ReportWire

Tag: iab-politics

  • GOP hardliners sink Pentagon bill in another blow for McCarthy | CNN Politics

    GOP hardliners sink Pentagon bill in another blow for McCarthy | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The House on Thursday has voted down a rule that would have advanced a Defense Department bill, another stumbling block for Speaker Kevin McCarthy and House Republican leadership ahead of a looming government shutdown deadline.

    The final vote was 216-212.

    While the specific legislation is separate from a proposal to keep the government funded beyond the present September 30 deadline, the defeat is another sign of divisions within the House Republican Conference, which has been negotiating for days to come up with a plan that can unify GOP House members. This is the third time House Republicans have bucked McCarthy and GOP leadership in a vote on a rule, a traditionally pro forma step that is taken to advance legislation.

    McCarthy emerged visibly frustrated from the House floor while it was in total paralysis as House hardliners tanked another rule, slamming the group for just wanting to “burn the place down.”

    “It’s frustrating in the sense that I don’t understand why anybody votes against bringing the idea and having the debate,” McCarthy told reporters.

    Opposition from hardliners has plagued efforts by Republican leadership to unify behind a plan to fund the government. Days of negotiations have yielded a few apparent breakthroughs, but McCarthy’s Republican opponents have been quick to throw cold water on progress and openly defy the speaker’s calls for unity. McCarthy’s thin margin in the chamber means that in most votes he can only lose four members without any support from Democrats – and absences can raise and lower the majority threshold.

    Late Thursday evening, McCarthy briefed his conference behind closed doors on a new plan to keep the government open – paired with deeper spending cuts and new border security measures – all in an attempt to win over wary members on his right flank. The plan, as outlined by the speaker, would keep the government open for 30 days at a $1.471 trillion spending level, a commission to address the debt and a border security package. Separately, they also agreed to move year-long funding bills at a $1.526 trillion level. That level is below the bipartisan agreement that the speaker reached with the White House to raise the national debt limit.

    As part of the deal, Republicans told CNN on Thursday night that they have the votes to move forward on the yearlong Pentagon spending bill that five conservative hardliners scuttled just Tuesday, with Reps. Ralph Norman of South Carolina and Ken Buck of Colorado indicating they will flip to a yes on the rule and will vote to advance the Department of Defense bill Thursday after the speaker came down to the spending levels that Norman had been demanding.

    But Thursday’s vote had five Republican opponents as well – as six Republicans total ended up voting against the rule. Reps. Dan Bishop of North Carolina, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Matt Rosendale of Montana, Eli Crane of Arizona and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia voted against the bill. House Rules Committee Chairman Tom Cole of Oklahoma also eventually changed his vote, casting his vote against the Rule so he could bring it back up for reconsideration. It’s unclear when Republicans may try the vote again.

    Republican leadership has alerted House members they plan to stay in session Friday and Saturday amid the standoff.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McCarthy privately outlines new GOP plan to avert shutdown, setting up clash with Senate | CNN Politics

    McCarthy privately outlines new GOP plan to avert shutdown, setting up clash with Senate | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Speaker Kevin McCarthy privately outlined to members a new GOP plan to keep the government open on Wednesday after a marathon two-and-a-half-hour GOP conference meeting.

    The California Republican later told reporters that Republican negotiators made “tremendous progress as an entire conference,” following days of GOP infighting and less than two weeks before a government funding deadline.

    “We are very close,” McCarthy said Wednesday evening when asked specifically what progress had been made on the GOP short-term bill. “I feel like just got a little more movement to go there,” he added of the new GOP plan. When asked specifically about the topline numbers, he wouldn’t get into details but said: “We’re in a good place.”

    The plan, as outlined by the speaker, would keep the government open for 30 days at $1.471 trillion spending levels, a commission to address the debt and a border security package. Separately, they also agreed to move year-long funding bills at a $1.526 trillion level. That level is below the bipartisan agreement that the speaker reached with the White House to raise the national debt limit.

    The levels are also far lower than what senators from both parties and the White House are willing to accept, meaning it’s unclear how such a deal would avert a government shutdown. With just 10 days left to fund the government, the new plan sets up a standoff with the Senate over how to keep the government open.

    As part of the deal, Republicans now believe they have the votes to move forward on the yearlong spending bill that five conservative hardliners scuttled just Tuesday.

    GOP Rep. Mike Garcia of California said after Wednesday evening’s conference meeting there is now “a little more clarity” on the path forward.

    “We have a little more clarity as to a potential plan moving forward,” Garcia said, adding, “We are still negotiating that final number and trying to figure out exactly what we can do.”

    Some of the people that were previously opposed now signaled they are supportive. Reps. Ralph Norman of South Carolina and Ken Buck of Colorado indicated they will flip to a yes on the rule and will vote to advance the Department of Defense bill Thursday after the speaker came down to the spending levels that Norman had been demanding.

    “Sounds like we’ve got the votes for the rule,” Garcia said, pointing to Buck and Norman as having committed to changing to a “Yes.”

    With McCarthy’s extremely thin margin in the chamber – and Democrats so far united against the GOP proposal – Republican leadership has been negotiating for days to try to win over enough GOP support to pass their legislation.

    When asked about struggling to make progress earlier Wednesday, McCarthy repeated his favorite line, insisting he will never back down from a challenge no matter how messy.

    “I wouldn’t quit the first time I went for the vote for speaker,” McCarthy said, a reference to how he was voted speaker only after 15 rounds and days of voting in January. “The one thing if you haven’t learned anything about me yet, I will never quit.”

    However, an additional potential complicating factor emerged Wednesday night with former President Donald Trump, the front-runner for the 2024 Republican nomination, coming out in opposition to a short-term funding bill as he called on lawmakers to defund the DOJ and the investigations into him.

    McCarthy and his GOP leadership team have been trying to sell the House Republican Conference on unifying behind a plan to fund the government, brokered between the House Freedom Caucus and the more moderate Main Street Caucus over the weekend. But that proposed legislation encountered immediate opposition from more than a dozen far-right Republican lawmakers who wanted deeper spending cuts attached.

    Amid that impasse with conservatives, moderates in the bipartisan House Problem Solver’s Caucus are close to finalizing their own framework on a short-term spending bill that would fund the government for several months at current levels and include Ukraine aid and disaster assistance, according to two sources. Even with Democratic support, that plan would still likely face major challenges – not the least of which is how it would get to the floor before the government runs out of money.

    There are already signs that this alternative plan could face its own strong headwinds – not just with Republicans but with Democrats. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a progressive Democrat from Washington state, told CNN on “Inside Politics” that she wants a “clean” continuing resolution of funds, a sign that progressives may not back some of the border security provisions that the Problem Solvers Caucus members are eyeing.

    House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries met with the House Problem Solvers Caucus earlier Wednesday, and said afterward that they need a bipartisan agreement in line with what was already negotiated in the debt ceiling package.

    “We need to find a bipartisan agreement consistent with what was previously reached,” he said.

    House GOP leadership announced Wednesday night that the House will be in and voting on Friday and Saturday, making official what was expected as the majority struggled to reach an agreement all week.

    The House is expected to pass a rule for the defense appropriations bill Thursday. Assuming the rule passes, the House will then start consideration of the defense bill with final passage expected Friday.

    The thinking would then be to pass the new GOP stopgap plan on Saturday, which is expected to be a full day.

    Members were advised on Tuesday to keep their schedules flexible as weekend votes were possible. Members filtering in and out of Whip Emmer’s office the past two days are insistent that they are making progress, but Rep. Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota told CNN earlier Wednesday that while they are getting closer, they are not close yet.

    Rep. Garrett Graves from Louisiana, who has been in the room for negotiations, had echoed that schedule change and projected Friday and Saturday work.

    “I think we’re going to be here this weekend,” he said.

    When pressed on what exactly they’d be up to and if they’d be able to vote by Saturday, Graves said, “Well, we won’t be having Mardi Gras parties,” indicating they’d be voting.

    Rep. Steve Womack, a Republican from Arkansas who sits on the House Appropriations Committee, lambasted the hardliners, calling it a “breach of duty.”

    “We’ve got a handful of people that are holding the rest of the conference, the majority of our conference kind of held hostage right now and in turn, holding up America,” he told CNN.

    Womack also said this will likely extend into the weekend and that “either it’s gonna be good or it’s gonna be bad.”

    This story and headline have been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Five Americans back on US soil after release from Iranian detention | CNN Politics

    Five Americans back on US soil after release from Iranian detention | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Five Americans freed from Iranian detention this week returned to US soil early Tuesday following an initial stop in Doha, Qatar, a US official tells CNN.

    Emad Shargi, Morad Tahbaz and Siamak Namazi, along with two Americans who have not been publicly named have arrived in the Washington, DC, area, after they were released Monday as part of a wider deal that includes the US unfreezing $6 billion in Iranian funds.

    The freed Americans will have the option to participate in a Department of Defense Program known as PISA (Post Isolation Support Activities) to help them acclimate back to normal life now that they are back in the United States.

    The return of the five Americans, all of whom had been designated as wrongfully detained, caps a significant diplomatic breakthrough after years of complicated indirect negotiations between the US and Iran, who do not have formal diplomatic ties.

    The group was flown out of Tehran on a Qatari government jet to Doha on Monday, before taking off for the Washington, DC, area to be reunited with their families, according to a senior administration official. Namazi’s mother, Effie Namazi, and Tahbaz’s wife, Vida Tahbaz, who had been previously unable to leave Iran, were also on the flight from Iran to Doha, the official said Monday.

    After a year of indirect negotiations, the deal began to broadly come together in Doha about seven months ago and the first tangible public steps took place about five weeks ago, when four of the Americans were transferred to house arrest. The fifth American was already under house arrest.

    President Joe Biden on Monday celebrated their release “after enduring years of agony, uncertainty, and suffering.” But while the release stood as the latest high-profile deal negotiated by his administration to secure the release of Americans deemed wrongly detained abroad, Biden drew criticism from some Republicans who likened the agreement to a “ransom payment.”

    A senior Biden administration official said Monday that the deal “has not changed our relationship with Iran in any way,” noting the US would still work to hold Iran accountable for its human rights abuses and to constrain its nuclear program.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • That jet the Marines lost? Taxpayers will pay $1.7 trillion for the F-35 program | CNN Politics

    That jet the Marines lost? Taxpayers will pay $1.7 trillion for the F-35 program | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

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



    CNN
     — 

    The military losing a fighter jet near Charleston, South Carolina, and asking the public to help find it is a plotline in which “Top Gun” (fighter jets) meets “The Hunt for Red October” (country can’t find its weapons system).

    But the larger story of the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter is like tax dollars meet “The Blob” (unstoppable force consumes everything in its path).

    “How in the hell do you lose an F-35?” wondered Rep. Nancy Mace, the South Carolina Republican, in a post on social media that speaks for everyone who read the headline about the state-of-the-art military plane that went missing Sunday after its pilot ejected and parachuted to safety.

    “How is there not a tracking device and we’re asking the public to what, find a jet and turn it in?” she continued.

    A more general and important question could be asked of the F-35 program writ large: How in the heck can you spend so much money on a plane that doesn’t work the way it’s supposed to?

    The exact amount of money for a single aircraft like the one that went missing is somewhere around $100 million.

    The entire F-35 program is on track to cost $1.7 trillion over the lifetime of the plane. Trillion. With a “t.”

    CNN’s Oren Liebermann reported the facts of what we know about the missing aircraft on CNN on Monday:

    • The pilot ejected safely and was taken to a hospital.
    • Joint Base Charleston posted a social media plea for information from anyone who might have seen the jet or its remains.
    • The search is focused northwest of Charleston near Lakes Marion and Moultrie.

    But we’re left with so many questions, he told CNN’s Jim Sciutto.

    “Was the transponder working? If not, why wasn’t it working? Why, maybe, had it been switched off? What was the mission it was on? All of this is either under investigation or a question we haven’t gotten an answer to yet.”

    When I asked Liebermann by email how to generally explain the F-35 program, he noted it is the most expensive weapons program in US history.

    For a country that spends a good portion of its income on its military and is known to have the most advanced fighting force on Earth, that’s saying something.

    The F-35 is what’s known as a “stealth” fighter, which means it is supposed to be able to avoid detection by enemies. Maybe a little too stealth.

    But if you watch the glossy Lockheed Martin video at F35.com, the jet is also supposed to be able to communicate with rest of the military, “sharing its operational picture with the ground, sea and air assets.” The video shows the jet beaming information to the ground and satellites.

    The New York Times’ editorial board used the word “boondoggle” to describe the F-35 program in 2021. But it added that the US is essentially stuck with the program.

    Or as CNN’s Zachary Cohen wrote back in 2015, “Is the world’s most expensive weapons program worth it?” Eight years later, the question still applies.

    Many US allies – Canada, Germany, Japan and others – also buy F-35s from Lockheed.

    The F-35, as developed by Lockheed at the request of the US military, was supposed to be the jack-of-all-jets, with versions to do different jobs for the Air Force, the Navy and the Marines.

    The version that went missing over South Carolina – the F-35B – is used by the US Marine Corps and meant to be able to “land vertically like a helicopter and take-off in very short distances,” according to a fact sheet from Lockheed. Another F-35B crashed in 2018, also in South Carolina.

    The Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan watchdog group, has written extensively on the F-35 and its cost overruns. I asked Dan Grazier, an F-35 expert for POGO, what has gone wrong.

    It all boils down to “failure at the conceptual level,” he told me in an email.

    “The architects of the program attempted to build a single aircraft to meet multiple mission requirements for not just three separate services but also those of multiple countries,” Grazier said, noting the difference between a small and nimble fighter jet and a long-range jet.

    “When someone attempts to design a single aircraft to perform all of these roles, they have to make numerous design tradeoffs that generally results in an aircraft that can sort of do it all, but doesn’t do anything particularly well.”

    The jet has never reached its full operational capability and already needs updates and tweaks, including a new engine. “Every F-35 built until now is nothing more than a very expensive prototype,” Grazier told me.

    “All of them will have to go through an expensive retrograde process in the future when the design is complete to bring them up to something approaching full combat standards.”

    I asked a spokesperson for Lockheed Martin if the company is confident the jets perform as they should considering the taxpayer investment.

    They provided this statement:

    The global F-35 fleet has surpassed more than 721,000 cumulative flight hours and spans 17 nations and three U.S. military services. Since F-35s began flying 17 years ago, there has been one pilot fatality and less than 10 confirmed destroyed aircraft. More than 965 F-35s have been delivered and more than 430,000 sorties completed.

    Diana Maurer is director of defense capabilities and management at the Government Accountability Office, the government’s own watchdog that earlier this year described the F-35 program as “more than a decade behind schedule and $183 billion over original cost estimates.”

    She said pilots frequently report being impressed by the plane’s capabilities. But they also report not being able to fly it often enough.

    Problems getting spare parts, issues with repairs and a reliance on contractors all contribute to the F-35 having a substandard readiness and frequent groundings of the fleet.

    “There’s a variety of reasons why they can’t get these aircraft up in the air as often as they would like,” Maurer said. “And that’s really frustrating from a taxpayer perspective for something that already costs hundreds of millions of dollars a year; cost many, many multiple billions already; and will cost nearly $2 trillion over the life cycle of the program.”

    Grazier said officials at the Pentagon have acknowledged problems with the F-35 that can be applied to the design process in the future. But this is a program that evolved over successive presidencies and with a rotating cast of characters in charge both in Congress and at the Pentagon.

    The system is supposed to have safeguards against extreme cost overruns, but when those warnings were triggered in previous decades, the F-35 program was allowed to barrel forward. And here we are.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Three generations of First Nations men share their views on Australia’s referendum | CNN

    Three generations of First Nations men share their views on Australia’s referendum | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Brisbane, Australia
    CNN
     — 

    Before Australians last voted in a referendum on First Nations people in 1967, Uncle Bob Anderson set up a table and chair at a tram stop in central Brisbane.

    From his rail-side office, he’d tell anyone who would stop and listen that Australia counted its horses, cows, sheep and goats, but not its Indigenous people. “My question to you is, do you think they should be?” he’d say.

    Some 56 years later, the Ngugi Elder sat on a chair under the hot Brisbane sun on Sunday, his wispy white hair covered in a straw hat, his presence a sign of support for another referendum concerning his people.

    Nearby, thousands of people gathered for “Walk for Yes” rallies in multiple cities around Australia ahead of the October 14 vote.

    On that day, some 17.5 million registered voters will be asked whether Australia should change the constitution to include a permanent body made up of First Nations people to advise the government on matters affecting them.

    Now 94, Anderson says a Yes vote isn’t just important for him but the country.

    “By talking and walking together as a nation and as a society, we will share a common destiny,” he said.

    But less than four weeks out from the vote, polls suggest the split between the supporters and opponents is widening, in favor of no change to the constitution.

    Veteran grassroots Aboriginal activist Wayne Wharton wore the reason for his objections on his T-shirt, as he shouted at Yes supporters on a bridge in central Brisbane.

    “You’re a thief, a liar and a gatekeeper,” he yelled, to a mix of ages and races walking by. “Give back what you stole, give back what you stole, give back what you stole.”

    Aboriginal activist Wayne Wharton delivers his message to supporters at the

    The 62-year-old Kooma man told CNN on the phone that fundamentally people are being asked the wrong question.

    “In a well-meaning country and a country seeking justice, this question would never have been raised or tabled. The question that would have been offered would have been a question about [a] treaty or just occupation,” he said.

    Like Anderson, Wharton remembers the curfews that confined First Nations people to the outskirts of town between sunset and sunrise, the racial slurs hurled at him and his family, the abuse of his ancestors forced to live in missions, and the theft of First Nations children under policies of assimilation that later prompted a national apology.

    Wharton said he wants “liberation, freedom and restitution” delivered through negotiation by the hundreds of Aboriginal nations with people occupying their land.

    “I’ve seen many things change in my 60 years, and as the White bigots that created this continent of privilege die, the next generations have a greater sense of fairness and justice,” Wharton said.

    “I believe in my children’s time a lot of this will be overcome. And that’s why I want to make sure that the door of opportunity is always going to be there for those people when the opportunity comes to create a just occupation, that the mechanism will be there and that it wouldn’t have been hijacked by some desperates in 2023 that changed the constitution.”

    Other First Nations people see it differently, including Nick Harvey-Doyle, who at 31 is half the age of Wharton, and a third of the age of the Aboriginal Elder Anderson.

    From his New York apartment, Harvey-Doyle, an Anaiwan man from New South Wales, co-organized a walk across Brooklyn Bridge on Saturday, attended by more than 350 people, mostly Australians, calling for a Yes vote.

    “I’m from a really small country town that has about 10,000 people and I think there’s about 8,000 Australians in the New York tri-state area. To me, that’s almost essentially a whole country town worth of votes,” he said.

    Nick Harvey-Doyle is studying in New York and is calling for a Yes vote.

    Harvey-Doyle is a former lawyer who is studying at New York University with a Roberta Sykes Scholarship that provides funding for Indigenous students to undertake postgraduate research abroad. Sykes, who died in 2010, was the first Black Australian to study at Harvard, and fought for a Yes vote in the 1967 Referendum.

    That referendum, to count Indigenous people in Australia’s Census figures, passed with over 90% approval.

    Harvey-Doyle implored Australians living overseas to cast their votes to improve the life outcomes for First Nations people, who have lagged behind the country’s non-Indigenous population in heath and welfare statistics for decades.

    “We as Aboriginal people don’t feel like we have carriage over our most intimate and important personal affairs,” he said.

    “I think Aboriginal people do have a different way of life from non-Indigenous people and the current structures and institutions we have in place, don’t always acknowledge that and aren’t always in the best cultural place to service our needs.

    “Actually having a body that exists that is enshrined in the constitution that allows us empowerment, to give advice over our own lives and our own issues is actually super important.”

    More than 350 people walked across Brooklyn Bridge in New York to call for a Yes vote in the Australian Voice referendum.

    According to the Australian Electoral Commission, as of Sunday, more than 96,000 registered voters were outside Australia – including those living abroad and some 58,000 who have notified the commission that they’ll be traveling on October 14.

    While voting is compulsory within Australia, being overseas is considered a valid reason not to vote. More than 100 polling centers will be open worldwide to enable people to vote in person, or they can return a postal ballot. Overseas voting starts early, on October 2.

    To pass, the referendum needs the majority vote across the country, as well as the majority of people in at least four states.

    Indigenous people won’t determine the outcome of this vote – that will be up to millions of other non-Indigenous Australians, some of whom object to Indigenous people being given a special place over others within the constitution, calling the vote “divisive.”

    Wharton says the concept of millions of non-Indigenous voters deciding what’s best for 3% of the population is racist in itself.

    However, Harvey-Doyle says he’s wary of the message a no vote would send in the country and beyond.

    “If we vote No, it says that we are really happy to be apathetic towards the poor life outcomes that some average Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience, and I feel like that goes against what it means to be Australian to give everyone a fair go,” he said.

    “It’ll be a really sad global position for us to put ourselves in, if we do vote No.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump, who paved way for Roe v. Wade reversal, says Republicans ‘speak very inarticulately’ about abortion | CNN Politics

    Trump, who paved way for Roe v. Wade reversal, says Republicans ‘speak very inarticulately’ about abortion | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump, who paved the way for the undoing of federal abortion rights protections, said that some Republicans “speak very inarticulately” about the issue and have pursued “terrible” state-level restrictions that could alienate much of the country.

    While avoiding taking specific positions himself, Trump said in an NBC interview that if he is reelected he will try to broker compromises on how long into pregnancies abortion should be legal and whether those restrictions should be imposed on the federal or the state level.

    “I would sit down with both sides and I’d negotiate something and we’ll end up with peace on that issue for the first time in 52 years,” he said.

    The former president targeted GOP primary rival Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in his criticism of how the Republican party has handled the issue, calling Florida’s six-week ban “a terrible thing and a terrible mistake.”

    DeSantis’ camp hit back on Sunday, taking aim at the former president for saying he’d be willing to work with both parties on abortion.

    “We’ve already seen the disastrous results of Donald Trump compromising with Democrats: over $7 trillion in new debt, an unfinished border wall, and the jailbreak First Step Act letting violent criminals back on to the streets. Republicans across the country know that Ron DeSantis will never back down,” tweeted spokesperson Andrew Romeo.

    Trump also warned Republicans that the party would lose voters by advancing abortion restrictions without exceptions for cases of rape, incest or risks to the mother’s life.

    “Other than certain parts of the country, you can’t – you’re not going to win on this issue,” he said.

    Trump’s comments made plain the challenge for 2024 Republican presidential primary contenders: trying to balance the priorities of their conservative base, for whom the Supreme Court’s June 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade was a victory decades in the making, and those of the general electorate, which has consistently supported abortion rights – most recently in the 2022 midterms and the Wisconsin Supreme Court race this spring.

    Abortion could also be a pivotal issue this fall in Virginia’s state legislative elections, which are widely viewed as a barometer of the electorate’s mood in the lead-up to next year’s presidential election.

    Trump’s appointment of three conservative Supreme Court justices paved the way to the reversal of the 1973 decision that guaranteed abortion rights across the United States through the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.

    That reversal left abortion rights up to the states, which has led to a patchwork of laws – including bans on abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy in Florida and Iowa, the first state to vote in the GOP presidential nominating process.

    Abortion rights have been a major fault line in the 2024 Republican primary. Trump’s former vice president, Mike Pence, has advocated a federal abortion ban after 15 weeks. DeSantis, Trump’s top-polling rival, has touted the six-week ban he signed into law. However, other contenders, including Nikki Haley, have taken more moderate approaches, warning of the political backlash Republicans could face among the broader electorate by pursuing strict abortion restrictions.

    Trump would not commit to a specific policy preference in the interview. He deflected questions about whether he would support a federal ban – and if so, after how many weeks – or would rather the issue be left to statehouses.

    “What’s going to happen is you’re going to come up with a number of weeks or months, you’re going to come up with a number that’s going to make people happy,” Trump said.

    Trump said he believed it was “probably better” to leave abortion restrictions up to the states instead of trying to pass federal legislation on the issue.

    “From a pure standpoint, from a legal standpoint, I think it’s probably better. But I can live with it either way,” Trump said. “It could be state or could it federal, I don’t frankly care.”

    The intra-GOP debate over abortion took center stage at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition gathering, attended by many of the state’s leading conservative evangelical activists.

    Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, one of the most vocal Trump critics among the GOP contenders, told reporters Saturday in Iowa that Trump has “taken evangelical voters for granted” and is “waffling on important issues.”

    “I think he is looking at the abortion question as not whether it’s going to win evangelical support, but what that’s going to look like down the road, and as he said he wants everybody to like him,” Hutchinson said.

    Asked about federal legislation on abortion, DeSantis continued not to engage on the topic of a national ban, instead pointing to new restrictions in states such as Iowa and Florida.

    “I’ve been a pro-life governor. I’ll be a pro-life president,” DeSantis said. “Clearly, a state like Iowa has been able to move the ball with pro-life protections. Florida has been able to move the ball.”

    Pence reiterated his support for a federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy as a minimum, saying, “It’s an idea whose time has come.” He said Trump and other GOP candidates want to relegate the abortion issue to the states, “but I won’t have it.”

    ‘Personal for every woman and every man’

    However, other contenders more focused on the general electorate, including Haley – the former South Carolina governor and US ambassador to the United Nations – have sought to thread the same needle as Trump.

    Haley on Saturday told attendees at the Faith and Freedom Coalition in Iowa that her beliefs are the “hard truth.” She said pursuing a federal 15-week abortion ban would have “everybody running from us.”

    While Haley opposes abortion, she has emphasized she believes Republicans and Democrats need find a consensus on abortion issues, such as banning later abortions and agreeing not to jail women who get them.

    “This issue is personal for every woman and every man. And we need to treat it that way. I don’t judge anyone for being pro-choice any more than I want them to judge me for being pro-life,” she said.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said on CNN last week that he would be open to signing a federal abortion ban “if it represented consensus,” while admitting the current setbacks to reaching that consensus within the US Senate and across states.

    “I want all of the 50 states to be able to weigh in if they want to, and what their state laws should be, and then let’s see if it’s a consensus,” he said.

    Democrats, meanwhile, are eyeing abortion as one of the most important issues in the 2024 presidential election.

    CNN previously reported that President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign earlier this month made a digital advertising buy highlighting the positions of Trump and other GOP 2024 contenders on the issue.

    “As Donald Trump visits states where women are suffering the consequences of his extreme, anti-abortion agenda, this ad reminds voters in states that have passed some of the most extreme abortion bans of Trump’s key role in appointing conservative justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade,” Biden’s campaign manager, Julie Chavez Rodriguez, said in a statement to CNN.

    This story has been updated with additional information Sunday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump says he supports mental competency tests for presidency amid concerns over age | CNN Politics

    Trump says he supports mental competency tests for presidency amid concerns over age | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump, the oldest candidate in the 2024 GOP presidential field, said there should not be an age limit for the presidency but expressed support for requiring mental competency tests for candidates.

    “I’m all for the tests,” Trump told NBC’s Kristen Welker in an interview clip that aired Saturday, citing a cognitive test he took in 2020 at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. “I aced it. I get everything right.”

    But the former president, 77, cast doubt on the practicality of requiring such a test, adding, “A lot of people say it’s not constitutional to do it.”

    Trump’s comments come as he considerably leads the Republican presidential pool to face President Joe Biden – who is 80 – in 2024.

    When asked if there is a need for a new generation to take the helm, Trump said, “It’s always time for a new generation.”

    But, he added, “Some of the greatest world leaders have been in their 80s,” though the 77-year-old quickly clarified that he’s “not anywhere very near 80, by the way.”

    The ages of the incumbent and the GOP front-runner have raised questions about whether they are fit for office, and other presidential candidates have used the issue to argue that they will not be effective leaders.

    Former Vice President Mike Pence, who is challenging his former boss for the GOP presidential nomination, told CNN in an interview that aired Sunday, “We don’t need a president whose too old and we don’t need a president whose too young.” But he stopped short of saying whether 77 is too old to be president.

    “I think that’s a judgment for voters,” Pence told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union.” “I trust voters to make their decision, whether it be the mental competency of people or whether it be their age or energy level.”

    But Trump said the problem with his successor is “bigger” than his age.

    “I don’t think Biden is too old, but I think he is incompetent,” Trump said. “And that’s a bigger problem.”

    Biden, who would be 82 at the start of his next term if reelected, has also shrugged off concerns about his age in recent months. When asked why an 82-year-old would be the best fit for president, Biden told MSNBC in May that he has “acquired a hell of a lot of wisdom.”

    “I’m more experienced than anybody (who’s) ever run for the office,” he said, adding that he thinks he’s proven himself to be effective.

    However, a recent CNN poll showed that roughly three-quarters of Americans say they’re seriously concerned that Biden’s age might negatively affect his current level of physical and mental competence and his ability to serve out another term if reelected.

    This story has been updated with additional information Sunday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why some of Biden’s problems may be overblown at this time | CNN Politics

    Why some of Biden’s problems may be overblown at this time | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden had a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week. He’s under an impeachment inquiry, his son was indicted in Delaware, inflation seems to be tilting back up, the United Auto Workers went on strike after Biden said they wouldn’t, and the chattering class is talking about him not running for reelection.

    Some of these factors explain why my colleague Zach Wolf wrote that “Biden’s two worst weaknesses were exposed” this past week, and it’s also why I’ve written about the president’s difficulties heading into next year.

    But while Biden clearly has problems – no president with an approval rating hovering around 40% is in good shape – some of his issues appear to be overblown at this time. Here are three reasons why:

    A Washington Post op-ed by columnist David Ignatius that called on Biden not to run for reelection got a lot of play this past week.

    Putting aside whether Biden should or shouldn’t run, the fact is that he is running. A lot of people will point to polls (like those from CNN) showing that a majority of Democrats don’t think the party should renominate him.

    But these surveys only tell you so much. They’re matching Biden against himself and not anyone else. When asked in the CNN poll to name a preferred alternative to Biden, only a little more than 10% wanted someone else and could name a specific person.

    When matched up against the announced Democratic opposition (Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson), Biden is crushing it. He’s over 70%, on average, in recent polling.

    Moreover, Biden’s job approval rating with Democrats hovers around 80%. That is well above the level at which past incumbents have faced strong primary challenges. Those challenges (such as when Ted Kennedy challenged incumbent Jimmy Carter in 1980) came at a time when the president had an approval rating in the 50s or 60s among his own party members.

    It is worth analyzing whether the fact that a lot of Democrats don’t think Biden should be renominated masks a larger problem he could face in a general election.

    But Biden’s pulling in more than 90% of Democrats in Fox News and Quinnipiac University general election polling released this past week. In both polls, his share slightly exceeded former President Donald Trump’s among Republicans (though within the margin of error).

    The fact is Biden’s got problems, but worrying about renomination is not one of them.

    From a political point of view, Biden’s connections to his son Hunter have caused the president nothing but heartache. Most voters think Biden did something inappropriate related to his son’s business dealings.

    So, it might naturally follow that House Republicans’ impeachment inquiry into the president’s ties to his son’s foreign business deals would be harmful to his political future.

    About 40% of voters, on average, think Joe Biden did something illegal. Most voters don’t.

    Some Republicans are no doubt hoping that Biden’s own troubles will make their likely nominee (Trump), who is under four indictments, look less bad by comparison. A majority of voters, however, think that Trump committed a crime.

    The public doesn’t see the Biden and Trump cases the same way.

    A Wall Street Journal poll from the end of August found that a majority of Americans (52%) did not want Biden to be impeached.

    Republicans will have to prove their case in the court of public opinion.

    It’s conceivable that Republicans will overshoot the mark like they have in the past. The impeachment inquiry into Bill Clinton in 1998 preceded one of the best performances by a president’s party in a midterm election. Clinton’s Democratic Party picked up seats in the House, which has happened three times for the president’s party in midterms over the last century.

    To see how impeachment could turn things upside down for the GOP this cycle, consider independent voters. While the vast majority of independents disapprove of the job Biden is doing as president (64%) in our latest CNN poll, only 39% think he did something illegal.

    An election about a potentially unpopular impeachment would be better for Biden than one about an issue that really hurts him (such as voters seeing him as too old).

    Stop me if you heard this one before: Biden is the president heading into an election, voters are unhappy with the state of the economy, and his party does much better in the elections than a lot of people thought.

    That’s what happened in the 2022 midterms.

    The inflation rate is lower now than it was then, but it’s on the uptick. Voters, both now and then, overwhelmingly disapprove of Biden’s handling of the economy. They even say the economy matters more than any other issue, like they did in 2022.

    What none of this data takes into account is that Americans almost always call the economy the top issue, according to Gallup.

    Believe it or not, fewer Americans say the economy is the top problem facing the country now (31%) than they have in either the median (40%) or average (45%) presidential election since 1988.

    If you think about recent presidential elections in which the economy was the big issue (1992, 2008 and 2012), the state of the economy dominated the headlines.

    But as mentioned above, right now, there are a lot of other things going on in the country, as was also the case during the 2022 midterms.

    It’s not as if the economy is helping Biden. I’m just not sure it’s hurting him.

    After all, there’s a reason why Democrats have consistently outperformed the 2020 presidential baseline in special elections this year.

    If things were really that bad for Biden and the Democrats, they’d most likely be losing elections all over the country. That simply isn’t happening at this point.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Florida GOP scraps planned loyalty oath in win for Trump over DeSantis in their shared home state | CNN Politics

    Florida GOP scraps planned loyalty oath in win for Trump over DeSantis in their shared home state | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Republican Party of Florida on Friday night scrapped plans to require presidential candidates to sign a loyalty oath, siding with former President Donald Trump over Gov. Ron DeSantis in a proxy war that tested the strength of the two rivals’ support in their home state.

    The party had quietly agreed in May to institute a pledge, mandating candidates promise to endorse the GOP nominee in order to make next year’s primary ballot – a move seen by Trump allies as a maneuver intended to boost DeSantis. Pro-Trump forces in the party, led by state Sen. Joe Gruters, pushed to reverse course Friday, arguing that the state GOP violated national party rules that bar such changes to candidate eligibility requirements within two years of an election.

    Gruters, a former chairman of the Florida GOP, made a motion to remove the language and won out in a voice vote by an “overwhelming” margin, he told CNN.

    “Common sense prevailed at the Republican Party of Florida tonight,” Gruters said.

    The vote by the state GOP’s executive committee took place during the organization’s quarterly meeting in Orlando, an event that should have been a celebration of the party’s recent electoral successes and a chance to lay the groundwork for the campaign to keep Florida red in 2024.

    Instead, the meeting exposed deepening divisions in the state party over its two presidential candidates. The outcome suggests that Trump maintains the upper hand over DeSantis in their shared home state.

    Republican Party of Florida Chairman Christian Ziegler did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    In a statement to CNN after the vote, DeSantis spokesman Bryan Griffin said, “Once Ron DeSantis secures the party’s nomination, we hope everyone in the field will join him in that fight.”

    “We believe anyone who wants to run for president as a Republican should be willing to pledge their support for our eventual nominee,” Griffin said. “It is surprising that anyone interested in seeing the defeat of Joe Biden in 2024 would disagree.”

    On Friday night, the two 2024 rivals had dueling speeches in Washington, DC, about two miles from each other at separate Christian conservative events. DeSantis at the Pray Vote Stand Summit hosted by the Family Research Council and Trump at the Concerned Women for America Summit, where DeSantis made remarks earlier in the afternoon.

    In August, DeSantis signed the Republican National Committee’s loyalty pledge to support the party’s eventual nominee, one of the requirements to appear on the debate stage. Trump has not signed the RNC’s loyalty pledge.

    On Thursday, Trump told conservative host Megyn Kelly he does not plan to debate his fellow Republicans, pointing to his commanding lead over the 2024 primary field.

    “I don’t see it,” Trump told Kelly. “Why would I do it?”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Americans are feeling gloomier about the economy | CNN Business

    Americans are feeling gloomier about the economy | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington, DC
    CNN
     — 

    Americans aren’t feeling gloomy about higher gas prices just yet, but they’re still on edge about inflation and the economy’s direction — and concerns are starting to surface about the possibility of a government shutdown.

    Consumer sentiment tracked by the University of Michigan edged down in September from the prior month by 1.8 points, according to a preliminary reading released Friday.

    “Both short-run and long-run expectations for economic conditions improved modestly this month, though on net consumers remain relatively tentative about the trajectory of the economy,” said the University of Michigan’s Surveys of Consumers Director Joanne Hsu in a release. “So far, few consumers mentioned the potential federal government shutdown, but if the shutdown comes to bear, consumer views on the economy will likely slide, as was the case just a few months ago when the debt ceiling neared a breach.”

    Sentiment could start to sour soon, since gas prices are highly visible indicators of inflation. Sentiment fell to its lowest level on record last summer when gas prices topped $5 a gallon and inflation reached a four-decade high. The national average for regular gasoline stood at $3.87 a gallon on Friday, according to AAA, seven cents higher than a week ago and 17 cents higher than the same day last year.

    Consumers’ expectation of inflation rates in the year ahead fell to a 3.1% rate in September, down from 3.5% in the prior month.

    This story is developing and will be updated.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The West fears a closer Russia and North Korea. China may not | CNN

    The West fears a closer Russia and North Korea. China may not | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    A rare meeting between Russia’s Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un at a space launch center in the Russian Far East earlier this week has triggered alarm from countries from South Korea and Japan to Ukraine, the United States and its partners in Europe.

    But China, the biggest economic lifeline for both Moscow and Pyongyang whose border lies less than 200 miles (321 kilometers) from where the two leaders met, may have a different view.

    Rather than look to oppose or limit cooperation between Russia and North Korea, Beijing may see more benefits than risks for itself in this emerging axis, analysts say – particularly in regard to its great power rivalry with the US.

    And while it’s unclear exactly how much insight Chinese officials have into negotiations between North Korea and Russia, analysts say the meeting itself may not have gone forward with some level of consideration of China’s ties to the two.

    “(Given) the importance of the support that China provides to both, China is of course looming in the background,” said Alexander Korolev, a senior lecturer in Politics and International Relations at the University of New South Wales in Australia.

    “China is too important for both North Korea and Russia, so for them it would be foolish to do something behind China’s back that it wouldn’t like,” he said. “The China factor is there.”

    Neither North Korea or Russia has released details of any agreements reached during the more than five hours Putin and Kim spent together during a tour of the Vostochny Cosmodrome, closed-door talks, and a lavish state dinner – where both leaders toasted to their countries’ growing friendship.

    But observers say it’s clear what each is looking for from the other.

    Moscow is desperate for fresh supplies of ammunition and shells to feed what’s become a war of attrition in Ukraine – and Pyongyang is believed to be sitting on a stockpile. Pyongyang, after years of sanctions over its nuclear weapon and missiles program, is in need of everything from energy to food to military technology – all of which Russia has.

    To be sure, North Korea potentially pumping munitions into Russia could raise awkward optics for China, which accounts for the vast majority of North Korea’s trade and remains Russia’s most powerful diplomatic partner after its Ukraine invasion.

    The international community has long looked to Beijing to exert pressure over its government to follow the rules.

    And in recent months Beijing has been at pains to frame itself as a proponent of peace in the conflict in Ukraine – part of a bid to win back lost goodwill in Europe, which has recoiled over Beijing’s decision to continue to strengthen its ties with Russia despite its war.

    Beijing has already signaled what its official response to any military cooperation between the two would be, with its Foreign Ministry this week repeatedly telling reporters that Wednesday’s meeting was “between the two countries” – implying it’s not China’s business.

    But while China itself has appeared careful to avoid any large-scale military support of Russia, analysts say it may see potential support from North Korea as a boost to its own geopolitical calculus, where Russia remains a crucial partner amid rising tensions with the West.

    “(If) North Korea is really prepared to provide ammunition to Russia, it would be good for the Chinese expectation that Russia doesn’t experience a major military defeat in the battlefield in Ukraine,” said Li Mingjiang, an associate professor of international relations at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.

    “In that respect, it’s good for China’s geopolitical interests … in terms of China and Russia on the one hand and Western countries on the other,” he said.

    China, which supported communist North Korea in the Korean War some 70 years ago, has maintained a complicated relationship with its rogue neighbor.

    Like Russia, it has backed past United Nations sanctions against North Korea’s weapons programs – though it’s also been accused of practicing an arbitrary implementation of these controls and in recent years has blocked efforts to strengthen sanctions and led efforts to ease them.

    Now, as China feels constrained by what it sees as an increasingly hostile US and its allies, it may welcome a stronger coordination with both Russia and North Korea as counterweights, analysts say.

    In that vein, a shift in the relationship between Russia and North Korea which sees Moscow lending support to Pyongyang could also take pressure off China – and strengthen its position in the region.

    “China would support a more capable North Korea in many respects – economically, militarily – and a North Korea that continues to serve as a troublemaker for the US,” said Li.

    One reason? “When you have a more assertive North Korea it will lead to some sort of incentive for the US and South Korea to seek China’s cooperation in terms of dealing with North Korea,” he said.

    Meanwhile, mutual support between the two sanctions-hit neighbors could mitigate international pressure on China over its strong ties to both.

    “Since China is not the sole supporter of either, it reduces China’s isolation for its support of both,” Yun Sun, director of the China Program at the Stimson Center think tank in Washington, who said that while their tightening of ties is not without drawbacks for Beijing, its leaders would still likely see this as a “net gain.”

    Even a transfer of military technology from Russia to North Korea, which may be concerning to China given its interests in regional stability, may have a silver lining, according to Sun.

    China has a stake in avoiding seeing tensions between North Korea and US-allied South Korea escalate into conflict, which could spark to an influx of refugees across its own borders — as well as American military response.

    “Such a (military technology) transfer will be destabilizing for the region, but China will turn the table and blame the US and its allies for pushing both Russia and North Korea in a corner. This reinforces China’s opposition to the ‘Asian NATO’ it sees US as orchestrating,” she said.

    But despite the potential gains, experts also say China is not immune to the risks that can come from a stronger Russia or a stronger North Korea.

    “Beijing has a large stake in global trade,” said Leif-Eric Easley, a professor at Ewha University in Seoul.

    “(It) can ill afford collateral damage from destabilizing pariah state behavior, such as the invasion of Ukraine and habitually threatening the use of nuclear weapons,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden’s two worst weaknesses were exposed this week | CNN Politics

    Biden’s two worst weaknesses were exposed this week | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

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



    CNN
     — 

    Two major threats to President Joe Biden’s reelection – his son Hunter’s legal problems and the widely held perception the 80-year-old is too old for reelection – are both causing him major pain this week.

    Hunter Biden was indicted on federal gun charges in Delaware on Thursday, accused of lying about his past drug abuse and violating a gun law when he bought a handgun in 2018, before his father’s presidential campaign. The weapon was later abandoned behind a grocery store by Hallie Biden, the wife of Hunter’s late brother, Beau. Hallie and Hunter were having an affair at the time.

    Read an annotated version of the indictment.

    That sad and sordid family drama of addiction could land the president’s son in prison, although separate investigations on tax evasion and foreign business dealings have not yet led to charges from the Delaware US attorney David Weiss, who was elevated earlier this year to special counsel to guarantee independence from the US Department of Justice.

    While Weiss has found no basis to criminally charge Hunter Biden over his foreign business dealings and no direct connection has been drawn between the son’s business interests and the father’s policy positions, House Republicans plan to dig deep as they look for more evidence during an official impeachment inquiry authorized by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy earlier this week.

    The impeachment may never occur, and the years of investigation may not have exposed any wrongdoing by President Biden – but the inquiry will certainly keep Hunter Biden top of mind for voters who may wonder why the president would let his family operate like this.

    Any Democrats who dismiss the effort might recall that McCarthy bragged in 2015 that the exhaustive House investigations focused on Hillary Clinton wounded her politically. At the time, he was talking about investigations into the death of a US ambassador in Benghazi, Libya, while she was secretary of state. The effort by today’s GOP to tie Biden to his son could have a similar effect.

    Even if there is nothing to tie President Biden to the millions of dollars Hunter Biden and other family members made from interests in China, Ukraine and elsewhere, most Americans are not convinced.

    Well more than half the country, 61%, thinks Biden had some involvement in his son’s business dealings while serving as vice president, according to a CNN poll conducted by SSRS in late August, before the gun-related indictment was handed down but after a previous plea deal fell apart. Most of those people who think the president was involved back then also think the actions were illegal.

    What’s not clear is whether the Hunter Biden issues will be a motivating factor outside the group of voters who already dislike the president. His low job approval rating and concerns about the economy could ultimately be more damaging in an election.

    The public’s perception of his relationship with his son is not even the most concerning element for Biden in the poll. That would be his age.

    “Biden’s age isn’t just a Fox News trope; it’s been the subject of dinner-table conversations across America this summer,” the Washington Post columnist David Ignatius wrote this week in calling for Biden to step aside ASAP to give someone else a shot at winning the 2024 election.

    Just about a quarter of Americans in CNN’s poll said Biden has the stamina and sharpness to serve effectively, far from a ringing endorsement of a president who brought policy wins back from a trip to Asia last week but left the impression he was confused at a press conference.

    Romney calls on Trump and Biden to ‘stand aside’ for younger candidates

    Only a third of Democrats and Democratic-leaning registered voters in the poll said they think Biden should be the Democrats’ candidate in 2024. Two-thirds want a different candidate, although almost nobody knows who.

    Ignatius had enough of the president’s respect earlier this summer to get an invite to Biden’s state dinner for the Indian prime minister in June. Hunter Biden also attended.

    Ignatius is among the people who effusively say Biden has been a very good president, both “successful” and “effective.”

    “What I admire most about President Biden is that in a polarized nation, he has governed from the center out, as he promised in his victory speech,” Ignatius wrote, adding plaudits for Biden’s domestic accomplishments and foreign policy leadership.

    But Ignatius fears another pairing of Biden with Vice President Kamala Harris “risks undoing his greatest achievement — which was stopping Trump.”

    Among Democratic voters, the most-cited concerns with Biden are his age and the need for someone younger.

    The vast majority of the Democrats interested in a Biden alternative picked “just someone besides Joe Biden.” One of the most-supported specific alternatives, Sen. Bernie Sanders, is older than Biden.

    The lack of confidence in Harris to take up the mantle was evident when CNN’s Anderson Cooper talked Wednesday night to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is running for reelection to Congress but stepped away from her leadership position.

    Cooper asked Pelosi if Harris was the best running mate for Biden.

    “He thinks so and that’s what matters,” Pelosi said, although she did commend Harris for being “politically astute.”

    kamala harris nancy pelosi split

    Anderson Cooper asks Nancy Pelosi twice if she thinks Harris is best running mate for Biden

    Pelosi promised that Democrats are behind Biden, and she does think he’s the best candidate to beat Trump.

    “He has great experience and wisdom,” Pelosi said.

    CNN’s Edward-Isaac Dovere writes that the Biden campaign is plotting a long-game strategy and that aides blame the media for “what they view as validating concerns about Biden’s age and about Republican claims of Hunter Biden’s corruption by covering those concerns, despite what they argue is a lack of evidence.”

    They are banking, he writes, on a data-focused emphasis on key states to turn the moveable voters away from Trump.

    He lost badly in Iowa and New Hampshire in the 2020 primary, for instance, before riding a wave of support from moderates in southern states to a dramatic upset of multiple younger candidates and those with more committed followings.

    Biden emerged from a crowded pack four years ago. There’s little indication it would make sense for him to open the primary up, as Ignatius suggests, to some of those same people today.

    Ultimately, there is an open question over what this election will be about.

    If it’s about a referendum on an aging president whose fitness worries voters and who allowed his son to make millions in circumstances that raise suspicions even without evidence of wrongdoing, Biden will struggle.

    That said, one of the few things voters might like less is a person who tried to overturn an election.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US will redirect millions of funds for Egypt to Taiwan and Lebanon | CNN Politics

    US will redirect millions of funds for Egypt to Taiwan and Lebanon | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Biden administration has notified Congress that it will withhold $85 million in aid to Egypt that had been conditioned on Cairo’s progress in its treatment of political prisoners, instead diverting that money to Taiwan and Lebanon, sources with knowledge of the matter told CNN.

    The administration said it would redirect $55 million worth of that funding to Taiwan and $30 million to Lebanon, the sources said.

    However, the administration will allow Cairo to access $235 million of the total of $320 million in foreign military financing that is conditioned on human rights issues, a senior State Department official said Thursday.

    The US provides more than $1 billion in foreign military financing to Egypt and the vast majority of it is not conditional.

    Secretary of State Antony Blinken “determined that it is in the US national security interest to waive certain human rights related conditions” and allow the $235 million to go to Egypt.

    “What I’m describing today reflects our current assessment that Egypt’s cooperation merits the national security waiver for fiscal year 2022,” the official said.

    “Our position on the very serious human rights situation in Egypt absolutely has not changed and we’re going to continue to raise those issues in Egypt consistently and at the most senior levels,” they added.

    The conditions around the $85 million – “that Egypt is making clear and consistent progress in relieving political prisoners, providing detainees with due process and preventing harassment of American citizens” – cannot be waived, the official explained.

    “The Secretary is determined that Egypt has not fulfilled his conditions and therefore we are reprogramming that 85 million,” the official said.

    The Wall Street Journal first reported on the redirection of the funds.

    Last month, a group of 11 House Foreign Affairs Committee Democrats called on Secretary of State Antony Blinken to withhold all $320 million in conditional foreign military financing over concerns about Cairo’s human rights abuses.

    “We acknowledge the historic, deeply rooted bilateral U.S. – Egypt relationship, based in shared social, economic, and political ties,” wrote the lawmakers, led by House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Rep. Gregory Meeks.

    “Nonetheless, we are strongly concerned by reports from both the State Department as well as numerous credible human rights and civil society organizations about the persistent and continued systemic violations of human rights in Egypt,” the letter continued.

    “As we continue to stand for the prioritization of basic human rights in our foreign policy and call on the Administration to adhere to the spirit and letter of the law in ensuring progress in the U.S.–Egypt relationship, we call on you to withhold the full $320 million of FY22 FMF until Egypt’s human rights record significantly improves,” it concluded.

    Meanwhile, the administration has been working to bolster Taiwan’s defense capabilities in preparation for a potential conflict with China, and in July announced a new weapons package for the self-governing island valued at up to $345 million.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Taliban welcomes China’s new ambassador to Afghanistan in lavish ceremony | CNN

    Taliban welcomes China’s new ambassador to Afghanistan in lavish ceremony | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Taliban has welcomed Zhao Sheng as China’s new ambassador to Afghanistan during a lavish ceremony held at the presidential palace in Kabul on Wednesday.

    China is among a handful of countries, including Pakistan, Iran and Russia that have maintained a diplomatic presence in Afghanistan since the Taliban retook control of the country in 2021.

    In the palace ceremony, Taliban Prime Minister Mohammad Hasan Akhund shook hands with Zhao and “accepted the credentials of the new Chinese Ambassador,” the prime minister’s office said on X, formerly known as Twitter.

    “The Honorable Prime Minister of the Islamic Emirate thanked the leadership of China for the appointment of Mr Zhao Sheng as ambassador and expressed hope that this appointment would elevate the diplomatic relations between the two countries to a higher level and the beginning of a new chapter,” Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in the statement

    According to the prime minister’s office, Zhao said that China was “a good neighbor of Afghanistan” and “fully respects Afghanistan’s independence, territorial integrity and independence in decision-making.”

    Zhao added that China does not have a policy of interference in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, and it does not want Afghanistan “to become its area of influence.”

    The Taliban prime minister said relations between the two countries had “been on a good level” and “expressed his hope for taking more steps to further strengthen the bilateral relations,” according to Mujahid.

    China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement the appointment was the “normal rotation of China’s ambassador to Afghanistan” and was “intended to continue advancing dialogue and cooperation” between the two countries.

    The ministry said, “China’s policy toward Afghanistan is clear and consistent.”

    China, a neighbor of Afghanistan with substantial investment in the region, was cautious about the potential security challenges posed by the abrupt return of the Taliban following the US withdrawal in August 2021.

    Since then, Chinese officials have stressed increasing cooperation with Afghanistan, along with other regional neighbors, on issues such as anti-terrorism cooperation, “economic collaboration” and boosting “regional stability and development.”

    In May, China, Afghanistan and Pakistan vowed to strengthen trilateral ties on security and counterterrorism at a meeting of the three country’s foreign ministers in Islamabad.

    Speaking at that meeting, Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang said China attached “great importance to the friendship with Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

    Notably from the meeting, the three sides agreed to cooperate on China’s Belt and Road trade and infrastructure program, through which China has heavily invested in the region.

    They also agreed to forge closer economic ties by extending the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to Afghanistan “so as to promote connectivity, improve cross-border trading, enhance the economic integration of the three countries and achieve sustainable development.”

    CPEC is a $60 billion Belt and Road flagship project that links China’s western Xinjiang region to Pakistan’s strategic Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea with a network of roads, railways, pipelines and power plants.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Husband of Alaska Rep. Mary Peltola dies in plane crash | CNN Politics

    Husband of Alaska Rep. Mary Peltola dies in plane crash | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Eugene “Buzzy” Peltola Jr., the husband of Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola, has died in a plane crash in Alaska, according to a statement from the congresswoman’s office.

    “He was one of those people that was obnoxiously good at everything. He had a delightful sense of humor that lightened the darkest moments. He was definitely the cook in the family. And family was most important to him. He was completely devoted to his parents, kids, siblings, extended family, and friends – and he simply adored Mary. We are heartbroken for the family’s loss,” the statement, which was shared to Peltola’s X account Wednesday morning, said.

    The statement asked for privacy for the Peltola family and said the congresswoman will be heading home to Alaska.

    This story is breaking and will be updated.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • White House to send letter to news execs urging outlets to ‘ramp up’ scrutiny of GOP’s Biden impeachment inquiry ‘based on lies’ | CNN Business

    White House to send letter to news execs urging outlets to ‘ramp up’ scrutiny of GOP’s Biden impeachment inquiry ‘based on lies’ | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The White House plans to send a letter to top US news executives on Wednesday, urging them to intensify their scrutiny of House Republicans after Speaker Kevin McCarthy launched an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden, despite having found no evidence of a crime.

    “It’s time for the media to ramp up its scrutiny of House Republicans for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies,” Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House Counsel’s Office, wrote in the letter, according to a draft copy obtained by CNN.

    The letter, which said an impeachment inquiry with no supporting evidence should “set off alarm bells for news organizations,” will be sent to executives helming the nation’s largest news organizations, including CNN, The New York Times, Fox News, the Associated Press, CBS News, and others, a White House official familiar with the matter said.

    The correspondence comes one day after McCarthy announced that he had directed three House committees to begin an impeachment inquiry into Biden. House Republicans, most of whom have denied that disgraced former President Donald Trump committed any wrongdoing, have long sought to baselessly portray Biden as a corrupt, crime-ridden politician engaged in sinister activities.

    While news organizations have published innumerable fact checks on the matter, they have also often failed to robustly call out the mis- and disinformation peddled by Republicans in their coverage, frustrating officials in the Biden White House who believe that the news media should be doing more to dispel lies that saturate the public discourse.

    In its letter Wednesday, the White House will ask news organizations to be more clear-eyed in their coverage of the impeachment inquiry, and not to fall prey to the traps of false equivalency in reporting.

    “Covering impeachment as a process story – Republicans say X, but the White House says Y – is a disservice to the American public who relies on the independent press to hold those in power accountable,” Sams wrote.

    “And in the modern media environment, where every day liars and hucksters peddle disinformation and lies everywhere from Facebook to Fox, process stories that fail to unpack the illegitimacy of the claims on which House Republicans are basing all their actions only serve to generate confusion, put false premises in people’s feeds, and obscure the truth,” Sams added.

    McCarthy launched the impeachment inquiry Tuesday without a formal House vote in a bid to appease Republicans on his far-right, including those who have threatened to oust the California Republican from his speakership if he does not move swiftly enough on such an investigation.

    The Republican House-led investigations into Biden have yet to provide any direct evidence that the president financially benefited from Hunter Biden’s career overseas.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kim Jong Un to visit Russia at Vladimir Putin’s invitation | CNN

    Kim Jong Un to visit Russia at Vladimir Putin’s invitation | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Kim Jong Un will travel to Russia at the invitation of his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, Pyongyang and Moscow said on Monday, amid warnings from the United States that the two leaders could strike an arms deal.

    The US government said last week that such a meeting could take place as part of Russia’s efforts to find new suppliers for weapons to use in its war against Ukraine.

    Neither country specified when or where the visit would take place, nor what would be on the agenda of any potential face-to-face. The Kremlin said in a statement Monday that Kim would pay an official visit to Russia “in the coming days,” while North Korean state media said they would “meet and have a talk.”

    However, it appears likely that the two leaders will see each other in the far eastern city of Vladivostok, where they met for the first time in April 2019. Putin reportedly arrived in Vladivostok on Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, according to state TV Russia 24. Kim, meanwhile, appears to be on a train heading to Russia, a South Korean government official told CNN.

    The visit will be Kim’s first foreign trip since the Covid-19 pandemic. With its borders sealed because of that for much of the past three years, North Korea has only recently begun to relax travel restrictions.

    It will also be only Kim’s 10th trip since assuming power in 2011. All of those came in 2018 and 2019, as the North Korean leader engaged in negotiations over his nuclear weapons and missile programs in three meetings with then-US President Donald Trump – one in Singapore, one in Hanoi and one in the demilitarized zone (DMZ) separating North and South Korea.

    Kim also made four trips to China over those two years to meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. The remaining trip was to the DMZ in 2018 to meet with then-South Korean President Moon Jae-in.

    Vladivostok lies 130 km (80 miles) from the border with North Korea.

    The North Korea leader is said to prefer traveling in an upscale armored train – as did his father before him – but rail travel accounts for less than half of his foreign trips. Three of this nine trips have been made in planes and two, both to the DMZ, by car.

    Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu also visited Pyongyang in July in an attempt to convince it to sell artillery ammunition.

    Last Tuesday, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan warned that North Korea it will “pay a price” if it strikes an arms deal with Russia, though he did not elaborate on these potential repercussions.

    North Korea is already under United Nations and US sanctions imposed over Pyongyang’s weapons of mass destruction program.

    The potential Putin-Kim meeting could lead to Pyongyang getting its hands on the sort of weapons those sanctions have barred it from accessing for two decades, especially for its nuclear-capable ballistic missile program.

    It also comes after more than a year and a half of war in Ukraine has left the Russian military battered, depleted and in need of supplies.

    Following Monday’s announcement from both countries, the White House urged North Korea to “not provide or sell arms to Russia.

    “As we have warned publicly, arms discussions between Russia and the DPRK are expected to continue during Kim Jong-Un’s trip to Russia,” said National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson in response to Russia and North Korea’s announcement.

    The statement also urged the country to “abide by the public commitments that Pyongyang has made to not provide or sell arms to Russia.”

    After reports emerged of North Korean arms sales to Russia in September 2022, a North Korean Defense Ministry official said at the time that Pyongyang had “never exported weapons or ammunition to Russia before and we will not plan to export them.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How booming Vietnam offers the US an alternative to China | CNN Business

    How booming Vietnam offers the US an alternative to China | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden is in Vietnam for a visit intended to deepen economic ties between Washington and Hanoi as part of efforts to reduce America’s reliance on China.

    The former foes have formally upgraded diplomatic ties to a “comprehensive strategic partnership,” a symbolic yet highly important move that experts say will solidify trust between the nations as America seeks an ally in Asia to counteract political tensions with China and advance its ambitions for key technologies, such as chipmaking.

    Companies from Apple (AAPL) to Intel (INTC) have already pushed deeper into the country to diversify their supply chains, maxing out many Vietnamese factories and helping fuel an economic expansion that continues to defy a global slowdown.

    On Monday, the White House announced a “landmark deal” between Boeing and Vietnam Airlines worth $7.8 billion, which is expected to support more than 30,000 jobs in the United States. Reuters has reported that the carrier will buy 50 Boeing 737 Max jets.

    Biden’s visit, which followed the G20 summit in India, is the first by a US president to Vietnam since Donald Trump’s 2019 trip. He has met with Vietnamese General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong and other leaders to “promote the growth of a technology-focused” Vietnamese economy, as well as discuss ways to improve stability in the region, according to the White House.

    In recent years, their trade has already soared under an existing partnership agreed in 2013, so the elevation in relations is “just catching up with the reality that already exists,” Ted Osius, president of the US-ASEAN Business Council and a former US ambassador to Vietnam, told CNN.

    The United States imported nearly $127.5 billion in goods from Vietnam in 2022, compared with $101.9 billion in 2021 and $79.6 billion in 2020, according to US government data.

    Last year, Vietnam became America’s eighth largest trading partner, rising from 10th place two years earlier.

    The two sides have been moving closer as US officials, particularly Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, have repeatedly pointed to the importance of “friend-shoring.”

    The practice refers to the movement of supply chains toward allies in part to shield businesses from political friction.

    “Rather than being highly reliant on countries where we have geopolitical tensions and can’t count on ongoing, reliable supplies, we need to really diversify our group of suppliers,” she said in a speech last year at the Atlantic Council think tank.

    Those tensions add to a litany of pressures, including rising labor costs and an uncertain operating environment that have already made corporations think twice about how much business they do in China, which is still considered the factory of the world.

    But increasingly, it has competition. During the US-China trade war, which started in 2018, businesses of all sizes began moving manufacturing to emerging markets such as Vietnam and India over tariffs.

    After the pandemic broke out, corporations were increasingly forced to consider strategies known as “China plus one,” which meant spreading out production hubs as a way to reduce reliance on a sole manufacturing base.

    The latest exodus could cost China dearly: In a 2022 report, Rabobank estimated that as many as 28 million Chinese jobs directly relied on exports to the West and could leave the country as a result of “friend-shoring.”

    Some 300,000 of those jobs, focused on low-tech manufacturing, are expected to move to Vietnam from China, analysts wrote.

    From an industrial perspective, the country has been booming for years, said Michael Every, a Rabobank global strategist who authored the report. Relatively lower wages and a youthful population have provided Vietnam with a solid workforce and consumer base, bolstering the case to invest in the nation of 97 million people.

    A fruit vendor walking past an Apple store in Hanoi

    But companies hoping to make the switch may already be too late, as some factories are so stretched, customers must wait, he said.

    Alicia García-Herrero, chief economist at Natixis, pointed to what she called “overheating,” saying demand for manufacturing in Vietnam has outstripped supply in some cases.

    “Too many companies [are] going to Vietnam,” she told CNN.

    Vietnam enjoyed an advantage, as it was first in the region to build up supply chain capabilities “for many, many sectors” years ago, she explained.

    Shortly after Biden landed in Vietnam on Sunday, the White House announced a new semiconductor partnership.

    “The United States recognizes Vietnam’s potential to play a critical role in building resilient semiconductor supply chains, particularly to expand capacity in reliable partners where it cannot be re-shored to the United State,” it said in a statement.

    The semiconductor industry has emerged as a key source of tension in US-China relations. Beijing and Washington are both racing to boost their prowess in the sector, and each side has recently enacted export controls aimed at limiting the other’s capacity.

    The United States needs a trusted partner for its supply of chips, and Vietnam can do just that, Osius said.

    Intel sees it that way. The California-based chipmaker has committed $1.5 billion to a sprawling campus located just outside Ho Chi Minh City, which it says will be its largest single assembly and test facility in the world.

    Osius expects more investments in the field to follow as Washington shores up ties with Hanoi.

    “The significance of Vietnam in that supply chain will increase,” he predicted. “We’re going to see an acceleration when it comes to collaboration in tech.”

    The International Monetary Fund projects Vietnam’s growth will slow to 5.8% from 8% last year as it copes with less overseas demand for its exports.

    But that compares favorably with a global growth forecast of 3%, and is noticeably faster many of the world’s major economies, such as the United States, China and the eurozone.

    “As the rest of Asia underwhelms, Vietnam will still be one of the fastest growing economies,” Natixis said in a recent research note.

    That’s compelling for corporations looking for bright spots in an otherwise gloomy environment.

    Such interest was noted in March, when the US-ASEAN Business Council led its biggest-ever business mission to Vietnam. The delegation consisted of 52 American firms, including corporate heavyweights such as Netflix (NFLX) and Boeing (BA).

    Of course, companies still have reservations over factors such as Vietnamese tech regulations, which they fear could include limits on the “transfer of data across borders, or too many rules requiring data localization,” according to Osius.

    In some cases, businesses are also concerned by how the country’s infrastructure still pales in comparison to a longtime trade powerhouse like China’s.

    For example, “there isn’t a sufficient port capacity for some of the goods to be exported as quickly as companies want them to be moved,” Osius said.

    Politically, Vietnam shares many similarities to China in that it is an authoritarian one-party state that tolerates little dissent.

    But overall, businesses simply want an easy way to hedge their bets.

    Vietnam is an obvious choice, because it’s a cheap alternative to manufacturing in China, said García-Herrero.

    For various sectors, transitioning isn’t difficult, because many Chinese suppliers also moved there because of US tariffs, she explained. “It’s the most similar because you have the same providers as in China.”

    The Biden administration, too, will likely be keen to secure that alternative.

    “It’s quite clear that they’re trying to set up a series of foreign policy victories ahead of 2024 [by] signing a strategic comprehensive partnership with Vietnam,” said Every, the Rabobank analyst.

    — CNN’s Kyle Feldscher, Jeremy Diamond and Kevin Liptak contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • British PM raised ‘strong concerns’ over Chinese interference after parliament employee arrested | CNN

    British PM raised ‘strong concerns’ over Chinese interference after parliament employee arrested | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said he raised his “very strong concerns” to China’s premier regarding potential Chinese interference in British democracy after a parliament employee was arrested on suspicion of spying for China.

    Speaking to journalists at the G20 summit in New Delhi on Sunday, Sunak said he used a meeting with Chinese Premier Li Qiang to raise several concerns including over “any interference in our parliamentary democracy.”

    This comes after two men were arrested under the UK’s Official Secrets Act amid reports that a parliamentary researcher with alleged links to senior Conservative Party politicians including security minister Tom Tugendhat was arrested on suspicion of spying for Beijing.

    UK newspaper, The Sunday Times broke the story on Sunday, reporting that the researcher was arrested alongside another man on March 13.

    According to a statement from London’s Metropolitan Police, police arrested a man in his 30s in Oxfordshire, southern England, and a man in his 20s in Edinburgh, Scotland.

    “The investigation is being carried out by officers from the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command, which has responsibility for investigations relating to allegations of Official Secrets Act and espionage-related offences,” the statement said.

    After being brought to a police station in south London, the two men were released on police bail until a date in early October, according to the statement.

    China’s embassy in London denied the spying accusations.

    “The claim that China is suspected of ‘stealing British intelligence’ is completely fabricated and nothing but malicious slander,” a spokesperson said in a statement.

    “We firmly oppose it and urge relevant parties in the UK to stop their anti-China political manipulation and stop putting on such self-staged political farce,” the statement added.

    According to the Sunday Times reporting, the arrested parliamentary researcher was also linked to the chairperson of the British government’s foreign affairs committee, Alicia Kearns.

    Posting on Saturday on X, formerly known as Twitter, Kearns declined to comment on the alleged ties, remarking: “While I recognise the public interest, we all have a duty to ensure any work of the authorities is not jeopardised.”

    A cross party group focused on relations with China, the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) said in a statement on Saturday on X that it was “appalled at reports of the infiltration of the UK Parliament by someone allegedly acting on behalf of the People’s Republic of China.”

    “It is for authorities to reveal the name of the person accused, and IPAC is united in hoping that justice is done expeditiously,” the alliance continued.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nikki Haley says she views China ‘as an enemy’ in pointed rebuke | CNN Politics

    Nikki Haley says she views China ‘as an enemy’ in pointed rebuke | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and 2024 Republican presidential contender, said Sunday that she views China “as an enemy” in a potential preview of the hardline approach she would take if elected president.

    “China’s been practically preparing for war with us for years,” Haley told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” Sunday. “Yes, I view China as an enemy.”

    America, the former United Nations ambassador said, needs to “make sure that we’re serious about China and they know that we’re serious about them – not going and being nice to them and thinking that they’re going to change.”

    Her comments come while President Joe Biden is in Vietnam trying to secure stronger diplomatic, military and economic ties with a network of allies and partners in response to China’s increasingly aggressive military and economic posture.

    On a separate track, the Biden administration has also pursued more stable ties and improved communication with Beijing over the last year, with a series of top Cabinet secretaries making the trip to China’s capital in just the last few months.

    “How much more has to happen for Biden to realize you don’t send Cabinet members over to China to appease them; you start getting serious with China and say: ‘We’re not going to put up with it,’” Haley said Sunday.

    “They keep sending different Cabinet officials over, Jake, and it’s embarrassing,” she added.

    Discussing the US’ relationship with China in an interview with CBS’ Margaret Brennan that aired Sunday, Vice President Kamala Harris said, “Yes, there’s tension when you are in a competition of any sort. But that does not mean that we are seeking conflict.”

    “And I think it’s important to not conflate the two,” Harris added.

    Detailing what her own approach would look like, Haley stressed the importance of cutting off China’s access to US oil, combating “Chinese infiltration” in American universities, and ending all normal trade relations until the flow of fentanyl to the US is stopped.

    “And then we’re going to build up our military, because China now has the strongest naval fleet in the world,” Haley said.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link