AGIESTA: In both 2022 and 2016, I would say that polling – when you lump it all together – had a mixed track record. Methodologically sound polling – assessed separately from the whole slew of polls out there – did better.

    In 2022 especially, many polls actually had an excellent year: National generic ballot polling on the House of Representatives from high-quality pollsters found a close race with a slight Republican edge, which is exactly what happened, and in state polls, those that were methodologically sound had a great track record in competitive races.

    Our CNN state polls in five key Senate battlegrounds, for example, had an average error of less than a point when comparing our candidate estimates to the final vote tally, and across five contested gubernatorial races we had an average error of less than a point and a half.

    But there were quite a few partisan-tinged polls that tilted some of the poll averages and perhaps skewed the story of what the “polls” were showing.

    In 2016, you probably remember the big takeaway that the national polls were actually quite accurate and the bigger issues happened in state polling.

    Some of that was because more methodologically sound work was happening at the national level, and many state polls were not adjusting (“weighting” is the survey research term for this type of adjustment) polls for the education level of their respondents.

    Those with more formal education are more likely to take polls, and with an electorate newly divided by education in the Trump era, those polls that didn’t adjust for it tended to overrepresent those with college degrees who were less likely to back Donald Trump.

    You add to that evidence of late shifts in the race and extremely close contests and a good amount of that polling in key states did not paint an accurate picture (the polling industry’s assessment of the 2016 issues is here). Most state polling now does adjust for education.

    WOLF: How, generally, does CNN conduct its polling?

    AGIESTA: CNN has recently made changes to the way we conduct our polling to be more in line with the way people communicate today, using several different methodologies depending on the type of work we’re doing.

    A few times a year, we conduct surveys with 1,500 to 2,000 respondents who are sampled from a list of residential addresses in the United States. We initially contact those respondents through a mailing, which invites them to take the survey either online or by phone, depending on their preference and at their convenience, and then we follow up with an additional reminder mailing and some phone outreach to people in the sample who are members of groups that tend to be a bit harder to reach.

    These polls stay in the field for almost a month. This process allows us to get higher response rates and to obtain a methodologically sound estimate of some baseline political measures for which there aren’t independent, national benchmarks such as partisanship and ideology.

    We also conduct polling that samples from a panel of people who have signed up to take surveys, but who were initially recruited using scientific sampling methods, which helps to protect against some of the biases that can be present in panels where anyone can sign up.

    Our panel-based polls can be conducted online, by phone or by text message depending on how quickly we’re trying to field and how complicated the subject matter is.

    WOLF: What are the signs you look for in a good poll and what are some of the polling red flags?

    AGIESTA: It can be really hard for people who aren’t well-versed in survey methodology to tell the difference between polls that are worth their attention and those that are not.

    Pollsters are using many different methodologies to collect data, and there isn’t one right way to do a good poll.

    But there are a few key indicators to look for, with the first being transparency. If you can’t find information about the basics of a poll – who paid for it, what questions were asked (the full wording, not just the short description someone put in a graphic), how surveys were collected, how many people were surveyed, etc. – then chances are it’s not a very good poll.

    Most reputable pollsters will gladly share that kind of information, and it’s a pretty standard practice within the industry to do so.

    Second, consider the source, much as you would with any other piece of information.

    Gallup and Pew, for example, are known for their methodological expertise and long histories of independent, thoughtful research. Chances are pretty good that most anything they release is going to be based in solid science.

    Likewise, most academic survey centers and many pollsters from independent media are taking the right steps to be methodologically sound.

    But a pollster with no track record and fuzzy details on methodology, I’d probably pass.

    I would also say to take campaign polling with a grain of salt. Campaigns generally only release polls when it serves their interest, so I’d be wary of those numbers.

    In the same vein, market research that’s publicly released that seems to prove the need for a specific product or service – a mattress company releasing a poll that says Americans aren’t getting great sleep, for example – maybe don’t take that one too seriously either.

    WOLF: The coming primary season offers its own set of challenges because there are polls focused on specific early contest states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Do you have any advice regarding these early contest polls in particular?

    AGIESTA: Polling primary electorates is notoriously difficult. It’s more difficult to identify likely voters, because they tend to be fairly low turnout contests, the rules on who can and can’t participate are different from state to state, and the quality of voter lists that pollsters may use for sampling varies by state.

    On top of that, as the election gets closer, the field of candidates and the contours of the race may change just before a contest happens – remember how the Democratic field shrank dramatically in the two days between the South Carolina primary and Super Tuesday in 2020 as an example.

    So when you’re looking at primary polling, it is very important to remember that polls are snapshots in time and not necessarily great predictors of future events.

    WOLF: Most of what general consumers like me want to see from a poll is which candidate is ahead. But I’ve heard you caution against focusing on the horse-race aspect of polling. Why?

    AGIESTA: There are several reasons for that caution.

    First is that polling of any kind has an error margin due to sampling. Even the most accurate poll has the possibility of some noise built into it because any sample will not be a perfect measure of the larger pool it’s drawn from.

    Because of that, any race that’s closer than something like a 5-point margin will mostly just look like a close race in polls.

    The value of polling in that situation is twofold: What it can tell you about why a race is close or what advantages each candidate has, and once you have multiple polls with similar methodologies, you can start to get a sense of how a race is trending.

    Polling is great for measuring which issues are more important to voters, how enthusiastic different segments of the electorate are, and what people think about the candidates in terms of their personal traits or job performance. Those measures can tell you a lot about the state of a race that you can’t get solely from a horse-race measure.

    WOLF: What is the best way to track who is ahead or behind in an election?

    AGIESTA: When you’re looking at trends over time, there are a few tactics that can help to make sense of disparate data.

    The best option is following the trend line within a single poll. If a pollster maintains the same methodology, the way a race moves or doesn’t in that poll’s trend line can tell you a lot about how it’s shaping up.

    That is sometimes hard to find though, as not every pollster conducts multiple surveys of the same race.

    Another good way to measure change over time is to lean on an average of polls, though, as we learned in 2022, those averages can vary pretty widely depending on how they’re handling things like multiple polls from the same pollster or whether they are including polls with a partisan lean.

    WOLF: I don’t have a landline and I don’t answer my phone for strange numbers. What makes us think polling is reaching a wide enough range of people?

    AGIESTA: Many polls these days are conducted using methods other than phone.

    Looking over the 13 different pollsters who released surveys that meet CNN’s standards for reporting in May or June on Joe Biden’s approval rating, only six conducted their surveys entirely by phone. And those phone pollsters are calling far more cellphones than landlines.

    The most important thing for any poll, regardless of how it’s conducted, is that it reaches people who are representative of those who are not answering the poll, and so far, it appears that right mix is achievable through multiple possible methodologies.

    WOLF: Are there specific groups of people that pollsters acknowledge they have trouble reaching? What is being done to fix it?

    AGIESTA: There are several demographic groups that pollsters know are frequently harder to reach than others – younger people, those with less formal education, Black and Hispanic Americans are among the most notable – and the prevailing theory of why 2020 election polling went awry is that some Republicans were less likely to participate in surveys than others.

    Pollsters have several techniques to combat this.

    Some pollsters who draw on online panels where they know the demographic and political traits of people who might participate in advance will account for this in their sampling plans.

    Phone pollsters can do something similar when they use a sample drawn from a voter list that has some of that information connected to a voter’s contact information.

    And if a pollster really wants to dig deep on a hard-to-reach group, they can conduct an oversample to intentionally reach a larger number of people from that group to improve the statistical power of their estimates within that group.

    WOLF: What is the next big challenge facing pollsters?

    AGIESTA: Well, the next election is always a good contender for the next big challenge for pollsters!

    But I think the big challenge looming over all of that is making sure that we’re finding the right ways to reach people and keep them engaged in research. The industry’s leaders are thinking through the right ways to use tools such as text messaging, social media and AI while still producing representative, replicable work.

    Elections are the attention-grabbing part of survey research, but pollsters measure attitudes and behaviors around so many parts of everyday life that our understanding of society would really suffer if survey methods fail to keep up with the way people communicate. I’m excited to see it continue to evolve.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • White House works to garner support for Biden’s labor nominee ahead of key committee vote | CNN Politics

    White House works to garner support for Biden’s labor nominee ahead of key committee vote | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A Senate committee is scheduled to hold a vote on Wednesday morning to consider whether to move forward with President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Department of Labor, Julie Su, marking a key milestone in the nomination process amid high-level efforts by the White House to push her confirmation forward.

    Democrats on the the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, which is considering Su’s confirmation on Wednesday, have generally appeared supportive of the nomination. But it’s not clear yet whether Su, currently the acting secretary of labor, has secured the votes of key Senate Democrats. Without their support, the nomination would likely fail when the Senate holds a floor vote to consider Su for the top labor role.

    An administration official told CNN that the White House has been engaging in a number of high-level efforts to galvanize support for Su. That includes holding nightly war room calls to track real-time updates and 15-20 external check-in calls per day across labor and business groups.

    Along with assembling together a diverse slate of supporters – which includes a long list of major union groups, stakeholder groups and lawmakers – the White House has also enlisted Marty Walsh, who left his role as Biden’s labor secretary earlier this year, to help get Su’s confirmation across the finish line.

    Walsh is actively working with groups and senators to confirm Su, the official said.

    Despite a narrow majority in the Senate, Democrats have with more recent frequency failed to sign off on high-profile Biden appointees. And if Su does not secure enough support from the Senate, she would be the highest-ranking Biden nominee so far to fail to be confirmed.

    A failed nomination would leave a Cabinet-level vacancy for a jobs-focused role at a critical time – as Biden works to secure a second term in office and as the nation continues to grapple with the possibility of a recession.

    Su was narrowly confirmed to be the deputy secretary of labor in 2021, receiving unanimous support at the time from Senate Democrats and no support from Republicans. And this time around, she’s also largely expected to have no support from Senate Republicans.

    Su’s Republican critics in the Senate have argued that her policy stances are hostile to small businesses. She has also faced scrutiny for California’s handling of unemployment benefits during the Covid-19 pandemic – particularly her oversight of the state’s Employment Development Department.

    A lack of Republican support would mean that in the 51-49 Democratic-controlled Senate, more than two defections from the Democratic caucus could tank the nomination. And if California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who has been away from Congress while recovering from shingles for the past two months, or another Democratic senator is absent, the path would narrow ever more.

    Two Democratic senators up for reelection in red states, Montana Sen. Jon Tester and West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, are not yet ready to throw their support behind her. It’s also not clear how Arizona independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, who left the Democratic Party last year but kept her committee assignments with the majority, will vote.

    Su has met with Tester, the administration official confirmed. Sinema has also spoken with Su to discuss the nomination, her office told CNN.

    The narrow majority in the Senate has proven to be a challenge for other Biden nominees in recent months, with Democrats failing to sign off on Phil Washington’s nomination to lead the Federal Aviation Administration as well as Gigi Sohn’s nomination to the Federal Communications Commission.

    Biden is continuing to stand by his labor nominee, telling union workers on on Tuesday – just hours after his reelection bid was announced – that Su is “gonna be a great secretary.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden campaign expected to add two new senior aides as it staffs up | CNN Politics

    Biden campaign expected to add two new senior aides as it staffs up | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign is expected to soon fill out more senior roles, sources familiar with the personnel moves told CNN, adding two veterans of his 2020 run to his 2024 effort – communicator TJ Ducklo and White House digital strategist Rob Flaherty.

    Ducklo, the former White House spokesperson who resigned mere weeks into the Biden administration after threatening a reporter, is returning to the Biden orbit as senior adviser for communications for the 2024 campaign, a campaign official said.

    Ducklo, who previously served as a national press secretary during Biden’s 2020 run, stepped down from his role as deputy press secretary at the White House in 2020 after reports emerged he had threatened a female reporter who asked about his relationship with another reporter.

    Ducklo will start on the campaign in mid-July, the official said. He has served as the chief communication officer and a senior adviser for Nashville Mayor John Cooper for the last year. He worked on the city’s response following The Covenant School shooting and was in close touch with the White House, including helping to organize the Nashville rally attended by Vice President Kamala Harris to support the “Tennessee three” lawmakers, the campaign said.

    While Ducklo has many fierce defenders within the Biden orbit, there are likely some who will be frustrated by the move.

    Anita Dunn, one of the president’s most senior advisers who is deeply involved in 2024 strategy and coordinating with the campaign from the West Wing, has previously defended the decision on Ducklo’s expected campaign role.

    “TJ made a mistake, took responsibility for it, and paid a price,” Dunn told Politico’s “West Wing Playbook” last month in a statement in her personal capacity. But that defense raised eyebrows for some outside the White House, with one former senior White House adviser calling it an “unforced error.”

    Dunn’s allegiance to Ducklo, a former senior White House adviser recently told CNN, “leaves the president vulnerable and exposed to unnecessary criticism and charges of hypocrisy.” But a current White House aide fired back, saying, “The president has values. Taking responsibility when you have done wrong means a lot. So does forgiveness.”

    Tara Palmeri, the reporter Ducklo threatened while she worked for Politico, recently called for his redemption, writing in Puck where she now works, “T.J. and I have spoken many times since. He’s kept me posted on how things are going in Nashville. And I truly believe that he’s coming back in a stronger way, more aware of the impact of his power.”

    Ducklo declined to comment to CNN.

    Flaherty, Biden’s director of digital strategy, is the latest aide to leave a White House role to shift toward the campaign. He is expected to take on a senior role in the reelection effort, sources familiar with the plans told CNN.

    Flaherty is a top official focused on the White House’s use of digital media. The White House’s prioritization of the issue was signaled in a move earlier this year elevating Flaherty’s role to assistant to the president-level for the first time.

    During his time at the White House, Flaherty developed Biden’s strategy on digital platforms in content both serious and light-hearted ways, and also engaged influencers to amplify the administration’s messaging. Those efforts included singer Olivia Rodrigo encouraging Covid-19 vaccination sign-ups for young people, as well as the case from Apple TV’s “Ted Lasso” promoting mental health in the briefing room.

    Flaherty also built the White House’s first texting program and oversaw a shift to vertical-oriented video, a White House official said.

    “So have grateful to have served with this team. No President has invested as much in connecting with Americans wherever they are as @POTUS has. I leave this chair knowing that the fight to vanquish malarkey will be in good hands long after I’m gone,” Flaherty said in a tweet Friday.

    He previously led the Biden’s 2020 campaign’s digital outreach. Flaherty’s last day at the White House will be June 30.

    Though Biden announced his candidacy in late April (with a vertical video shared to social media), his campaign has been slow to announce key personnel moves.

    Campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez and deputy campaign manager Quentin Fulks began their roles in May, former White House spokesperson Kevin Munoz is serving in a communications role, and the campaign announced the hiring of communications director Michael Tyler, a seasoned Democratic strategist who previously worked for Sen. Cory Booker’s 2020 campaign and the Democratic National Committee, on Thursday.

    Elizabeth Alexander also took a temporary leave from her role as communications director for first lady Dr. Jill Biden in May to help the campaign build out its communications team.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Draft GOP autopsy of 2022 midterms urges candidates to stop ‘rehashing old grievances’ | CNN Politics

    Draft GOP autopsy of 2022 midterms urges candidates to stop ‘rehashing old grievances’ | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A draft Republican autopsy report on the party’s worse-than-expected showing in the 2022 midterm elections urges GOP candidates to move past complaints about how the 2020 and 2022 elections were run – a clear criticism of former President Donald Trump, who continues to falsely claim his loss was a result of widespread voter fraud.

    The report does not mention Trump, the leading contender for the GOP’s 2024 presidential nomination, by name.

    But it takes direct aim at his grievances over the 2020 presidential election and false claims of widespread voter fraud in 2022.

    Voters’ distaste for relitigating those elections, the draft report states, is among “the obvious lessons of the 2022 election cycle.”

    “The Republican candidates in 2022 who delivered results and had a vision for the future did much, much better than those stuck in the past and rehashing old grievances,” the draft report says.

    CNN obtained a portion of the draft report, which was expected to be circulated this week at a Republican National Committee meeting in Oklahoma City – however, a source familiar with the presentation said it was likely to be scuttled following reports of its contents.

    The draft report was first reported by The Washington Post.

    Some GOP officials bristled at the upbeat nature of the report – and the notable lack of Trump mentions – which was commissioned before the former president widened his lead in 2024 primary polling.

    The report urges Republican candidates to offer an “aspirational message” that contrasts with President Joe Biden on issues such as taxes, school choice and border security, and to move past complaints about previous elections.

    “America has always been a nation focused on the future. The American people want to move forward and rarely, if ever, are concerned about what happened in the past. The balance of survey data makes it clear that voters are done with the 2020 and 2022 elections. They have no patience for endless conversations relitigating previous elections from Democrats and Republicans,” the draft report states. “Those who don’t heed that lesson from 2022 will be more likely to lose in 2024 and successive cycles.”

    The draft report describes “election integrity” as critical, but it also urges Republican campaigns to focus on tactics that Trump and some 2022 candidates eschewed, including mail-in voting.

    “Republican campaigns must push our supporters to vote early in person or by mail. Republicans cannot continue to give Democrats a head start,” the draft report says.

    Trump and a slew of Trump-backed Republican candidates who lost in 2022 – including Arizona gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake and Senate candidate Blake Masters and Pennsylvania GOP nominee for governor Doug Mastriano – had campaigned on claims of voter fraud. Lake has still not conceded the Arizona governor’s race.

    “Republicans have only won the popular vote once in the last eight presidential elections. Clearly, something is not working for us,” the draft report says.

    It also describes the Supreme Court’s June 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to overturn Roe v. Wade’s federal protections of abortion rights as politically damaging in the midterm elections.

    “It is true: We underestimated the impact of Dobbs, and we failed to defend our position on the sanctity of life even though more Americans agree with us than with Democrats,” the draft report says. “Democrats will continue to engage on this issue, so we must learn our lesson.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Arizona governor contacted by special counsel in Jan. 6 probe | CNN Politics

    Former Arizona governor contacted by special counsel in Jan. 6 probe | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Special counsel Jack Smith’s team has contacted former Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, who Donald Trump pressured to overturn the 2020 election, a source familiar with the outreach confirmed first to CNN.

    A spokesman for Ducey confirmed the outreach from Smith’s team, which has not been previously reported.

    “Yes, he’s been contacted. He’s been responsive, and just as he’s done since the election, he will do the right thing,” Ducey spokesman Daniel Scarpinato told CNN.

    Trump narrowly lost Arizona to Joe Biden by less than 11,000 votes. Trump publicly attacked Ducey, a former ally, over the state’s certification of the results. As Ducey was certifying the election results in November 2020, Trump appeared to call the governor – with a “Hail to the Chief” ringtone heard playing on Ducey’s phone. Ducey did not take that call but later said he spoke with Trump, though he did not describe the specifics of the conversation.

    Ducey, behind closed doors, said that the former president was pressuring him to find fraud in the presidential election in Arizona that would help him overturn the election, a source with knowledge told CNN earlier this month after The Washington Post first reported the news. There was no recording made of that call, a source familiar with the matter said.

    Then-Vice President Mike Pence also spoke with Ducey in the wake of the 2020 election.

    Trump had repeatedly pressured Pence to help him find evidence of fraud and overturn the 2020 election results, CNN previously reported. Pence spoke to Ducey multiple times, though he did not pressure the GOP governor as he had been asked, sources told CNN.

    Pence, however, said he does not recall “any pressure” from Trump in asking him to call Ducey after the election, telling CBS he was “calling to get an update. I passed along that information to the president. And it was no more, no less than that.”

    Ducey is just the latest Arizona Republican known to have spoken with federal investigators as part of the ongoing criminal probe into efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

    Former Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers, who also rejected pressure on two calls with Trump following the election, spoke with the FBI a few months ago, he told CNN earlier this month.

    Bowers, in an interview on CNN’s “The Source,” said he hadn’t known Ducey had also received pressure from the former president, though, he added, the former governor “wasn’t a pushover, but I am surprised. It’s pleasant to know that he also was getting it.”

    In recent weeks, federal investigators have focused on Trump’s efforts, as well as those of his top lawyers as they organized fake electors to submit votes to Congress on his behalf and as they sought to sway Pence into blocking the election result.

    The latest news comes as Trump announced Tuesday he had been informed by the special counsel that he is a target of the criminal investigation, a sign he may soon be charged by Smith.

    Ducey, before his fallout with Trump, had been seen as a formidable candidate for Senate in 2022, but the term-limited governor ultimately ruled out a challenge to Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, who won last year over a Trump-endorsed GOP nominee.

    Ducey announced last month he would be leading Citizens for Free Enterprise, which describes itself as a “new national effort to promote and protect free enterprise.”

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Inside the backchannel communications keeping Donald Trump in the loop on Republican investigations | CNN Politics

    Inside the backchannel communications keeping Donald Trump in the loop on Republican investigations | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Donald Trump continues to wield enormous power on Capitol Hill as House Republicans seek to curry favor with the former president, pursuing his fixations through their investigations and routinely updating him and his closest advisers on their progress.

    A number of top House GOP lawmakers have disclosed in recent days their efforts to keep the former president informed on the pace and substance of their investigations. Lines of communication appear to go both ways. Not only are Trump, his aides and close allies regularly apprised of Republicans’ committee work, they also at times exert influence over it, multiple people familiar with the talks tell CNN.

    The constant, and sometimes direct, communication between Trump and the committees has emerged as a crucial method for Trump to shape Republicans’ priorities in their newly-won House majority. It also underscores the extraordinary sway an ex-president still holds over his party’s lawmakers and the deference many still afford him.

    That dynamic has been on full display over the past week, as top House Republicans attempted to intervene in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation of hush money payments Trump allegedly made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. That’s led to an acrimonious back and forth between three powerful Republican committee chairs and Bragg over what, if any, jurisdiction Congress has over the DA’s work.

    House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, the third-ranking House Republican, has become a key point person for Trump on Hill investigations. The New York Republican talks to Trump roughly once a week, and often more, frequently briefing him on the House committees’ work, three sources familiar with their conversations tell CNN. Trump often calls her as well, the sources said.

    Stefanik and Trump spoke several times last week alone, where she walked him through the GOP’s plans for an aggressive response to Bragg.

    GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who serves on the House Oversight Committee, which is conducting a number of investigations into President Joe Biden, also speaks to Trump on a frequent basis. Both she and Stefanik have endorsed Trump’s 2024 presidential bid and are said to be interested in serving as his running mate.

    “I keep him up on everything that we’re doing,” Greene told CNN. “He seems very plugged in at all times. Sometimes I’m shocked at how he knows all these things. I’m like, ‘How do you know all this stuff?’”

    Multiple sources tell CNN that Trump and House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan speak regularly but declined to divulge whether those conversations included Jordan’s investigative efforts. 

    “Conversations among concerned parties about issues facing the country are not news and regular order in Congress,” Jordan’s spokesperson Russell Dye said in a statement to CNN.

    Trump, meanwhile, has been regularly briefed on the work of House Oversight Chairman James Comer, but the Kentucky Republican said the two have not spoken since the 2020 presidential election.

    “I haven’t talked to Trump since he was President” Comer told CNN. “Now, I talk to former people that used to work for Trump every now and then. But not about Trump.”

    A source close to Comer added he communicates with “a variety of outside groups, associations and interested parties about the Oversight Committee’s work.”

    At his rally in Waco, Texas on Saturday, Trump publicly thanked Comer and Jordan, saying Comer “has become a great star.”

    The decision of what to investigate also underscores the extent to which Republican-led committees are willing to act as a shield for the embattled former president, as well as attempt to inflict damage on Biden ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

    That includes launching a probe into the House Select Committee that investigated January 6, investigating GOP allegations of Biden family influence peddling, and dropping investigations into foreign spending at Trump-owned properties.

    Trump’s influence on House Republicans has been particularly telling in the way they have gone after Bragg in recent days.

    After Trump on March 18 suggested his arrest was imminent, two days later, Jordan, Comer and Bryan Steil, chair of House Administration Committee, sent a letter to Bragg calling for him to sit down for a transcribed interview with their panels — a move that multiple sources familiar with the letter said was prompted by Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s public condemnation of Bragg’s case.

    The request came after Trump lawyer Joe Tacopina sent a letter to Jordan last month asking him to investigate Bragg’s “egregious abuse of power,” The New York Times first reported and CNN confirmed.

    When Trump isn’t communicating directly with House Republicans himself, he is often doing so through a few top advisers, including those on his payroll and former aides who are still loyal to him, sources tell CNN.

    Boris Epshteyn, a self-described in-house counsel and senior adviser for Trump who is helping coordinate the former president’s legal strategy, has been at the center of the communications, four people familiar with the talks tell CNN.   

    Epshteyn frequently interacts with committee staff, counsel to the chairmen, members of the committee and aides to House leadership, sources said. Epshteyn’s role in the discussions range from being briefed on their work to the pace of the investigations. 

    Brian Jack, a former Trump administration official who joined McCarthy’s team in 2021 to lead his political operation, has also served as a crucial communicator between Trumpworld and the Speaker’s office, multiple source familiar his role said. Jack, who remains an adviser to McCarthy, recently began working on Trump’s 2024 reelection campaign.

    Jack is less involved in communications with the committees themselves, the sources said, but given his role in both McCarthy’s and Trump’s orbit, he’s often the go-to for advice on how to strategize efforts between the Hill and Trump’s team.

    Multiple sources familiar with the backchanneling say much of the talks are less about putting pressure on the committees – as members already know how to maximize their defense of Trump – and more about ensuring Trump’s team is on the same page as congressional Republicans.

    “Trump doesn’t have to tell House GOP committees to investigate, they already are doing investigations that play into Trump’s base and issues: Big Tech censorship, border, Hunter Biden’s business deals, and weaponization of the federal government,” a senior House GOP aide told CNN.

    A spokesperson for Trump did not respond to CNN’s requests for comment.

    Members on key investigative committees also keep in regular contact with Trump-aligned grassroots groups about investigations. Some of those groups have grown frustrated in recent weeks with how the House panels are conducting their work, including the time it took to hire individuals and get the investigative work started, multiple sources familiar with the matter said.

    GOP Rep. Dan Bishop, who serves on the weaponization subpanel, told CNN, “We’ve heard from outside groups a fair amount about ideas and recommendations.”

    Heritage Foundation president Dr. Kevin Roberts said in a statement to CNN, “Conservatives have high expectations for these committees to begin the process of de-weaponizing the federal government because the very fabric of our society is at stake.”

    A number of these Trump-affiliated groups have urged the GOP-led committees to move more aggressively against Biden.

    “We can’t have two years of hearings and then a report,” President of Judicial Watch Tom Fitton told CNN, referring to the pressure his group has placed on Congress to act immediately on the abuses of power that he sees happening, including “censoring Americans and trying to jail those who are perceived as political opponents.”

    Fitton said he has appreciated how House Republicans have updated the public on an “ongoing basis as opposed to just sitting on material” and added “if they don’t seem to be going in the right direction, there will be some pushback.”

    A number of other Trump-affiliated groups have urged GOP-led committees to move more aggressively against Biden. That includes the Conservative Partnership Institute, run by former GOP Sen. Jim DeMint and now home to Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows, and the Center for Renewing America, run by Trump’s former Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought.

    Staffers close to Jordan are in regular communication with outside groups, and to assuage the tensions that have arisen at times, they have explained that investigations take time to build, according to multiple sources familiar with the communications.

    “I’ve been raising holy hell because this weaponization committee has been structured to fail from Day One,” said Mike Davis, a former top aide to Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley and founder of the Article III Project, which advocates for “constitutionalist judges.”

    “We’ve known since November that we were going to have these committees,” said Davis. “And they’re just now starting to get their act together.”

    Davis added that he has spoken at length with many of the outside groups about their concerns – though he has recently praised Jordan for calling on Bragg to testify, calling it “a step in the right direction” and even tweeted a number of times in support of Jordan.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bidens host glamorous state dinner to cap off visit from South Korean president | CNN Politics

    Bidens host glamorous state dinner to cap off visit from South Korean president | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden capped South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s official state visit with a glamorous state dinner at the White House Wednesday night to celebrate the two nations’ 70-year alliance.

    “This visit is about reaffirming all that unites our two nations. It’s about a commitment to bear one another’s concerns and listen to each other’s dreams. It allows us to overcome every difficulty with great determination. That allows us to move further and faster in space, cyber, technology and all areas that matter most to our future,” Biden said in remarks at the beginning of the dinner.

    Biden wrapped his short speech with a toast: “To our partnership, to our people, to possibilities, and to the of the Republic of Korea and the United States will create together. May we do it together for another 170 years.”

    But Biden wasn’t the only leader who took the mic. Following a round of musical performances, his South Korean counterpart joined him on stage to give his own – a karaoke rendition of Don McLean’s “American Pie” – which received a standing ovation from the crowd.

    The US president and the first lady, who wore a mauve, long sheath evening gown by Reem Acra, had welcomed guests to a White House adorned with a photo-ready hand-painted silk screen with Korean and American symbolism – a magpie, a tiger and a hibiscus for South Korea, a bald eagle, bison, and roses for the US.

    Angelina Jolie and her son Maddox Jolie-Pitt, home design stars Chip and Joanna Gaines (who did not have any tips for the White House), Notre Dame football coach Marcus Freeman, and Olympic gold medalist snowboarder Chloe Kim were some of the noteworthy guests attending Wednesday’s fete.

    Also in attendance was Samantha Cohen, who was previously misidentified as the daughter of former Trump fixer Michael Cohen.

    The elaborate dinner is the result of weeks of careful diplomatic preparations, with each detail meticulously planned by a team of White House chefs, social staff, and protocol experts. Ties between the countries were front and center in the décor and on the menu, with guests dining under towering cherry blossom branches on food prepared by Korean American celebrity chef Edward Lee. The menu included crab cakes with a gochujang vinaigrette, braised beef short ribs, and a deconstructed banana split with lemon bar ice cream and a doenjang caramel.

    Top Biden officials arrived decked out in their formal wear for the occasion, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken and his wife, cabinet secretary Evan Ryan; Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, who was followed closely by what appeared to be the “nuclear football”; US Trade Representative Katherine Tai; US Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield; Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines; and press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who offered a twirl in her gown. Other key Biden advisers Bruce Reed, Steve Ricchetti, Jen O’Malley Dillon, and Liz Sherwood-Randall were also in attendance.

    Only one GOP official was spotted at the dinner: Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, who told reporters he would “absolutely” support House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s debt limit bill and that it is “time for the White House to negotiate.” He didn’t answer a question on whether he’d bring it up Wednesday night.

    Other state and local officials were on hand, including Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, Wilmington Mayor Michael Purzycki, Vermont Gov. Phil Scott, and San Antonio Mayor Ron Nirenberg, plus Democratic lawmakers including Reps. Ami Bera, Judy Chu, and Ted Lieu and Sen. Mazie Hirono in a traditional hanbok dress.

    Sen. Tammy Duckworth, who is a co-chair of Biden’s reelection campaign, told reporters she was “very honored” to serve in that capacity and found out when the president personally called her “earlier in the week and asked.”

    There were also key family members in attendance, including Biden’s brother Frank Biden, second gentleman Doug Emhoff’s brother Andrew Emhoff, and Vice President Kamala Harris’ niece Meena Harris.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer arrived to the black-tie event in a suit. “This is as tux-y as I get,” he said, shrugging.

    CORRECTION: This report has been updated to correctly identify Samantha Cohen, a guest at the state dinner.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Georgia state election board investigation clears Fulton County of 2020 election wrongdoing | CNN Politics

    Georgia state election board investigation clears Fulton County of 2020 election wrongdoing | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Georgia State Election Board dismissed the years-long investigation into alleged misconduct by Fulton County election workers during the 2020 election, saying it had found no evidence of conspiracy.

    “Over the course of the investigation, it was confirmed that numerous allegations made against the Fulton County Department of Registration and Elections, and specifically, two election workers, were false and unsubstantiated,” according to a press release from Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office.

    Former President Donald Trump and his campaign had targeted Fulton County election workers at State Farm Arena in Atlanta by baselessly claiming they were counting fake mail-in ballots during the 2020 election.

    The investigation – conducted by Georgia Secretary of State investigators, along with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and Federal Bureau of Investigation special agents – concluded that “there was no evidence of any type of fraud as alleged.”

    The attorney representingformer election workers Wandrea “Shaye” Moss and her mother Ruby Freeman said his clients had been “collateral damage” in an effort to subvert the presidential election.

    “This serves as further evidence that Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss – while doing their patriotic duty and serving their community – were simply collateral damage in a coordinated effort to undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election. Lies about Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss have been proven false over and over again, and those who perpetuate them should be held accountable,” attorney Von DuBose said.

    A team representing Trump presented heavily edited video before Georgia lawmakers in a December 2020 state Senate hearing that purportedly showed election workers producing “suitcases” of illegal ballots, according to court filings. That allegation was investigated by state election officials and quickly proven to be false.

    Tuesday’s announcement echoes that there was no wrongdoing committed by election officials in Fulton County.

    According to the Georgia Secretary of State’s office, “three law enforcement agencies reviewed the entire unedited video footage of the events in question surrounding [the two election workers] at State Farm Arena,” and that “all allegations made against [the two election workers] were unsubstantiated and found to have no merit.”

    “We remain diligent and dedicated to looking into real claims of voter fraud,” Raffensperger said. “We are glad the State Election Board finally put this issue to rest. False claims and knowingly false allegations made against these election workers have done tremendous harm. Election workers deserve our praise for being on the front lines.”

    Citing significant improvements in Fulton County elections, the State Election Board on Tuesday also unanimously voted to end an attempted state takeover of the county’s election board, a review that was implemented after lawmakers requested it under Georgia’s 2021 voting law.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: After getting target letter in 2020 election probe, Trump tells another election lie | CNN Politics

    Fact check: After getting target letter in 2020 election probe, Trump tells another election lie | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    On Tuesday morning, former President Donald Trump announced he had received a target letter, an indication he could soon be indicted, in special counsel Jack Smith’s criminal investigation into Trump’s lie-filled effort to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election.

    On Tuesday night, Trump went out of his way to tell another election lie.

    At a town hall event in Iowa, Fox host Sean Hannity gently suggested that Trump, now a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, should embrace early voting, mail-in voting and legal “ballot harvesting,” which is known less pejoratively as ballot collection.

    Hear what Trump advisers are telling him to do in order to avoid jail time

    Trump said he would do so, but he refused to offer an unequivocal endorsement. Instead, he added the kind of false claim he deployed in 2020.

    “I do,” he said of supporting the methods Hannity mentioned, “but I also have to say something else, ‘cause the one thing a lot of people, including you, don’t talk about: they also create phony ballots, and that’s a real problem. That’s my opinion. They create a lot of phony ballots.”

    Trump didn’t say who “they” were, but his claim is pure fiction.

    There was a tiny smattering of voter fraud in the 2020 election that was not even close to widespread enough to have changed the outcome in any state. While a minuscule number of people – some of them Trump supporters – voted illegally by doing such things as sending in a ballot for a deceased relative, voting twice or voting while prohibited because of a felony record, there was no sign that anyone created “a lot of phony ballots” in this election or any other recent federal election.

    David Becker, founder and executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, a nonpartisan nonprofit, called Trump’s claim “100% false.” Becker said in a message to CNN on Wednesday: “All ballots have a variety of security measures that make it nearly impossible for anyone to simply print them up and have them counted.”

    trump honig 0718 split

    Hear what ex-prosecutor thinks will happen next to Trump

    “Even if someone attempting fraud could produce an exact duplicate of a type of the hundreds of thousands of different ballot types in any national election, which is very unlikely, the ballot would still need to be returned by a registered voter who hadn’t otherwise voted, and the signature and/or driver’s license number would have to match what is on file,” Becker said

    “I talk to election officials all the time, all over the country, Rs and Ds, and in my 25 years working in this space I don’t recall hearing of any effort to create phony ballots in ANY election. It would be about the dumbest crime one could commit – zero chance it works and close to 100% chance you get caught and go to prison.”

    Trump previously delivered wild conspiratorial claims about unnamed people having supposedly “dumped” phony Biden votes into the 2020 totals in the middle of the night. Those stories, too, were wholly imaginary. Biden’s position improved late on Election Night in some states simply because ballots from legal mail-in voters and legal urban voters, both of which tended to favor Democrats, were counted as normal.

    A Trump campaign spokesperson did not respond to a CNN request on Tuesday night to explain what Trump was talking about this time.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Exclusive: National security officials tell special counsel Trump was repeatedly warned he did not have the authority to seize voting machines | CNN Politics

    Exclusive: National security officials tell special counsel Trump was repeatedly warned he did not have the authority to seize voting machines | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Former top national security officials have testified to a federal grand jury that they repeatedly told former President Donald Trump and his allies that the government didn’t have the authority to seize voting machines after the 2020 election, CNN has learned.

    Chad Wolf, the former acting Homeland Security secretary, and his former deputy Ken Cuccinelli were asked about discussions inside the administration around DHS seizing voting machines when they appeared before the grand jury earlier this year, according to three people familiar with the proceedings. Cuccinelli testified that he “made clear at all times” that DHS did not have the authority to take such a step, one of the sources said.

    Trump’s former national security adviser Robert O’Brien, in a closed-door interview with federal prosecutors earlier this year, also recounted conversations about seizing voting machines after the 2020 election, including during a heated Oval Office meeting that Trump participated in, according to a source familiar with the matter.

    Details about the secret grand jury testimony and O’Brien’s interview, neither of which have been previously reported, illustrate how special counsel Jack Smith and his prosecutors are looking at the various ways Trump tried to overturn his electoral loss despite some of his top officials advising him against the ideas.

    Now some of those same officials, including Wolf, Cuccinelli and O’Brien, as well as others who have so far refused to testify, may have to return to the grand jury in Washington, DC, to provide additional testimony after a series of pivotal court rulings that were revealed in recent weeks rejected Trump’s claims of executive privilege.

    Cuccinelli was spotted going back into the grand jury on Tuesday, April 4.

    Without that privilege shield, former officials must answer questions about their interactions and conversations with the former president, including what he was told about the lack of evidence for election fraud and the legal remedies he could pursue.

    That line of questioning goes to the heart of Smith’s challenge in any criminal case he might bring – to prove that Trump and his allies pursued their efforts despite knowing their fraud claims were false or their gambits weren’t lawful. To bring any potential criminal charges, prosecutors would have to overcome Trump’s public claim that he believed then and now that fraud really did cost him the election.

    “There’s lots of ways you can show that. But certainly one of them is if they were told by people who knew what they were talking about, that that there was no basis to take the actions,” said Adav Noti, an election law attorney who previously served in the US Attorney’s Office in Washington, DC, and at the Federal Election Commission’s general counsel’s office.

    “I would not want to be a defense lawyer trying to argue, ‘Well, yes, my client was told that, but he never really believed it,’” Noti said.

    Inside the Trump White House after the 2020 election, the push to seize voting machines eventually led to executive orders being drafted in mid-December of that year, directing the military and DHS to carry out the task despite Wolf and Cuccinelli telling Trump and his allies their agency did not have the authority to do so.

    Those orders, which cited debunked claims about voting system irregularities in Michigan and Georgia, were presented to Trump by his former national security adviser Michael Flynn and then-lawyer Sidney Powell during a now-infamous Oval Office meeting on December 18.

    Smith’s team has asked witnesses about that meeting in front of the grand jury and during closed-door interviews, multiple sources told CNN. Among them was O’Brien, who told the January 6 House select committee that he was patched into the December 18 meeting by phone after it had already devolved into a screaming match between Flynn, Powell and White House lawyers, according to a transcript of O’Brien’s deposition that was released by the panel.

    O’Brien told the committee that at some point someone asked him if there was evidence of election fraud or foreign interference in the voting machines. “And I said, ‘No, we’ve looked into that and there’s no evidence of it,” O’Brien said he responded. “I was told we didn’t have any evidence of any voter machine fraud in the 2020 election.”

    When asked about that meeting by federal prosecutors working for Smith, O’Brien reiterated that he made clear there was no evidence of foreign interference affecting voting machines, according to the source familiar with the matter.

    O’Brien met with prosecutors earlier this year after receiving a subpoena from Smith’s team and is among the Trump officials who could be called back to discuss conversations with Trump under the judge’s recent decision on executive privilege.

    Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, who personally told allies of the former president that there was no evidence of foreign election interference or widespread fraud that would justify taking extreme steps like seizing voting machines, must also testify, the judge decided.

    A spokesperson for Ratcliffe did not respond to CNN’s request for comment. Wolf declined to comment.

    Cuccinelli acknowledged to the January 6 committee last year that, after the election, he was asked several times by Trump’s then-attorney Rudy Giuliani, and on at least one occasion by Trump himself, if DHS had authority to seize voting machines. Wolf told the committee he was repeatedly asked the same question by then White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

    Giuliani, who was subpoenaed by the Justice Department before Smith took over the investigation, previously acknowledged to the January 6 committee that he participated in that December 18 Oval Office meeting and other conversations about having DHS and the military seize voting machines.

    Giuliani told congressional investigators that he and his team “tried many different ways to see if we could get the machines seized,” including options involving DHS, according to the transcript of his committee interview. Giuliani also acknowledged taking part in conversations – even before the Dec. 18 Oval Office meeting – where the idea of using the military to seize voting machines was raised.

    “I can remember the issue of the military coming up much earlier and constantly saying, ‘Will you forget about it, please? Just shut up. You want to go to jail? Just shut up. We’re not using the military,’” he added.

    Robert Costello, an attorney for Giuliani, told CNN that Giuliani has not received a subpoena from Smith. Costello said that in early November, Giuliani was subpoenaed by the DC US Attorney seeking documents and testimony. Costello says he told the Justice Department Giuliani couldn’t comply with the given deadlines because they were in the middle of disciplinary proceedings at the time. That was the last time Giuliani heard from DOJ, says Costello.

    “I haven’t heard a word since November 2022,” Costello told CNN on March 30.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Whistleblowers say IRS recommended far more charges, including felonies, against Hunter Biden | CNN Politics

    Whistleblowers say IRS recommended far more charges, including felonies, against Hunter Biden | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Two whistleblowers told Congress that IRS investigators recommended charging Hunter Biden with attempted tax evasion and other felonies, which are far more serious crimes than what the president’s son has agreed to plead guilty to, according to transcripts of their private interviews with lawmakers.

    The IRS whistleblowers said the recommendation called for Hunter Biden to be charged with tax evasion and filing a false tax return – both felonies – for 2014, 2018 and 2019. The IRS also recommended that prosecutors charge him with failing to pay taxes on time, a misdemeanor, for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, according to the transcripts, which were released Thursday by House Republicans.

    It appears that this 11-count charging recommendation also had the backing of some Justice Department prosecutors, but not from more senior attorneys, according to documents that the whistleblowers provided to House investigators.

    In a deal with prosecutors announced earlier this week, Hunter Biden is pleading guilty to just two tax misdemeanors.

    The allegations come from Gary Shapley, a 14-year IRS veteran, who oversaw parts of the Hunter Biden criminal probe, and an unnamed IRS agent who was on the case nearly from its inception. Shapley approached Congress this year with information that he claimed showed political interference in the investigation. He and the entire IRS team were later removed from the probe.

    “I am alleging, with evidence, that DOJ provided preferential treatment, slow-walked the investigation, did nothing to avoid obvious conflicts of interest in this investigation,” Shapley told lawmakers.

    David Weiss, the Trump-appointed US attorney in Delaware who oversaw the Hunter Biden criminal probe, eventually reached a plea deal where the president’s son will plead guilty to two misdemeanors for failing to pay taxes on time. The plea agreement will also resolve a separate felony gun charge, if Hunter Biden abides by certain court-imposed conditions for a period of time.

    Hunter Biden isn’t pleading guilty to any felonies, and he wasn’t charged with any tax felonies. CNN reported that prosecutors are expected to recommend no jail time. He is scheduled to appear in federal court in Delaware on July 26.

    It isn’t uncommon for there to be internal disagreements among investigators over which charges to file against the target of an investigation, much like the disagreements that the IRS whistleblowers described. CNN reported last year that some FBI and IRS investigators were at odds with other Justice Department officials over the strength of the case, and that there were discussions over which types of charges were appropriate and whether further investigation was needed.

    Sources familiar with the criminal probe told CNN in April that prosecutors were still actively weighing a felony tax charge against Hunter Biden. And it is common for prosecutors to strike deals with defendants where they plead guilty to a small subset of the possible charges they could’ve faced.

    The Justice Department probe into Hunter Biden was opened in November 2018, and was codenamed “Sportsman.” According to Shapley’s testimony, federal investigators knew as early as June 2021 that there were potential venue-related issues with charging Hunter Biden in Delaware. Under federal law, charges must be brought in the jurisdiction where the alleged crimes occurred.

    If the potential charges couldn’t be brought in Delaware, then Weiss would need help from his fellow US attorneys. He looked to Washington, DC, where some of Hunter Biden’s tax returns were prepared, and the Central District of California, which includes the Los Angeles area where Hunter Biden lives.

    But Shapley told the committee that the US attorneys in both districts wouldn’t seek an indictment.

    A second whistleblower, an IRS case agent who also testified to the committee but hasn’t been publicly identified, also told lawmakers that this is what happened. He agreed that Weiss was “was told no” when he tried to get the cooperation of the US attorneys in in DC and Los Angeles, who are Biden appointees.

    Hunter Biden’s eventual plea agreement was filed in Weiss’ jurisdiction, in Delaware.

    Shapley contends in his interview that Attorney General Merrick Garland was not truthful when he told Congress that Weiss had full authority on the investigation.

    Shapley recounted a meeting on October 7, 2022, where, according to Shapley’s notes memorializing the meeting, Weiss said, “He is not the deciding person on whether charges are filed” against Hunter Biden. This undermines what Weiss and Garland have publicly said about Weiss’ independence on the matter.

    Shapley also testified to committee investigators that it was during this October 2022 meeting that he learned for the first time that Weiss had requested to be named as a special counsel, but was denied.

    In testimony to Congress in March, Garland said Weiss was advised “he is not to be denied anything he needs.”

    Regarding the claims of political interference with the Hunter Biden criminal probe, Weiss told House Republicans in a recent letter that Garland granted him “ultimate authority over this matter, including responsibility for deciding where, when, and whether to file charges.”

    After the transcripts were released Thursday, spokespeople for the US attorney’s offices in DC and Los Angeles issued near-identical statements reiterating that Weiss “was given full authority to bring charges in any jurisdiction he deemed appropriate.” The Justice Department echoed those comments in a statement saying Weiss “needs no further approval” to bring charges wherever he wants.

    The whistleblowers also allege that at multiple key junctures, investigators were thwarted in their efforts because prosecutors were concerned about interfering in the 2020 presidential election.

    In 2020, IRS investigators sought to conduct search warrants and take other overt steps. But according to Shapley, several weeks before the election, in September 2020, a Justice Department prosecutor questioned the optics of searching Hunter Biden’s residence and Joe Biden’s guest home.

    Later that year, other planned searches were delayed because then-President Donald Trump was refusing to concede and was continuing to contest the results.

    Republicans have slammed the plea agreement Hunter Biden struck as a “sweetheart deal,” and said it amounted to “a slap on the wrist.”

    House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith said earlier Thursday that the transcripts reveal “credible whistleblower testimony alleging misconduct and abuse” at the Justice Department that “resulted in preferential treatment for the president’s son.”

    The Missouri Republican highlighted the whistleblowers’ allegations that the Justice Department “overstepped” in their efforts to intervene in the Hunter Biden criminal probe.

    “The testimony … details a lack of US attorney independence, recurring unjustified delays, unusual actions outside the normal course of any investigation, a lack of transparency across the investigation and prosecution teams, and bullying and threats from the defense counsel,” Smith said.

    Democrats on the committee said the transcripts were “a premature and incomplete record” of what happened with the Hunter Biden probe and accused the GOP of a “stunning abuse of power.”

    Hunter Biden’s lawyer pushed back in a statement Friday against the whistleblowers claims, saying it was “preposterous and deeply irresponsible” to suggest that federal investigators “cut my client any slack” during their “extensive” five-year probe.

    “A close examination of the document released publicly yesterday by a very biased individual raises serious questions over whether it is what he claims it to be,” attorney Chris Clark said. “It is dangerously misleading to make any conclusions or inferences based on this document.”

    Shapley, the IRS supervisor-turned-whistleblower, told House lawmakers that Justice Department prosecutors denied requests to look into messages allegedly from Hunter Biden where he used his father as leverage to pressure a Chinese company into paying him.

    “I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled,” according to a document Shapley gave to Congress, which quotes from texts that are allegedly from Hunter Biden to the CEO of a Chinese fund management company.

    The message continues: “Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand. And now means tonight.” The message goes onto say, “I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”

    The second, unnamed IRS whistleblower also testified to lawmakers about this alleged WhatsApp message, saying prosecutors questioned whether they could be sure Hunter Biden was telling the truth that his father was actually in the room in the messages. The unnamed whistleblower testified that they did not know whether the FBI investigated the message.

    Shapley told House investigators that a Justice Department attorney insisted that the FBI not ask directly about Joe Biden when doing interviews. But the FBI did manage to ask one key witness about Joe Biden, and Shapley said the witness told investigators that some suggestions of the president’s involvement were overstated.

    An email sent among business partners of Hunter Biden said an equity stake should be held “for the big guy,” an apparent reference to Joe Biden, who was vice president at the time. But one of the associates told the FBI that it was probably just “wishful thinking or maybe he was just projecting” that Joe Biden would get involved if he did not run for president in 2016.

    Joe Biden has repeatedly denied having any involvement in his son’s overseas business dealings, where he made millions of dollars from China, Ukraine and other countries. House Republicans have used their oversight probes to look for evidence that Joe Biden was actually involved.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • $35 political contribution to Democrats raises fresh scrutiny of Judge Merchan | CNN Politics

    $35 political contribution to Democrats raises fresh scrutiny of Judge Merchan | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Judge Juan Merchan, the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s criminal case in New York, donated $35 in political contributions to Democrats in 2020, including a $15 contribution to the campaign of Trump’s opponent, President Joe Biden.

    The political donations are undoubtedly small, but they nevertheless raise questions about Merchan’s impartiality as he has come under attack by the former president as a “Trump-hating judge.”

    “While the amounts here are minimal, it’s surprising that a sitting judge would make political donations of any size to a partisan candidate or cause,” said Elie Honig, a senior CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor.

    According to federal election records, Merchan made the three donations in July 2020 through ActBlue, an online fundraising platform for Democratic candidates and causes.

    Merchan contributed $15 earmarked for the Biden campaign, and made two $10 contributions, one earmarked to the Progressive Turnout Project, a voter outreach organization, and another to Stop Republicans, a subsidiary of the Progressive Turnout Project.

    Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics professor at New York University, said that New York, like most US jurisdictions, has adopted language from the American Bar Association Model Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judges from “soliciting funds for, paying an assessment to, or making a contribution to a political organization or candidate.”

    “The contribution to Biden and possibly the one to ‘Stop Republicans’ would be forbidden unless there is some other explanation that would allow them,” Gillers said.

    But Gillers said that the donation “would be viewed as trivial, especially given the small sums.” He said if a complaint was made, the state’s Commission on Judicial Conduct would remind the judge of the rules.

    Asked if this could be grounds for a legal challenge or recusal, Gillers said, “Absolutely not. This does not come anywhere near the kind of proof required for recusal.”

    Trump has been attacking Merchan and his family, including his daughter, whose political consulting firm did work for the Biden campaign and now-Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign. Trump has also complained about Merchan for presiding over the case against the Trump Organization, which was convicted on tax fraud charges late last year.

    CNN’s John Miller reports that the New York Police Department is tracking numerous threats against Merchan but has not seen specific, credible threats.

    An attorney for Trump on Thursday condemned those making threats against Merchan. Joe Tacopina, one of the lawyers representing Trump in the case, told CNN the threats were “appalling and we condemn anyone participating in such behavior.”

    Trump lawyer Susan Necheles declined to comment on the donations. But the former president’s political allies are pointing to the contributions to argue the judge should remove himself from the case.

    “He donated to Joe Biden’s campaign. He should get off this case. And this judge has a history, with President Trump, in prior cases,” Mike Davis, a former Republican chief counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee and founder of a conservative judicial advocacy group, told CNN’s Pamela Brown. “He finds out that this judge actually donated to Biden’s campaign. So, that at least raises the appearance of impartiality – the appearance that this judge could not be impartial against President Trump.”

    Karen Friedman Agnifilo, a CNN legal analyst and former prosecutor in the Manhattan district attorney’s office, said that the political donations amount to an “unforced error” for Merchan.

    “Judge Merchan has a reputation of being a fair down the middle judge, however, donating to a defendant’s political rival can cause the appearance of a conflict, even where there is none, and creates an unforced error in this case involving Trump,” she said.

    A search of federal election databases does not turn up any additional political contributions for Merchan. New York state campaign finance records show that he gave a $99 contribution in 2002 to Rolando Acosta, who has served as a New York state appeals court judge since 2017.

    A source familiar with the court system said that the court administration doesn’t monitor judges’ personal affairs. The decision to recuse from the case would be up to Merchan himself.

    If he doesn’t, however, Trump’s lawyers could appeal the matter to a New York state appeals court.

    A spokesperson for the courts said, “We decline to comment on pending cases.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The 10 Senate seats most likely to flip in 2024 | CNN Politics

    The 10 Senate seats most likely to flip in 2024 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Opportunity is ripe for Republicans to win back the Senate next year – if they can land the candidates to pull it off.

    The GOP needs a net gain of one or two seats to flip the chamber, depending on which party wins the White House in 2024, and it’s Democrats who are defending the tougher seats. Democrats hold seven of the 10 seats that CNN ranks as most likely to flip party control next year – and the top three are all in states former President Donald Trump carried twice.

    But this spring’s recruitment season, coming on the heels of a midterm cycle marred by problematic GOP candidates, will likely go a long way toward determining how competitive the Senate map is next year.

    National Republicans got a top pick last week, with Gov. Jim Justice announcing his Senate bid in West Virginia – the seat most likely to flip party control in 2024. (Rankings are based on CNN’s reporting, fundraising figures and historical data about how states and candidates have performed.) But Justice appears headed for a contentious and expensive primary. And in many other top races, the GOP hasn’t yet landed any major candidates.

    Democrats, meanwhile, are thankful that most of their vulnerable incumbents are running for reelection, while a high-profile House member has largely cleared the field for one of their open Senate seats.

    Pollster asked Democrats who they like for 2024. Here’s what he found

    The unknown remains West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin. Responding to Justice’s candidacy, Manchin – who has said he’ll decide about running by the end of the year – had this to say to CNN about a potentially messy GOP primary: “Let the games begin.”

    The anti-tax Club for Growth’s political arm has already committed to spending $10 million to back West Virginia Rep. Alex Mooney in the GOP primary. And tensions between the club, which has turned against Trump, and more establishment Republicans could become a feature of several top Senate races this cycle, especially with the National Republican Senatorial Committee weighing more aggressive involvement in primaries to weed out candidates it doesn’t think can win general elections.

    In the 2022 cycle, most of Trump’s handpicked candidates in swing states stumbled in the general election. But the former president picked up a key endorsement this week from NRSC Chair Steve Daines. The Montana Republican has stayed close with Trump, CNN has previously reported, in a bid to ensure he’s aligned with leadership.

    Democrats defending tough seats have previously used GOP primaries to their advantage. Manchin survived in 2018 in part because his opponent was state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey. That wasn’t an accident. Democrats had spent big attacking one of his primary opponents to keep him out of the general election.

    Last year’s midterms underscored that candidates really do matter after Republicans failed to harness favorable national winds in some key races. In a presidential year, the national environment is likely to loom large, especially with battleground states hosting key Senate races. It will also test whether some of the last remaining senators who represent states that back the opposite parties’ presidential nominees can hold on.

    President Joe Biden, who carried half of the states on this list in 2020, made official last week that he’s running for reelection. The GOP presidential field is slowly growing, with Trump still dominating most primary polling. It’s too early to know, however, what next year’s race for the White House will look like or which issues, whether it’s abortion or crime or the economy, will resonate.

    So for now, the parties are focused on what they can control: candidates. Even though the 2024 map is stacked in their favor, Republicans can’t win with nobody. But there’s plenty of time for would-be senators to get into these races. Some filing deadlines – in Arizona, for example – aren’t for nearly another year. And there’s an argument to be made that well-funded or high-profile names have no reason to get in early.

    Here’s where the Senate map stands 18 months from Election Day.

    Incumbent: Democrat Joe Manchin

    joe manchin 2024 senate race

    Sen. Joe Manchin isn’t one to shy away from attention – and he’s getting plenty of it by keeping everyone guessing about his reelection plans. Assuming he runs, Democrats will have a fighting chance to defend this seat in a state Trump carried by 39 points in 2020. The senator has repeatedly broken with the White House – on Biden’s first veto and the White House’s debt ceiling stance, for example.

    Without Manchin, Democrats know West Virginia is all but lost. Manchin raised only $371,000 in this year’s first fundraising quarter, which ended March 31, and Republicans are already attacking him, with One Nation – the issue advocacy group aligned with Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell – launching an ad campaign tying him to the Inflation Reduction Act. (The senator went on Fox News last week and threatened to back a repeal of his own bill.) Still, Manchin has nearly $10 million in the bank, as well as outside cover from Democratic-allied groups.

    Republicans will likely be spending quite a lot of time and money attacking each other in the primary. The Club for Growth’s political arm is backing House Freedom Caucus member Alex Mooney, while Gov. Jim Justice will likely have backup from GOP party leaders. The wealthy governor, who was first elected as a Democrat before switching parties in 2017, has high name ID and is close with Trump. Mooney also has Trumpian credentials, having won a member-on-member House primary last year with the former president’s endorsement. The congressman is already attacking the governor in an ad as “Liberal Jim Justice,” using imagery of his opponent in a face mask.

    Incumbent: Democrat Jon Tester

    jon tester 2024 senate race

    Democrats got welcome news with Sen. Jon Tester’s announcement that he’s running for a fourth term – and that he raised $5 million in the first quarter (more than a million of which came from small-dollar donors). Tester is running in Trump country – Montana backed the former president by 16 points in 2020 – but like Manchin he has a well-established brand to draw on, which includes breaking with Biden when he needs to. (Tester also voted for a GOP resolution to roll back a Biden administration ESG investing rule, which prompted the president’s first veto.) The GOP field is still taking shape. Republicans are interested in retired Navy SEAL Tim Sheehy, a businessman with the potential to self-fund, and state Attorney General Austin Knudsen.

    Another potential candidate is Rep. Matt Rosendale, who lost to Tester in 2018 after winning the GOP nomination with the help of the Club for Growth, which has recently been at odds with Trump. Rosendale made a telling appearance at Mar-a-Lago in April for Trump’s post-indictment speech after snubbing the former president’s pick for House speaker in January when he didn’t back Kevin McCarthy. The congressman hasn’t said yet whether he’s running, but he raised only about $127,000 in the first quarter of the year – well short of what he’d need for a competitive Senate bid.

    Incumbent: Democrat Sherrod Brown

    sherrod brown 2024 senate race

    Sen. Sherrod Brown is the only Democrat to win a nonjudicial statewide race in Ohio over the past decade, so the big question for 2024 is whether he can defy expectations again in his red-trending state. Trump has twice carried the Buckeye State by 8 points, and his handpicked candidate, JD Vance, defeated Democrat Tim Ryan by about 6 points in last year’s Senate race despite the Republican’s campaign struggles.

    Brown is much more of an institution in Ohio than Ryan, and he’s built up relationships not just among White working-class communities but urban centers too. He raised $3.6 million in the first quarter of the year. Two wealthy Republicans are in the race to try to take him on – businessman Bernie Moreno, whom Trump has praised, and state Sen. Matt Dolan, whose family owns the Cleveland Guardians baseball team. Both men ran for Senate in 2022, but Moreno dropped out ahead of the primary. Dolan, who ran as a moderate conservative less than enthralled with Trump and his election lies, finished third in a crowded field. Rep. Warren Davidson and Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose could also jump into this year’s GOP race.

    Incumbent: Independent Kyrsten Sinema

    kyrsten sinema 2024 senate race

    Arizona has the potential to be one of the most interesting races this cycle, but a lot depends on whether Democratic-turned-independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema runs for reelection. Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego, who’s running to her left, outraised the incumbent $3.8 million to $2.1 million in the first quarter. Sinema has a clear cash-on-hand advantage – nearly $10 million to Gallego’s $2.7 million.

    Earlier this month, Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb became the first major Republican to enter the race, leaning into a law enforcement message. But the filing deadline isn’t until next April, so there’s still plenty of time for others to jump in. Some Republicans are anxious about the potential entry of Kari Lake, last year’s losing gubernatorial nominee, who still maintains she won. She’d likely be popular with the base in a state that’s become a hotbed of election denialism, but her candidacy could pose a serious risk for the party in a general election. The NRSC recently pushed her to move away from election conspiracy theories, CNN reported.

    Former attorney general nominee Abe Hamadeh and Karrin Taylor Robson, who lost last year’s gubernatorial primary to Lake, have also met with NRSC officials, CNN reported. Also in the mix could be Republican businessman Jim Lamon, who lost the party nod for the state’s other Senate seat last year. Republicans would like to see Sinema run because she and Gallego would likely split the vote on the left. But they’ve got their work cut out from them in landing a candidate who can appeal to the GOP base without alienating the general electorate in a state that narrowly backed Biden in 2020.

    Incumbent: Democrat Jacky Rosen

    jacky rosen 2024 senate race

    Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen is, as expected, running for reelection, touting her middle-class roots and bipartisan legislative wins in an announcement video in April. “Nevada is always a battleground,” the senator says – a reminder that Democrats don’t want to take this state for granted. Rosen was first elected in 2018 – a midterm year – by 5 points. Last fall, her Democratic colleague, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, defeated former state Attorney General Adam Laxalt by less than a point.

    The state tends to get bluer in presidential years, but Biden and Hillary Clinton both carried it only by about 2 points. Republicans don’t yet have a major name in the race, but they’re watching two defeated candidates from last year – Army veteran Sam Brown, who lost the GOP Senate nod, and attorney April Becker, who lost a bid for a redrawn House seat.

    Incumbent: Democrat Tammy Baldwin

    tammy baldwin 2024 senate race

    Sen. Tammy Baldwin announced earlier this month that she’s running for a third term, giving Democrats an automatic advantage for now over Republicans, who have no declared candidates in this perennial battleground state. Baldwin raised $2.1 million in the first quarter, ending with nearly $4 million in the bank.

    Establishment Republicans have expressed strong interest in Rep. Mike Gallagher. Even Rep. Tom Tiffany, who recently bought Senate web domain names, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he thought his fellow congressman should run. But there’s little sign that Gallagher, the chair of the new House select committee on the Chinese Communist Party, is interested. Two businessmen with the ability to tap into or raise significant resources could be in the mix – Eric Hovde, who lost the GOP Senate nomination in 2012, and Scott Mayer. And then there’s controversial former Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, who could draw support in a GOP primary but seriously complicate a general election for Republicans.

    Democrats are feeling good about the recent state Supreme Court election, which the Democratic-backed candidate won by 10 points, flipping control of the bench to liberals. Still, the competitiveness of this state – which Biden carried by about half a point after Trump had won it by a similar margin four years earlier – shouldn’t be underestimated.

    Incumbent: Democrat Debbie Stabenow (retiring)

    debbie stabenow 2024 senate race

    Rep. Elissa Slotkin has mostly cleared the Democratic field of major rivals in the race to succeed retiring Democrat Debbie Stabenow in another Midwestern battleground state. A few less-known names are in, and actor Hill Harper – of “The Good Doctor” and “CSI: NY” – could throw his hat in the Democratic ring, but it’ll be hard to rival Slotkin’s fundraising. She brought in about $3 million in the first quarter.

    On the GOP side, State Board of Education member Nikki Snyder announced her campaign in mid-February, but she hadn’t raised much money by the end of the first quarter. Former Rep. Peter Meijer could run, but his vote to impeach Trump would likely kill his prospects of winning the nomination – unless it were a heavily splintered primary field. Other possible GOP names include businessman Kevin Rinke and former Detroit Police Chief James Craig, who finished second and sixth, respectively, in last year’s gubernatorial primary. (Craig was a write-in candidate after failing to make the ballot because of invalid signatures.)

    Michigan Democrats did well last year – retaining the top three executive offices and flipping the state legislature – and they feel optimistic about their chances in the state in a presidential year. Still, Biden only won the state by less than 3 points. And while Slotkin has experience winning tough races, a lot may depend on whom the GOP nominates and which way the national winds are blowing next year.

    Incumbent: Democrat Bob Casey

    bob casey 2024 senate race

    Democrats breathed another sigh of relief when Sen. Bob Casey, who disclosed a prostate cancer diagnosis earlier this year, announced that he was running for a fourth term. A former state auditor general and treasurer and the son of a two-term governor, Casey is well known in the Keystone State. He most recently won reelection by 13 points against a hard-line congressman who had tied himself closely to Trump.

    This year, national Republicans are eyeing former hedge fund executive Dave McCormick, who lost the GOP nomination for Senate last year, as a top-tier recruit. Upon Casey’s reelection announcement, McCormick immediately attacked him, saying in a statement that a vote for Casey was “a vote for Biden and [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer.” The wealthy Republican has been on tour promoting his new book, “Superpower in Peril: A Battle Plan to Renew America,” and has hired staff but has yet to launch a campaign.

    And consternation remains among national Republicans that losing 2022 gubernatorial nominee Doug Mastriano could jump into the race. An election denier who lost by 15 points last fall, Mastriano could jeopardize the race for Republicans. His candidacy would likely inspire a concerted effort by national Republicans to defeat him in the primary.

    Incumbent: Republican Ted Cruz

    ted cruz 2024 senate race

    Texas and Florida – both in a far different category of competitiveness compared with the rest of the states on this list – are trading places this month. GOP Sen. Ted Cruz is running for reelection after passing on another presidential bid. He raised $1.3 million in the first quarter – relatively little for a massive, expensive state – and ended March with $3.3 million in the bank. He’s proved to be a compelling boogeyman for the left, with Democrat Beto O’Rourke raising millions to try to unseat him in 2018, ultimately coming up less than 3 points short.

    After a gubernatorial loss last year, O’Rourke hasn’t made any noise about this race. But Democratic Rep. Colin Allred, who raised about half a million dollars in the first quarter, is looking at it. State Sen. Roland Gutierrez, who represents Uvalde, is also weighing a bid, the San Antonio Express-News reported. Still, unseating Cruz in a state Trump won by nearly 6 points in 2020 will be a tall order.

    Incumbent: Republican Rick Scott

    rick scott 2024 senate race

    Sen. Rick Scott has a history of close elections – he was first elected in 2018 by a fraction of a point following two prior narrow wins for governor. But GOP Sen. Marco Rubio and Gov. Ron DeSantis won commanding victories last fall, suggesting the state is getting redder.

    Democrats don’t seem to have a major candidate as yet, but whoever opposes Scott is likely to use his controversial policy proposal – released last year during his NRSC chairmanship – against him. Scott’s plan had originally proposed sunsetting all federal programs every five years, but the senator later added a carve-out for Medicare and Social Security amid backlash from his own party. His most immediate headache could come in the form of intraparty attacks along those lines – and others.

    Attorney Keith Gross has launched a primary challenge, alluding in his announcement video to Scott’s tenure as the head of a hospital chain company that the Justice Department investigated for health care fraud. While the company pleaded guilty to fraudulent Medicare billing, among other things, and paid $1.7 billion in fines, Scott wasn’t charged with a crime. It’s unclear how much of his own money Gross, who previously ran for office in Georgia as a Democrat, would put into a campaign.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden vs. Trump: The 2024 race a historic number of Americans don’t want | CNN Politics

    Biden vs. Trump: The 2024 race a historic number of Americans don’t want | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The 2024 presidential primaries are in full swing. President Joe Biden is the overhelming favorite for the Democratic nomination. Former President Donald Trump remains the clear front-runner for the Republican nod.

    This puts a lot of Americans in a position they don’t want to be in: A historically large share of them do not like either man at this point.

    A CNN/SSRS poll from earlier this month found that more Americans viewed neither Biden nor Trump favorably than those who held favorable views of either man. A plurality (36%) viewed neither candidate favorably, while 33% had a favorable view of Trump and 32% for Biden. Constraining ourselves to registered voters, 31% viewed neither Biden nor Trump favorably.

    When you zoom in on those who were unfavorably inclined toward Biden and Trump (i.e., putting aside those who were unsure or were neutral), 22% of adults and 21% of registered voters had an unfavorable view of both men.

    To put that in perspective, consider the end of the 2016 presidential election. That race (between Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton) is the benchmark election for candidate unlikability. It is the only one on record in which both candidates were disliked by more Americans than liked on Election Day.

    The final pre-election CNN poll of that campaign found that 16% of registered voters held an unfavorable view of both Trump and Clinton. When you add in those who were neutral or didn’t have an opinion, 19% viewed neither nominee favorably.

    If the numbers we’re seeing now in CNN polling continue through the election, more Americans will dislike both major party nominees for president than ever before.

    Usually, most Americans like at least one of the candidates running for president. That has been the norm for most of polling history.

    Just 5% of voters said they had an unfavorable view of both Biden and Trump in the final 2020 CNN poll. An even smaller 3% of voters said they had an unfavorable view of Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney in the final CNN poll of the 2012 campaign.

    It’s worth noting, of course, that we’re still well more than a year out from the 2024 election. Things can change.

    But frequently, they change for the worse as more negative ads fly.

    When you examine the polling at this point in the 2016 campaign, the current 2024 polling is even more ahistorical.

    While Trump’s favorable rating among registered voters this month nearly equaled his favorable rating in CNN’s July 2015 poll (34%), Clinton’s stood at 44% in the 2015 survey. Her unfavorable rating was 49%. Biden’s favorable rating in CNN’s latest poll was 32% among adults and 35% among registered voters. His unfavorable figure was 56% among both groups.

    Neither Trump nor Biden are anywhere near positive territory this cycle, and we’re not talking about one outlier poll.

    The average of all polling so far indicates that both men have favorable ratings below 40% with unfavorable ratings into the mid-50s.

    CNN’s May poll showed that 23% of voters didn’t hold a favorable view of either candidate. In each of Quinnipiac University’s last three polls among registered voters, somewhere between 22% and 28% of the electorate viewed neither candidate favorably. The average was 24%.

    The closest anyone came to having a favorable rating above an unfavorable rating was Biden in Quinnipiac’s June poll. His favorable rating was 42% to an unfavorable rating of 54%.

    So what happens if Biden and Trump continue to be this unpopular? Maybe primary voters decide they want to nominate someone else for president. But Biden doesn’t have a primary competitor with a favorable rating as close to his among Democrats. Trump’s most formidable challenger at this point, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, also has a net unfavorable rating among the general electorate.

    If Biden and Trump make it to the general election with such low ratings, it could open the door for a third-party candidate. Ross Perot’s 1992 independent bid for the White House got major tailwinds early in that election cycle because both Democratic challenger Bill Clinton and Republican incumbent George H.W. Bush had low favorable ratings.

    (Bill Clinton’s favorable rating in 1992 improved after winning his party nomination.)

    Likewise, Hillary Clinton and Trump’s low favorable ratings in 2016 allowed the cumulative share of the vote outside the two major parties to eclipse 5% for the only time in the past 25 years.

    The bottom line is that there may be repercussions if both parties put up such unpopular nominees. A number of voters may be unwilling to settle for a major-party candidate they dislike.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump lawyer says there’s ‘no need’ to appear before grand jury in special counsel’s 2020 election probe | CNN Politics

    Trump lawyer says there’s ‘no need’ to appear before grand jury in special counsel’s 2020 election probe | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    John Lauro, the recent addition to former President Donald Trump’s legal team, told Fox News on Friday there is no reason for the former president to appear before a federal grand jury investigating the 2020 election aftermath, adding that Trump “did absolutely nothing wrong.”

    Earlier this week, Trump said he received a letter from special counsel Jack Smith informing him that he’s a target of the investigation and inviting him to appear before the grand jury. CNN previously reported that Trump’s team believed they had until Thursday to respond.

    The grand jury did not convene on Friday after meeting on Thursday.

    “There’s no need to appear in front of any grand jury right now,” Lauro said. “President Trump did absolutely nothing wrong. He’s done nothing criminal.”

    “The bottom line is that the special prosecutor, which is really the Biden Justice Department, is after President Trump and that’s the focus,” Lauro told Fox News.

    Lauro also echoed claims made by Trump and his GOP allies that the Justice Department is being politicized to target a political opponent and said that Trump merely asked for an audit in the wake of the 2020 election.

    “The only thing that President Trump asked is a pause in the counting so those seven contested states could either re-audit or recertify,” Lauro said of Trump’s actions following his election loss. “I’ve never heard of anyone get indicted for asking for an audit.”

    The target letter cites three statutes that Trump could be charged with: pertaining to deprivation of rights; conspiracy to commit an offense against or defraud the United States; and tampering with a witness, according to multiple news outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, that cited a person familiar with the matter.

    The Justice Department has been investigating possible violations of the law around conspiracy and obstruction of the congressional proceeding on January 6, 2021, which is part of the witness tampering law, CNN previously reported following a Justice Department search of a Trump administration adviser’s home.

    Trump has already been indicted twice this year. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged the former president on 34 counts of falsifying business records in March, and Smith charged Trump on 37 counts in the classified documents investigation last month. Trump pleaded not guilty in both cases.

    Justice Department regulations allow for prosecutors to notify subjects of an investigation that they have become a target. Often a notification that a person is a target is a strong sign an indictment could follow, but it is possible the recipient is not ultimately charged.

    Trump addressed the target letter on Tuesday at a Fox News town hall in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, saying that Smith’s probe amounts to “election interference” and calling it a “disgrace.” His campaign is already fundraising off of the target letter.

    Lauro told Fox News that if he appears in court on Trump’s behalf, he’ll be representing “the sovereign citizens of this country who deserve to hear the truth.” The attorney also said he would request that cameras be allowed in the courtroom in Washington, DC, following any indictment of the president there.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How the ‘independent state legislature’ theory, now rejected by SCOTUS, fueled chaos in 2020 and could influence 2024 | CNN Politics

    How the ‘independent state legislature’ theory, now rejected by SCOTUS, fueled chaos in 2020 and could influence 2024 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a controversial legal theory that would’ve given partisan state lawmakers nearly unchecked power over US elections.

    Former President Donald Trump and his staunch allies used the now-rejected “independent state legislature” theory to justify their attempts to overturn the 2020 election. And many Trump critics warned that, without action from the Supreme Court, these same vulnerabilities would threaten the 2024 election.

    In a case about North Carolina redistricting, the Supreme Court ruled that state courts and other state entities can review laws passed by state legislatures setting rules for federal elections. The court’s majority – a coalition of three conservatives with the three-justice liberal bloc – rejected the GOP-backed theory that elected politicians have unreviewable authority to set election rules.

    One of the reasons Republicans might want to shift power to state legislatures is because their party has a structural advantage on that front. Republicans currently control the legislatures in four states that Joe Biden carried in 2020 – Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin and New Hampshire – and they control two additional statehouses in the battleground states of North Carolina and Florida.

    States across the country adjusted their election rules in 2020, while the Covid-19 pandemic was raging and before vaccines were available. The changes included adding dropboxes in populated areas and easing the rules for when mail-in ballots can be accepted, among other things.

    Many of these tweaks were implemented by state courts, governors, secretaries of state and other state election administrators. But according to the “independent state legislature” theory, these rule changes were illegal, because they didn’t come directly from the state legislature.

    This is what formed the basis of many of Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

    Trump allies, like right-wing lawyer John Eastman, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, used this theory to argue Biden’s victories in key states were illegitimate because they “unlawfully” conducted elections or “failed to follow their own laws.”

    This legal theory fueled their unsuccessful lawsuits seeking to nullify millions of votes, and their attempt to reject Biden’s electors when Congress tallied the electoral votes on January 6, 2021.

    Still, after the 2020 debacle, conservative legal figures kept up the fight, perhaps with an eye toward 2024. Top Republicans, including Trump and House GOP leaders, continued to peddle the theory. Eastman filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in the North Carolina case, urging the justices to give state legislatures full control over elections.

    “Federal courts overwhelmingly rejected those Republican arguments before and after the 2020 elections, and the Supreme Court today put the issue to bed,” said R. Stanton Jones, a lawyer who argued against the theory when the case was before the North Carolina Supreme Court.

    The high court’s ruling will have a significant impact on the 2024 presidential election, because it closes off some legal pathways for Trump to once again undermine the electoral process.

    For starters, there is now Supreme Court precedent rejecting some of the more maximalist but unsettled theories that have been championed by Eastman and other GOP lawyers. (Never mind the fact that amid the 2020 chaos, even Eastman admitted that his harebrained legal proposals would be unanimously rejected by the Supreme Court, as CNN recently reported.)

    But the somewhat limited ruling leaves plenty of avenues for future election-related challenges, regarding how districts are drawn, the deadlines for mail-in ballots, and other key questions.

    Legal scholars observed Tuesday that the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, specifically said federal courts have “a duty to exercise judicial review” over state court decisions that influence federal elections. But the majority opinion didn’t set the ground rules.

    “By not setting a clear standard for when state courts would go too far in the future, the decision leaves open a number of questions that will have to be resolved in future election-related disputes,” said Steve Vladeck, a CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

    Indeed, Adam Kincaid, who leads a national GOP redistricting group, said in a statement that Tuesday’s ruling “should serve as a warning to state courts inclined to reach beyond the constitutional bounds of judicial review,” signaling that there are plenty of lawsuits to come.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Key lawmakers granted access to Biden, Trump and Pence classified documents | CNN Politics

    Key lawmakers granted access to Biden, Trump and Pence classified documents | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Top lawmakers on Capitol Hill who oversee the intelligence community finally have been granted the ability to look over the classified documents found improperly in the homes of President Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence, three sources familiar with the matter tell CNN, ending a months-long standoff between Congress and the administration.

    The members of the “Gang of Eight”, which includes the House and Senate leaders from each party as well as the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, are privy to the most sensitive classified information. They began to get the documents last week.

    A source familiar with the process tells CNN the Gang of Eight began getting access to Biden, Pence and Trump’s classified documents “in a rolling production” last week. The Biden administration is giving the group access to the documents “in tranches” and not all at once, according to the source.

    For several months, leaders of the intelligence committees have been pushing for more information about the kinds of documents found, offering harsh criticism for the lack of information they received early on.

    The argument from top lawmakers on the Senate Intelligence Committee has been that they needed to understand the contents and extent of the documents found at each residence in part to understand the potential damage that could be unfurled if the documents had fallen into the wrong hands and if proper mitigation protocols had been followed.

    In January, Intelligence Chairman Mark Warner, a Democrat from Virginia, and Vice Chairman Marco Rubio, a Republican from Florida, blasted the administration for the lack of transparency over the documents and what they were.

    “We simply want to know what was this information,” Rubio said at the time. “What (were) these materials that they had? So that we can make an honest assessment when they provide us a risk assessment, of whether or not they’ve taken the proper mitigation if any was necessary.”

    Warner, in recent weeks, had an at-times heated phone conversation with Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco on the lack of congressional access to the classified documents found in the possession of Biden, Trump and Pence, two sources familiar with the call tell CNN.

    Warner and Rubio have applied considerable public pressure on the DOJ to grant access to the documents.

    Republican Rep. James Comer, chair of the House Oversight Committee, told Fox News Tuesday morning, “it is very disappointing that it has taken the government this long to allow the Gang of Eight to have access” to the classified documents.

    Punchbowl was first to report that that administration has begun giving the Gang of Eight access to the documents.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump again refuses to concede 2020 election while taking questions from New Hampshire GOP primary voters | CNN Politics

    Trump again refuses to concede 2020 election while taking questions from New Hampshire GOP primary voters | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump, the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2024, once again refused to concede that he lost the 2020 election and repeated false claims about it being stolen at a CNN town hall in New Hampshire on Wednesday.

    Taking questions from GOP primary voters at the town hall moderated by “CNN This Morning” anchor Kaitlan Collins, Trump remained defiant about the 2020 election as well as the myriad investigations into him – making clear that he’s sticking to the script he’s delivered over the past two years on conservative media.

    The town hall at Saint Anselm College – his first appearance on CNN since 2016 – came as unprecedented legal clouds hang over him as he seeks to become only the second commander in chief ever elected to two nonconsecutive terms. New Hampshire, home to the first-in-the-nation GOP primary, is also home to many swing voters and is a state he lost in both 2016 and 2020 after winning the primaries.

    The audience of Republicans and undeclared voters who plan to vote in the GOP primary cheered Trump throughout the evening, including when he attacked Tuesday’s jury verdict that found he sexually abused former magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll. Trump mocked Carroll on Wednesday while downplaying the significance of the $5 million the jury awarded her for battery and defamation.

    The former president said he would pardon “a large portion” of the rioters at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, and even pulled out a printout of his own tweets from that day in an attempt to deflect blame as Collins pressed him on why he waited three hours before telling the rioters to leave the Capitol.

    “I am inclined to pardon many of them,” Trump said Wednesday night.

    When Collins pressed Trump on the Manhattan federal jury finding Trump sexually abused Carroll in a luxury department store dressing room in 1996, Trump suggested it was helping his poll numbers.

    When asked if the jury’s decision would deter women from voting for him, the former president said, “No, I don’t think so.”

    Trump insulted Carroll, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and even Collins when she pressed him on a question about why he hadn’t returned classified documents he kept at Mar-a-Lago.

    “It’s very simple – you’re a nasty person, I’ll tell you,” Trump said on stage.

    Trump also took questions from New Hampshire voters on the economy and policy issues, such as abortion. The former president, who solidified the conservative majority on the Supreme Court that struck down Roe v. Wade, repeatedly declined to say whether he would sign a federal abortion ban if he won a second term.

    Trump suggested Republicans should refuse to raise the debt limit if the White House does not agree to spending cuts.

    “I say to the Republicans out there – congressmen, senators – if they don’t give you massive cuts, you’re going to have to do a default, and I don’t believe they’re going to do a default because I think the Democrats will absolutely cave, will absolutely cave because you don’t want to have that happen, but it’s better than what we’re doing right now because we’re spending money like drunken sailors,” Trump said.

    When Collins asked him to clarify whether the US should default if the White House doesn’t agree to cuts, Trump said, “We might as well do it now than do it later.”

    Trump pleaded not guilty last month to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Trump also faces potential legal peril in both Washington, DC – where a special counsel is leading a pair of investigations – and in Georgia, where the Fulton County district attorney plans to announce charges this summer from the investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election in the Peach State.

    Still, the twice-impeached former president has repeatedly said that any charges will not stop him from running for president, dismissing all of the investigations as politically motivated witch hunts. That’s a view many GOP voters share, according to recent surveys. Nearly 70% of Republican primary voters in a recent NBC News poll said investigations into the former president “are politically motivated” and that “no other candidate is like him, we must support him.”

    Trump was pressed on the investigation into his handling of classified documents and why he didn’t return all of the documents in his possession after receiving a subpoena. He responded by pointing out the classified documents found at the homes of others – including President Joe Biden and former Vice President Mike Pence. But they both returned the documents once they discovered they had them in their possession.

    The FBI obtained a search warrant and retrieved more than 100 classified documents from Trump’s Florida resort in August 2022, which came after he had received a subpoena to return documents in June 2022 and after his attorney had asserted that all classified material in his possession had been returned.

    Asked during the town hall whether he showed the classified documents to anyone at Mar-a-Lago, Trump said, “Not really.”

    The former president would not say whether he wants Russia or Ukraine to win the war during Wednesday’s town hall, instead saying that he wants the war to end.

    “I don’t think in terms of winning and losing. I think in terms of getting it settled so we stop killing all these people,” he said.

    When asked again whether or not the former president wants Ukraine to win, Trump did not answer directly, but instead claimed that he would be able to end the war in 24 hours.

    “Russians and Ukrainians, I want them to stop dying,” Trump said. “And I’ll have that done in 24 hours.”

    Trump said he thinks that “(Russian President Vladimir) Putin made a mistake” by invading Ukraine, but he stopped short of saying that Putin is a war criminal.

    That’s something that “should be discussed later,” Trump said.

    “If you say he’s a war criminal, it’s going to be a lot tougher to make a deal to make this thing stopped,” he said.

    While a handful of rivals have entered the Republican presidential primary – and Trump’s biggest potential rival, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, has not yet officially launched a bid – Trump has maintained a healthy lead in early GOP primary polling. In a Washington Post/ABC News poll released Sunday, 43% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents named Trump unprompted when asked who they would like to see the party nominate in 2024, compared with 20% naming DeSantis, and 2% or less naming any other candidate.

    Trump’s participation in the town hall was indicative of a broader campaign strategy to try to expand his appeal beyond conservative media viewers, CNN’s Kristen Holmes reported earlier Wednesday. He’s surrounded himself with a more organized team and has been making smaller retail politics stops while scaling back larger rallies – signs of a more traditional campaign than his 2016 and 2020 operations. He lost that 2020 race by about 7 million votes, although he continues to falsely claim it was stolen from him – claims he stuck to on Wednesday night.

    There have been warning signs for the GOP that the obsession with the 2020 election isn’t palatable beyond the base. Many of Trump’s handpicked candidates who embraced his election lies in swing states lost in last year’s midterm elections. And his advisers acknowledge he still has work to do to engage with Republican voters outside of his loyal base of supporters, multiple sources told CNN.

    But that didn’t mean Trump was ready to acknowledge the reality that he lost the 2020 election. And if he becomes the GOP nominee in 2024, Trump said Wednesday he would not commit to accepting the results regardless of the outcome, saying that he would do so if he believes “it’s an honest election.”

    “If I think it’s an honest election, I would be honored to,” he said.

    This story has been updated with additional details from the town hall.

    [ad_2]

    Source link