ReportWire

Tag: iab-elections

  • Wisconsin Elections Commission deadlocks on reappointment of elections chief in key presidential battleground | CNN Politics

    Wisconsin Elections Commission deadlocks on reappointment of elections chief in key presidential battleground | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The top election official in Wisconsin appears poised to remain in her post for now – after state election commissioners deadlocked Tuesday on her reappointment.

    Meagan Wolfe, the administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, has been targeted by Republican lawmakers and conservative activists ever since the 2020 election saw Joe Biden flip this crucial swing state on his way to the White House. Her term was slated to end Saturday.

    The stalemate has added to uncertainty about the future of election oversight in a key presidential battleground ahead of the 2024 elections.

    During a meeting Tuesday, a majority of the six-member commission that oversees elections voiced support for Wolfe, a widely respected nonpartisan administrator. But Democrats on the state elections commission effectively blocked an up-or-down vote on her reappointment, saying they had no assurances that the Republican-controlled state Senate would confirm Wolfe for a second, four-year term.

    In the end, all three Democrats abstained on the question of her reappointment. The commission, evenly divided between Democratic and GOP appointees, requires at least four “yes” votes to take action.

    In a news conference immediately after the vote, Wolfe said she had not “fully digested” the commission’s actions. But she said her intention was to ensure that the agency and local election officials “have the stability” needed to carry out next year’s elections.

    Democrats relied on a 2022 Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling to argue that Wolfe could remain in her post. In that case, the then-conservative majority on the court ruled that lawmakers cannot replace an appointed official until their post is vacant. The justices held that the end of a term does not constitute a vacancy.

    Commissioners said they were aware that litigation over Wolfe’s status was likely.

    “Absent a promise from the Senate to confirm Meagan Wolfe, I don’t think we should even play this game,” Democratic Commissioner Mark Thomsen said as he opposed even holding a vote on the reappointment. “I will take my shots with the court, rather than at the Senate.”

    The commission’s chair, Republican appointee Don Millis, said he was “very concerned” that Wolfe’s status as a holdover would lead to questions about the legitimacy of her future actions and further feed election conspiracy theories in the state.

    Wolfe has defended the 2020 election and pushed back against rampant, unfounded claims that widespread election fraud marred the results of the presidential contest that year. Biden won Wisconsin by nearly 21,000 votes, a victory that has survived multiple lawsuits and election reviews.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump and DeSantis trade shots in New Hampshire showdown | CNN Politics

    Trump and DeSantis trade shots in New Hampshire showdown | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis described former President Donald Trump as having over-promised and under-delivered on Tuesday, vowing in New Hampshire to “break the swamp” in Washington while faulting Trump for failing to deliver on his 2016 campaign promises to “drain” it.

    “If I tell you I’m going to do something, I’m not just saying that for an election,” DeSantis said in one of his sharpest attacks on the former president yet.

    Trump, meanwhile, mocked the size of DeSantis’ town hall crowds, telling attendees at a luncheon in Concord that “nobody showed up” to the Florida governor’s event a 40-minute drive south in Hollis.

    The two top-polling contenders for the GOP’s 2024 nomination circled each other Tuesday in New Hampshire, trading shots as they crisscrossed the state that hosts the first primary – after Iowa’s caucuses – and is a crucial momentum-builder.

    Their exchanges offered a preview of the months to come, with the Republican field having taken shape in recent weeks and the party’s first presidential debate less than two months away.

    Trump was blunt about why he was targeting DeSantis, rather than other GOP 2024 rivals, such as his former vice president, Mike Pence, or his former United Nations ambassador, Nikki Haley.

    “Somebody said, ‘How come you only attack him?’” Trump told the crowd in Concord. “I said, ‘Cause he’s in second place.’”

    “‘Well, why don’t you attack others?’” Trump said, repeating the question he said he was asked. “Because they’re not in second place. But soon, I don’t think he’ll be in second place, so I’ll be attacking somebody else.”

    The former president even praised two other GOP contenders, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, who he said is “actually a pretty good guy” after Ramaswamy said he would pardon Trump, and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, who he said “happens to be a very nice guy, actually.”

    Harping on early-state polls that show Trump with a lead in the GOP’s 2024 primary, Trump focused his attacks on DeSantis over his response to the Covid-19 pandemic in Florida and his past support for privatizing Social Security and Medicare.

    Trump argued that during the height of the coronavirus pandemic, DeSantis wanted “everything closed” in Florida and gave “very threatening speeches – you know, thinks he’s a tough guy.”

    He said DeSantis “loved Fauci,” referring to the government’s former top infectious disease expert, who was a central figure in the Trump administration’s response to the pandemic and recently retired during President Joe Biden’s administration.

    Trump’s remarks came shortly after DeSantis had fielded a voter’s question about Trump at a town hall in Hollis.

    A voter told DeSantis “most of us in this room voted to drain the swamp twice” and asked why he’s the one to “get it done this time as opposed to the other choice.”

    “I remember these rallies in 2016. It was exciting. ‘Drain the swamp.’ I also remember ‘Lock her up, lock her up,’ right? And then two weeks after the election, ‘Ah no, forget about it. Forget I ever said that.’ No, no, no. One thing you’ll get from me, if I tell you I’m going to do something, I’m not just saying that for an election,” DeSantis said.

    He said he doesn’t make promises he can’t follow through on, even if they might help him “marginally politically.” DeSantis also said just draining the swamp is not effective enough. Instead, he said he wants to “break” it.

    It was a riff on one of Trump’s signature 2016 campaign lines, and a suggestion that the former president had not delivered on his lofty promises to remake Washington.

    “The idea of draining the swamp, in some respects, I think it misses it a little bit,” DeSantis said. “We didn’t drain it. It’s worse today than it’s ever been by far. And that’s a sad testament to the state of affairs of our country. But even if you’re successful at draining it, the next guy can just refill it. So, I want to break the swamp. That’s really what we need to do.”

    The Florida governor said he would “drop the hammer” on some federal agencies, including the Justice Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Internal Revenue Service, and “end the weaponization of government.”

    “All of these agencies are going to be turned inside and out,” DeSantis said.

    His promise of a more aggressive approach than Trump’s ignores the potential legal hurdles he could encounter if elected next November. In Florida, more than a dozen legal battles testing the constitutionality of many of the victories DeSantis has touted on the campaign trail are ongoing. Critics say DeSantis has built his governorship around enacting laws that appeal to his conservative base but that, as a Harvard-trained lawyer, he knows are unconstitutional and not likely to take effect.

    The Florida governor’s remarks in New Hampshire came the day after he had taken aim at another signature Trump 2016 campaign pledge: DeSantis said that “not nearly enough” of the wall Trump had promised on the United States-Mexico border had been built.

    “For us, it’s going to be a national emergency on day one. This is going to be mobilizing all available assets on day one. We have a plan for all the different levers of authority that we have to be able to bring this to bear,” DeSantis said at the Rio Grande River on the U.S. Mexico Border in Maverick County, Texas, on Monday.

    In an effort to position himself to Trump’s political right on immigration enforcement, DeSantis also said he would be “more aggressive in terms of our plan than anything he did in empowering local officials to enforce immigration law.”

    Trump fired back on the issue later Tuesday in his second New Hampshire stop as he mingled with voters in Manchester at the opening of his campaign headquarters there, saying that DeSantis was promising to carry out policies that Trump had already enacted as president.

    “I saw DeSantis yesterday, he got up and said exactly what I was doing,” with his border and immigration policies, Trump said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nikki Haley takes aim at Trump’s record on China in foreign policy speech | CNN Politics

    Nikki Haley takes aim at Trump’s record on China in foreign policy speech | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said that the Chinese military was “stronger” at the end of Donald Trump’s presidency and accused the former president of being “singularly focused” on trade with China while he was in office.

    “China was military stronger – militarily stronger – when President Trump left office than when he entered. That’s bad. But Joe Biden’s record is much worse,” the 2024 Republican presidential candidate, who served as Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations, said in a policy speech on China at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington on Tuesday.

    Haley, who is polling in the single digits, has started to take more direct aim at the Republican primary’s leading candidates in recent weeks. Tuesday marked her strongest public objections to Trump’s record with China so far.

    She said Trump “did too little about the rest of the Chinese threat” and demonstrated “moral weakness in his zeal to befriend [Chinese] President Xi.”

    “He did not put us on a stronger military foothold in Asia. He did not stop the flow of American technology and investment into the Chinese military. He did not effectively rally our allies against the Chinese threat. Even the trade deal he signed came up short when China predictively failed to live up to its commitments,” Haley said.

    She added that, “Trump congratulated the Communist Party on its 70th anniversary of conquering China. That sends a wrong message to the world. Chinese communism must be condemned, never congratulated.”

    Haley did say that Trump deserves credit for pushing both parties to “take off their blinders” with regard to threats from China and claimed that Biden’s track record on China is worse than Trump’s.

    She called Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s trip to China last week a “gold plated-invitation for more Chinese aggression, not less.”

    “Just look at what happened. China’s scolded us then President Xi pronounced it was a good meeting. He only says that when he gets a lot more than he gives. In fact, he gave us nothing,” Haley said.

    In her speech laying out what her policy toward China would look like as president, Haley declared the Chinese Communist Party an “enemy” and deemed it the “most dangerous foreign threat we face since the second world war.”

    “The Communist Party’s endgame is clear. China is preparing its people for war. President Xi has openly said it. We should take him at his word and act accordingly,” she said.

    Haley added that the question of China is a question for presidential leadership, saying there must be a “series of fundamental shifts” in US policy. She said that her administration would respond domestically, economy and militarily.

    She also proposed specific moves, including pushing Congress to put an end to permanent trade relations with China until the flow of fentanyl into the US ends, and eliminating federal funding for all universities that take Chinese money.

    “Universities must choose, you either take Chinese money or you take American money, but the days of taking both are over. It shouldn’t be a hard decision,” Haley said

    Haley also said that the US should ban all lobbying from the CCP and stop allowing licenses for exporting sensitive technology to China.

    On Taiwan, she said that the US should make clear that if China invades Taiwan “it would mean a full-blown economic decoupling and it would massively damage China.” Though Haley did not explicitly commit to keeping or getting rid of the US policy of strategic ambiguity when it comes to Taiwan.

    Haley also said that a Russian defeat in the Ukraine war “would be an enormous loss for China” and – as she has done before – made the case for continued support to Ukraine so that it can reclaim its territory.

    “Now is the time to seize the moment and help Ukraine bring this war to a decisive end. Make no mistakes China is watching the war in Ukraine with great interest,” Haley said. “China is seeing what most fears if it invades Taiwan, but that could change in short order. If America and the West abandon Ukraine and Russia succeeds in taking its territory and freedom, China will hear an unmistakable message. That message can only encourage China to invade Taiwan as soon as possible. The warning signs are already flashing.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump allies outraged after McCarthy says ‘I don’t know’ if Trump is strongest 2024 candidate | CNN Politics

    Trump allies outraged after McCarthy says ‘I don’t know’ if Trump is strongest 2024 candidate | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Advisers and allies to former President Donald Trump are expressing outrage after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said that he thinks Trump can win in 2024, but does not know if he is the “strongest” candidate.

    “I’ve been fielding calls on this since it happened,” one Trump ally told CNN, referring to McCarthy’s comments. “People are not happy. What was he thinking?”

    During a CNBC interview Tuesday, McCarthy was pressed on Trump’s 2024 prospects and the multi-faceted legal issues facing the former president. “Can he win that election? Yeah he can,” McCarthy said. “The question is, is he the strongest to win the election – I don’t know that answer.”

    The Speaker also said he believes Trump can beat President Joe Biden. “Can Trump beat Biden? Yeah, he can beat Biden.”

    Sources close to Trump believe the former president helped secure the speakership for McCarthy after urging House Republicans to vote for the embattled leader after McCarthy lost three straight speakership votes in January. Trump also made calls on McCarthy’s behalf ahead of the vote. McCarthy finally secured the gavel on the 15th ballot and immediately thanked the former President for his support.

    Some advisers to the former President have in the past brushed off questions as to why McCarthy has not offered an endorsement of Trump in 2024, and instead dodged the question when posed by reporters.

    “He has a lot of people to navigate if he he’s going to win the speakership,” one adviser told CNN in December when McCarthy avoided answering whether he would back Trump in his recently launched third bid for president.

    McCarthy also argued Trump’s policies are good for the country when asked if it is good for the party to have Trump as the nominee.

    “Republicans get to select their nominee. I think if you want to go sheer policy to policy, it’s not good for Republicans, its good for America. Trump’s policies are better, straightforward than Biden policy,” McCarthy said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Trump’s self-serving comparison to Hillary Clinton’s classified email scandal | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Trump’s self-serving comparison to Hillary Clinton’s classified email scandal | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly and inaccurately compared his federal indictment to the Hillary Clinton email investigation that ended without charges, claiming unfair treatment.

    Trump most recently invoked Clinton on Tuesday night during a lie-filled fundraiser at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, hours after his arraignment in federal court. This misleading line of attack is a common refrain at his public events – and also for some of his opponents in the 2024 Republican presidential primary.

    Facts First: This is an inaccurate and self-serving comparison. To be sure, investigators found problems with how both Trump and Clinton handled classified material, and they both misled the public about their conduct. But there are several major differences that break in Clinton’s favor. Trump mishandled far more classified material. And prosecutors have presented evidence that he knowingly broke the law and obstructed the investigation, while the FBI concluded that Clinton didn’t act with criminal intent.

    On Tuesday night, Trump baselessly claimed that “Hillary Clinton broke the law, and she didn’t get indicted” because “the FBI and Justice Department protected her.” But an exhaustive 2018 report from the Justice Department inspector general concluded that investigators made the right call by not charging Clinton, and that their decision-making wasn’t motivated by political bias.

    Trump also claimed Clinton had a “deliberate intention” of violating records retention laws when she used a private email server to conduct government business as secretary of state. He also said “there has never been obstruction as grave” as what Clinton did to impede the FBI probe into her emails. Both of Trump’s assertions here are belied by the FBI’s conclusions in the case.

    Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who supervised the Clinton email probe in 2015-2016 and is now a CNN contributor, told CNN’s Dana Bash on Monday that the Clinton probe was “very, very different” from the Trump case.

    “Should it have happened? No,” McCabe said of Clinton’s private email server. “But what we didn’t have was evidence that Hillary Clinton had intentionally exchanged or withheld classified information.”

    Here’s a breakdown of some of the key differences between the Clinton and Trump situations.

    The FBI examined tens of thousands of emails from Clinton’s private server. Investigators found 52 email chains that contained references to information “that was later deemed to be classified,” McCabe said. Only eight of those chains contained “top secret” material, the highest level of classification.

    Almost none the email chains had markings or “stampings” on them that would’ve indicated at the time that the material was classified, McCabe said.

    Compare that with Trump, who took more than 325 classified records to Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House, including at least 60 “top secret” files, according to prosecutors. The indictment says these documents contained foreign intelligence from the CIA, military plans from the Pentagon, intercepts from the National Security Agency, nuclear secrets from the Department of Energy, and more.

    These were full documents with “headers and footers” and cover sheets explicitly “indicating they were some of the most classified materials we have,” McCabe said. A picture that federal prosecutors included in a court filing shows some of the papers found at Mar-a-Lago with clear classification markings in large bold letters, saying “TOP SECRET” or “SECRET.”

    Then-FBI Director James Comey announced in July 2016 that Clinton wouldn’t be charged. He said, “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” because there wasn’t enough evidence that Clinton “intended to violate laws,” even though she had been “extremely careless” with classified information.

    In the Trump probe, special counsel Jack Smith had enough evidence for a federal grand jury to indict Trump on 37 criminal charges, including 31 counts of willfully retaining national defense information. The former president has pleaded not guilty.

    There are also significant differences on obstruction that undercut Trump’s narrative.

    Prosecutors say Trump conspired to defy a grand jury subpoena demanding the return of all classified documents, and that he misled his attorneys who were trying to comply with the subpoena.

    In the indictment, prosecutors also cited a recorded conversation from 2021 where Trump admitted that he possessed a document containing “secret information” about US military plans that he “could have declassified” as president – but didn’t.

    For this and other conduct, six of his 37 overall charges are related to potential obstruction.

    Despite Trump’s repeated claims to the contrary, prosecutors never accused Clinton of obstructing the investigation into her emails. The FBI ultimately concluded that there was not “clear evidence” that Clinton “intended to violate laws,” and that charges weren’t warranted in this situation without any evidence of obstruction.

    Furthermore, Clinton gave a voluntary interview to the FBI and she could have been prosecuted if she made any false statements. After closing the probe, Comey later told lawmakers that “we have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI” or was “untruthful with us.”

    Two of the 37 charges against Trump use that same false-statements statute.

    From the moment Trump’s documents scandal became public last year, he has responded with a constant stream of lies, recycled falsehoods, and anti-government conspiracy theories.

    Clinton’s public dishonesty about her emails was nowhere near as frequent and egregious as Trump’s dishonesty about the classified documents probe. Nonetheless, some of Clinton’s own public defenses, which she offered to voters amid the 2016 campaign season, ended up proving untrue.

    For example, while she was under FBI investigation, Clinton publicly said she “never sent or received any classified material,” and also said she “did not email any classified material to anyone.” In another instance, she offered an unequivocal denial, saying “there is no classified materials” on her private server.

    Fact-checkers deemed these claims to be false or misleading after Comey revealed after the probe that some classified material was found on Clinton’s server – albeit in less than 1% of the 30,000-plus emails reviewed by the FBI.

    Some of Clinton’s public denials included a caveat that she never transmitted anything with visible classification “markings.” Comey later testified to Congress that only three emails reviewed by the FBI contained a classification marking.

    Regarding Trump’s claim that biased FBI and Justice Department officials “protected” Clinton in 2016 — in her view, they actually cost her the presidency. She has publicly blamed her election loss on Comey’s bombshell announcement in late October 2016 that he was reopening the email probe, only to clear her again on the eve of Election Day.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why power in Congress is now so precarious | CNN Politics

    Why power in Congress is now so precarious | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Control of Congress has become so precariously balanced between the two parties that it may now be subject to the butterfly effect.

    The butterfly effect is a mathematical concept, often applied to weather forecasting, that posits even seemingly tiny changes – like a butterfly flapping its wings – can trigger a chain of events that produces huge impacts.

    Because it has become so difficult for either party to amass anything other than very narrow majorities in the House and Senate, the exercise of power in both chambers now appears equally vulnerable to seemingly miniscule shifts in the political landscape.

    Just in the past few weeks, a revolt by a small band of House conservatives effectively denied the Republican majority control of the floor for days. At the same time, a Supreme Court voting rights decision that might affect only a handful of House seats has raised Democratic hopes of recapturing the chamber in 2024. In the Senate, the extended absence of a single senator to illness – California Democrat Dianne Feinstein – prompted an eruption of concern among party activists over the upper chamber’s ability to confirm President Joe Biden’s judicial nominations.

    In different ways, these developments are all manifestations of the same underlying dynamic: the inability of either side to establish large or lasting congressional majorities.

    Viewed over the long-term, majorities in the House and Senate for the past 30 years have consistently been smaller than they were when Democrats dominated both institutions in the long shadow of the New Deal from the 1930s into the 1980s. And those majorities have grown especially tight since former President Donald Trump emerged as the polarizing focal point – pro and con –of American politics.

    Since the Civil War, only rarely has either chamber been as closely divided between the parties as it is this year, with Republicans holding just a five-seat advantage in the House and Democrats clinging to a one-seat Senate majority. It’s been even more rare for both chambers to be so closely divided at the same time – and rarer still for them to be split almost evenly between the parties in consecutive Congresses, as they have been since 2021.

    It remains possible that either side could break out to a more comfortable advantage in either chamber. The 2024 map offers Republicans an opportunity, especially if they run well in the presidential race, to establish what could prove a somewhat durable Senate majority. But many analysts consider it more likely that the House and Senate alike will remain on a razor’s edge, with narrow majorities that frequently flip between the two sides.

    The key development shaping this “butterfly effect” era are the indications that narrow majorities are now becoming the rule in both legislative chambers.

    Slim majorities and frequent shifts in control have been a central characteristic of the Senate for longer. In the 12 Congressional sessions since 2001, one party or the other has reached 55 Senate seats only three times: Republicans after George W. Bush’s reelection in 2004, and Democrats after Barack Obama’s wins in 2008 and 2012. In six of the past 12 sessions, the majority party has held 52 Senate seats or less, including two when voters returned a Senate divided exactly 50-50.

    By contrast, one party or the other amassed 55 seats or more seven times in the 10 sessions from 1981 through 2000. Lopsided majorities were even more common in the two decades of unbroken Democratic Senate control from 1961 to 1980: the party held at least 55 seats nine times over that interval.

    Largely because the Senate majorities have been so small for the past several decades, control of the body has shifted between the parties more frequently than in most of American history. Neither party, in fact, has controlled the Senate for more than eight consecutive years since 1980. Never before in US history has the Senate gone so long without one party controlling it for more than eight years.

    Generally, over the past few decades, the parties have managed somewhat more breathing room in the House. Neither side lately has consistently reached the heights that Democrats did while they held unbroken control of the lower chamber from 1955 through 1994 when the party routinely won 250 seats or more. But Republicans reached 247 seats after the second mid-term of Obama’s presidency in 2014. Democrats, for their part, soared to more than 250 seats after Obama’s victory in 2008, and 235 following the backlash against Trump in the 2018 election.

    But the Democratic majority fell to just 222 seats after the 2020 election. And Republicans likewise eked out only 222 seats last fall, far below the party’s expectations of sweeping gains. Those slim majorities may reflect a precarious new equilibrium. “I don’t think a major swing in either direction is possible in this new normal,” said Ken Spain, former communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee. “We are in this perpetual state of power shifting hands, where the House is often times on a razor’s edge.”

    Former Rep. Steve Israel, who served as chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, sees the same pattern continuing. “We’re looking at very narrow House majorities for the foreseeable future,” he told me in an email.

    Like the Senate, smaller majorities in the House are translating into more frequent shifts in control. While Democrats held the House for 40 consecutive years until 1994, the longest either party has controlled it since was the GOP majority from 1995 through 2006. In the post-1994 era, Democrats have twice captured the House only to lose it just four years later. If Republicans lose the White House next year, there is a strong chance they could surrender their current House majority after just two years.

    As recent events show, this era of narrow majorities is changing how Congress operates in ways that are often overlooked in the day-to-day scrimmaging.

    One is creating a virtually endless cycle of trench warfare over House redistricting. As I’ve written, the district lines for an unusually large number of seats are still in flux beyond the first election following the reapportionment and redistricting of seats after the decennial Census.

    Because the margins in the House are now so small, the parties have enormous incentive to use every possible legal and political tool to influence any seat that could conceivably tip the balance. “We are in the perpetual redistricting era,” said Marina Jenkins, executive director of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. “We’ve been creeping into that era for the past 10 years, and I think it’s just going to continue to be that way.”

    The two sides are scrimmaging across a broad battlefield. Republican gains on the state Supreme Courts in Ohio and North Carolina could pave the way for the GOP to draw new lines that might net the party a combined half a dozen House seats. Democratic gains on the state Supreme Courts in Wisconsin and New York could allow Democrats to offset that with new maps that produce gains of two seats in the former and four or five in the latter.

    The Supreme Court’s surprising decision this month to strike down Alabama’s congressional map as a violation of the Voting Rights Act, could lead by 2024 to the creation of new Black-majority seats that would favor Democrats not only in Alabama, but also Louisiana and maybe Georgia, experts say. The Court’s decision could also invigorate a voting rights case that could force Texas Republicans to create more Latino-majority seats there; while that case is unlikely to be completed in time for the 2024 election, it could ultimately produce a dramatic impact, with three or more redrawn seats that could favor Democrats. Racial discrimination cases brought on other grounds could eventually threaten GOP congressional maps in South Carolina, Arkansas and Florida.

    And even all this maneuvering doesn’t mark the end of the potential combat. If Democrats win multiple voting rights judgements against Republican-drawn maps, some observers think other GOP-controlled states may try to offset those gains by simply redrawing their own maps to squeeze out greater partisan advantage. Most states do not bar that sort of mid-decade redistricting, which was used most dramatically in Texas after the GOP won control of the state legislature there in 2002. “That threat is real,” said Jenkins.

    The unusual recent rebellion by House conservatives that denied the GOP a majority to control the floor marks another key characteristic of the butterfly effect era in Congress: the ability of small groups to exert disproportionate influence. When Democrats held their slim majority in the last Congress, they were stalemated for months by a standoff between centrists and progressives over whether to decouple the bipartisan infrastructure bill from Biden’s sweeping Build Back Better agenda.

    Ultimately, though, progressives reluctantly agreed to separate the two issues, allowing the infrastructure bill to pass. And then progressives, reluctantly again, agreed to pass the much scaled-back version of the Biden agenda that became the Inflation Reduction Act. Democrats, in fact, over the previous Congress displayed a record-level of party unity in passing not only those two bills but almost every other major party priority through the House, from multiple voting rights bills, to legislation restoring abortion rights nationwide, an assault weapon ban, police reform, and a bill barring LGBTQ discrimination.

    Republican leaders are finding it tougher to corral their narrow majority. The recent backlash against the debt ceiling deal by far-right conservatives prevented Republicans from passing the “rules” needed to control floor debate on legislation in the House. Less than a dozen House Republicans joined the rebellion, but it was enough to trigger a stunning stumble into chaos for the majority party.

    “Culturally the two parties are somewhat different when it comes to governing,” said Spain, now a Washington-based communications consultant. “On the Democratic side there tend to be family squabbles but ultimately everybody falls in line… On the Republican side, the tail tends to wag the dog. I think [Speaker Kevin] McCarthy did a pretty effective job threading the needle in getting the debt ceiling negotiated. Now we’re seeing the fall out.”

    Former Republican Rep. Charlie Dent, who now directs the Aspen Institute Congressional program, also believes it is more difficult for Republicans than Democrats to govern with a narrow House majority, largely because governing is not a priority for the right flank in the GOP conference.

    “It’s important to remember that the House Democratic conference certainly believes in governance,” Dent said. “That’s true of virtually all of them, whether they are more moderate or centrist vs. those who are on the far left. They want the government to function.” But, he added, “When you have a narrow Republican majority like we do, there is a rump group in the House Republican caucus who simply thrives on throwing sand into the gears of government and don’t want it to function well, if at all. They are more inclined to shut the government down. Some of them would be willing to default. And that’s the difference” between the parties.

    Narrow majorities are also roiling the Senate, as demonstrated both by the uproar over Feinstein’s absence and the liberal discontent in the last Congress over the enormous influence of West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema. If Senate majorities stay as small as they have been recently, pressure is almost certain to grow for either party to end the filibuster the next time it wins unified control of the White House and Congress.

    In this century, neither side has controlled the 60 Senate seats required to break a filibuster except for a few months when Democrats did in 2009 and early 2010 (until losing that super-majority when Republicans won a special election to replace Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who had died of brain cancer.) And even as it has grown more difficult for either party to approach 60 Senate votes, both have also found it harder to attract more than token crossover support from senators in the other party. In a world where 60 Senate votes is virtually out of reach, it’s difficult to imagine a party holding “trifecta” control of the White House and both congressional chambers granting the minority party a perpetual veto of the majority’s agenda through the filibuster.

    Political analysts caution that it remains possible that either party might break through this trench warfare to reestablish larger majorities. But to do so, it would need to overcome the interplay between two powerful political trends.

    The first is the hardening separation of the country into reliably red and blue blocks. Far fewer states than in the past are genuinely up for grabs in the presidential race: perhaps as few as five to seven, or even less, may be truly within reach for both sides next year. And even within the states, the divisions are hardening between Democratic dominance in larger metropolitan areas and Republican strength outside of them.

    The impact of this sorting both between and within the states is magnified by the second big trend: the decline of split-ticket voting. Fewer voters are hopscotching between the two sides with their votes; more appear to be viewing elections less as a choice between two individuals than as a referendum on which party they want in control of government.

    In 2022, only 23 House Members were elected in districts that supported the other side’s presidential candidate. (Eighteen House Republicans hold districts that voted Biden; just five House Democrats hold seats that voted for Trump.) Democrats now hold 48 of the 50 Senate seats in the 25 states that backed Biden in 2020 while Republicans hold 47 of the 50 in the 25 states that voted for Trump. And all three of those remaining Trump-state Democratic senators – Ohio’s Sherrod Brown, Montana’s Jon Tester and West Virginia’s Manchin – face difficult reelection races in 2024.

    With more states reliably leaning toward either party in the presidential race, and fewer legislators winning in places that usually vote the other way for president, both parties are grappling over a shrinking list of genuine congressional targets. Kyle Kondik, managing editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball, a political newsletter from the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, points out that wave elections that produce big congressional majorities typically have come when one party faces a bad environment and must also defend a large number of seats that it had previously won in places that usually vote for the other side. (That was the compound dynamic that wiped out rural House Democrats in 2010 and suburban House Republicans in 2018.) Now, he notes, the potential impact of a bad environment is limited because each side holds so few seats on the other’s usual terrain. “Neither side is that dramatically overextended,” said Kondik. “Everything is sorted out.”

    The paradoxical impact of more sorting and stability in the electorate, though, has been more instability in Congress, as the two sides trade narrow and fragile majorities. For the foreseeable future, control of Congress may pivot on the few quirky House and Senate races in each election that defy the usual partisan patterns. Such races are often decided by idiosyncratic local developments – a scandal, a candidate with an unusually compelling (or repelling) personal style, a major gaffe – that are as hard to predict or foresee as the sequence of events that begins when a butterfly flaps its wings.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Christie calls GOP presidential debate pledge a ‘useless idea’ | CNN Politics

    Christie calls GOP presidential debate pledge a ‘useless idea’ | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie said Sunday it was a “useless idea” to force 2024 GOP contenders to sign a pledge to back the party’s ultimate nominee in order to participate in primary debates.

    “It’s only in the era of Donald Trump that you need somebody to sign something on a pledge. So I think it’s a bad idea,” the former New Jersey governor told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” about the Republican National Committee requirement.

    Christie, who kicked off his presidential bid earlier this month, said he’s expressed his views directly to RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, “so this is not the first time she’s hearing it.” But he affirmed that he would do what was needed to be up on the stage to try to save my party and save my country from going down the road of being led by three-time loser Donald Trump.”

    “I’ll take the pledge in 2024 just as seriously as Donald Trump took it in 2016,” Christie said.

    Trump, as a candidate in 2015, did not rule out an independent run for president at a debate in Cleveland. He ultimately signed a pledge to support the party’s eventual nominee and to not run as a third-party candidate if he did not win the GOP nomination.

    McDaniel has repeatedly supported requiring a so-called loyalty pledge for participation in the GOP debates, telling CNN on Friday it was a “no-brainer.”

    “Once it’s all done and the dust is settled and you’ve made your best case, if the voters choose someone else, then you need to get behind who the voters chose and make sure we beat Joe Biden,” McDaniel said. “We can’t have division. We can’t have people who get on the debate stage who are going to come out and say, ‘I’m not going to support the eventual nominee.’”

    Most of the GOP primary field has signaled support for the pledge, including most recently former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, whose campaign had previously sought to amend to pledge.

    “You have to make the pledge based on the fact that Donald Trump is not going to be our nominee and you’re confident of it. Therefore, you can sign a statement saying you’re going to support the nominee of the party. I’m not going to, you know, support – just like other voters are not going to support – somebody for president who is under indictment,” Hutchinson told ABC News on Sunday.

    Trump pleaded not guilty in federal court last week to 37 charges related to his alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving office.

    The RNC announced earlier this month that the first presidential primary debate will take place on August 23 in Milwaukee. Qualifying candidates will need to register at least 1% in three national polls, or a combination of national polls and a poll from the early-voting states recognized by the RNC. Candidates will also need “a minimum of 40,000 unique donors to candidate’s principal presidential campaign committee (or exploratory committee), with at least 200 unique donors per state or territory in 20+ states and/or territories,” the RNC said in a statement.

    A recent CNN Poll found Trump was the first choice of 53% of Republican and Republican-leaning voters in the primary, roughly doubling Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ 26%. Other hopefuls were all polling in the single digits, including Christie, Hutchinson, former Vice President Mike Pence, former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley and South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Deployment ceremony for Nikki Haley’s husband takes place in South Carolina | CNN Politics

    Deployment ceremony for Nikki Haley’s husband takes place in South Carolina | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The official deployment ceremony for a South Carolina Army National Guard brigade that includes Michael Haley, the husband of Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley, is set to take place Saturday in Charleston.

    The ceremony is scheduled to be held at The Citadel military college ahead of the brigade’s deployment to Africa in support of the United States Africa Command.

    One person familiar with the details of the deployment told CNN that Michael Haley will likely remain deployed through the spring of 2024, which overlaps with much of the Republican primary nominating calendar. This will be his second active-duty deployment overseas – he previously served in Afghanistan as part of the South Carolina Army National Guard in 2013 when his wife was serving as the state’s governor.

    “This is the start of what, my and my family, will be a yearlong prayer that they’re effective and that they’re strong and that they come home safely,” Nikki Haley, who was also the US ambassador to the United Nations in the Trump administration, said at a CNN town hall in Iowa earlier this month.

    “We’re so proud,” the former governor said when asked how she and her family felt about Michael Haley going overseas for a year. “We love him so much. This is – it’s not our first rodeo. He did this when I was governor. He seems to find really interesting times, you know, but what you realize is deployments are never convenient but they’re necessary.”

    Nikki Haley earlier this week referenced her husband’s upcoming deployment when she offered a rare rebuke of former President Donald Trump over his federal indictment for his alleged mishandling of classified documents. Trump was arraigned this week in a Miami federal court and pleaded not guilty to 37 charges, including 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information.

    “My husband is about to deploy this weekend. This puts all of our military men and women in danger if you are going to talk about what our military is capable of or how we would go about invading or doing something with one of our enemies,” Nikki Haley said on Fox News.

    She said that if the charges against Trump were true, then “Trump was incredibly reckless with our national security.” Her comments represented a sharp departure from the statement she had put out prior to the indictment being unsealed in which she characterized the move against Trump as “prosecutorial overreach” and “vendetta politics,” echoing the argument made by the former president as he attacks the justice system and denies any wrongdoing.

    But the former UN ambassador said this week she would be inclined to pardon Trump if she were elected president because, she argued, “the issue is less about guilt and more about what’s good for the country.” She criticized the Department of Justice, arguing it had “handled this whole thing terribly.”

    Michael Haley has not been traveling with his wife as she campaigns in early nominating states such as Iowa and New Hampshire, but he was present at her CNN town hall, a day after the couple attended Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst’s “Roast and Ride” fundraiser in Des Moines. The latter event was one of the campaign season’s first “cattle calls” – gatherings of large crowds of Republicans in states that vote early on the primary calendar – and was attended by almost all the 2024 GOP candidates, with Trump a notable absentee.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Top Biden campaign officials fanning out across the country to preview reelection effort | CNN Politics

    Top Biden campaign officials fanning out across the country to preview reelection effort | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Top Biden campaign officials are popping the hood on President Joe Biden’s emerging reelection machine and giving top supporters a peek inside as their first quarterly fundraising deadline rapidly approaches.

    Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez, her deputy Quentin Fulks and Democratic National Committee executive director Sam Cornale are embarking Thursday on a cross-country tour to meet with top donors, local Democratic officials and other supporters in an effort to stir up enthusiasm and build fundraising momentum.

    “One thing that we want them to understand is that right now is a critical investment time, right?” Chavez Rodriguez said of the message she will deliver to supporters. “It’s an opportunity for them to invest in building the campaign and the architecture of the infrastructure and in the kinds of programs that we want to be able to run in 2024 as we’re in full campaign mode and reaching out to voters across the country.”

    The six-state trip, which begins Thursday in Atlanta, comes as the president, the first lady, vice president and second gentleman are embarking on a separate fundraising blitz, hitting nearly two dozen fundraisers before the end of the month.

    The campaign is racing against the clock to deliver a strong first quarter of fundraising amid nagging questions about whether Democrats are sufficiently energized about the prospect of reelecting Biden, who would be 86 at the end of a potential second term.

    Despite those questions, the campaign and DNC have decided not to fundraise off of former President Donald Trump’s indictment and arrest, a deliberate decision designed to leave no question about the non-political nature of that prosecution.

    “It’s so important that we restore the integrity of the Department of Justice and ensure that they are an independent entity and agency and that they continue to do their job in these most critical moments. And so for us that separation, that independence is core and it’s not something that we will second guess or deliberate,” Chavez Rodriguez told CNN in her first published interview as campaign manager.

    Chavez Rodriguez and several senior Democratic officials will travel to six cities over the next week – Atlanta, Minneapolis, Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and St. Louis – as part of what the Biden campaign is dubbing the “Steady, Strong Leadership Tour.” Officials plan to travel to additional cities later in June and July, according to a campaign official.

    In each city, they will meet with a relatively small groups of supporters – “in the dozens,” according to a campaign official – to lay out how the campaign is building out its infrastructure and plotting a path to reelection in 2024.

    Chavez Rodriguez said she and her team will lay out their priority states, key voter coalitions and the close partnership between the Biden campaign and DNC during meetings that will include both “grasstops” and “grassroots” leaders.

    “This is really an opportunity for us to continue to build on that energy and that momentum and continue to really unify the party and show that we have a real strong operation, a real strong campaign and that we’re going to continue to build the effort that we need to build to effectively win in 2024,” Chavez Rodriguez said.

    Biden will also criss-cross the country in the final stretch to the quarterly deadline, fundraising in Connecticut on Friday before making multiple stops in California next week and Chicago and Maryland the following week, among others.

    First lady Dr. Jill Biden held multiple fundraisers in New York and California this week and Vice President Kamala Harris and second gentleman Doug Emhoff will also round out the fundraising blitz.

    Chavez Rodriguez declined to outline the campaign’s fundraising target for this quarter, but said she believes the campaign will show “strong momentum and energy.”

    “You know, folks are gonna want to try to poke holes at anything that they can, but I think that, you know, we’ll continue to show just strong momentum and energy,” Chavez Rodriguez said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Four major environmental groups endorse Biden’s reelection | CNN Politics

    Four major environmental groups endorse Biden’s reelection | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Four major environmental groups endorsed President Joe Biden’s 2024 reelection for president on Wednesday night, ahead of his speech at a League of Conservation Voters dinner in the nation’s capital.

    LCV Action Fund, NextGen PAC, the Sierra Club, and the NRDC Action Fund endorsed Biden together at the dinner, which is honoring former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It is the first time all four groups have issued a joint endorsement, Tiernan Sittenfeld, senior vice president of government affairs for the League of Conservation Voters Action Fund, told CNN.

    During his remarks at the event, Biden touched on the hazardous air quality stemming from wildfires in Canada that hung over much of the American Midwest and Northeast last week, noting that while there are many threats to future generations, climate change “is the only truly existential threat.”

    “If we don’t meet the requirements that we’re looking at, we’re in real trouble,” Biden said, adding that work of the environmental groups “has never been more important than it is today. Together we’ve made a lot of progress so far, but we’ve got to finish the job.”

    The president listed his environmental wins to applause from the crowd, including new acreage that his administration has designated for conservation.

    Sittenfeld said the endorsement is a recognition of Biden’s achievements on climate, clean energy, and environmental justice, including the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and strong federal regulations issued by Biden administration agencies.

    “They have done more than any administration in history by far to address the climate crisis and advance clean energy solutions and environmental justice,” Sittenfeld told CNN.

    Sittenfeld said environmental groups want to see Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris elected for four more years so they can “finish the job” on their climate agenda, especially given that Republican candidates running for president could undo part of that agenda.

    “The stakes have never been higher and we’ve seen day after day MAGA Republicans in Congress trying to gut commonsense climate progress,” Sittenfeld told CNN, adding the contrast between Biden and Republican candidates for president “could not be more stark.”

    “Clearly as much progress as we’ve made, there’s so much more needed,” Sittenfeld said.

    “We are endorsing because of the transformational progress we already made and the progress they’re going to continue to make,” former EPA administrator Carol Browner, the chair of LCV’s board of directors, echoed.

    The four groups have considerable sway in the environmental movement and the Biden administration. Their political arms have spent millions of dollars on past elections and mobilized voters across the country on climate issues.

    The Sierra Club is one of the oldest environmental groups in the country, while NextGen calls itself the nation’s biggest group mobilizing youth voters. Meanwhile, Biden’s first White House Climate Adviser Gina McCarthy came most recently from NRDC before serving in her post (McCarthy was also EPA administrator in the Obama administration).

    “President Biden’s climate leadership has been nothing short of historic,” Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the NRDC Action Fund, said in a statement.

    However significant the groups early endorsement of Biden is, it doesn’t necessarily represent the views of the entire climate movement. Some groups and activists have recently expressed frustration with the president and his administration for approving fossil fuel projects, most recently pushing for the Mountain Valley pipeline to be included in the debt limit law.

    As wildfire smoke choked DC’s air quality last Thursday, activists staged a large sit-in outside of the White House to protest the pipeline.

    “President Biden, we are all out here because we want you to declare a climate emergency and do the right thing,” Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a progressive Democrat from Michigan, told the crowd.

    As CNN has reported, a White House official had said the White House pushed for the pipeline to be included in the debt limit provision to deliver on a compromise that the White House and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer struck with Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia last year to secure his vote for the Inflation Reduction Act.

    But some climate activists balked at that reasoning, saying they want to see Biden reject fossil fuel projects in addition to passing bold climate bills.

    “Why does Manchin get priority over millions of young people who put their disillusionment aside to vote in 2020 and 2022?” said Elise Joshi, acting executive director of youth group Gen-Z for Change. “Every single time young people are showing up for the Democratic Party, and the uphold of promises doesn’t seem to apply to us.”

    Joshi said she will ultimately vote for Biden in the 2024 election, but added the president needs to give her and young people more reasons to turn out enthusiastically for him.

    “Most importantly I don’t want a Republican presidency, we know that would be horrific,” she said. “But if (Biden) is our best option of two, why not make that option better?”

    This headline and story have been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden’s press secretary violated Hatch Act, watchdog says | CNN Politics

    Biden’s press secretary violated Hatch Act, watchdog says | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre violated the Hatch Act for using the term “mega MAGA” from the briefing room podium, the US Office of the Special Counsel has determined, and has received a warning letter.

    Jean-Pierre was found to be in violation of the Hatch Act, a law that is supposed to stop the federal government from affecting elections or going about its activities in a partisan manner, when she said “mega MAGA Republican officials who don’t believe in the rule of law,” according to a letter from OSC. The letter was addressed to Michael Chamberlain, a former Trump administration official and director of the “Protect the Public’s Trust” organization, after Chamberlain filed a complaint that Jean-Pierre used the phrase “mega MAGA Republican[s]” in an “an inappropriate attempt to influence the vote.”

    “OSC has investigated your allegation and concluded that Ms. Jean‐Pierre violated the Hatch Act. However … we have decided not to pursue disciplinary action and have instead issued Ms. Jean‐Pierre a warning letter,” OSC’s Hatch Act Unit chief Ana Galindo-Marrone said in the June 7 letter to Chamberlain, who served in the Department of Education during Donald Trump’s presidency.

    Galindo-Marrone wrote, “OSC concluded that the timing, frequency, and content of Ms. Jean‐Pierre’s references to ‘MAGA Republicans’ established that she made those references to generate opposition to Republican candidates. Accordingly, making the references constituted political activity. Because Ms. Jean‐Pierre made the statements while acting in her official capacity, she violated the Hatch Act prohibition against using her official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.”

    Galindo-Marrone suggested that the White House Counsel’s Office “did not at the time believe” that those remarks were prohibited by the Hatch Act, and that it was “unclear” whether OSC’s analysis “was ever conveyed to Ms. Jean-Pierre.”

    Jean-Pierre has taken pains during her tenure to avoid Hatch Act violations. She has refused to answer political questions, citing the 1939 law, during more than 40 White House press briefings or gaggles. Former members of Biden’s administration – namely former chief of staff Ron Klain and former press secretary Jen Psaki – have been accused of violating the Hatch Act.

    White House spokesman Andrew Bates told CNN that the White House is reviewing the OSC’s opinion.

    “As has been made clear throughout the administration, we take the law seriously and uphold the Hatch Act. We are reviewing this opinion,” Bates said.

    A Biden administration official also noted the Trump White House’s repeated use of the term “Make America Great Again” for official purposes – found in nearly 2,000 references on the official Trump White House website. Thirteen senior Trump administration officials violated the Hatch Act, according to a report released from the OSC in November 2021.

    “Mega-MAGA” and other similar terms were used often from the White House briefing room podium in the lead-up to the 2022 midterm elections as the White House sought to draw contrasts with Trump-aligned factions of the GOP.

    Biden senior adviser Anita Dunn spoke about the decision to use the tongue-twister. While she said she “did not coin it” herself, she told Axios in a conversation shortly before the election, she was involved in the decision to harness the term as the White House went on the offensive.

    “I did not coin it, no – I was part of a project when I was outside of the government that was looking deeply at Republican elected officials, at how they describe themselves, at their agenda, at a wing, in particular, of Republicans who had espoused certain beliefs, starting with denial about the election results in 2020, and looking for an effective way to shorthand all of that for people,” she said.

    The use of the term “MAGA,” Dunn said, “came very organically out of research, listening to people talk about what they thought was the problem with some of these Republican elected officials.”

    Pressed on the use of “mega” and “ultra” as MAGA modifiers, she added, “Well, it was MAGA, but, you know, you can always improve on something.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump’s indictment divides 2024 Republican hopefuls | CNN Politics

    Trump’s indictment divides 2024 Republican hopefuls | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Republican presidential candidates Vivek Ramaswamy and Asa Hutchinson Sunday articulated vastly different plans for how they’d approach the federal indictment against former President Donald Trump should either capture the White House in 2024.

    Contenders for the GOP nomination are grappling to strike the right tone on Trump, seen as the GOP front-runner to take on President Joe Biden next year, as they look to build their support among Republican primary voters.

    Trump is facing his first federal indictment for retention of classified documents and conspiracy with a top aide to hide them from the government and his own attorneys – a total of 37 counts.

    Ramaswamy, who vowed to pardon Trump if elected president before details of the 37-count indictment were revealed, doubled down Sunday, telling CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” that after “reading that indictment and looking at the selective omissions of both fact and law,” he was “even more convinced that a pardon is the right answer here.”

    Ramaswamy acknowledged that he “would not have taken those documents with me,” but the tech entrepreneur maintained there was a difference between “bad judgment and breaking the law.”

    Bash presses Ramaswamy on pledge to pardon Trump

    Those comments stood in contrast to Hutchinson, who called Ramaswamy’s vow to pardon Trump “simply wrong” in a separate interview on “State of the Union” later Sunday.

    “It is simply wrong for a candidate to use the pardon power of the United States of the president in order to curry votes, and in order to get an applause line. It is just wrong,” the former Arkansas governor told Bash.

    “We do not need to have our commander in chief of this country not protecting our nation’s secrets,” Hutchinson said, adding later, “These are things that should not be disclosed as entertainment value to a political contact that you’re speaking with.”

    Asked if he believes the indictment will help Trump in the 2024 race, Hutchinson said, “I suspect that he’s going to raise money on the indictment as he did before. And obviously with a lot of Republican leaders saying that this is selective prosecution, that this is unfair – there is a sympathy factor that is built in.”

    But, Hutchinson said, “The Republican Party stands for the rule of law and our system of justice. Let’s not undermine that by our rhetoric, by making up facts, and by accusing the Department of Justice of things that there is no evidence of.”

    Ramaswamy isn’t the only 2024 GOP contender to criticize the Justice Department in the days since Trump first disclosed the indictment.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday accused the DOJ of “weaponization of federal law enforcement” while vowing, if elected president, to “bring accountability to the DOJ, excise political bias and end weaponization once and for all.”

    DeSantis declined to comment on the indictment Saturday at a campaign stop in Oklahoma, but he repeated his vow to end the “weaponization” of government and clean house from top to bottom” as president.

    Former Vice President Mike Pence on Saturday called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to “stop hiding behind the special counsel and stand before the American people” to explain “this unprecedented action.”

    “We also need to hear the former president’s defense so that each of us can make our own judgment,” Pence told attendees at the North Carolina GOP convention in Greensboro, where Trump also spoke hours after addressing a similar gathering in Georgia.

    Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and Trump’s United Nations ambassador, characterized the indictment as “prosecutorial overreach” in a statement Friday, adding that it was time to move “beyond the endless drama and distractions.”

    North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, who entered the GOP race last week, vowed Sunday in an interview on CBS News to “follow every rule related to handling classified documents” after potentially leaving office as president. He told Fox News on Saturday that Trump’s mishandling of documents was not something that voters want to spend their time talking about.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a onetime ally and close adviser to Trump who has emerged as his chief critic in the 2024 race, however, described the details of the indictment as “damning.”

    “This is irresponsible conduct,” he told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Friday, adding that “the conduct that Donald Trump engaged in was completely self-inflicted.”

    Christie is scheduled to participate in a CNN town hall hosted by Anderson Cooper in New York on Monday.

    SOTU rep jim jordan full interview_00123522.png

    Full Interview: Dana Bash presses Rep. Jim Jordan on indictment

    Trump has maintained the reliable backing of hard-line conservatives in Congress, such as House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, who fiercely defended the former president in an interview with Bash on Sunday.

    “The president’s ability to classify and control access to national security information flows from the Constitution,” the Ohio Republican said. “He alone decides. He said he declassified this material. He can put it wherever he wants. He can handle it however he wants.”

    But the laws under which the Justice Department said it was investigating possible crimes – statutes about the willful retention of national defense information, obstruction of a federal investigation, and the concealment or removal of government records – do not require documents to be classified for a crime to have been committed, CNN previously reported.

    Bash also reminded Jordan that Trump, on tape, in a 2021 meeting admitted to having a document that wasn’t declassified, a detail first reported by CNN. But Jordan repeatedly countered, claiming that saying Trump “could have” declassified material as president was not the same as saying he “didn’t” already declassify the material.

    “He has said time and time again, he’s declassified all this material,” the congressman said.

    Asked if he had evidence of Trump declassifying any documents, Jordan said, “I go on the president’s word, and he said he did.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • DeSantis gets his first gubernatorial endorsement from Oklahoma governor | CNN Politics

    DeSantis gets his first gubernatorial endorsement from Oklahoma governor | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Republican presidential candidate and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis earned his first gubernatorial endorsement Saturday from Oklahoma GOP Gov. Kevin Stitt.

    Ahead of DeSantis’ remarks in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Stitt said DeSantis is “the right guy to beat Biden for the next eight years.”

    Stitt highlighted DeSantis’ handling of the Covid-19 pandemic and argued that his tenure as Florida’s governor proves his leadership capacity.

    “As fellow Governors during COVID, DeSantis did not surrender states’ rights and individual liberties over to groupthink,” Stitt said in a statement. Both governors passed similar measures to ban mask mandates in their states.

    “As a proven leader, DeSantis has boldly delivered results for the people of Florida that laid the groundwork for a booming economy, an education system focused on student outcomes, and better infrastructure for working families,” Stitt continued. He added that he is confident that DeSantis can “deliver these same results all across America.”

    Stitt is among DeSantis’ highest-profile endorsements to date. With many Republicans backing former President Donald Trump, DeSantis has earned the support of four GOP members of Congress thus far: Reps. Bob Good of Virginia, Laurel Lee of Florida, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Chip Roy of Texas, who is one of the hardline members of the party.

    Stitt’s endorsement comes as the GOP presidential field has widened with former Vice President Mike Pence and former New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie announcing their bids earlier this week. Trump, however, remains the front runner despite his legal troubles.

    A CNN poll last month showed that the former president has consolidated the support of slightly above half of his party at this early stage of the race — nearly double the support for DeSantis.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump hits campaign trail as indictment roils 2024 race | CNN Politics

    Trump hits campaign trail as indictment roils 2024 race | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump is set to return to the campaign trail Saturday, traveling to Georgia and North Carolina for speeches at a pair of state Republican conventions as news of his federal indictment roils the party’s 2024 presidential race.

    The pre-planned stops come the day after the Justice Department unsealed its indictment laying out the government’s case that Trump and aide Walt Nauta mishandled classified national security documents.

    Trump’s speeches will mark his first public outings since he was indicted for a second time in less than three months, with probes into election interference efforts in Georgia and his actions surrounding January 6, 2021, in Washington threatening to pose further legal troubles.

    The visits will give Trump a chance to respond to the charges in a campaign-style as he mounts battles on both the political and legal fronts. The former president is scheduled to appear Tuesday in a federal courtroom in Miami, where he will be read the charges against him.

    So far, Trump has cast his prosecution as a politically motivated effort to stop his bid for the presidency. He has described special prosecutor Jack Smith as “deranged” and the case against him as a “hoax,” while accusing President Joe Biden of similarly mishandling classified documents.

    “I had nothing to hide, nor do I now. Nobody said I wasn’t allowed to look at the personal records that I brought with me from the White House. There’s nothing wrong with that,” he said Friday on his social media platform Truth Social.

    Trump released a four-minute video Thursday evening repeating many of his past claims, including that the Justice Department is being weaponized and that the investigations into him represent “election interference.”

    “I am an innocent man. I did nothing wrong,” Trump said in the video.

    News of the former president’s indictment Thursday was met at his Bedminster golf club in New Jersey with a belief that he would benefit politically as conservatives rallied around him.

    Trump spent Friday morning in Bedminster playing golf with Florida Rep. Carlos Gimenez as his allies made rounds of phone calls to shore up support for the former president.

    After the indictment was unsealed Friday, concern began to settle in, a source familiar with the mood at Bedminster told CNN, as Trump aides began to acknowledge the legal implications. His team still thinks Trump will likely benefit politically – at least in the short term – the source said, but aides have grown more wary of how the indictment will play out legally.

    Trump has long avoided legal culpability in his personal, professional and political lives. He has settled a number of private civil lawsuits through the years and paid his way out of disputes concerning the Trump Organization. As president, he was twice impeached by the Democratic-led House but avoided conviction by the Senate.

    But after leaving office, the Justice Department’s criminal investigations into the alleged retention of classified information at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and his efforts to overturn the 2020 election cast dark clouds over the former president. Smith’s investigation into January 6, 2021, and efforts to overturn the election is still ongoing.

    In March, the Manhattan district attorney in New York indicted Trump on charges related to hush-money payments to a former adult star. In Georgia, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is expected to announce in August whether there are any charges in her investigation into attempts by Trump and his allies to overturn the 2020 election in the state.

    On the campaign trail, many of Trump’s Republican 2024 presidential rivals responded to the news of his indictment by attacking the Justice Department – another indication that they see advantage among conservative primary voters in defending a former president who remains popular with the party’s base.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday accused the DOJ of “weaponization of federal law enforcement” while vowing, if elected president, to “bring accountability to the DOJ, excise political bias and end weaponization once and for all.”

    Former Vice President Mike Pence had called on the Justice Department to release the indictment against his former boss. After it did so, he did not comment on its contents while campaigning in New Hampshire.

    Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and Trump’s United Nations ambassador, characterized the indictment as “prosecutorial overreach” in a statement Friday, adding that it was time to move “beyond the endless drama and distractions.”

    North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, who entered the GOP race earlier this week, said Saturday that Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents is not something voters want to spend their time on.

    “When we’re on the road in Iowa the last two days and here in New Hampshire talking about the economy, energy policy, national security – those are the things that are hitting every American every single day,” Burgum told Fox News.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, another onetime ally and close adviser to Trump who has emerged as his chief critic in the 2024 race, described the details of the indictment as “damning.”

    “This is irresponsible conduct,” he told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Friday, adding that “the conduct that Donald Trump engaged in was completely self-inflicted.”

    “The bigger issue for our country is, is this the type of conduct that we want from someone who wants to be president of the United States?” Christie said.

    Another Trump critic, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, said the former president should drop out of the race “for the good of the country.”

    “This is unprecedented that we have a former president criminally charged for mishandling classified information, for obstruction of justice. This obviously will be an issue during the campaign,” Hutchinson told Tapper on Friday in a separate interview.

    “For the sake of the country, he doesn’t need this distraction. The country doesn’t need this distraction, as well.”

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • As horse racing’s best trainers rake in millions, records show they’ve violated rules aimed at keeping the animals safe | CNN

    As horse racing’s best trainers rake in millions, records show they’ve violated rules aimed at keeping the animals safe | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    As horse racing’s elite saddle up for the final race of the coveted Triple Crown at New York’s Belmont Stakes, the sport’s top trainers will face off for their share of the $1.5 million purse at the lavish, star-studded event – amid growing scrutiny after a recent spate of horse deaths.

    A CNN analysis of disciplinary records found that the top earning trainers in the sport – whose thoroughbreds win them millions of dollars – have all broken rules meant to keep their horses safe. Trainers slapped with violations have continued racing, pocketing winnings while paying minimal fines.

    Records show that horse racing’s most successful trainers have violated the sport’s rules multiple times over the course of thousands of races across decades-long careers. The violations range from failed drug tests on race day to falsifying a trainer license. At least three of the trainers have horses competing at the Belmont Stakes this weekend.

    Many of the violations center on the use of drugs that could mask pain prior to a race, potentially leading racehorses – bred for speed with spindly legs – to run on preexisting injuries that increase the risk of fatal breakdowns on the tracks. Researchers have found that about 90% of fatal horse injuries involve preexisting issues, such as small fractures that weaken horses’ bones.

    While therapeutic medications are often legal for treating horses, several are banned on race day.

    “If a horse has an anti-inflammatory, it could compromise an inspection,” said Dr. Jennifer Durenberger, a veterinarian with the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority, the national regulatory body established in 2020. “It’s one of the reasons we do restrict medications in the pre-race period.”

    In many ways, the violations say more about the sport than the trainers themselves. Historically, drug limits and rules have varied from state to state, and punishments, which typically led to fines of a few hundred dollars, seemed more like slaps on the wrists than true deterrents. Trainers suspended from one racetrack were still able to compete on others.

    Horse racing reform advocates, and even some trainers, say that national standards for drug violations will help with compliance and improve horse safety.

    Trainers and their representatives interviewed by CNN, however, largely dismissed their disciplinary records, citing unaccredited testing labs, sensitive testing which picks up on minute traces of medication and inconsistent rules among tracks that led to mistakes often beyond their control. They also say the violations must be placed in the context of the thousands of races their horses have started.

    It was supposed to be a triumphant comeback for legendary horse trainer Bob Baffert, but his Preakness Stakes win was underscored by tragedy.

    Just hours before a horse he trained, National Treasure, won the second-leg of the Triple Crown last month, Baffert’s powerful bay-colored colt, Havnameltdown, suffered an injury to its fore fetlock, the equivalent of an ankle, during an earlier race that day. A veterinarian deemed the injury “non-operable,” leaving the three-year-old horse to be euthanized on the track. The Maryland Racing Commission is investigating the death.

    During his short life, Havnameltdown earned $708,000 in prize money for his handlers, including Baffert, who has said the horse got “hit pretty hard” by another horse coming out of the starting gate.

    The Maryland race marked Baffert’s anticipated return to a Triple Crown race – the first since his 2021 Kentucky Derby win was disqualified after his horse, Medina Spirit, failed a post-race drug test. Baffert was cited by the state horse racing commission and Churchill Downs handed him a suspension that banned him from the next two Derby races.

    The drug test revealed that Medina Spirit had betamethasone in his system. The drug is legal for horses in Kentucky, but state rules don’t allow any detectable levels on race day. Baffert disputed the test result and appealed the commission’s citation.

    During his suspension, Baffert continued to race at other tracks and claimed his cut of millions in prize money. Months after the Derby, Medina Spirit died while training at California’s Santa Anita Park; the necropsy report was inconclusive.

    Equine deaths are quite common – hundreds die on and off the track annually. The root cause of what can bring down a massive, muscular horse can range from the natural to the exploitive, including being overworked and overdrugged in the quest for winnings.

    But while some deaths are difficult to prevent, the recent spate of tragedies, especially ones like the public euthanasia of Havnameltdown, have cast a dark shadow over the multi-billion-dollar industry.

    In the span of a month, 12 horses died at Churchill Downs, Kentucky’s most prominent track, since the stable opened this season. The track has suspended racing there while the fatalities are investigated.

    Bob Baffert-trained horse Havnameltdown, behind the curtain, had to be euthanized on May 20, 2023, during the sixth race of Preakness Day in Baltimore.

    The deaths sparked public outrage and thrust the industry back into the national spotlight just a week after HISA rolled out regulations that include medication control.

    But that’s done little to assuage critics’ concerns over the treatment of horses in what was once called the sport of kings.

    “All of it sounds really impressive and it’s quite a show, but that’s all it is: A show. Meanwhile, the horses continue to die,” said Patrick Battuello, an advocate who has tracked horse deaths for the last decade. “The killing is built into the system. … In what other sport are the athletes drugged and doped without their consent?”

    Defenders of the sport argue that the number of horse racing deaths have declined in recent years, and that the industry is safer than it ever was. They point to falling annual death counts collected by The Jockey Club, an influential industry organization, which reports the number of horses who die or are euthanized after racing injuries. The group has tallied several hundred racing deaths each year, with 328 in 2022, down from 709 a decade earlier.

    But those numbers don’t include horses who die during training or between races, which critics argue leads to a severe undercounting of deaths in the sport. They also only include thoroughbred horses, not quarter horses and standardbred horses. Battuello has tallied more than 9,500 racehorses that died since 2014, largely based on death records he’s collected from state horse racing commissions – roughly 1,000 a year.

    While the exact rules vary from state to state, trainers are generally required to report horse deaths that occur at racetracks or as a result of injuries sustained during races. Most deaths are categorized as racing-related or training-related.

    In a statement, The Jockey Club argued that its numbers were “the most accurate data possible” and noted that it had different criteria for including racing-related deaths than Battuello.

    The sport’s highest-earning trainers were among those who had the most horses die at racetracks or due to racing injuries, according to a CNN analysis of state records collected by Battuello over the last decade, as well as data from the horse racing website Equibase.

    Some prominent trainers saw far more of their horses die during training than in actual races. CNN’s review found that Todd Pletcher, who’s earned more than any horse trainer in the industry over the course of his career, has trained at least 38 horses whose deaths were reported to state racing commissions since 2014.

    Trainer Todd Pletcher watches a workout at Churchill Downs Tuesday, May 2, 2023, in Louisville, Kentucky.

    More than three-fourths of those deaths were related to training, not racing, according to Battuello’s count – meaning that Pletcher largely avoided the national spotlight shone on deaths that took place during prominent races like the Preakness or Belmont.

    Similarly, four of the seven deceased horses trained by Baffert that CNN documented did not die as a direct result of injuries sustained during races, and thus likely wouldn’t be included in the official tally of deaths counted by The Jockey Club.

    CNN’s review is an undercount of deaths because it only counted deaths reportable to state commissions. The review connected horses to their most recent trainer of record as of their last race – so it’s possible that some of the horses could have moved to a different trainer before their deaths.

    Horse trainers bear the ultimate responsibility for the wellbeing of the horse and adherence to the rules on the track, an industry standard known as the “absolute insurer rule.”

    “We are completely responsible for the horses. When they arrive on the racetrack that day, we’re responsible for what’s going into that horse, whether it’s medication or feed,” said Graham Motion, a 30-year horse trainer in Maryland. “That has to be our responsibility. There’s no other way really to make it work.”

    The most successful trainers in the sport have all been cited for medical or drug violations.

    Pletcher has racked up nine drug-related violations throughout his career. On one occasion, regulators found he broke rules regarding Lasix – known as the “water drug” – which makes a horse urinate and potentially run faster. New regulations have banned the drug – though state commissions can apply for three-year exemptions – while the effect on horse safety is studied, according to HISA.

    Pletcher was suspended for 10 days last month, after a delayed drug test showed that his horse, Forte, had elevated levels of a common pain-reliever and anti-inflammatory drug during a race he won in New York back in September.

    Irad Ortiz Jr. rides Forte to victory during the Breeders' Cup Juvenile race at Keenelend Race Course, on Nov. 4, 2022, in Lexington, Kentucky.

    “Forte came into our care on March 25, 2022, and he has never been prescribed or administered meloxicam,” Pletcher, who did not respond to CNN’s multiple requests for comment, told Bloodhorse.com. “We did an internal investigation and could not find an employee who had used the drug.”

    Records show Pletcher plans to appeal the ruling.

    Baffert, too, was suspended after his horse, Medina Spirit – who placed first in a 2021 race at Churchill Downs – tested positive for an anti-inflammatory. The suspension was one of about two dozen drug-related violations during Baffert’s career; the vast majority included anti-inflammatories like betamethasone and phenylbutazone.

    One of the three highest earning trainers, Steve Asmussen, has been cited for violations of medication rules about 40 times, in many instances finding elevated levels of anti-inflammatories or thyroid medication, according to records from the Association of Racing Commissioners International, an umbrella organization of horse racing regulators. Research has shown thyroid medication in horses can cause cardiac arrythmias and new regulations ban its use in thoroughbreds, including on race day.

    Clark Brewster, an attorney for both Baffert and Asmussen, said the tally of violations from ARCI data paints an unfair picture of his clients because many of those citations involved therapeutic medications that only slightly exceeded allowable limits in the rules, which he said have repeatedly shifted. “These guys are painstakingly trying to get it right.”

    Motion, the veteran Maryland trainer, himself has been cited at least twice in his career for medication violations, once after one of his horses tested positive for methocarbamol – a muscle relaxer that is permissible to treat horses, but not allowed on race day.

    “It was a very difficult time for me. And I fought it. And I almost regret fighting it now,” said Motion, adding that he felt his team “handled the medication the proper way.”

    He said the new rules around when horses need to withdraw from such medication ahead of race day could have prevented this type of incident.

    Trainer Steve Asmussen before the 149th running of the Kentucky Oaks on May 5, 2023, at Churchill Downs in Louisville, Kentucky.

    Some therapeutic drugs, including anti-inflammatories, are a big concern for the industry on race day. Before each race, horses are examined by veterinarians to determine their fitness and identify potential ailments. But medication in the horse’s system, like anti-inflammatories, can mask some of those preexisting injuries.

    “The extent [of the preexisting injury] can change dramatically and it can go from something minor to something that is potentially serious, if not life threatening” when a horse bursts onto the track from the starting stall, said Dr. Mary Scollay, chief of science at the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit which oversees the new medication control regulations under HISA.

    New HISA regulations, implemented last month, include strict rules about withdrawal times and allowable medication levels on race day.

    “We want to make sure that there is no lingering effects from that medication that could mask a potential injury that would put that horse at risk to the horse, the rider, the others that are in that race,” said Dr. Will Farmer, equine medical director at Churchill Downs Incorporated. “That’s why we have very strict regulation around use of therapeutics in regards to a race specifically.”

    For decades, a patchwork of local and state rules governed the racetracks in the United States, and trainers found in violation of the rules meant to keep their horses safe have been met with minimal repercussions.

    Pletcher – whose horses have earned more than $460 million in almost 25,000 races – paid $5,000 in fines for drug-related citations over the course of his 27-year career. Baffert and Asmussen were each fined over $30,000 during their decades-long careers, according to records from the racing commissioners association. Those fines are offset by more than $340 million and $410 million in earnings, respectively, according to Equibase.

    What’s more, suspensions only banned trainers from certain tracks, allowing them to continue racing – and pocketing earnings – in other states.

    Since the 2022 New York race where Pletcher’s horse Forte had a post-race positive drug test, the horse won four more competitions for Pletcher, earning his handlers more than $2 million.

    Forte is set to race this weekend and is one of the favorites to win the Belmont Stakes.

    Baffert, too, was able to continue racing after he was hit with the suspension following Medina Spirit’s positive drug test. During that time, Baffert entered hundreds of races on other tracks, competing for purses totaling nearly $125 million, according to Equibase data. In 2022 alone, Baffert’s horses brought in nearly $10 million in prize money.

    A general view at the start during the 145th running of the Kentucky Derby at Churchill Downs.

    The biggest change in the governance of American horse racing was tucked into a 2020 federal spending bill. That proviso ultimately created the national Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority, or HISA – a move that, after three previous legislative attempts, found support from federal lawmakers after a particularly deadly season at a California racetrack.

    During the 2018-2019 season, a staggering 56 horses died at one of the most glamorous racetracks in the country, Santa Anita Park, once home to the famous 1940s thoroughbred Seabiscuit.

    The California Horse Racing Board could not determine a common denominator for the fatalities but found that the vast majority of horses that died had preexisting injuries. And, while no illegal substances or procedures were found, many of the horses were on anti-inflammatories and various other medications.

    “Horse racing must develop a culture of safety first,” the California board wrote in its investigative report. “A small number of participants refusing to change will harm the entire industry.”

    Initially a local scandal, the deaths in Santa Anita Park would have national implications. The fatalities led not only to a complete overhaul of racing practices in Santa Anita – improved track maintenance, restrictions on the use of medications, and softer whips on race day – but also to new national rules under the new regulator, HISA.

    As a private entity under the supervision of the Federal Trade Commission, HISA creates uniform regulations and penalties to govern racetracks throughout the country. The latest set of rules, implemented last month, include anti-doping and medication control programs. They also state that any suspension for a rule violation will carry across all tracks under HISA’s jurisdiction.

    HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus said the goal is to ensure that “there is a level playing field, that the horses are treated properly, that there is built-in safety and integrity” in the sport.

    But some pockets of the industry aren’t welcoming the changes – most notably the National Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association, which has questioned the constitutionality of HISA and filed suits arguing regulatory overreach.

    In an annual NHBPA conference held in March, trainers spoke out against HISA citing an increased administrative burden and added costs of higher fees and required veterinary checks.

    “The whole thing is a façade. It’s been all smoke and mirrors,” said Bret Calhoun, a horse trainer and member of the Louisiana HBPA board, according to the Thoroughbred Daily News. “They sold this thing as the safety of the horse. It’s absolutely not about safety of horse. It’s a few people, with self-interest and they have their own personal agenda.”

    There are several lawsuits challenging HISA’s legitimacy and authority in the sport, some backed by the NHBPA, making their way through courts across the country. But while legal battles are fought in the courts, horses keep dying on the tracks.

    Last week, a horse death at Belmont Park meant that there have been fatalities around all three racetracks in the Triple Crown this season.

    “There is risk in any sport. We cannot eliminate risk. We can continue to diminish risk as best we can. We are never going to eliminate a horse getting injured,” said Motion, adding “the most important thing is the welfare of the horse. It’s not winning at all costs. It’s winning with a healthy animal.”

    To identify racehorses who died while being trained by the industry’s highest-earning trainers, CNN combined a list of dead horses compiled by activist Patrick Battuello with data from the horse racing website Equibase.

    Since 2014, Battuello has collected state horse racing commission reports on horse deaths through public records requests and published a list of racehorses who died each year on his website. Most of the horse deaths Battuello has identified are based on state records, although a handful are based on news reports or verbal confirmation he received from racetrack officials.

    CNN matched Battuello’s list of deceased horses with data downloaded from Equibase that listed each horse’s trainer as of its most recent race. For the top three trainers with the highest earnings, Pletcher, Asmussen and Baffert, CNN reviewed the original documents Battuello collected from the commissions, which he provided to reporters.

    Because the Equibase data on trainers is based on each horse’s most recent race, some horses may have moved to other trainers before they died. In a handful of cases, when state death records listed a different trainer for a horse than Equibase does, CNN used the trainer listed in the records.

    CNN’s review only included horse deaths that were required to be reported to state commissions, so it undercounts the total deaths associated with individual trainers. In addition, not all of the dead horses Battuello has documented were able to be reliably matched with Equibase’s data, so additional deaths may also be missing from the review.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden set to project a business-as-usual attitude after Trump indictment | CNN Politics

    Biden set to project a business-as-usual attitude after Trump indictment | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The last time former President Donald Trump was indicted, his successor left the White House the next day intent on going about his schedule without wading into the matter.

    As Trump is indicted a second time, President Joe Biden is planning to do the same thing – an intentional demonstration of calm and normalcy amid the continuing chaos of his predecessor.

    He’ll probably get asked about the indictment throughout the day as he leaves the White House to visit sites in North Carolina. But there is little to suggest he’ll weigh in on the substance of the case.

    That’s because he and his aides believe doing so would only lend grist to Trump’s claim that he’s the victim of a political “witch hunt.” Biden doesn’t want to be baited into providing Trump any fuel for his allegations, people familiar with his thinking said. And he remains firmly of the belief that sitting presidents should not comment on legal matters.

    Those dynamics – already in play when Trump was indicted in New York – are only amplified now that former president has been handed a federal indictment by Biden’s Justice Department. It’s a situation Biden and his team know they must handle carefully.

    “You’ll notice, I have never once – not one single time – suggested to the Justice Department what they should do or not do on whether to bring any charges or not bring any charges. I’m honest,” Biden said at a news conference Thursday.

    Biden and first lady Dr. Jill Biden are set to travel to North Carolina on Friday to promote his job training agenda and sign an executive order meant to help military spouses remain in the workforce. The official trip is the type of activity Biden is planning a lot of over the coming year, as he works to sell his accomplishments to a skeptical electorate.

    Aides know Biden’s dutiful, there-and-back stops at community colleges, union halls and construction sites aren’t likely to generate the same level of headlines as those about Trump’s legal peril.

    Yet perhaps more than the accomplishments themselves, Biden is hoping to project an air of competence and authority as a contrast to the chaos that has accompanied Trump for years. That comparison could hardly be starker this week.

    There is another additional goal with Friday’s trip – kicking off a push to flip a state that has gone Republican in the last three presidential elections.

    The last time Biden traveled to North Carolina, Rep. Wiley Nickel offered a bullish outlook on his state’s political potential during the flight to Durham on Air Force One.

    “I talked to him a number of times about it. We have been pushing with folks from all over on why North Carolina is a must win and why it’s a state that’s set to have a great outcome in November,” the Democrat told CNN this week.

    The pitch may have worked. The trip is one of Biden’s first trips outside Washington to sell his agenda since he announced his bid for reelection in April.

    He won’t be the only 2024 contender in the state. A two-hour drive west, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis plans to speak at the North Carolina Republican Party convention in Greensboro. Former Vice President Mike Pence and Trump are also expected to address the gathering over the weekend.

    The convergence of candidates in the Tar Heel State is hardly a coincidence. After narrowly losing there to Trump in 2020, Biden’s campaign said in a strategy memo this spring the state is among their top targets next year as they look to expand the electoral map.

    On the Republican side, North Carolina’s 16 electoral votes would be essential for a pathway back to the White House. The last Democratic presidential candidate win there was Barack Obama in 2008.

    Yet the 1.3% margin Trump won by in 2020 was the smallest of any state, a demonstration – at least in Biden’s mind – that it is well within grasp in 2024. The state’s demographics are becoming more urban and diverse. Biden’s campaign has already purchased television ad time there.

    On Friday, Biden’s stops are considered official business, not campaign-related. But they reflect his team’s strategy of working to promote his accomplishments in places up for grabs in next year’s election.

    He plans to visit a community college in Rocky Mount to tout job training programs before heading to Fort Liberty – recently renamed from Fort Bragg, removing the moniker of a Confederate general – to sign an executive order meant to help military spouses remain in the workforce.

    “We’re asking agencies to make it easier for spouses employed by the federal government to take administrative leave, telework and move offices. We’re creating resources to support entrepreneurs and the executive order helps agencies and companies retain military spouses through telework or when they move abroad,” said first lady Dr. Jill Biden, who’s accompanying her husband in North Carolina on Friday.

    Both stops will put a spotlight on the types of agenda items the president plans to use as the basis for his reelection argument next year, centering on job creation and the middle class. Biden has focused heavily on job training for those without college degrees as part of his effort to revive American manufacturing.

    Despite a strong job market and rising wages, however, Biden has struggled to convince Americans of his economic agenda, according to polls. The three Republican candidates speaking in Greensboro this weekend will undoubtedly hammer the president on issues like inflation.

    Events like the stops in Rocky Mount and Fort Liberty on Friday are meant to explain to Americans what Biden has done so far, an approach he’s expected to continue pursuing in the coming year as Republicans engage in a primary battle.

    Nash Community College, where the president is visiting, is part of a coalition of historically black colleges that has received around $24 million from Biden’s American Rescue Plan for training on clean energy careers, according to the White House.

    The executive order he’ll sign later at Fort Liberty is meant to allow military spouses to remain in the workforce through greater employer flexibility. The issue has been a main agenda item for the first lady.

    It wasn’t clear whether Biden would address the renaming of the base, which became official last week. Many Republicans opposed stripping the names of Confederate generals from bases, an effort that began under Biden. Trump has likened the moves to erasing American history.

    Biden’s aides have acknowledged that simply selling the president’s agenda isn’t likely to be enough to get him reelected. They have also worked to highlight what they say are extreme Republican positions on issues like education and abortion.

    In this, too, North Carolina also offers a backdrop for areas Democrats believe they have an upper hand. North Carolina Republicans passed a restrictive new law last month that would outlaw most abortions after 12 weeks, using their legislative supermajority to override a veto from Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper.

    There are already plans by Biden’s campaign to focus on the ban as the campaign works to make inroads in the state.

    Nickel said Republicans’ abortion platform was the reason he was elected last year.

    “We focused almost exclusively two things. Rejecting far-right extremism and standing up for a woman’s right to choose. And that’s what folks understood our campaign was about,” he said.

    For Biden, whose time as a candidate will be carefully managed as he works to confront still-significant headwinds, Nickel had this piece of advice for winning in North Carolina: “I think he needs to show up a lot.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Takeaways from CNN’s town hall with Mike Pence | CNN Politics

    Takeaways from CNN’s town hall with Mike Pence | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former Vice President Mike Pence staked out a series of clear differences with boss-turned-2024 rival Donald Trump, and needled other Republican contenders, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, in a CNN town hall in Iowa on Wednesday night.

    Hours after he launched his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, Pence broke with the former president on immigration policy, entitlement spending, US support for Ukraine in its war against Russia and more.

    He said he would not reinstate the policy of separating migrant families at the border – a widely criticized practice that Trump didn’t rule out reviving in his own CNN town hall last month.

    Pence also said that other Republican rivals were wrong to put changes to Social Security off the table, telling the crowd at Grand View University in Des Moines that seriously reducing federal spending will require changes to entitlement programs.

    He sharply rebuked Trump for describing Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “genius” for his invasion of Ukraine, while casting DeSantis as naive on the issue. And he continued to criticize the former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

    Pence said he and Trump don’t just disagree about the past; the two have “a different vision for our party.”

    “I’m somebody who believes in American leadership in the world. Our party needs to lead on fiscal responsibility and stand without apology for life. We’ll have those debates,” he said.

    Still, Pence said, he will “support the Republican nominee in 2024,” a pledge he said he felt comfortable making because he doubted Trump would win the primary.

    “Different times call for different leadership,” Pence said. “The American people don’t look backwards; they look forward. … I don’t think my old running mate is going to be the Republican nominee for president.”

    Here are six takeaways from Pence’s CNN town hall:

    Pence urged the Justice Department not to indict his onetime boss, saying such an indictment would fuel division inside the country and “send a terrible message to the wider world.”

    While Pence said that “no one is above the law,” he said the DOJ could resolve its investigation into Trump’s potential mishandling of classified documents without resorting to an indictment, just as the department informed Pence’s attorney last week that there would be no charges brought in the case of the classified documents discovered in his home.

    But in Pence’s case, the former vice president immediately contacted the National Archives and the FBI to return his documents, while Trump resisted handing over his classified material and failed to return all classified documents after receiving a subpoena last May.

    Pence’s response underscores the tightrope the former vice president is walking when it comes to the numerous probes into his former boss. CNN reported Wednesday that the Justice Department had informed Trump he’s a target of special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the mishandling of classified documents and possible obstruction, a sign that prosecutors may be moving closer to indicting the former president.

    While Pence criticized Trump for his actions on January 6 at his campaign kickoff Wednesday and at the town hall, he sought to distinguish those actions from the documents probe, protesting that there were “dozens” of better ways that the FBI could have handled Trump’s case before resorting to an unprecedented search the former president’s residence.

    So far, Pence’s sharpest criticism of Trump came when he was asked about the United States’ role in helping Ukraine in its efforts to repel Russia’s invasion.

    After arguing that the US should accelerate its support for the Ukrainian military, Pence pointed to Trump’s description of Putin in a February 2022 radio interview as a “genius” for his invasion of Ukraine.

    “I know the difference between a genius and a war criminal, and I know who needs to win the war in Ukraine,” Pence said. “And it’s the people fighting for their freedom and fighting to restore their national sovereignty in Ukraine. And America – it’s not our war, but freedom is our fight. And we need to give the people of Ukraine the ability to fight and defend their freedom.”

    Pence’s comments align him with Nikki Haley, Trump’s United Nations ambassador and a 2024 rival, and against their former boss and DeSantis, who entered the GOP race last month. The former vice president echoed Haley’s veiled shot at DeSantis – who described the war as a “territorial dispute” – casting such characterizations as naive.

    “Anybody that thinks Vladimir Putin will stop if he overruns Ukraine has what we say back in Indiana, another thing coming,” Pence said. “He has no intention of stopping. He’s made it clear that he wants to recreate that old Soviet sphere of influence in Eastern Europe.”

    Pence participates in a CNN Republican Presidential Town Hall on Wednesday.

    Pence repeatedly highlighted his support for “parents’ rights,” especially when it comes to schools. But he said the judgment of those same parents should not apply to situations when a minor is seeking gender transition care.

    “I strongly support state legislation, including, as we did in Indiana, that bans all gender transition, chemical or surgical procedures, under the age of 18,” he said – even when parents support their child’s decision to go forward.

    Republican presidential candidates have all railed against what Pence on Wednesday described as “radical gender ideology,” language that by definition falsely suggests there is a movement of people seeking to convince young people to change their gender identities.

    “However adults want to live, they can live,” Pence said. “But for children, we’re going to protect kids from the radical gender ideology and say no chemical or surgical transition before you’re 18.”

    Pressed on the age question, Pence compared gender transition to body art, saying, “There’s a reason why you don’t let kids get a tattoo before they’re 18.”

    When Bash asked what he would say to children and families who feel targeted by his position and those of his ideological allies, Pence offered an olive branch of sorts.

    “I’d put my arm around them and tell them I love ‘em,” he said, “but (tell them) ‘Just wait.’”

    Pence speaks during a CNN Republican Presidential Town Hall moderated by CNN's Dana Bash at Grand View University in Des Moines, Iowa, on June 7.

    Pence has been a fierce anti-abortion advocate his entire adult life. On Wednesday night, he made clear he would not deviate from that position.

    “I couldn’t be more proud to be vice president in an administration that appointed three of the justices that sent Roe v. Wade to the ash heap of history,” Pence said, “and gave America a new beginning for life.”

    On the question of a federal ban on the procedure, Pence said he supported exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. But he did not tap dance around the fundamental question, even as voters around the country – in the midterms and in referendums – have registered their anger over the Supreme Court’s decision and the subsequent passage of state laws to sharply restrict abortion rights.

    “We will not rest or relent until we restore the sanctity of life to the center of American law in every state in the country,” Pence said.

    Still, the former vice president acknowledged that his side had a “long way to go to win the hearts and minds of the American people” and encouraged his allies to show both “principle and compassion.”

    To that end, he offered qualified support for social spending programs to help support newborns and new parents.

    “We have to care as much about newborns and mothers as we do about the unborn,” Pence said. But he stopped short of specifically endorsing paid family leave for all Americans or subsidized child care.

    Pence said he would “take a step back” from the approach of the Trump-era landmark sentencing reform law, known as the First Step Act.

    “We need to get serious and tough on violent crime, and we need to give our cities and our states the resources to restore law and order to our streets. And I promise you, we’ll do that, if I’m your president,” Pence told Bash.

    Under the First Step Act, thousands of federal inmates, most of them serving sentences for drug offense and weapons charges, were released from prison early, either for good behavior or through participation in rehabilitation programs. The law also eased mandatory minimum sentencing for certain drug offenders.

    Asked about DeSantis’ promise to repeal the First Step Act if elected president, Pence again conceded that he would take a different approach than the First Step Act.

    “We ought to be thinking about how we make penalties tougher on people that are victimizing families in this country,” he said.

    Pence repeated the criticism he has leveled at his former boss for more than a year, insisting that Trump was wrong to ask his second-in-command to overturn some states’ 2020 Electoral College votes in his ceremonial role presiding over Congress as it counted those votes on January 6, 2021.

    Pence said he “frankly hoped the president would come around” since early 2021. Though he said he agreed that some states inappropriately changed their election procedures during the coronavirus pandemic.

    “But at the end of the day, I think the Republican Party has to be the party of the Constitution,” he said.

    Pence also broke with Trump over the legal fates of those who rioted at the US Capitol on January 6 – and have since faced criminal charges and convictions. Trump said he would consider pardoning many of those rioters, who he said were being treated “very unfairly.”

    Pence, though, said the United States “cannot ever allow what happened on January 6 to happen again in the heart of our democracy.”

    “I have no interest or no intention of pardoning those that assaulted police officers or vandalized our Capitol. They need to answer to the law,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump and DeSantis escalate feud in dueling campaign events | CNN Politics

    Trump and DeSantis escalate feud in dueling campaign events | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday escalated their ongoing feud at dueling campaign events in Iowa and New Hampshire amid DeSantis’ first campaign swing as a declared 2024 candidate.

    Trump pushed back on DeSantis’ claim that it would require two presidential terms to carry out an effective and lasting conservative agenda as the Florida governor tried to seize on the potential vulnerability that Trump could only serve one term if reelected.

    “When he says eight years, every time I hear it I wince because I say, if it takes eight years to turn this around, then you don’t want him. You don’t want him as your president,” Trump said at a campaign event in Urbandale, Iowa.

    “You don’t need eight years, you need six months,” Trump said. “Who the hell wants to wait eight years?”

    When a reporter in New Hampshire then asked DeSantis about Trump arguing he could accomplish his priorities in six months, the Florida governor quipped, “Why didn’t he do it his first four years?”

    At a campaign stop in Rochester, New Hampshire, DeSantis argued if a president only served one term, “Everything would get reversed, the bureaucrats would wait you out.”

    In another veiled shot at DeSantis, Trump on Thursday made a point to tell the crowd gathered that he would take a few questions from attendees.

    “When we’re finished, we’ll take a couple of questions, and we’ll do that because I see these politicians they all don’t want to take questions, you know. They walk in, they make, they read a speech, see here’s my speech that I’m supposed to be reading,” Trump said as he held up a paper copy of his remarks.

    Trump’s comments came after DeSantis lashed out at a reporter from the Associated Press who asked him why he wasn’t taking questions from voters.

    “They’re coming up to me talking to me, what are you talking about? I’m out here… with people, are you blind?” DeSantis said at the event on Thursday in New Hampshire as he took photos with voters.

    DeSantis hasn’t been taking questions from the podium from attendees at his campaign events since he kicked off his campaigning this week.

    As Trump held back-to-back campaign events in Iowa on Thursday, buses and billboards from the DeSantis-aligned super political action committee Never Back Down were in the parking lot at at least two of his events. At one Trump event a member of the super PAC was handing out fliers to attendees criticizing Trump for suggesting the six-week abortion ban DeSantis signed into law in Florida was “too harsh.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 5 things to know for May 31: DeSantis, Artificial intelligence, Debt deal, UK, Ukraine | CNN

    5 things to know for May 31: DeSantis, Artificial intelligence, Debt deal, UK, Ukraine | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    One-time Silicon Valley darling Elizabeth Holmes reported to prison Tuesday to begin serving out her 11-year sentence after being convicted on multiple charges of defrauding investors. Her life in prison will be quite a change, with mandatory jobs, very early mornings and no black turtlenecks.

    Here’s what else you need to know to Get Up to Speed and On with Your Day.

    (You can get “CNN’s 5 Things” delivered to your inbox daily. Sign up here.)

    Ron DeSantis officially kicked off his 2024 presidential campaign Tuesday in Iowa. While speaking to reporters after the event at an evangelical church outside Des Moines, the Florida governor leveled a series of shots at his rival, former President Donald Trump, painting him as selfish, unprincipled and petty. As the opening contest in the GOP nominating fight, Iowa holds a unique role in sizing up the presidential field. That’s especially important this election season since it’s the first time in over a century a former president is seeking to return to the White House. Meanwhile, Florida officials just changed state campaign finance guidelines in a very specific way to allow DeSantis’ allies to initiate a specific kind of transfer to move tens of millions of dollars to a super PAC supporting his campaign. The planned move has already drawn a watchdog complaint with the Federal Election Commission.

    Dozens of industry leaders and academics in the field of artificial intelligence have called for greater global attention to the possible threat of “extinction from AI.” A statement, signed by leading industry officials like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Geoffrey Hinton — the so-called “godfather” of artificial intelligence — highlights wide-ranging concerns about the ultimate danger of unchecked AI. Experts say humanity is still a ways off from the prospect of science-fiction-like AI overlords, but the flood of hype and investment into the AI industry has led to calls for regulation now before any major mishaps occur. The growing AI arms race has already generated more immediate concerns. Lawmakers, advocacy groups and tech insiders have raised alarms about the potential for AI-powered language models like ChatGPT to spread misinformation and displace jobs.

    AI developers are warning ‘risk of extinction’ to humans

    The House of Representatives is on track to vote today on a bill to suspend the nation’s debt limit through January 1, 2025. The bill already cleared a key hurdle Tuesday evening when the powerful House Rules Committee voted 7-6 to advance it to the floor. That’s a win for House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who was tasked with convincing members of the committee to vote in favor even though some fellow Republicans don’t approve of the bill and have vowed to sink it in the chamber. Still, it appears a wide range of House members on both sides of the aisle are poised to support the deal. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill would reduce budget deficits by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years, and reduce discretionary spending by a projected $1.3 trillion from 2024 to 2033.

    exp debt limit bill rana foroohar intv 053102ASEG1 cnni us_00005607.png

    U.S. House to vote on debt limit bill amid criticism

    The UK’s inflation problems are getting so out of hand, officials are considering food price caps to curb the crisis. New data released this week shows the cost of store items, a metric known as shop price inflation, rose 9% through the year to May. That’s the highest it’s ever been since such stats were first recorded in 2005. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is considering asking retailers to cap the price of essential food items, something the UK government tried in the 1970s to tepid effect. Economists say capping prices leads to lower supply and higher demand, resulting in shortages. The enduring shadow of Brexit still looms large over Britain’s economy, and some experts say the government should be focused on shedding burdensome regulations that resulted from the move instead of trying to control prices. 

    Russia’s war on Ukraine is increasingly spilling into Russian territory. The governor of Russia’s Belgorod region, which borders Ukraine, said four people were recently injured in a “massive strike” there. This is the latest in a series of strikes against Russian targets by Ukrainian forces. Russian President Vladimir Putin addressed the spate of attacks, saying Ukraine “chose the path of intimidation,” and is provoking Russia to “mirror actions.” Amid all the violence, scientists have another concern: International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi has outlined a plan to protect Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and asked that Russia and Ukraine observe them to ensure the plant’s safety and security. 

    exp russia ukraine drone strikes sam kiley FST 053112ASEG2 cnni world_00002524.png

    Russia blames Ukraine after drone strikes in Moscow

    Alleged Russian ‘spy’ whale now in Swedish waters

    Patiently waiting for a mystery novel series about spy whales. 

    Michael Jordan was a ‘horrible player’ and ‘horrible to play with,’ says former Chicago Bulls teammate Scottie Pippen

    Dang, Scottie. Tell us how you really feel!

    Venice authorities discover why canal turned fluorescent green

    Given all the fluorescent things it could have been, this is quite a relief.

    This is the world’s first 3D-printed, cultivated fish fillet

    Mmm, science is delicious.

    Air New Zealand to weigh passengers before they board the airplane

    What an innovative way to make air travel even more stressful

    1.4 million

    That’s about how many people have now been displaced in Sudan since a civil war erupted there in April, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says. Hundreds have been killed in the violence, and reports of sexual assault are increasingly common. 

    “I just tried to follow the police commands but I guess that didn’t work.”

    — Aderrien Murry, the 11-year-old boy who was shot in the chest less than two weeks ago by a Mississippi police officer after he called 911 for help. The boy said he prayed and sang in the moments after he was shot as his mother tried to stop the bleeding. Aderrien’s family wants the officer fired, and is seeking restitution from the state. 

    Check your local forecast here>>>

    A perfect day

    Bless people who put little collar cameras on their outdoor cats. These videos bring a type of peace I didn’t know existed. (Click here to view)

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Republican tries to scuttle debt limit bill in House Rules Committee as pressure grows on key swing vote | CNN Politics

    Republican tries to scuttle debt limit bill in House Rules Committee as pressure grows on key swing vote | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Rep. Chip Roy accused House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Monday of cutting a deal that could complicate negotiators’ efforts to pass a bill to raise the US debt ceiling this week.

    But McCarthy’s allies quickly refuted the Texas Republican, underscoring the tension ahead of a key meeting of the House Rules Committee on Tuesday – and putting new pressure on a conservative holdout, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who has yet to take a position on the plan.

    Roy contended that McCarthy cut a hand-shake deal in January that all nine Republicans on the powerful panel must agree to move any legislation forward, otherwise bills could not be considered by the full House for majority approval. That would essentially doom the debt ceiling bill since Roy – who sits on the panel – and another conservative committee member are trying to stop the bill from advancing.

    “A reminder that during Speaker negotiations to build the coalition, that it was explicit both that nothing would pass Rules Committee without AT LEAST 7 GOP votes – AND that the Committee would not allow reporting out rules without unanimous Republican votes,” Roy tweeted.

    Senior GOP sources acknowledged that there was an agreement for seven Republican committee members to agree to move forward in order to advance a bill to the floor, but they flatly dispute that there was a deal for all nine to sign off for legislation to advance.

    “I have not heard that before. If those conversations took place, the rest of the conference was unaware of them,” said Rep. Dusty Johnson of South Dakota. “And frankly, I doubt them.”

    The dispute is significant because Roy sits on the committee – which is divided between nine Republicans and four Democrats – as does GOP Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina. Both men have emerged as leading foes of the bipartisan debt limit bill to avoid a June 5 default, arguing it does little to rein in government spending.

    A third conservative who sits on the panel – Massie – has been mum about how he plans to handle the rule vote in committee. McCarthy agreed to name all three men to the panel as part of the promises he made during his hard-fought speaker’s victory – all to give more power to conservatives on committees, including on Rules, which is typically stacked with the speaker’s closest allies.

    If Massie were to join Roy and Norman and vote against the rule at Tuesday’s meeting, he could effectively stall the measure in committee.

    But in January, Massie told CNN he was reluctant to vote against rules to stop bills in their tracks.

    “I would be reluctant to try to use the rules committee to achieve a legislative outcome, particularly if it doesn’t represent a large majority of our caucus,” Massie said at the time. “So I don’t ever intend to use my position on there to like, hold somebody hostage – or hold legislation hostage.”

    Democrats on the committee may also vote for the rule, sources told CNN, and that would ensure it has the votes to advance to the floor. But if Massie were to oppose the rule, only six Republicans would be in favor of it, complicating McCarthy’s efforts to bring the plan to the floor since he previously agreed to only take up bills with the backing of seven committee Republicans.

    Massie’s office declined to comment on how he may vote on Tuesday, and neither Roy nor the speaker’s office responded to requests for comments on the Texan’s assertion.

    But Republicans close to McCarthy refuted the notion that bills could only advance with unanimous GOP support in the committee.

    “I’m a rules guy,” Johnson said. “And when I checked, there wasn’t a rule that something has to come out of Rules Committee unanimously. Now Chip is a rules guy too. So I think he’s going to understand that, that this is a majoritarian institution, and that ultimately, we’re going to serve Americans the best way that the majority of us know how – that’s going to be to pass this bill.”

    Other McCarthy allies agreed.

    “I don’t know what Speaker McCarthy agreed to, but that has not been something that any of us were familiar with,” Rep. Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma said. “I think that comment was that it had to be unanimous to come out of the Rules Committee to go to the floor is the tweet that I read. And I think that is inaccurate, at best, but I don’t know because I wasn’t in the room. I don’t know how you would have something like that functionally work.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link