ReportWire

Tag: international-us 2020 elections

  • Biden to visit Selma as he makes his own case for voting rights | CNN Politics

    Biden to visit Selma as he makes his own case for voting rights | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden will visit Alabama on Sunday to commemorate the 58th anniversary of the landmark Bloody Sunday march that galvanized the Civil Rights movement and helped lead to an expansion of voting rights.

    Biden’s stop in Selma comes as he and fellow Democrats struggle to pass their own sweeping voting rights measures, with dim prospects of passage in a Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

    Still, Biden plans to make fresh calls for new voting protections when he speaks from the Edmund Pettus Bridge, where in 1965 a group of civil rights marchers were beaten by White state troopers as they attempted to cross.

    The president will participate in the yearly walk across the bridge to commemorate the events, which sparked outrage and helped rally support behind the Voting Rights Act. Among the protesters beaten was the late US Rep. John Lewis.

    Aside from its place in history, Selma is also still recovering from devastating tornadoes that struck two months ago.

    It’s not Biden’s first time attending the anniversary events in Selma; in 2020, during his run for the presidency, he spoke at historic Brown Chapel AME Church as he worked to court Black voters ahead of Super Tuesday.

    “We’ve been dragged backward and we’ve lost ground. We’ve seen all too clearly that if you give hate any breathing room it comes back,” he said in his speech then.

    Biden would go on to win the Democratic nomination and the presidency, due in large part to his support from Black voters.

    Vice President Kamala Harris, who represented the administration at the anniversary event last year, said in a statement Sunday that “America has seen a new assault on the freedom to vote.”

    “Extremists have worked to dismantle the voting protections that generations of civil rights leaders and advocates fought tirelessly to win. They have purged voters from the rolls. They have closed polling places. They have made it a crime to give water to people standing in line,” she said.

    During last year’s event, Harris had vowed that she and Biden would “put the full power of the executive branch behind our shared effort” while criticizing Republican lawmakers for voting to block passage of the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Freedom to Vote Act. She called on those gathered at the foot of the Edmund Pettus Bridge “to continue to push the Senate to not allow an arcane rule to deny us the sacred right.”

    On Sunday, Biden plans to “talk about the importance of commemorating Bloody Sunday so that history cannot be erased,” according to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre.

    “He will highlight how the continued fight for voting rights is integral to delivering economic justice and civil rights for black Americans,” she said.

    Bloody Sunday commemorates when, in 1965, 600 people began a march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, demanding an end to discrimination in voter registration. At the Edmund Pettus Bridge, state and local lawmen attacked the marchers with billy clubs and tear gas, driving them back to Selma. Seventeen people were hospitalized and dozens more were injured by police.

    This story has been updated with additional information Sunday.

    Source link

  • Fact check: Republicans at CPAC make false claims about Biden, Zelensky, the FBI and children | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Republicans at CPAC make false claims about Biden, Zelensky, the FBI and children | CNN Politics


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Conservative Political Action Conference is underway in Maryland. And the members of Congress, former government officials and conservative personalities who spoke at the conference on Thursday and Friday made false claims about a variety of topics.

    Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio uttered two false claims about President Joe Biden. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia repeated a debunked claim about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama used two inaccurate statistics as he lamented the state of the country. Former Trump White House official Steve Bannon repeated his regular lie about the 2020 election having been stolen from Trump, this time baselesly blaming Fox for Trump’s defeat.

    Rep. Kat Cammack of Florida incorrectly said a former Obama administration official had encouraged people to harass Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina inaccurately claimed Biden had laughed at a grieving mother and inaccurately insinuated that the FBI tipped off the media to its search of former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence. Two other speakers, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and former Trump administration official Sebastian Gorka, inflated the number of deaths from fentanyl.

    And that’s not all. Here is a fact check of 13 false claims from the conference, which continues on Saturday.

    Marjorie Taylor Greene said the Republican Party has a duty to protect children. Listing supposed threats to children, she said, “Now whether it’s like Zelensky saying he wants our sons and daughters to go die in Ukraine…” Later in her speech, she said, “I will look at a camera and directly tell Zelensky: you’d better leave your hands off of our sons and daughters, because they’re not dying over there.”

    Facts First: Greene’s claim is false. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky didn’t say he wants American sons and daughters to fight or die for Ukraine. The false claim, which was debunked by CNN and others earlier in the week, is based on a viral video that clipped Zelensky’s comments out of context.

    19-second video of Zelensky goes viral. See what was edited out

    In reality, Zelensky predicted at a press conference in late February that if Ukraine loses the war against Russia because it does not receive sufficient support from elsewhere, Russia will proceed to enter North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries in the Baltics (a region made up of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia) that the US will be obligated to send troops to defend. Under the treaty that governs NATO, an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. Ukraine is not a NATO member, and Zelensky didn’t say Americans should fight there.

    Greene is one of the people who shared the out-of-context video on Twitter this week. You can read a full fact-check, with Zelensky’s complete quote, here.

    Right-wing commentator and former Trump White House chief strategist Steve Bannon criticized right-wing cable channel Fox at length for, he argued, being insufficiently supportive of Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. Among other things, Bannon claimed that, on the night of the election in November 2020, “Fox News illegitimately called it for the opposition and not Donald J. Trump, of which our nation has never recovered.” Later, he said Trump is running again after “having it stolen, in broad daylight, of which they [Fox] participate in.”

    Facts First: This is nonsense. On election night in 2020, Fox accurately projected that Biden had won the state of Arizona. This projection did not change the outcome of the election; all of the votes are counted regardless of what media outlets have projected, and the counting showed that Biden won Arizona, and the election, fair and square. The 2020 election was not “stolen” from Trump.

    NATIONAL HARBOR, MARYLAND - MARCH 03: Former White House chief strategist for the Trump Administration Steve Bannon speaks during the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Gaylord National Resort Hotel And Convention Center on March 03, 2023 in National Harbor, Maryland. The annual conservative conference entered its second day of speakers including congressional members, media personalities and members of former President Donald Trump's administration. President Donald Trump will address the event on Saturday.  (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

    Bannon has a harsh message for Fox News at CPAC

    Fox, like other major media outlets, did not project that Biden had won the presidency until four days later. Fox personalities went on to repeatedly promote lies that the election was stolen from Trump – even as they privately dismissed and mocked these false claims, according to court filings from a voting technology company that is suing Fox for defamation.

    Rep. Jim Jordan claimed that Biden, “on day one,” made “three key changes” to immigration policy. Jordan said one of those changes was this: “We’re not going to deport anyone who come.” He proceeded to argue that people knowing “we’re not going to get deported” was a reason they decided to migrate to the US under Biden.

    Facts First: Jordan inaccurately described the 100-day deportation pause that Biden attempted to impose immediately after he took office on January 20, 2021. The policy did not say the US wouldn’t deport “anyone who comes.” It explicitly did not apply to anyone who arrived in the country after the end of October 2020, meaning people who arrived under the Biden administration or in the last months of the Trump administration could still be deported.

    Biden did say during the 2020 Democratic primary that “no one, no one will be deported at all” in his first 100 days as president. But Jordan claimed that this was the policy Biden actually implemented on his first day in office; Biden’s actual first-day policy was considerably narrower.

    Biden’s attempted 100-day pause also did not apply to people who engaged in or were suspected of terrorism or espionage, were seen to pose a national security risk, had waived their right to remain in the US, or whom the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement determined the law required to be removed.

    The pause was supposed to be in effect while the Department of Homeland Security conducted a review of immigration enforcement practices, but it was blocked by a federal judge shortly after it was announced.

    Rep. Ralph Norman strongly suggested the FBI had tipped off the media to its August search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home and resort in Florida for government documents in the former president’s possession – while concealing its subsequent document searches of properties connected to Biden.

    Norman said: “When I saw the raid at Mar-a-Lago – you know, the cameras, the FBI – and compare that to when they found Biden’s, all of the documents he had, where was the media, where was the FBI? They kept it quiet early on, didn’t let it out. The job of the next president is going to be getting rid of the insiders that are undermining this government, and you’ve gotta clean house.”

    Facts First: Norman’s narrative is false. The FBI did not tip off the media to its search of Mar-a-Lago; CNN reported the next day that the search “happened so quietly, so secretly, that it wasn’t caught on camera at all.” Rather, media outlets belatedly sent cameras to Mar-a-Lago because Peter Schorsch, publisher of the website Florida Politics, learned of the search from non-FBI sources and tweeted about it either after it was over or as it was just concluding, and because Trump himself made a public statement less than 20 minutes later confirming that a search had occurred. Schorsch told CNN on Thursday: “I can, unequivocally, state that the FBI was not one of my two sources which alerted me to the raid.”

    Brian Stelter, then CNN’s chief media correspondent, wrote in his article the day after the search: “By the time local TV news cameras showed up outside the club, there was almost nothing to see. Websites used file photos of the Florida resort since there were no dramatic shots of the search.”

    It’s true that the public didn’t find out until late January about the FBI’s November search of Biden’s former think tank office in Washington, which was conducted with the consent of Biden’s legal team. But the belated presence of journalists at Mar-a-Lago on the day of the Trump search in August is not evidence of a double standard.

    And it’s worth noting that media cameras were on the scene when Biden’s beach home in Delaware was searched by the FBI in February. News outlets had set up a media “pool” to make sure any search there was recorded.

    Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a former college and high school football coach, said, “Going into thousands of kids’ homes and talking to parents every year recruiting, half the kids in this country – I’m not talking about race, I’m just talking about – half the kids in this country have one or no parent. And it’s because of the attack on faith. People are losing faith because, for some reason, because the attack [on] God.”

    Facts First: Tuberville’s claim that half of American children don’t have two parents is incorrect. Official figures from the Census Bureau show that, in 2021, about 70% of US children under the age of 18 lived with two parents and about 65% lived with two married parents.

    About 22% of children lived with only a mother, about 5% with only a father, and about 3% with no parent. But the Census Bureau has explained that even children who are listed as living with only one parent may have a second parent; children are listed as living with only one parent if, for example, one parent is deployed overseas with the military or if their divorced parents share custody of them.

    It is true that the percentage of US children living in households with two parents has been declining for decades. Still, Tuberville’s statistic significantly exaggerated the current situation. His spokesperson told CNN on Thursday that the senator was speaking “anecdotally” from his personal experience meeting with families as a football coach.

    Tuberville claimed that today’s children are being “indoctrinated” in schools by “woke” ideology and critical race theory. He then said, “We don’t teach reading, writing and arithmetic anymore. You know, half the kids in this country, when they graduate – think about this: half the kids in this country, when they graduate, can’t read their diploma.”

    Facts First: This is false. While many Americans do struggle with reading, there is no basis for the claim that “half” of high school graduates can’t read a basic document like a diploma. “Mr. Tuberville does not know what he’s talking about at all,” said Patricia Edwards, a Michigan State University professor of language and literacy who is a past president of the International Literacy Association and the Literacy Research Association. Edwards said there is “no evidence” to support Tuberville’s claim. She also said that people who can’t read at all are highly unlikely to finish high school and that “sometimes politicians embellish information.”

    Tuberville could have accurately said that a significant number of American teenagers and adults have reading trouble, though there is no apparent basis for connecting these struggles with supposed “woke” indoctrination. The organization ProLiteracy pointed CNN to 2017 data that found 23% of Americans age 16 to 65 have “low” literacy skills in English. That’s not “half,” as ProLiteracy pointed out, and it includes people who didn’t graduate from high school and people who are able to read basic text but struggle with more complex literacy tasks.

    The Tuberville spokesperson said the senator was speaking informally after having been briefed on other statistics about Americans’ struggles with reading, like a report that half of adults can’t read a book written at an eighth-grade level.

    Rep. Jim Jordan claimed of Biden: “The president of the United States stood in front of Independence Hall, called half the country fascists.”

    Facts First: This is not true. Biden did not denounce even close to “half the country” in this 2022 speech at Independence Hall in Philadelphia. He made clear that he was speaking about a minority of Republicans.

    In the speech, in which he never used the word “fascists,” Biden warned that “MAGA Republicans” like Trump are “extreme,” “do not respect the Constitution” and “do not believe in the rule of law.” But he also emphasized that “not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans, are MAGA Republicans.” In other words, he made clear that he was talking about far less than half of Americans.

    Trump earned fewer than 75 million votes in 2020 in a country of more than 258 million adults, so even a hypothetical criticism of every single Trump voter would not amount to criticism of “half the country.”

    Rep. Scott Perry claimed that “average citizens need to just at some point be willing to acknowledge and accept that every single facet of the federal government is weaponized against every single one of us.” Perry said moments later, “The government doesn’t have the right to tell you that you can’t buy a gas stove but that you must buy an electric vehicle.”

    Facts First: This is nonsense. The federal government has not told people that they can’t buy a gas stove or must buy an electric vehicle.

    The Biden administration has tried to encourage and incentivize the adoption of electric vehicles, but it has not tried to forbid the manufacture or purchase of traditional vehicles with internal combustion engines. Biden has set a goal of electric vehicles making up half of all new vehicles sold in the US by 2030.

    There was a January controversy about a Biden appointee to the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, Richard Trumka Jr., saying that gas stoves pose a “hidden hazard,” as they emit air pollutants, and that “any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” But the commission as a whole has not shown support for a ban, and White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at a January press briefing: “The president does not support banning gas stoves. And the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which is independent, is not banning gas stoves.”

    Rep. Ralph Norman claimed that Biden had just laughed at a mother who lost two sons to fentanyl.

    “I don’t know whether y’all saw, I just saw it this morning: Biden laughing at the mother who had two sons – to die, and he’s basically laughing and saying the fentanyl came from the previous administration. Who cares where it came from? The fact is it’s here,” Norman said.

    Facts First: Norman’s claim is false. Biden did not laugh at the mother who lost her sons to fentanyl, the anti-abortion activist Rebecca Kiessling; in a somber tone, he called her “a poor mother who lost two kids to fentanyl.” Rather, he proceeded to laugh about how Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene had baselessly blamed the Biden administration for the young men’s deaths even though the tragedy happened in mid-2020, during the Trump administration. You can watch the video of Biden’s remarks here.

    Kiessling has demanded an apology from Biden. She is entitled to her criticism of Biden’s remarks and his chuckle – but the video clearly shows Norman was wrong when he claimed Biden was “laughing at the mother.”

    Rep. Kat Cammack told a story about the first hearing of the new Republican-led House select subcommittee on the supposed “weaponization” of the federal government. Cammack claimed she had asked a Democratic witness at this February hearing about his “incredibly vitriolic” Twitter feed in which, she claimed, he not only repeatedly criticized Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh but even went “so far as to encourage people to harass this Supreme Court justice.”

    Facts First: This story is false. The witness Cammack questioned in this February exchange at the subcommittee, former Obama administration deputy assistant attorney general Elliot Williams, did not encourage people to harass Kavanaugh. In fact, it’s not even true that Cammack accused him at the February hearing of having encouraged people to harass Kavanaugh. Rather, at the hearing, she merely claimed that Williams had tweeted numerous critical tweets about Kavanaugh but had been “unusually quiet” on Twitter after an alleged assassination attempt against the justice. Clearly, not tweeting about the incident is not the same thing as encouraging harassment.

    Williams, now a CNN legal analyst (he appeared at the subcommittee hearing in his personal capacity), said in a Thursday email that he had “no idea” what Cammack was looking at on his innocuous Twitter feed. He said: “I used to prosecute violent crimes, and clerked for two federal judges. Any suggestion that I’ve ever encouraged harassment of anyone – and particularly any official of the United States – is insulting and not based in reality.”

    Cammack’s spokesperson responded helpfully on Thursday to CNN’s initial queries about the story Cammack told at CPAC, explaining that she was referring to her February exchange with Williams. But the spokesperson stopped responding after CNN asked if Cammack was accurately describing this exchange with Williams and if they had any evidence of Williams actually having encouraged the harassment of Kavanaugh.

    Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana boasted about the state of the country “when Republicans were in charge.” Among other claims about Trump’s tenure, he said that “in four years,” Republicans “delivered 3.5% unemployment” and “created 8 million new jobs.”

    Facts First: This is inaccurate in two ways. First, the economic numbers for the full “four years” of Trump’s tenure are much worse than these numbers Kennedy cited; Kennedy was actually referring to Trump’s first three years while ignoring the fourth, which was marred by the Covid-19 pandemic. Second, there weren’t “8 million new jobs” created even in Trump’s first three years.

    Kennedy could have correctly said there was a 3.5% unemployment rate after three years of the Trump administration, but not after four. The unemployment rate skyrocketed early in Trump’s fourth year, on account of the pandemic, before coming down again, and it was 6.3% when Trump left office in early 2021. (It fell to 3.4% this January under Biden, better than in any month under Trump.)

    And while the economy added about 6.7 million jobs under Trump before the pandemic-related crash of March and April 2020, that’s not the “8 million jobs” Kennedy claimed – and the economy ended up shedding millions of jobs in Trump’s fourth year. Over the full four years of Trump’s tenure, the economy netted a loss of about 2.7 million jobs.

    Lara Trump, Donald Trump’s daughter-in-law and an adviser to his 2020 campaign, claimed that the last time a CPAC crowd was gathered at this venue in Maryland, in February 2020, “We had the lowest unemployment in American history.” After making other boasts about Donald Trump’s presidency, she said, “But how quickly it all changed.” She added, “Under Joe Biden, America is crumbling.”

    Facts First: Lara Trump’s claim about February 2020 having “the lowest unemployment in American history” is false. The unemployment rate was 3.5% at the time – tied for the lowest since 1969, but not the all-time lowest on record, which was 2.5% in 1953. And while Lara Trump didn’t make an explicit claim about unemployment under Biden, it’s not true that things are worse today on this measure; again, the most recent unemployment rate, 3.4% for January 2023, is better than the rate at the time of CPAC’s 2020 conference or at any other time during Donald Trump’s presidency.

    Multiple speakers at CPAC decried the high number of fentanyl overdose deaths. But some of the speakers inflated that number while attacking Biden’s immigration policy.

    Sebastian Gorka, a former Trump administration official, claimed that “in the last 12 months in America, deaths by fentanyl poisoning totaled 110,000 Americans.” He blamed “Biden’s open border” for these deaths.

    Rep. Scott Perry claimed: “Meanwhile over on this side of the border, where there isn’t anybody, they’re running this fentanyl in; it’s killing 100,000 Americans – over 100,000 Americans – a year.”

    Facts First: It’s not true that there are more than 100,000 fentanyl deaths per year. That is the total number of deaths from all drug overdoses in the US; there were 106,699 such deaths in 2021. But the number of overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids other than methadone, primarily fentanyl, is smaller – 70,601 in 2021.

    Fentanyl-related overdoses are clearly a major problem for the country and by far the biggest single contributor to the broader overdose problem. Nonetheless, claims of “110,000” and “over 100,000” fentanyl deaths per year are significant exaggerations. And while the number of overdose deaths and fentanyl-related deaths increased under Biden in 2021, it was also troubling under Trump in 2020 – 91,799 total overdose deaths and 56,516 for synthetic opioids other than methadone.

    It’s also worth noting that fentanyl is largely smuggled in by US citizens through legal ports of entry rather than by migrants sneaking past other parts of the border. Contrary to frequent Republican claims, the border is not “open”; border officers have seized thousands of pounds of fentanyl under Biden.

    Source link

  • Biden’s FAA nominee to get long-awaited confirmation hearing this week | CNN Politics

    Biden’s FAA nominee to get long-awaited confirmation hearing this week | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden’s embattled pick to lead the Federal Aviation Administration is scheduled for his confirmation hearing before Congress on Wednesday morning amid a series of challenges for the agency.

    Phil Washington is expected to get grilled by senators on issues that have emerged since he was nominated last summer and explain why he’s qualified to lead an agency that urgently needs to address a slew of complex challenges.

    The hearing for Washington, whose lack of aviation experience and legal entanglements have raised concerns on Capitol Hill, comes after a year of the FAA operating without a permanent administrator. In that time, the agency has contended with several problems that have plagued travelers and the airline industry, such as recent near-collisions involving airliners, crucial staffing shortages and malfunctions of aging technology that have cause major air travel disruption.

    Washington, whose nomination was first announced by Biden nearly eight months ago, will appear before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Wednesday at 10 a.m. ET.

    Washington, the current CEO of the Denver International Airport, has held leadership roles at municipal transit organizations, including in Denver and Los Angeles, focused on bus and rail lines. He also led the Biden-Harris transition team for the Department of Transportation. Prior to his work in transportation, Washington served in the military for 24 years.

    While Washington has worked in transportation-related positions since 2000, he had no experience in the aviation industry prior to joining the Denver airport in 2021. Since his nomination last summer, Washington has faced questions about his limited experience and, in September, was named in a search warrant issued as part of a political corruption investigation in Los Angeles.

    According to a questionnaire given to the commerce committee ahead of Wednesday’s hearing, Washington wrote that though his name was mentioned in the search warrant along with several other names, no search was ever executed on him or his property, nor was he questioned about the matter.

    Washington’s name was also recently mentioned in a federal lawsuit filed earlier this month. Benjamin Juarez, a former parking director at the Denver Airport, alleges that the city permitted intolerable working conditions and that he faced ongoing threats to his job, Axios reported. Juarez’s attorney says he contacted Washington, who was leading the airport, at least twice for help and did not receive a response.

    Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, the ranking Republican on the committee, has asserted that Washington failed to disclose his naming in the lawsuit involving his work at the Denver airport. Republicans have also questioned whether Washington, an Army veteran who left the military in 2000 after more than 20 years of service, would be statutorily considered a civilian – a requirement in order to serve as the FAA chief.

    If he’s not considered a civilian, he would need a waiver from Congress permitting him to lead the agency. And Republicans do not support granting Washington a waiver.

    A GOP aide on the Senate commerce committee told CNN that Cruz and Senate Republicans expect to raise all these issues – including his legal entanglements, his lack of experience, his management and his possible ineligibility – during Wednesday’s hearing.

    They’ll also focus on Washington’s efforts to incorporate diversity, equity, and inclusion in the vendor and contractor process as well as leading efforts “to make it harder and more expensive to drive in Los Angeles to force people to use mass transit instead in order to save mankind from climate change,” according to the aide. Specifically, the aide referenced Washington’s work to pursue a policy which charges drivers for using congested roadways during peak hours.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in January that he would push to confirm Washington.

    “There is no doubt about it: it’s time to clear the runway for President Biden’s choice for FAA administrator, Phil Washington. With recent events, including airline troubles and last week’s tech problem, this agency needs a leader confirmed by the Senate immediately,” Schumer said in a statement following a computer system failure that triggered the delay of more than 12,000 flights. “I intend to break this logjam, work to hold a hearing for Mr. Washington, where he can detail his experience and answer questions and then work towards a speedy Senate confirmation.”

    The FAA is a sprawling and complex safety, regulatory and operational agency, tasked with regulatory oversight of all civilian aviation in the US.

    It’s been without a permanent administrator for about a year, when the Trump-nominated Stephen Dickson stepped down midway through his five-year term. Billy Nolen, the agency’s top safety official, was named acting director in April.

    The agency has a professed focus on safety, but agency leadership is ultimately responsible for steering its focus as its mission gets wider – with responsibilities expanding to include establishing the federal approach to private space launches and regulating drones – even as longstanding aspects of the aviation industry continue to grapple with major challenges.

    A failure of the 30-year-old NOTAM, or Notice to Air Missions, system led to the first nationwide airplane departure grounding since the 9/11 attacks, showcasing just one way aging industry technology is being stretched beyond its limits by increased volume. Now, the FAA is planning to dramatically accelerate replacing the safety system.

    Another FAA computer system failed earlier this year when it was overloaded, leading to delays in Florida. And the agency has struggled to modernize parts of air traffic control, with a 2021 Transportation Department Office of Inspection General report citing difficulties integrating the FAA’s multi-billion dollar Next Generation Air Transportation System project due to extended delays.

    There have been recent near-collisions on US runways, prompting federal safety investigators to open multiple inquiries. Air traffic control is staffed at the lowest level in decades, according to industry experts. And key roles at US airlines pared down amid the Covid-19 pandemic have not ramped up to meet current outsized travel demand.

    In February, Nolen, the acting chief, ordered a sweeping review of the agency in the wake of recent aviation safety incidents. That review is expected to include a major safety meeting this month.

    Another challenge is the FAA’s evolution in how it handles oversight following the Boeing 737 MAX crashes.

    Congress created reforms to the FAA’s oversight in a late 2020 law but critics say the agency has been slow to implement changes.

    A House Transportation committee investigation into 737 MAX certification found the model of oversight used then “creates inherent conflicts of interest that have jeopardized the safety of the flying public.” The report also concluded senior FAA officials overrode decisions of FAA experts.

    The agency is also still trying to resolve an 5G interference issue.

    The next generation of cell phone technology can interfere with devices on aircraft that determine how far above the ground the aircraft is – the radar or radio altimeter.

    FAA says it brought its concerns to the administration at the time when the Federal Communications Commission was developing plans to auction this portion of spectrum. But now the FAA is trying to play catch up while wireless carriers agreed to voluntarily pause rolling out their new tech around airports.

    Source link

  • 2020 Presidential Candidates Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    2020 Presidential Candidates Fast Facts | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a look at the 2020 presidential candidates and key dates in their campaigns.

    Donald Trump 45th President of the United States. Running for reelection.
    Primary Campaign Committee – Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
    Website – https://www.donaldjtrump.com/
    January 20, 2017 – The day he is inaugurated, Trump submits paperwork to the Federal Election Commission to be eligible to run for reelection in 2020.
    February 27, 2018 – The Trump campaign announces Brad Parscale, the digital media director of his 2016 campaign, has been hired to run his reelection bid.
    March 17, 2020 – Earns enough delegates needed to win the Republican nomination for president.

    Bill WeldFormer Massachusetts Governor
    Primary Campaign Committee – 2020 Presidential Campaign Committee
    Website – https://www.weld2020.org/
    April 15, 2019 – Announces he is running for the Republican nomination for president on CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper.
    March 18, 2020 – Weld announces he is suspending his presidential campaign.

    Joe WalshFormer US Representative from Illinois
    Primary Campaign Committee – Walsh 2020
    Website – https://www.joewalsh.org/
    August 25, 2019 Announces he is running for the Republican nomination for president on ABC’s “This Week.”
    February 7, 2020 – Walsh tells CNN’s John Berman on “New Day” that he is ending his candidacy for president.

    Mark Sanford Former Governor of South Carolina
    Primary Campaign Committee – Sanford 2020
    Website – https://www.marksanford.com/
    September 8, 2019 – Announces he will launch a primary challenge for the 2020 Republican nomination on “Fox News Sunday.”
    November 12, 2019 – Announces he is suspending his presidential campaign.

    John Delaney US Representative from Maryland’s 6th District
    Primary Campaign Committee – Friends of John Delaney
    Website – https://www.johnkdelaney.com
    July 28, 2017 – In a Washington Post op-ed, Delaney announces he is running for president.
    January 31, 2020 – Delaney announces that he is ending his 2020 presidential campaign.

    Andrew YangEntrepreneur, founder of Venture for America
    Primary Campaign Committee – Friends of Andrew Yang
    Website – https://www.yang2020.com/
    February 2, 2018 – Announces he is running for president via YouTube.
    February 11, 2020 – Announces he is suspending his presidential campaign.

    Richard Ojeda Former State Senator from Virginia
    Primary Campaign Committee – Ojeda for President
    November 12, 2018 – Announces he is running for president at the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC.
    January 25, 2019 – Announces he is suspending his campaign for president.

    Julián CastroFormer Mayor of San Antonio, Texas, and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under US President Barack Obama.
    Primary Campaign Committee – Julián for the Future Presidential Exploratory Committee
    Website – https://www.julianforthefuture.com/
    January 12, 2019 – Officially announces he is running for president.
    January 2, 2020 – Announces he is suspending his presidential campaign.

    Tulsi GabbardUS Representative from Hawaii’s 2nd District
    Primary Campaign Committee – Tulsi Now
    Website – https://www.tulsi2020.com/
    January 11, 2019 – I have decided to run and will be making a formal announcement within the next week,” the Hawaii Democrat tells CNN’s Van Jones.
    February 2, 2019 – Gabbard officially launches her 2020 presidential campaign at an event in Hawaii.

    March 19, 2020 – Ends her campaign for president, and endorses former Vice President Joe Biden.

    Kamala HarrisUS Senator from California
    Primary Campaign Committee – Kamala Harris For The People
    Website – https://kamalaharris.org/
    January 21, 2019 – Announces she is running for president in a video posted to social media at the same time she appears on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”
    December 3, 2019 – Harris ends her 2020 presidential campaign.

    Marianne Williamson Author and activist
    Primary Campaign Committee – Marianne Williamson for President
    Website – https://www.marianne2020.com/
    January 28, 2019 – Williamson formally launches her 2020 presidential campaign with a speech in Los Angeles.
    January 10, 2020 – Announces she is ending her presidential campaign.

    Cory Booker US Senator from New Jersey
    Primary Campaign Committee – Cory 2020
    Website – https://corybooker.com/
    February 1, 2019 – Releases a video announcing his candidacy, appears on the talk show, “The View,” participates in multiple radio interviews and holds a press conference in Newark, New Jersey.
    January 13, 2020 – Booker ends his presidential campaign.

    Elizabeth WarrenUS Senator from Massachusetts
    Primary Campaign Committee – Warren for President, Inc.
    Website – https://elizabethwarren.com/
    February 9, 2019 – Warren officially announces she is running for president at a rally in Lawrence, Massachusetts.
    March 5, 2020 – Warren ends her presidential campaign.

    Amy Klobuchar US Senator from Minnesota
    Primary Campaign Committee – Amy For America
    Website – https://www.amyklobuchar.com/
    February 10, 2019 – Announces her presidential bid at a snowy, freezing outdoor event in Minneapolis.
    March 2, 2020 – Klobuchar ends her presidential campaign.

    Bernie Sanders US Senator from Vermont
    Primary Campaign Committee – Bernie 2020
    Website – https://berniesanders.com
    February 19, 2019 – Announces that he is running for president, during an interview with Vermont Public Radio.
    April 8, 2020 – Announces he is suspending his presidential campaign.

    Jay InsleeGovernor of Washington
    Primary Campaign Committee – Inslee for America
    Website – https://jayinslee.com/
    March 1, 2019 – Announces his presidential bid in a video.
    August 21, 2019 – Announces he is suspending his presidential campaign.

    John Hickenlooper Former Governor of Colorado
    Primary Campaign Committee – Hickenlooper 2020
    Website – https://www.hickenlooper.com/
    March 4, 2019 – Hickenlooper launches his campaign with a biographical video entitled, “Standing Tall.”
    March 7, 2019 – Officially kicks off his campaign with a rally in Denver.
    August 15, 2019 – Hickenlooper ends his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

    Beto O’RourkeFormer US Representative from Texas
    Primary Campaign Committee – Beto for America
    Website – https://betoorourke.com
    March 14, 2019 – Announces his presidential bid in a video.
    November 1, 2019 – Announces he is ending his presidential campaign.

    Kirsten GillibrandUS Senator from New York
    Primary Campaign Committee – Gillibrand 2020
    Website – https://kirstengillibrand.com/
    March 17, 2019 – Officially declares her Democratic candidacy for president via YouTube.
    August 28, 2019 – Announces that she is ending her campaign.

    Wayne Messam Mayor of Miramar, Florida
    Primary Campaign Committee – Wayne Messam for America
    Website – https://wayneforamerica.com/
    March 28, 2019 – Officially declares his Democratic candidacy for president in a video released to CNN.
    November 20, 2019 – Messam announces that he is suspending his campaign.

    Tim Ryan US Representative from Ohio’s 13th District
    Primary Campaign Committee – Tim Ryan for America
    Website – https://timryanforamerica.com/
    April 4, 2019 – Announces his presidential bid during an appearance on ABC’s “The View.” The televised announcement came just minutes after Ryan’s campaign website went live.
    October 24, 2019 – Announces he is dropping out of the presidential race.

    Eric SwalwellUS Representative from California’s 15th District
    Primary Campaign Committee – Swalwell for America
    Website – https://ericswalwell.com/
    April 8, 2019 – Announces he is running for president during a taping of the “Late Show with Stephen Colbert.”
    July 8, 2019 – Announces he is dropping out of the presidential race.

    Pete ButtigiegMayor of South Bend, Indiana
    Primary Campaign Committee – Pete for America
    Website – https://peteforamerica.com/
    April 14, 2019 – Officially announces he is running for president during a rally in South Bend, Indiana.
    March 1, 2020 – Announces he is suspending his presidential campaign.

    Seth MoultonUS Representative from Massachusetts’ 6th District
    Primary Campaign Committee – Seth Moulton for America
    Website – https://sethmoulton.com/
    April 22, 2019 – Announces, via campaign video, he is running for president.
    August 23, 2019 – Announces that he is ending his presidential bid during a speech at the Democratic National Committee summer meeting in San Francisco.

    Joe Biden Former US Vice President
    Primary Campaign Committee – Biden for President
    Website – https://joebiden.com/
    April 25, 2019 – Announces he is running for president in a campaign video posted to social media.

    Michael BennetUS Senator from Colorado
    Primary Campaign Committee – Bennet for America
    Website – https://michaelbennet.com/
    May 2, 2019 – Announces his candidacy during an interview on CBS’ “This Morning.”
    February 11, 2020 – Announces he is ending his presidential campaign.

    Steve BullockGovernor of Montana
    Primary Campaign Committee – Bullock for President
    Website – https://stevebullock.com/
    May 14, 2019 – In a video posted online, announces that he is running for president.
    December 2, 2019 – Announces he is ending his presidential campaign.

    Bill de Blasio Mayor of New York City
    Primary Campaign Committee – de Blasio 2020
    Website – https://billdeblasio.com/
    May 16, 2019 – Announces he is running for president in a video posted to YouTube.
    September 20, 2019 – Announces that he is ending his campaign.

    Joe Sestak Former US Representative from Pennsylvania’s 7th District
    Primary Campaign Committee – Joe Sestak for President
    Website – https://www.joesestak.com/
    June 23, 2019 – Announces his candidacy in a video posted to his website.
    December 1, 2019 – Announces he is ending his presidential campaign.

    Tom SteyerFormer hedge fund manager and activist
    Primary Campaign Committee – Tom 2020
    Website – https://www.tomsteyer.com/
    July 9, 2019 – Announces his candidacy in a video posted online.
    February 29, 2020 – Announces he is ending his presidential campaign.

    Deval Patrick Former Governor of Massachusetts
    Primary Campaign Committee – Deval for All
    Website – https://devalpatrick2020.com/
    November 14, 2019 – Announces his candidacy in a video posted to his website.
    February 12, 2020 – Announces he is ending his presidential campaign.

    Michael BloombergFormer New York Mayor
    Primary Campaign Committee – Mike Bloomberg 2020
    Website – https://www.mikebloomberg.com/
    November 24, 2019 – Officially announces his bid in a letter on his campaign website.
    March 4, 2020 – Bloomberg ends his presidential campaign.

    Source link

  • GOP grapples with how to control Trump — again | CNN Politics

    GOP grapples with how to control Trump — again | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    GOP leaders are sending warnings that they want former President Donald Trump to play by the rules and put his party above his own interests as he embarks on a third campaign – that is, to behave in a way he rarely, if ever, has before.

    Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel gave the clearest sign yet on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday that 2024 GOP White House candidates will have to pledge to back the party’s presidential nominee if it isn’t them – or risk being banned from the debate stage.

    “I think it’s kind of a no-brainer, right?” McDaniel told Dana Bash, adding that formal criteria haven’t yet been established for the first debate in August. “If you’re going to be on the Republican National Committee debate stage asking voters to support you, you should say, ‘I’m going to support the voters and who they choose as the nominee,’” McDaniel added.

    The former president, who signed a loyalty pledge in 2015, responded with his typical hubris on Sunday, despite recent polling showing that enthusiasm for him among the GOP isn’t what it used to be. “President Trump will support the Republican nominee because it will be him,” a campaign spokesperson told CNN in response to McDaniel’s prediction there’d be a loyalty pledge required of candidates.

    Trump has already said that whether he would back someone other than himself as the 2024 Republican nominee would depend on who the candidate was. Given that he is attacking his potential primary rivals, especially high-flying Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the potential for new party splits is growing.

    Ever since Trump took control of the GOP with his 2016 nomination and victory, the party has almost always capitulated to his unruly instincts and crushing of rules and conventions – most notoriously appeasing his extremism during two impeachments. Many GOP lawmakers amplified his false claims of electoral fraud in the 2020 presidential election and whitewashed his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection.

    Yet Trump’s intervention in last year’s midterm elections, when many of his election-denying acolytes lost in swing states and helped to quell a Republican red wave, highlighted how his own priorities may diverge from his party’s. Some Republican leaders blame Trump and the way he alienates more moderate, suburban voters for the party’s disappointing performances when they lost the House in 2018, the Senate and White House in 2020 and fell short of expectations in 2022, even though they flipped the House. As a result, some top GOP donors and opinion formers have argued that it’s time for the party to move on from a candidate who is radioactive with many voters and who could thwart their chances of defeating President Joe Biden in an expected reelection bid. It remains to be seen if this view is shared among Trump’s longtime base.

    Questions about whether Trump would support DeSantis as nominee – or anyone else who might beat him – stemmed from a radio interview with Hugh Hewitt earlier this month.

    “It would depend. I would give you the same answer I gave in 2016 during the debate. … It would have to depend on who the nominee was,” Trump said.

    It would be a nightmare scenario for the GOP if Trump were to lose the party’s nominating contest next year but spend the general election railing against the party’s presidential pick. Even small defections among Trump’s devoted grassroots political base could be critical in the kind of swing state races that decided the last two presidential elections.

    Trump acts as if he is entitled to his third consecutive spot at the top of the Republican Party’s presidential ticket. But that assumption will face a new test this week when DeSantis, whom Trump has already accused of disloyalty for considering a White House run, promotes and releases a new book in a rite of passage for potential presidential candidates.

    Trump has also lashed out at Nikki Haley, who served as his ambassador to the United Nations and has launched a 2024 bid rooted in calls for a new generation of American political leadership. Both Trump and Haley are scheduled to speak at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference outside Washington, DC. DeSantis, meanwhile, is scheduled to attend events in Texas and California.

    While requiring debate candidates to sign a pledge to support the nominee would be a show of party unity and would, in effect, be an attempt to box Trump in, it would hardly be enforceable should the ex-president not win the nomination. Given that Trump already falsely claimed the 2020 general election, which he lost fair and square, was marred by voter fraud, it’s hardly far-fetched to believe he may trash any nomination process that he doesn’t win.

    But McDaniel said on CNN that she was sure that all the candidates would sign such a pledge, noting Trump had signed on in the 2016 race and raising the leverage that the party has in getting all of the candidates on board.

    “I think they all want to be on the debate stage. I think President Trump would like to be on the debate stage. That’s what he likes to do,” McDaniel told Bash.

    The RNC head, who just won her own contested reelection, also warned that the GOP has lost big races in the midterms “because of Republicans refusing to support other Republicans. And unless we fix this in our party, unless we start coming together, we will not win in 2024.”

    McDaniel may also have a problem beyond Trump, since some possible GOP 2024 contenders have warned that following his role in inciting a mob attack on Congress in one of the most damaging blows to US democracy in modern times, the ex-president is no longer fit to carry the party’s banner or for the presidency.

    Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson said on CBS this month that Trump had “disqualified himself and should not serve our country again as a result of what happened” on January 6, 2021. But Hutchinson did not say whether he would decline to endorse Trump if he were the nominee. Another possible anti-Trump candidate, former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, suggested to Hewitt this month that he would support the ex-president if he was the party’s nominee but later said on Twitter, “Trump won’t commit to supporting the Republican nominee, and I won’t commit to supporting him.”

    One reason why the question of whether Trump would endorse a nominee other than himself in 2024 is so topical is because of some early signs that the former president might not have quite the hold on his party as he once did. His campaign hasn’t exactly caught fire since he launched it last fall. Some recent polls, while too far out from primary voting to be decisive, suggest that DeSantis is closely matched with Trump – even if other candidates like Haley and potential candidates like ex-Vice President Mike Pence trail in single figures.

    After his bumper reelection win in Florida in November, DeSantis is seen by some party figures as representative of Trump’s populist, cultural and “America First” principles without the indiscipline and scandal that follows the ex-president. The Florida governor has adopted Trump’s pugilistic partisan style, telling Fox News host Mark Levin on Sunday that he had made “the Democratic Party in our state, basically, a rotten carcass on the side of the street.”

    It remains a question, however, how DeSantis would stand up to Trump’s searing attacks on a debate stage. And many once vaunted candidates – like former Govs. Jeb Bush of Florida and Scott Walker of Wisconsin – have looked strong in theory, only to see their campaigns flame out when they hit the trail.

    Still, McDaniel’s message on Sunday shows the depth of party concern that an untamed Trump could again severely impair the Republican Party’s hopes of winning the White House and control of Congress.

    Source link

  • Democrats have been doing well in special elections in 2023 | CNN Politics

    Democrats have been doing well in special elections in 2023 | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Democrat Jennifer McClellan easily won the special election for Virginia’s 4th Congressional District last week. The fact that a Democrat comfortably retained a Democratic seat in a district President Joe Biden would have won under its new lines by 36 points in 2020 is not surprising.

    What is notable is that McClellan didn’t just win, she outperformed Biden’s 2020 margin by 13 points. It’s part of a pattern in special elections this year that suggests that the national environment may be friendlier to Democrats than Biden’s sub-50% job approval rating would indicate.

    So far in 2023, besides McClellan’s race, there have been 12 special elections for state legislative seats in which at least one Democrat ran against at least one Republican. And in those 12 races, Democrats have been outperforming Biden’s 2020 margins by an average of 4 points.

    Now, 12 isn’t a particularly large sample size when examining special state legislative elections, so that 4-point average swing could shift somewhat as more special elections are held.

    Still, a sample size of 12 isn’t nothing, especially considering these elections have taken place in areas ranging from red to blue and across six states, from New Hampshire all the way down to Louisiana.

    And this 4-point swing to the Democrats is very much unlike what we saw in the state legislative special elections during the 2022 cycle before Roe v. Wade was overturned. In those elections, Democrats were underperforming Biden’s margin by an average of 4 points.

    The change in special elections reminds me of what happened in early 2019. Democrats were coming off a big 2018 midterm campaign in which the special elections leading up to it were the first indication that the party was in for a big night.

    In state special elections in the first half of 2019, Democrats continued to outperform the party baseline from the previous presidential election, but not by anywhere close to how well they had done in specials before the 2018 midterms. Sure enough, Biden would go on in 2020 to do better than Democrats had done in 2016, though not as well as Democratic House candidates had done in 2018.

    Also in the first half of 2019, House Republicans easily retained control of a very red district in Pennsylvania in the first special federal election of that cycle. The result was similar to how House Democrats did in Virginia last week – easily winning a very Democratic seat in the first congressional special election of 2023.

    That big Republican win in Pennsylvania in 2019 wasn’t surprising, but what was so out of character was how the result nearly matched the GOP baseline set in the previous presidential election. This was very unlike the vast majority of special federal elections in the 2018 cycle and presaged a tight 2020 presidential election.

    Let’s not forget, too, that Democrats did do better than the 2020 baseline in the special elections last year following the overturning of Roe v. Wade (though generally not by the same degree as the result in Virginia last week). This foreshadowed a stronger-than-expected midterm election for the party in control of the White House.

    Of course, it’s still very early in the current election cycle. There’s a lot of time for things to shift between now and the 2024 general election.

    But, for the moment at least, congressional and state legislative elections aren’t the only ones in which Democrats have been doing well.

    Indeed, if you want an idea of how the current political environment could make a difference in a swing state, look no further than one of the most important swing states: Wisconsin.

    The Badger State held a nonpartisan primary last week for a critical state Supreme Court seat. This race – to succeed a retiring conservative – will determine whether liberals or conservatives hold the majority on the bench and could affect rulings on abortion and gerrymandering, among other issues.

    Two liberals and two conservatives ran in the primary, which had an unusually high turnout. A liberal and a conservative have advanced to the April general election, but the two liberals combined beat the two conservatives combined by 8 points – in a state Biden won by less than a percentage point in 2020.

    Were that result to hold in April, it would mark one of the most important judicial election wins for liberals in the country this century.

    We’ll just have to wait to see if this blue tint we’re witnessing in a small cross-section of elections across the country continues to hold true as the year goes on.

    Source link

  • Colorado discipline office moves toward ethics complaint against ex-Trump attorney for 2020 election gambits | CNN Politics

    Colorado discipline office moves toward ethics complaint against ex-Trump attorney for 2020 election gambits | CNN Politics


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The disciplinary office that regulates attorney conduct in Colorado is taking steps toward potentially bringing an ethics complaint against Jenna Ellis, the lawyer who played a prominent role in former President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

    Colorado’s Attorney Regulation Counsel, an independent office in the state, indicated last week that it had been authorized to prepare and file a formal complaint against Ellis, according to a February 17 email provided to CNN by Project 65, a group of bipartisan lawyers that is asking for disciplinary action against Ellis and other pro-Trump attorneys who tried to overturn and undermine the 2020 election.

    “We expect the Complaint will be filed within the next month or so,” said the email, which was sent to the head of a group that asked the disciplinary office to investigate Ellis.

    Under Colorado attorney disciplinary rules, the office still has the option to reach a settlement or stipulation with Ellis at this point in the process, so it’s not guaranteed that an ethics complaint will ultimately be filed against her.

    Jessica Yates, who runs the disciplinary office, told CNN that the office cannot comment on specific cases. The email was sent to Michael Teter, the managing director of the 65 Project.

    Ellis did not respond to CNN’s attempts to reach her for comment. When the 65 Project asked for the ethics investigation into Ellis last March, she told CNN that she would not be “intimidated by this dirty political maneuver to undermine the legal profession.”

    Teter told CNN that the recent move by the disciplinary office “demonstrates the seriousness of her misconduct in her attempt to overturn the 2020 election by abusing the court system and making fraudulent, baseless allegations.” Ellis was the public face of many of Trump’s election-reversal gambits, working on Trump’s legal efforts as well as the failed bid to convince state legislatures to nullify President Joe Biden’s win.

    Several other Trump-aligned lawyers have faced potential professional consequences – including the possibility of suspension or disbarment – for their post-election legal conduct. However, some of the bids to discipline those attorneys have run into roadblocks.

    The disciplinary action that was brought against Sidney Powell, who put forward some of the most outlandish false claims about the presidential vote, was thrown out by a Texas judge on Thursday.

    But an attorney disciplinary committee in DC made the preliminary finding last year that former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani violated ethics rules for his work on a Trump lawsuit that tried to throw out hundreds of thousands of votes in Pennsylvania. There will be more rounds of appeal before that finding is finalized and a punishment is handed down, but the DC Bar’s disciplinary counsel has asked for Giuliani to be disbarred. And Jeffrey Clark, the former Justice Department lawyer who tried unsuccessfully to get the department to validate Trump’s false voter fraud claims, is also facing attorney ethics proceedings in DC.

    If the attorney regulation counsel in Colorado moves forward with a complaint against Ellis, and there isn’t a settlement, the matter will be go through rounds of proceedings in front of a disciplinary judge, including a potential trial-like hearing before a panel made up of the judge and two other volunteers. The decision by that panel can then be appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court.

    Source link

  • Proud Boy testifies in sedition trial about far-right group being the ‘tip of the spear’ on January 6 | CNN Politics

    Proud Boy testifies in sedition trial about far-right group being the ‘tip of the spear’ on January 6 | CNN Politics


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The sole Proud Boy to plead guilty to seditious conspiracy in connection to the US Capitol riot testified on Wednesday that members of the far-right organization believed the country was barreling toward revolution and that they were the “tip of the spear.”

    Jeremy Bertino, a top lieutenant to Proud Boys Chairman Enrique Tarrio, testified as part of a cooperation deal that he struck with prosecutors against Tarrio and four other members of the Proud Boys charged with conspiring to stop the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

    “We had a big fight on our hands. It was going to be an uphill battle, and everyone had turned against us,” Bertino testified. “My belief was that we had to take the reins and pretty much be the leaders that we had been building ourselves up to be.”

    His testimony allowed prosecutors to show jurors how the events of January 6, 2021, unfolded in the mind of a top member of the organization as he watched it online from his North Carolina home, sending messages to his “brothers” about targeting then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and assuring them that members of the far-left group Antifa weren’t there to stop them.

    Some of the messages featured in court were from defendants in the case, whom Bertino said he would “take a bullet for.” But Bertino and the five defendants – Tarrio, Ethan Nordean, Zachary Rehl, Joseph Biggs and Dominic Pezzola – rarely made eye contact during the testimony.

    There was not a premeditated or specific plan to storm the Capitol, Bertino testified, adding that getting the Proud Boys to communicate and work together was like “herding cats.” The Proud Boys had several group messages from the days before the riot where members mentioned descending on the Capitol building, according to exhibits shown by prosecutors.

    As court challenges to the 2020 election failed, members of the Proud Boys – who saw themselves as the “foot soldiers of the right” – began to believe the country was headed toward an “all-out revolution,” Bertino testified.

    “I felt it coming,” he said.

    The Proud Boys believed that the government was controlled by “commies,” he testified, and they began to turn against the police, whom the group increasingly saw as their enemy. Everybody in the organization felt “desperate,” including Tarrio, Bertino told the jury.

    “His tones were calculated,” Bertino said of Tarrio. “Cold, but very determined. He felt the exact same way that I did.”

    Members also were inspired by then-President Donald Trump’s reference to their organization in a 2020 presidential debate, where he told the group to “stand back and stand by.” Bertino testified that there were “nonstop requests for membership” after the debate, specifically from people who wanted to attend rallies, and that the group did less vetting of new members to keep up with applications.

    During cross examination, Bertino said that he thought the Proud Boys had a goal to stop the 2020 election but had no knowledge of how that goal would be achieved.

    “I didn’t have a direct idea of where they were going, how they were going to get there.”

    Bertino was not in Washington, DC, on the day of the riot because he was at home recovering from a stab wound he suffered during a previous pro-Trump rally, but he testified that he watched on a livestream video. He saw the mob as starting the “next American revolution,” and told others Proud Boys he was brought to tears during the attack.

    “I was happy, excited, in awe and disbelief that people were doing what they said they would do,” Bertino told the jury. When the crowd descended on the Capitol building, “it meant that we influenced people, the normies, enough to make them stand for themselves and take back their country and take back their freedom,” he said.

    In chats to other Proud Boys, Bertino encouraged members to move forward, telling them that he could see the Capitol building on a livestream and that no members of Antifa would be at the building to stop the pro-Trump mob.

    Bertino also messaged: “They need to get peloton” – which he testified was a misspelled reference to Pelosi. “She was the talking head of the opposition and they needed to remove her from power,” he said.

    By the evening of January 6, Bertino grew angry at Trump supporters for leaving the Capitol building, he told the jury.

    “The way I felt at the moment, if we give that building up, we were giving up our country,” Bertino testified. He sent encrypted messages to other Proud Boys members, saying that “we failed,” and “Half measures mean nothing,” and, referring to lawmakers inside the Capitol, “Fuck fear: They need to be hung.”

    “Once they took that step, there was no coming back from it,” Bertino testified Wednesday. “And they decided basically to balk and walk away after creating all that chaos down there.”

    “The revolution had failed,” he continued, “because the House was still going to go on and certify the election.”

    Bertino told the jury that after January 6, he tried to delete what he saw as incriminating messages on his phone and he wasn’t fully truthful with FBI agents when they asked him about the Capitol attack.

    “I guess it’s a natural instinct to protect yourself and protect those you love,” Bertino testified.

    “I love them,” he said of the five defendants. “I didn’t want to see anything bad happen to them. Still don’t.”

    Source link

  • House January 6 investigator says it’s ‘likely’ 2020 election subversion probes will produce indictments | CNN Politics

    House January 6 investigator says it’s ‘likely’ 2020 election subversion probes will produce indictments | CNN Politics


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The top investigator on the House committee that probed the January 6, 2021, US Capitol attack said Wednesday it is “likely” that the Georgia and federal investigations into efforts to subvert the 2020 presidential election will produce indictments.

    Timothy Heaphy told CNN’s Kate Bolduan on “Erin Burnett OutFront” that “unless there is information inconsistent, which I don’t expect, I think there will likely be indictments both in Georgia and at the federal level.”

    In Georgia, the foreperson of the Atlanta-based grand jury that investigated former President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election told CNN on Tuesday that the panel is recommending multiple indictments and suggested “the big name” may be on the list.

    The grand jury met for about seven months in Atlanta and heard testimony from 75 witnesses, including some of Trump’s closest advisers from his final weeks in the White House.

    Now that the grand jury is finished, it’s up to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to review the recommendations and make charging decisions. Willis’ decisions in this case will reverberate in the 2024 presidential campaign and beyond.

    Trump, who has launched his 2024 campaign for the White House, denies any criminal wrongdoing.

    At the federal level, special counsel Jack Smith is overseeing parts of the criminal investigation into the Capitol attack and has subpoenaed members of Trump’s inner circle. On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that Smith had subpoenaed the former president’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner for testimony.

    “I think it could be very important,” Heaphy said of the pair’s potential testimony.

    “They were present for really significant events. The special counsel will want to hear about the president’s understanding of the election results and also what happened on January 6. And they both had direct communications with him about the events preceding the riot at the Capitol,” he said.

    The special counsel has a massive amount of evidence already in-hand that it now needs to comb through, including evidence recently turned over by the House January 6 committee, subpoena documents provided by local officials in key states and discovery collected from lawyers for Trump allies late last year in a flurry of activity, at least some of which had not been reviewed as of early January, sources familiar with the investigation told CNN at the time.

    “He will not stop because of a family relationship, because of purported executive privilege,” Heaphy said of Smith. “He believes that the law entitles him to all of that information, and he’s determined to get it.”

    Ivanka Trump and Kushner previously testified to the House select committee, which expired in January after Republicans took control of the House. The panel had referred the former president to the Justice Department on four criminal charges in December, and while largely symbolic in nature, committee members stressed those referrals served as a way to document their views given that Congress cannot bring charges.

    This story has been updated with additional information Wednesday.

    Source link

  • How an old debate previews Biden’s new strategy for winning senior voters | CNN Politics

    How an old debate previews Biden’s new strategy for winning senior voters | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    In pressing Republicans on Social Security and Medicare, President Joe Biden is reprising one of the most dramatic moments of his long career.

    During the 2012 vice-presidential debate, Biden engaged in a nearly 11-minute exchange with GOP nominee Paul Ryan over Republican plans to reconfigure the two massive programs for the elderly, several of which Ryan had authored himself.

    Biden and many Democrats felt he had won the argument on stage. Yet on Election Day, Ryan and GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney routed Biden and President Barack Obama among White seniors, and beat them soundly among seniors overall, exit polls found.

    That outcome underscores the obstacles facing Biden now as he tries to recapture older voters by portraying Republicans as threats to the two towers of America’s safety net for the elderly. While polls consistently show that voters trust Democrats more than Republicans to safeguard the programs, GOP presidential nominees have carried all seniors in every presidential election back to 2004 and have reached at least 58% support among White seniors in each of the past four contests, exit polls have found. Democrats have likewise consistently struggled among those nearing retirement, older working adults aged 45-64.

    Those results suggest that for most older voters, affinity for the GOP messages on other issues – particularly its resistance, in the Donald Trump era, to cultural and racial change – has outweighed their views about Social Security and Medicare. Those grooves are now cut so deeply, over so many elections, that Biden may struggle to change them much no matter how hard he rails against a range of GOP proposals that could retrench or restructure the programs.

    Biden’s charge that Republicans are threatening the two giant entitlement programs for the elderly – which triggered his striking back and forth exchanges with GOP legislators during the State of the Union – fits squarely in his broader political positioning as he turns toward his expected reelection campaign.

    As I’ve written, the 80-year-old Biden, at his core, “remains something like a pre-1970s Democrat, who is most comfortable with a party focused less on cultural crusades than on delivering kitchen-table benefits to people who work with their hands.” As president he’s expressed that inclination primarily through what he calls his “blue-collar blueprint to rebuild America” – the planks in his economic plans, such as generous incentives to revive domestic manufacturing, aimed at creating more opportunity for workers without a college degree. Politically, Biden’s staunch defense of Social Security and Medicare, programs critical to the economic security of financially vulnerable retirees, represents a logical bookend to that emphasis.

    “We all know that whose side you are on is a critical debate point for every election and this debate over Social Security and Medicare really helps crystallize whose side Biden is on versus whose side Republicans are on in a very effective way for him,” said Democratic pollster Matt Hogan, who helped conduct an extensive series of bipartisan polls during the 2022 campaign measuring attitudes among seniors for the AARP, the giant lobby for the elderly.

    From Franklin Roosevelt through Hubert Humphrey and Tip O’Neill, generations of Democrats have framed themselves as the defenders of the social safety net for seniors against Republicans who they say would unravel it. Biden showed how comfortable he was stepping into those shoes during his 2012 vice-presidential debate with Ryan, then a young representative from Wisconsin who Romney had selected as his running mate.

    Nearly 30 years Biden’s junior, Ryan was an unflinching advocate of restructuring Social Security and Medicare to reduce costs over time. In particular, Ryan was the principal supporter of a conservative plan to convert Medicare, the giant federal health insurance program for the elderly, into a system called “premium support.” Under that proposal, Medicare would be transformed from its current structure, in which the government directly pays doctors and hospitals who provide care for beneficiaries, into a voucher (or “premium support”) system, in which the government would provide recipients a fixed sum to purchase private insurance. Ryan had also drafted proposals to partially privatize Social Security by allowing workers to divert part of their payroll taxes into private investment accounts, a change that would have reduced the tax dollars flowing into the system and eventually required substantial cuts in guaranteed benefits.

    For nearly 11 minutes during the debate in October 2012, moderator Martha Raddatz of ABC skillfully guided Biden and Ryan through a heated, but civil and substantive, discussion of Social Security and Medicare’s future. Ryan insisted that changes were needed to preserve the programs’ long-term viability and that current seniors and those near retirement would not see their benefits reduced.

    Biden appealed openly to the Democrats’ historic image as the programs’ protectors and condemned Ryan and the GOP for wanting to partially privatize them. At one point in the debate, Biden declared: “we will be no part of a [Medicare] voucher program or the privatization of Social Security.” A few moments later, he insisted: “These guys haven’t been big on Medicare from the beginning. And they’ve always been about Social Security as little as you can do. Look, folks, use your common sense. Who do you trust on this?”

    At the time, Democrats felt Biden had at least held his own, restoring the party’s momentum after Obama’s surprisingly listless performance eight days earlier in his first debate against Romney. And Democrats through the rest of the campaign railed against the Republican ticket as a threat to Social Security and Medicare.

    But on election day, those arguments did not translate into gains for Obama and Biden among seniors or the older working adults (aged 45-64) nearing retirement. As Hogan noted, the newly passed Affordable Care Act, which generated some of its funding through savings in Medicare, was extremely unpopular at the time among older voters. Obama and Biden not only lost seniors and the older working age adults, but actually ran slightly more poorly among both groups in 2012 than they did in 2008.

    In fact, no Democratic presidential nominee since Al Gore in 2000 has carried most seniors in a presidential campaign; Obama in 2008 was the only one since Gore to carry most of the older working age adults. Among older Whites, the Democratic deficit is even more pronounced: the Republican presidential nominee has carried around three-fifths of both White seniors and those nearing retirement in each of the past four elections. Biden in 2020 slightly improved on Hillary Clinton’s anemic 2016 performance with both groups, but still lost to Trump by 15 percentage points among White seniors and by 23 points among the Whites nearing retirement, according to the exit polls conducted by Edison Research for a consortium of media organizations including CNN. Biden performed especially poorly among older Whites without a college degree – an economically stressed group heavily reliant on the federal retirement programs.

    Estimates by Catalist, a Democratic targeting firm, and the Pew Research Center likewise found that Trump in both 2016 and 2020 beat his Democratic opponents among both seniors and the older working adults. Like the exit polls, the Catalist data show the Republican nominees carrying about three-fifths of White seniors and older working adults in each of the past three presidential elections.

    The story is similar in congressional contests. In House elections, the exit polls found Republicans winning all seniors and older working adults comfortably in the 2014 and 2022 midterm campaigns and narrowly carrying them even in 2018 when Democrats romped overall. In all three of those midterm congressional elections, Republicans carried about three-fifths of the near retirement White adults, while they also reached that elevated threshold among White seniors in both the 2014 and 2022 campaigns.

    Republicans have maintained these advantages with older voters despite polls showing that most Americans trust Democrats more than the GOP to protect Social Security and Medicare, and that most Americans, especially seniors, oppose the intermittently surfacing GOP proposals to partially privatize both programs.

    Politically, “Democrats have used Social Security and Medicare really a lot over the past two or three decades, maybe four decades,” said Jim Kessler, executive vice president for policy at Third Way, a centrist Democratic group. “The payoff has been a lot less than Democrats have generally thought it would be.”

    Could this time be different for Biden and the Democrats? Congressional Republicans have certainly provided plenty of evidence for his claim that they still hope to restructure the programs. The proposed 2023 budget by the Republican Study Committee, the members of which include about three-fourths of House Republicans, reprises the ideas of converting Medicare into a premium support system and establishing private investment accounts under Social Security, while also raising the retirement age for both programs and reducing Social Security benefits over time. And although Florida Sen. Rick Scott renounced the idea late last week, his “Rescue America” agenda did include a proposal to require Congress to reauthorize all federal programs, including Social Security and Medicare, every five years.

    These ideas have precipitated an unusual degree of open Republican dissension. Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell repeatedly, and unreservedly, denounced the Scott plan until the Florida senator backed off. Trump recently released a video in which he declared the GOP should not cut “a single penny” of Social Security or Medicare benefits – which put him directly at odds with the three-fourths of House Republicans in the Republican Study Committee. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, bending more toward Trump’s position, seems unlikely to incorporate into the GOP budget plans the RSC’s most sweeping changes in Social Security and Medicare.

    Kessler believes Biden may succeed where other Democrats have failed at hurting the GOP with the issue, and he argued that the conspicuous Republican infighting demonstrates they share that concern. “We are watching a high-profile battle that I’ve never really seen before on these issues in the Republican Party,” Kessler said. “And part of it is clearly they think it’s a problem when they didn’t years ago. If they think it’s a problem, maybe it’s a problem.”

    Stuart Stevens, who served as Romney’s chief strategist in the 2012 campaign but has since become a fierce critic of the Trump-era GOP, also believes the party could face more risk over its entitlement agenda than it did back then. The reason is that he thinks the idea of sunsetting Social Security and Medicare every five years, even if Scott is trying to jettison it, may prove more immediately tangible and understandable to voters than Ryan’s complex ideas of partially privatizing both programs.

    “The question I always ask myself in campaigns is ‘are you talking about something the other side doesn’t want to talk about?’” Stevens said. “That’s probably a good sign that they are losing on the issue.”

    Whether Biden proves more effective than other recent Democrats at attracting older voters around Social Security and Medicare will likely pivot on whether seniors believe the GOP genuinely would cut the programs if given the power to do so, argued Robert Blendon, a professor emeritus at the Harvard School of Public Health, who specializes in public attitudes about the social safety net. “If the senior community actually believes that it’s being threatened it really would affect their votes,” he predicted. But, he added, “as long as they are not threatened, the other values of seniors on top issues more and more correspond with Republicans.”

    There’s no doubt about the second half of that equation. Polling has consistently found that older Whites, in particular, are more receptive than their younger counterparts to hardline Trump-era GOP messages around crime, immigration and the broader currents of racial and cultural change: for instance, about half of Whites older than 50 agree that discrimination against Whites is now as big a problem as bias against minorities, a far higher percentage than among younger Whites, according to a new national survey by the Public Religion Research Institute. Older Whites are also more likely than younger generations to lack a college degree or to identify as Christians, attributes that generally predict sympathy for GOP cultural and racial arguments.

    Through the 21st century, those cultural and racial attitudes among older White voters have consistently trumped any concerns they may hold about the Republican commitment to Social Security and Medicare. Despite Biden’s impassioned articulation of the case against the GOP, that didn’t change even in 2012 when Republicans placed on their national ticket a vice presidential nominee who directly embodied the GOP aspirations to reconfigure and retrench those programs.

    Even small changes in seniors’ preferences could have a big impact in closely balanced states with a large retiree population like Arizona and Pennsylvania. But the entrenched GOP advantage among older voters over the past two decades suggests Biden’s hopes in 2024 may pivot less on improving with the “gray” than maximizing his vote among the “brown”: the diverse, younger generations that recoil from the same Republican messages on culture and race that electrify so many older Whites.

    Source link

  • Primary voters aren’t excited about Biden or Trump. What does that mean for 2024? | CNN Politics

    Primary voters aren’t excited about Biden or Trump. What does that mean for 2024? | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    The first phase of the 2024 presidential primary season is officially underway, bringing with it a cavalcade of early polling designed to answer a seemingly basic question: whether President Joe Biden and his predecessor, Donald Trump, have the support of their respective parties.

    That topic, though, is more complicated than it seems, reflecting voters’ complex attitudes toward the two men, which in both cases fall far short of either an enthusiastic endorsement or a definitive rejection.

    At first glance, Trump, who launched his third bid for the presidency in November, and Biden, who is yet to officially announce his reelection plans, seem to face similar challenges.

    Just 44% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents in a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll said they’d prefer to see Trump win the party nomination in 2024, with an even slimmer 31% on the Democratic side saying they’d like to see Biden renominated.

    That’s in line with other recent polls, including a December CNN survey that found just 38% of Republican-aligned voters and 40% of Democratic aligned-voters thought their parties should renominate Trump and Biden, respectively.

    But while many Republicans and Democrats would prefer to see someone else nominated, the vague concept of “someone else” isn’t an eligible challenger for the presidency. And when it comes to specific, viable rivals, Trump and Biden currently face very different situations.

    So far, one potential primary challenger to Trump has significantly broken through among the GOP faithful, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, although polls have varied on his precise strength against the former president.

    When a recent Monmouth University poll asked GOP and GOP-leaning voters an open-ended question about whom they’d like to see as their party’s nominee next year, most named either Trump (33%) or DeSantis (33%). Two percent or fewer mentioned anyone else as a possible nominee – including former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, the latest entrant into the GOP race who’d yet to declare when the survey was taken.

    CNN’s December polling found that among Republican-aligned voters who favored a nominee besides Trump, 47% had a particular alternate candidate in mind, including 38% who singled out DeSantis.

    There are no similarly prominent rivals to Biden: 72% of Democratic-aligned voters in CNN’s December poll who wanted to see the party nominate someone else said they had nobody specific in mind.

    Despite the lukewarm partisan reactions to Trump’s and Biden’s 2024 candidacies, both are well-regarded within their parties, for the most part.

    In the Post-ABC poll, 79% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said they’d feel positively if Trump were elected to the White House in 2024, with 72% of Democrats and Democratic-leaners saying the same about the prospect of Biden being reelected. Just 7% on the Republican side said they’d be angry to see Trump return to office, with only 3% on the Democratic side saying they’d be angry to see Biden serve another term, the Post-ABC survey found.

    And in a January CNN poll, 29% of Republican adults said they viewed Trump unfavorably, compared with the 14% of Democrats who expressed an unfavorable view of Biden.

    With nearly a year to go before any votes are cast, the 2024 primary landscape remains liable to change, as new candidates enter the race and voters learn more about them. That’s particularly true on the Republican side, where a number of politicians have openly signaled interest in running; Democratic leaders, by contrast, have largely shied away from calls to challenge a Biden reelection campaign.

    None of the recent survey findings predict how the presidential primary landscape will develop in the months to come, or how public opinion might evolve in response. But taken together, they help to paint a fuller picture of where things stand now.

    Both Trump and Biden remain generally well-liked by their respective parties, even as Democrats and Republicans also express a shared eagerness to find alternatives. And so far, Trump, unlike Biden, has seen at least one real potential challenger emerge.

    Source link

  • Fox News executives refused to let Trump on-air when he called in during January 6 attack, Dominion says | CNN Politics

    Fox News executives refused to let Trump on-air when he called in during January 6 attack, Dominion says | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump tried to call into Fox News after his supporters attacked the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, but the network refused to put him on air, according to court filings from Dominion Voting Systems in its defamation case against the company.

    The House select committee that investigated the January 6 attack did not know that Trump had made this call, according to a source familiar with the panel’s work.

    The panel sought to piece together a near minute-by-minute account of Trump’s movements, actions and phone calls on that day. His newly revealed call to Fox News shows some of the gaps in the record that still exist, due to roadblocks the committee faced.

    “The afternoon of January 6, after the Capitol came under attack, then-President Trump dialed into Lou Dobbs’ show attempting to get on air,” Dominion lawyers wrote in their legal brief.

    ‘He could easily destroy us’: See Tucker Carlson’s private text about Trump

    “But Fox executives vetoed that decision,” Dominion’s filing continued. “Why? Not because of a lack of newsworthiness. January 6 was an important event by any measure. President Trump not only was the sitting President, he was the key figure that day.”

    The network rebuffed Trump because “it would be irresponsible to put him on the air” and “could impact a lot of people in a negative way,” according to Fox Business Network President Lauren Petterson, whose testimony was cited by Dominion in the new filing.

    Dobbs’ show on Fox Business – in which he routinely promoted baseless conspiracies about the 2020 election – was canceled a few weeks after the January 6 insurrection.

    Fox News and its parent company have denied all wrongdoing and are aggressively fighting Dominion’s defamation lawsuit. In a previous statement, a Fox spokesperson claimed that Dominion “mischaracterized the record” in its court filing and “cherry-picked quotes” that were “stripped of key context.”

    The most prominent stars and highest-ranking executives at Fox News privately ridiculed claims of election fraud in the 2020 election, despite the right-wing channel allowing lies about the presidential contest to be promoted on its air, damning messages contained in a Thursday court filing revealed.

    General view of Fox Plaza on February 8, 2023 in New York City.

    Haberman describes ‘striking’ claim that stood out to her from court documents

    The messages showed that Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham brutally mocked lies being pushed by Trump’s camp asserting that the election had been rigged.

    In one set of messages revealed in the court filing, Carlson texted Ingraham, saying that Sidney Powell, an attorney who was representing the Trump campaign, was “lying” and that he had “caught her” doing so. Ingraham responded, “Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy [Giuliani].”

    giuliani screengrab

    Court filings show Fox stars ridiculed Giuliani over 2020 election fraud claims

    The messages also revealed that Rupert Murdoch, the chairman of Fox Corporation, did not believe Trump’s election lies and even floated the idea of having Carlson, Hannity and Ingraham appear together in prime time to declare Joe Biden as the rightful winner of the election.

    Such an act, Murdoch said, “Would go a long way to stop the Trump myth that the election stolen.”

    The court filing offered the most vivid picture to date of the chaos that transpired behind the scenes at Fox News after Trump lost the election and viewers rebelled against the channel for accurately calling the contest in Biden’s favor.

    Dominion filed its mammoth lawsuit against Fox News in March 2021, alleging that during the 2020 presidential election the network “recklessly disregarded the truth” and pushed various pro-Trump conspiracy theories about the election technology company because “the lies were good for Fox’s business.”

    Fox News has not only vigorously denied Dominion’s claims, it has insisted it is “proud” of its 2020 election coverage.

    Source link

  • Why it’s better to start a presidential campaign early | CNN Politics

    Why it’s better to start a presidential campaign early | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    The nascent 2024 presidential campaign seemed to hit a different gear this week with Nikki Haley entering the Republican primary. The former South Carolina governor and onetime United Nations ambassador joins former President Donald Trump as the only major competitors to declare bids for the presidency.

    Haley’s announcement, and the lack of one so far from President Joe Biden and a slew of Republicans, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, got me thinking: Do primary winners tend to be early or late entrants to the presidential race?

    The answer depends on who else is running. If you’re in a primary without an incumbent, then it’s better to be early, while it matters far less with an incumbent running.

    The modern primary era began in 1972 on the Democratic side and in 1976 on the Republican side. Since then, hundreds of major candidates have decided to run for president or at least formed exploratory committees with the Federal Election Commission. For each of them, I jotted down whichever date was first, to see if there was a pattern.

    It turns out that the median date for candidates to enter a presidential primary without an incumbent has been March 16 the year before the general election. There has been a wide variation on that from year to year. Some years, the median candidate gets in really early (January 2007 for the 2008 cycle on both the Democratic and Republican side), while other years it’s much later (August 1991 for the 1992 cycle on the Democratic side).

    There is no real correlation between how late or how early a field forms and the eventual nominee’s success in the general election. Democrats, for example, won the presidency in both 1992 and 2008, even with a much later start in 1992.

    What does seem to matter for winning a primary is when candidates get into the race compared with their competitors. In the 17 primaries since 1972 that did not feature an incumbent, 10 of the winning candidates entered earlier than that year’s median candidate. Two of the winners were the median candidates. Five got into the race later than the median candidate.

    There were six who started running about one and a half months or more before that cycle’s median candidate. Democrat George McGovern, in the 1972 cycle, started nearly a full year before the median hopeful that cycle.

    McGovern remains the only major-party nominee who had less than 5% of the vote in early national surveys while the polling leader had more than 20% support. McGovern’s success is part of the reason why primary campaigns seem to start so early compared with when the actual voting takes place.

    Getting in the public eye early, raising money and building an organization are key to winning a presidential campaign. If you fall too far behind, it can be a disaster.

    Even candidates you might “think” entered the race late, often got in far earlier. Trump’s June 2015 official announcement became well known for his ride down the escalator. Less remembered was the fact that he started an exploratory committee in March 2015, and he was already campaigning at the time.

    Of course, joining a presidential race early is no guarantee of success. Former Florida Gov. Reubin Askew in the 1984 cycle and ex-Maryland Rep. John Delaney in the 2020 cycle filed with the FEC for the Democratic primary less than a year after the previous presidential election. Neither got very far.

    Still, on the whole, joining early is better than getting in late. After all, the winners who have gotten in late didn’t get that late. The latest, for example, was Republican Ronald Reagan in the 1980 campaign. He entered less than three months after the median candidate.

    Biden, in the 2020 cycle, was the other winning candidate to enter more than 15 days after the median candidate.

    Both Biden and Reagan shared some qualities that few others had. They had previously run for president and were well known nationally, so they didn’t need time to build name recognition or a campaign and fundraising apparatus.

    What we’ve seen more often is the late-entering “savior” candidate who enters on a white horse – and fails. Think about former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson in the 2008 cycle and then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry in the 2012 cycle. Both Republicans entered with a splash and proceeded to win zero primaries combined. The same was true for Democrat Mike Bloomberg in the 2020 cycle, though he won American Samoa.

    For incumbents, meanwhile, there’s a much greater ability to wait before indicating publicly that they’re going for another term.

    The median date, since 1976, for presidents to either form an exploratory committee or announce their campaign is April 30 of the year before the general election. That’s about a month and a half later than when the median nonincumbent’s campaign gets started.

    Some presidents do go early. Trump’s failed 2020 reelection campaign started the moment he entered the White House. (He formed an exploratory committee on Inauguration Day.)

    Later is the general rule, however, for incumbents. Reagan’s highly successful 1984 reelection campaign, for instance, didn’t get underway until October 1983. George H.W. Bush, likewise, got going on his 1992 reelection bid in October 1991.

    It shouldn’t be too surprising that incumbents can afford to go later. They rarely have any major competitors for their party nomination. They have universal name recognition, and incumbents don’t need the same amount of time to ramp up their campaign infrastructure to raise money.

    All of that seems to match up with what Biden is going through at this point. In fact, some reports suggest he’ll likely announce a reelection bid in April.

    But for Republicans wondering whether it’s too soon to start campaigning, history is pretty clear. It’s better to start sooner or you might fall too far behind to recover.

    Source link

  • Joe Biden hates when people talk about his age. A looming reelection run is making it ‘omnipresent.’ | CNN Politics

    Joe Biden hates when people talk about his age. A looming reelection run is making it ‘omnipresent.’ | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    When President Joe Biden sets out for his annual physical at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Thursday morning, he’ll be setting a new record – as he does every morning – as the oldest US president ever.

    Biden’s age is “omnipresent” in nearly every conversation, one person involved told CNN, at a time when he’s preparing for a reelection announcement that would try to extend his time in the Oval Office until he is 86 years old.

    Biden hasn’t officially decided to run again, though he’s said he intends to and his campaign infrastructure is largely in place. Even though aides say the president has told them that his age will not be the determining factor in his final decision about running for reelection, conversations about it are shaping everything from planning anticipated campaign schedule logistics to calibrating Vice President Kamala Harris’ role as his running mate. White House spokesman Andrew Bates disputes how much of a factor the president’s age is in conversations: “That’s simply not true, and makes one think they aren’t involved in many conversations here.”

    That is leading to a focus on events that try to play up the president’s vitality, while trying to strike a balance in the schedule of a man who tends to make more blunders when tired.

    It also underscored the importance of a State of the Union address advisers viewed as Biden at his best, from cadence and delivery to his off-script sparring with Republicans in the House chamber. The speech served as a prime-time moment, in front of tens of millions of viewers, to lay out for the country the scale of his accomplishments and vision for the path ahead.

    And, at least implicitly, it also represented a window into why his age shouldn’t be viewed as detriment to his efforts to lead the country down that path.

    The effect was immediate with at least one group watching: quietly anxious Democratic officials. More than a dozen of acknowledged after the fact it was a night that either put to rest or went a long way in assuaging their lingering concerns about the party’s leader.

    That Biden repeatedly went back to the phrase “finish the job” roughly a dozen times during the speech “wasn’t exactly subtle,” one of those Democrats said.

    Though advisers say Biden would keep to the standard of not starting daily campaigning for at least a year, just as President Barack Obama did in 2011, they’re already looking for low impact ways to maximize keeping him in the public eye. To some extent it would track and build on the oft-criticized formula deployed in the lead up to the midterms, where Biden eschewed a road warrior, rally heavy strategy and tailored and targeted events – and smaller crowds – instead.

    “Funny that we didn’t hear much from the critics about that strategy after November 8,” one adviser said sarcastically of the Democrats’ precedent-busting performance on Election Day last year.

    Among the possible strategies are having him keep up the kind of news-making appearances he’s been doing in and around Washington and preparing for what they’re hoping will be the most extensive digital effort of a presidential campaign ever.

    Top surrogates deployed at a regular clip would include a roster populated by a younger generation of politicians, people familiar with the matter say, even as one pointed out that given Biden’s age, that’s to some degree an inevitability.

    “Like we did in 2020, if he runs in 2024 there will be a range of surrogates that show the diversity of the party, across all ages, from Maxwell Frost to Bernie Sanders,” a Biden adviser said, referencing the 26-year-old freshman congressman from Florida and the independent Vermont senator.

    To many top Democratic operatives and officials looking ahead, Biden’s age is the top issue of his reelection campaign – in essence, what he’s running against, at least until a Republican nominee emerges, according to CNN’s conversations with three dozen White House aides, elected officials, leading Democratic operatives and others beginning to prepare for the race ahead.

    “It’s part of who he is – as much a part as his record of legislative accomplishments in the last two years, as much a part as his empathy and his connection with people,” said a senior Biden adviser.

    The adviser went on to spell out a theory of the case Biden’s team believes will outweigh any concerns, no matter how persistent they appear in public polling.

    “At the end of the day, people are going to say, ‘Who’s on my side?’” the adviser said. “‘Who’s fighting for me? Who’s getting things done and making a material difference in my life?’”

    That’s how Mitch Landrieu, the White House infrastructure coordinator, made the case to the antsy Democratic mayors he joined for a political meeting in January at a hotel a few blocks from the White House.

    “People want to focus on one number – the president’s age, 80,” he said, and let the words linger for just a moment.

    The mayors looked around uncomfortably, according to two people in the room. They’d been thinking about Biden’s age themselves, constantly hearing doubts he could or would run constantly from back home. They were startled to hear it said out loud by a White House official.

    “But,” Landrieu said, as he started to tick through stats around Covid-19 shots, jobs created, unemployment rates, “there are a whole lot more important numbers out there.”

    Still, voters bring Biden’s age up constantly in focus groups. Many veer toward assuming he must be ineffective or being puppeteered: “‘brain dead,’ ‘mush’ – ‘dementia’ is a word that comes up all the time,” said one person who observed multiple focus group sessions during campaigns last year.

    More than a dozen Democratic operatives and officials told CNN they’re worried that Donald Trump – himself a septuagenarian who is facing calls for new leadership from younger politicians in his party – or another much younger Republican who may emerge as the nominee could make a show of seeming more energetic just by keeping a pace of two or three events each day. A number of prominent figures in the Democratic Party are privately questioning the president’s ability to keep up an active travel schedule.

    A handful of ambitious Democrats have already quietly prepared rudimentary contingency plans in case Biden has a change of heart and decides against running for reelection, people familiar with the efforts told CNN. Those plans span everything from thinking through top donors to eyeing potential core campaign staff, should Biden reassess his ability to serve another four years or has an unexpected health problem, sparking a short fuse primary.

    And while top White House aides bristle at any suggestion that the president’s age is a liability, others in the building quietly worry that this may be actively underplaying underplaying the concerns that they’re hearing from their own friends and family members.

    Other Democratic operatives preparing for a campaign worry about letting suspicions fester, comparing them to the conspiracies about hidden conditions that trailed Hillary Clinton throughout 2016.

    “They’re going to be talking about it,” said one top Democrat working on planning ahead for the reelection campaign. “So, we’ve got to talk about it.”

    The president’s opponents are talking about it. Right-wing media coverage of the classified documents found in Biden’s former office and garage made him out to be either senile – to explain why he hadn’t remembered what happened to the documents – or at the center of a conspiracy theory about a controversy manufactured by Democrats to ease him into retirement.

    Texas Sen. Ted Cruz told CNN with a sorrowful tone in an interview last month, “He’s plainly diminished, far below the threshold needed to be a functioning and effective president.” Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ Republican response to Biden’s State of the Union used the line, “At 80, he’s the oldest president in American history.”

    “They attacked him over age before he beat them in 2020. They attacked him over age as he built the best legislative record in modern history,” said Bates. “They did the same before he beat them 2022. I’m not sure what they think they’re accomplishing. The trend is not good for them. Maybe they forgot?”

    It’s not just them. Voters young and old often say they can’t really believe he’s going to run. Mocking him as ancient or asleep has become an easy joke for late night comedians. Many prominent Democrats privately say some panicky version of what Robert Reich, the 76-year-old former secretary of labor, wrote recently: Biden’s age is “deeply worrying, given what we know about the natural decline of the human brain and body.”

    Biden advisers argue that most of the people making those kinds of comments are partisan Republicans, and that this is just another instance of a hyperpolarization in politics. They point to Biden’s previous physicals and assessments by outside experts who say that he has no physical or mental competence issues at all.

    Sure, there has been a noticeably increased stiffness to his walk since he’s been in office, aides say, so much so that the White House physician, brought in a team to assess Biden’s gait during his last physical in 2021. They concluded it was the result of normal “wear and tear” of his spine.

    They acknowledge there are days where his energy levels at public events can appear less vigorous. But they are unequivocal about their view that Biden wouldn’t green light another run if he didn’t think he could do it – and they wouldn’t support one either.

    And they say these doubts are just the latest way of underestimating the president, pointing out that age concerns also dogged his 2020 campaign – even though some of those same advisers confided to others at the time that they believed his age was his biggest liability when he was four years younger.

    Asked what the argument will be for a 2024 campaign, the Biden senior adviser snapped: “I’ve got two words for you: Wisdom and experience.”

    Those words, and an overall emphasis on Biden as an embodiment of reassuring routine and normalcy, pop up repeatedly among aides who are starting to look ahead.

    They are also quietly reframing a key moment at the end of the 2020 primary campaign, when Biden was endorsed in March 2020 by the much younger Harris, Booker and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and described himself “as a bridge” to the next generation.

    Many at the time took that to mean a four-year bridge, an implicit one-term promise that acknowledged his age. Advisers point out he’d previously rejected a one-term pledge.

    But people around Biden suggest, what he was talking about was not just getting Donald Trump out of the White House but getting past Trump and Trumpism. Advisers say that is what the logic around a 2024 run boils down to: Making the case that the only thing worse than an 82-year-old president is a Republican one.

    Biden advisers also argue that the president’s persona as an elder statesman could help Democrats hold onto voters who see the party as changing too quickly and veering too far left.

    “People feel like it’s a turbulent world that we’re living in, and it is a strength for Joe Biden to be able to point to not just years of experience in government up to this point, but more immediately his last two years in the White House being able to get things done, despite the turbulence,” said a second Biden adviser. “And what we’re seeing from Republicans in the House in terms of chaos and extremism is an incredibly powerful contrast too, that underscores the idea that his experience – and yes, age – is a benefit.”

    Although there are clear moments when Biden is visibly slower physically than he was, dozens of aides, administration officials and members of Congress who’ve actually spent time with him have relayed stories to CNN about how thorough and demanding he is in meeting after meeting.

    “There’s a confidence that comes from knowing what you’re doing,” Ted Kaufman, one of Biden’s closest friends and advisers since his first campaign, told CNN late last year.

    Biden likes to talk and keep talking, but he did spend 36 years in the Senate. He sometimes rambles, but he rambled long before his hair went gray.

    He often gets stuck on, or mispronounces, names on his teleprompter, but that’s far more connected to a convergence of wanting to get the name correct while not encountering a block tied to the childhood stutter he worked intensively and successfully to overcome, but still surfaces in certain moments.

    Several prominent Democratic officials told CNN that they worry even so, every stumble now will be viewed through the prism of age. Biden’s advisers are keenly aware of what they view as a perception – or in some cases, in the words of one person close to Biden, “the bull— caricature” – that they say doesn’t match the reality they see.

    They say he’s the one constantly adding to his schedule, pushing for photo lines with local politicians and extra time to greet crowds after his events, or making meetings run over by peppering policy aides with questions.

    “The energy is higher now than maybe when I first met him, and I really believe that that’s inspired by the work,” said Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester, who as a Delaware Democrat has known and worked with Biden much of her life.

    There is perhaps no better window into the public perception versus private reality advisers try to convey than a 15-hour stretch in Bali, Indonesia, at the Group of 20 meeting last November.

    Nearing the end of a grueling six-day, three-country trip to Asia that also included his first face-to-face meeting as president with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Biden chose to skip the gala dinner and went back to his hotel. Whispers went around that Biden was too tired, unable to keep going.

    Just a few hours later, he was sitting across from national security adviser Jake Sullivan and Secretary of State Antony Blinken trying to head off a spiraling international crisis.

    Biden, wearing khakis and a gray T-shirt from a Delaware-based tractor and garden supply center, was on the phone with the Polish president over the missile that had landed in Polish territory and killed two people, raising the possibility that Russia’s unrelenting attacks on Ukraine had finally spilled into a NATO ally.

    There were calls with the NATO secretary general and constant communication with his military leadership. Aides discussed an emergency call with G7 and NATO leaders. Biden said that wasn’t enough.

    “We’re all here,” Biden told his senior team of the leaders scattered across nearby hotels. “Bring them here.”

    An hour later, Biden himself walked the 10 leaders who came to the Grand Hyatt through early intelligence that the missile likely was not of Russian origin. Fears of dramatic escalation quickly dissipated. Thirty minutes later, Biden was walking through mangrove trees telling French President Emmanuel Macron and other leaders stories from his Senate days.

    Aides said Biden didn’t skip the gala because he was tired, though they never explained further. The truth, two people familiar with the matter said, was he wanted some time to focus on preparation for his granddaughter’s wedding that weekend at the White House, rather than have more generic conversations with counterparts over another meal. He was ready, however, when a crisis moment arrived, they said. And he drove the response.

    White House aides clock mentions of Biden’s age in the media – with particular attention to those that happen to leave out the ages of similarly aged politicians like Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is a year older, and Trump, who is 76.

    They quickly shoot down what they see as sneering insinuations, like when reporters ask why the president has a light public schedule on the days back from overseas trips – though that has been standard practice for multiple recent presidents, including Obama. They insist that his midterm travel schedule proves how robust a presence he can be on the road, even though Biden rarely appeared at more than a few events each week through the fall.

    Biden hated people talking about how old he was when he was younger. He hates it even more now.

    “Do I wish he was 10 years younger? Yeah. So does he!” said one Biden donor. “But there is nothing to me, beyond his chronological age, that would lend itself to the argument he shouldn’t seek reelection.”

    Aides laugh at how often his reaction to seeing news mentions of his age is to do a little jog in or out of his next public event. Friends say he’s taken to making sarcastic references to his age, even as he speaks proudly about all he’s been able to accomplish.

    Or there was his move three weeks ago in the State Dining Room, when he pretended to wobble as he got back up from taking a knee for a photo with the NBA champion Golden State Warriors, taking a moment to make fun of the crowd’s shock.

    “I wanted to get up there and actually give him an arm and help him up, but I didn’t know if I’d get in trouble for that, so I just kinda stood back,” star forward Draymond Green told CNN afterward. “To see him in that physical condition at his age, to get up and down like that, was absolutely incredible.”

    A number of younger Democratic politicians and operatives tell CNN they’re ready to embrace the idea of Biden as a grandfatherly figure, continuing to be a source of comfort and calm for a battered nation, even capitalizing on a specific sort of nostalgia for a pre-Trump time in politics. and the news.

    Of course, that would take Biden himself buying in. Even his grandkids don’t call him grandpa – they call him Pop.

    “He doesn’t want to be a grandpa,” said one person who knows him. “He wants to be a bro.”

    Aftab Pureval, the Cincinnati mayor who just turned 40 in September, said a visit from the president last month left him with the impression that Biden has more than enough left in the tank.

    Pureval saw a man who laughed hard when the mayor deliberately used a famous Biden interjection – one that contains a four-letter word that starts with F – to describe what a big deal the bipartisan infrastructure money was in helping rebuild the local Brent Spence Bridge.

    There were the fist bumps with the crowd at the barbecue spot in town they went to afterward. There was the way the president immediately flashed the fraternity hand sign when a young black man mentioned that he was a member of Phi Beta Sigma.

    “When you’re with him, age was never really on my mind. What was on my mind was the president provided the single biggest grant in our nation’s history to our bridge,” Pureval said.

    “His age is his age, but you can’t argue with the results.”

    Source link

  • Here are the Republicans considering 2024 presidential runs | CNN Politics

    Here are the Republicans considering 2024 presidential runs | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and United States ambassador to the United Nations, launched her bid for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination Tuesday.

    But the primary is still in its early stages, and it could take months before the field fully rounds into form and candidates make more than occasional visits to states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina that will kick off the GOP’s nominating process.

    Haley could stand alone for weeks or even months as the party’s only official rival to former President Donald Trump.

    Here’s a look at who’s in and who is considering a 2024 run for the Republican nomination:

    Donald Trump: The former president officially launched his campaign in November, days after the midterm elections. And he never really stopped running after 2020, continuing to hold campaign-style rallies with supporters.

    Nikki Haley: Haley launched her presidential campaign Tuesday. It was a shift from her previous insistence she would not run against Trump. “It’s time for a new generation of leadership to rediscover fiscal responsibility, secure our border and strengthen our country, our pride and our purpose,” she said in a video announcing her bid.

    Ron DeSantis: The Florida governor emerged as the top alternative to Trump in many conservatives’ eyes after his dominant reelection victory. A DeSantis announcement is likely months away, with Florida currently in the middle of its legislative session. But his memoir, accompanied by a media blitz, will drop at the end of February, and top advisers are building a political infrastructure.

    Mike Pence: The former vice president’s split with Trump over the events of January 6, 2021, kicked off a consistent return to political travel. He has made clear that he believes the GOP will move on from Trump. “I think we’re going to have new leadership in this party and in this country,” Pence told CBS in January.

    Tim Scott: The South Carolina senator would make a second Palmetto State Republican in the 2024 field if, as expected, he enters the race in the near future. Scott is building a political infrastructure, including hiring for a super PAC, and is set to visit Iowa for an event his team billed as focused on “faith in America.”

    Ted Cruz: The Texas senator and 2016 GOP contender has not ruled out another presidential bid. But he is also seeking reelection in 2024. “I think there will be plenty of time to discuss the 2024 presidential race. I’m running for reelection to the Senate,” he told the CBS affiliate in Dallas in February.

    Glenn Youngkin: The Virginia governor’s 2021 victory offered Republicans a new playbook focused on parental power in education. His political travel, including stops for a series of Republican gubernatorial candidates last year, makes clear Youngkin has ambitions beyond Virginia. He faced a setback to his push for a 15-week abortion ban when Democrats won a state senate special election earlier this year, expanding their narrow majority.

    Chris Sununu: The New Hampshire governor’s timeline isn’t clear, but he recently established a political action committee that borrowed his state’s motto: “Live Free or Die.” He has positioned himself as a strong Trump opponent and alternative within the GOP. He would also start with the advantage of being universally known in an early-voting state. “I think America as a whole is looking for results-driven leadership that calls the balls and strikes like they see them and is super transparent,” Sununu told Axios this week.

    Kristi Noem: The South Dakota governor who won reelection in November has certainly cultivated a national profile, becoming a regular at conservative gatherings and donor confabs. But she hasn’t committed to a presidential run. “I’m not convinced that I need to run for president,” she told CBS in January.

    Greg Abbott: The Texas governor who cruised past a 2020 presidential contender, former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, to win his third term in November is unlikely to make any official 2024 moves until his state’s legislative session wraps up at the end of May. He told Fox News in January that a 2024 run “is it’s not something I’m ruling in right now. I’m focused on Texas, period.”

    Larry Hogan: The former Maryland governor is another Trump opponent. He told Fox News he is giving a 2024 run “very serious consideration.”

    Chris Christie: The former New Jersey governor is one of several 2024 GOP prospects headed to Texas for a private donor gathering in late February, along with Pence, Haley, Scott, Sununu and Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp. Christie said on ABC earlier this year he doesn’t believe Trump could beat President Joe Biden in 2024.

    Asa Hutchinson: The former Arkansas governor is a rare Republican from a deep-red state who has been willing to criticize Trump. Now weeks removed from office, he also doesn’t have the at-home responsibilities facing other governors. He told CBS that he’ll decide on a 2024 by “probably April.” He said he believes voters are “looking for someone that is not going to be creating chaos, but also has got the record of being a governor, of lowering taxes.”

    Mike Pompeo: Trump’s secretary of state and the former Kansas congressman said during a tour for his new book, “Never Give an Inch: Fighting for the America I Love,” that he would decide on a presidential run in the coming months. He’s been among the Republicans most openly considering a run, traveling to early-voting states for more than a year.

    Liz Cheney: The former Wyoming congresswoman who emerged as the foremost GOP critic of Trump’s lies about widespread election fraud lost her House seat to a Trump-backed primary challenger. She launched a political action committee last year and made clear she intends to try to purge the GOP of Trump’s influence. But what that means in the context of a potential 2024 bid is not yet clear.

    Will Hurd: The former Texas congressman who represented a border district recently traveled to New Hampshire, an early-voting state, though it’s not clear whether or when he would enter the race. “I always have an open mind about how to serve my country,” he told Fox News.

    Others to keep an eye on: Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, who fended off a Trump-backed primary challenge on the way to reelection last year, has added political staffers and is sometimes mentioned as a vice presidential prospect. Florida Sen. Rick Scott and Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley have both said they will not run for president in 2024 – but things can change, and both had also taken steps to build their national profiles. Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton has teased a run as a Trump foil.

    Source link

  • Washington Post: Trump campaign commissioned research that failed to prove 2020 election fraud claims | CNN Politics

    Washington Post: Trump campaign commissioned research that failed to prove 2020 election fraud claims | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    A research firm commissioned by former President Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign team to prove his electoral fraud claims instead failed to substantiate his theories, the Washington Post reported Saturday.

    The Berkeley Research Group was commissioned to look into voting data from six states, according to the Post, and a source told the publication that the campaign team wanted about a dozen claims tested. People familiar with the matter told the publication that the findings did not match what the team had hoped for, and the findings were never released.

    While some anomalies and “unusual data patterns” were found, the Post reported, they wouldn’t have made a difference to President Joe Biden’s victory.

    The firm’s findings also refuted some of Trump’s voting conspiracies, including the identities of dead people used to vote and Dominion voting systems used to manipulate the outcome, the paper reported.

    The research was conducted in the last weeks of 2020 and before the January 6 US Capitol attack, according to the Post. Two sources told CNN that the House January 6 committee looking into the role Trump played in inciting the insurrection did not know about the firm’s work.
    Trump has continued to repeat his election lies as he focuses on his 2024 White House bid.

    CNN previously reported that following two years of advice from allies and advisers to stop exhaustively relitigating the 2020 election, his first rally late last month showed an attempted forward-driven message of what he would aim to accomplish with a second term.

    The former president has often pushed back on that advice, arguing that his message is strong enough as it is, and one source close to him told CNN his proclivity for focusing on the 2020 election will be tough to break because he still regularly hears from members of his base who believe so-called election integrity is an important talking point as he seeks reelection.

    Another adviser said that despite the defeat of several Trump-backed midterm candidates who denied the legitimacy of the 2020 election, Trump has said he does not believe their losses were tied to their election lies.

    Source link

  • Pence subpoenaed by special counsel investigating Trump | CNN Politics

    Pence subpoenaed by special counsel investigating Trump | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Former Vice President Mike Pence has been subpoenaed by the special counsel investigating Donald Trump and his role in January 6, 2021, a source familiar with the matter told CNN.

    Special counsel Jack Smith’s office is seeking documents and testimony related to January 6, the source said. They want the former vice president to testify about his interactions with Trump leading up to the 2020 election and the day of the attack on the US Capitol.

    The subpoena marks an important milestone in the Justice Department’s two-year criminal investigation, now led by the special counsel, into the efforts by Trump and allies to impede the transfer of power after he lost the 2020 election. Pence is an important witness who has detailed in a memoir some of his interactions with Trump in the weeks after the election, a move that likely opens the door for the Justice Department to override at least some of Trump’s claims of executive privilege.

    Pence’s attorney Emmet Flood is known as a hawk on executive privilege, and people familiar with the discussions have said Pence was expected to claim at least some limits on providing details of his direct conversations with Trump. Depending on his responses, prosecutors have the option to ask a judge to compel him to answer additional questions and override Trump’s executive privilege claims.

    ABC News first reported on the subpoena.

    Pence’s office declined to confirm he had been subpoenaed. A spokesman for the special counsel declined to comment to CNN on the matter.

    Months of negotiations preceded the subpoena to the former vice president, CNN has reported.

    Justice Department prosecutors had reached out to Pence’s representatives to seek his testimony in the criminal investigation, according to people familiar with the matter. Pence’s team had indicated he was open to discussing a possible agreement with DOJ to provide some testimony, one person said.

    That request occurred before the department appointed Smith to oversee two Trump-related investigations, the January 6-related probe and another into alleged mishandling of classified materials found at the former president’s Mar-a-Lago residence.

    In November, Pence published his memoir that detailed some of his interactions with Trump as the former president sought to overturn the results of his election loss to President Joe Biden. Pence and his team knew that the book’s publication would raise the prospect that the Justice Department would likely seek information about those interactions as part of its criminal investigation, people briefed on the matter told CNN.

    Pence rebuffed an interview request from the House select committee that investigated the January 6 insurrection, but allowed top aides to provide testimony in the House’s probe, as well as in the Justice Department’s criminal investigation. The DOJ successfully secured answers from top Pence advisers Greg Jacob and Marc Short in significant court victories that could make it more likely the criminal investigation reaches further into Trump’s inner circle.

    There are no plans for Trump’s team to challenge the grand jury subpoena of Pence at this time, according to a source familiar with its thinking. But it would still be possible for Trump to attempt to assert executive privilege over some conversations they had, if Pence declines to detail those conversations to the grand jury.

    So far, Trump’s team has lost those challenges when Pence’s deputies and two White House counsel’s office attorneys testified, following Chief Judge Beryl Howell’s rulings that they must answer questions they initially refused to because of confidentiality around the presidency.

    Howell’s tenure as chief judge of the DC District Court ends in mid-March, meaning a different federal judge, James Boasberg, could be the one to field privilege disputes in the continuing grand jury investigation.

    CNN reported earlier Thursday that Smith had also subpoenaed former Trump national security adviser Robert O’Brien in both of the Trump-related probes, according to a source familiar with the matter. O’Brien has been asserting executive privilege in declining to provide some of the information that prosecutors are seeking from him, the source said.

    Trump’s former acting Department of Homeland Security secretary was separately interviewed by Justice Department lawyers in recent weeks as part of the probe into 2020 election interference, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

    Rather than appearing before a federal grand jury, former acting secretary Chad Wolf was interviewed under oath by Justice Department lawyers and FBI officials, something one of the sources characterized as a “standard” first step for prosecutors.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    Source link

  • Chinese spy balloons under Trump not discovered until after Biden took office | CNN Politics

    Chinese spy balloons under Trump not discovered until after Biden took office | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    The transiting of three suspected Chinese spy balloons over the continental US during the Trump administration was only discovered after President Joe Biden took office, a senior administration official told CNN on Sunday.

    The official did not say how or when those incidents were discovered.

    The official said that the intelligence community is prepared to offer briefings to key Trump administration officials about the Chinese surveillance program, which the Biden administration believes has been deployed in countries across five continents over the last several years.

    Hear what Biden said after suspected Chinese spy balloon was shot down

    After the Biden administration disclosed last week that a suspected Chinese spy balloon was hovering over Montana, the Pentagon said that similar balloon incidents had occurred during the Trump administration. In response, former Trump administration Defense Secretary Mark Esper told CNN on Friday that he was “surprised” by that statement.

    “I don’t ever recall somebody coming into my office or reading anything that the Chinese had a surveillance balloon above the United States,” he said.

    Former President Donald Trump also said on Truth Social this week that reports of Chinese balloons transiting the US during his administration were “fake disinformation.”

    John Bolton, a former national security adviser under Trump, also pushed back on the assertion that balloons surveilled the US during the former president’s tenure, asking, “Did the Biden administration invent a time machine? What is the basis of this new detection?” but added he would take a briefing from the current administration on the Trump-era balloon discoveries if it was offered to him.

    “The very fact, if it is a fact, that the Chinese tried this before, should have alerted us and should have caused us to take action before the balloon crossed into American sovereign territory,” Bolton said Monday on “CNN This Morning.”

    The Biden administration official now says the incidents were not discovered until after the Trump administration had already left. But the official did not say how those incidents were discovered or when.

    CNN reported on Sunday that the Pentagon had briefed Congress of previous Chinese surveillance balloons during the Trump administration that flew near Texas and Florida.

    Rep. Michael Waltz confirmed in a statement to CNN that “currently, we understand there were incursions near Florida and Texas, but we don’t have clarity on what kind of systems were on these balloons or if these incursions occurred in territorial waters or overflew land.”

    Another Chinese spy balloon also transited the continental US briefly at the beginning of the Biden administration, the senior administration official said. But the balloon that was shot down by the US military on Saturday was unique in both the path it took, down from Alaska and Canada into the US, and the length of time it spent loitering over sensitive missile sites in Montana, officials said.

    The senior administration official said that with regard to the balloon shot down on Saturday, the analysis into its capabilities is ongoing. But, the official added, “closely observing the balloon in flight has allowed us to better understand this Chinese program and further confirmed its mission was surveillance.”

    Republicans have criticized the Biden administration for not shooting the balloon down earlier after it was first noticed over Alaska on January 28. House Republicans are weighing the passage of a resolution this week condemning the Biden administration for its handling the balloon, CNN reported Sunday

    Over the weekend, Biden revealed he ordered the Pentagon to shoot the balloon down last Wednesday when he was first briefed on it hovering over Montana, but that he was advised by his military team to wait until the balloon was over water to minimize the risk posed to civilians and infrastructure. Shooting it down over water also maximized the possibility of recovering the payload – the equipment carried by the balloon that the US says was being used for surveillance – intact and able to be examined further by the US intelligence community, officials said.

    Source link

  • House Oversight chairman and former Twitter employees strike deal on subpoenas in exchange for testimony | CNN Politics

    House Oversight chairman and former Twitter employees strike deal on subpoenas in exchange for testimony | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer has subpoenaed three former Twitter employees who will testify before the panel in relation to their investigation into Twitter’s decision to temporarily suppress a New York Post story regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop, three sources familiar with the documents tell CNN.

    Twitter’s former Chief Legal Officer Vijaya Gadde, former Deputy General Counsel James Baker and former Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth requested they be subpoenaed in order to compel their testimony, the sources told CNN, given the legal complications of publicly sharing privileged information from Twitter before the committee.

    The hearing comes after Twitter’s CEO, Elon Musk, released some internal communications from Twitter staff about the decision to censor the New York Post story in the closing weeks of the 2020 presidential election campaign season.

    Comer, who met privately with Musk last month when the billionaire visited the Capitol, told CNN last week that the hearing may “incorporate some private conversations with some high-level people at Twitter” who support the belief that the US government may have played a role in the suppression of the New York Post story.

    When asked specifically if Musk has conveyed this sentiment to him, the Kentucky Republican told CNN: “I cannot answer that but that may come out in the hearing.”

    Comer’s belief that the government may have been involved in the suppression of the story is rooted in the so-called “Twitter files” that Musk made publicly available. Comer added his panel so far has only had access to the files that have been released publicly.

    “Americans deserve answers about this attack on the First Amendment and why Big Tech and the Swamp colluded to censor this information about the Biden family selling access for profit. Accountability is coming,” Comer said in a statement regarding the hearing.

    CNN has previously reported that allegations the FBI told Twitter to suppress the story are unsupported, and a half a dozen tech executives and senior staff, along with multiple federal officials familiar with the matter, all denied any such directive was given in interviews with CNN.

    Republicans on the panel are especially eager to grill Baker, who previously served as general counsel at the FBI during the investigation into whether former President Donald Trump had colluded with Russia. Baker joined Twitter just five months before the 2020 election.

    Gadde, Baker and Roth did not respond to CNN’s requests for comment.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    Source link

  • Opinion: Biden doesn’t throw away his shot | CNN

    Opinion: Biden doesn’t throw away his shot | CNN

    Editor’s Note: Sign up to get this weekly column as a newsletter. We’re looking back at the strongest, smartest opinion takes of the week from CNN and other outlets.



    CNN
     — 

    In Lord Byron’s satirical epic poem, “Don Juan,” the main character marvels at “the whole earth, of man the wonderful, and of the stars … of air-balloons, and of the many bars to perfect knowledge of the boundless skies — and then he thought of Donna Julia’s eyes.”

    The balloon from China floating eastward over the United States last week riveted the nation’s attention for a lot longer.

    At first, the enormous balloon, carrying a smaller substructure roughly the length of three city buses, seemed to symbolize America’s wide-open vulnerability to what the Pentagon described as surveillance from a rising power.

    But the downing of the balloon off the Carolinas Saturday gave President Joe Biden’s administration a way to unleash its fighter jets without any loss of life.

    “I told them to shoot it down,” said Biden, peering at reporters through his Ray-Ban aviators at a Maryland airport. Referring to his national security team, Biden added, “They said to me let’s wait till the safest place to do it.”

    The incident led to the abrupt postponement of Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s trip to China and an apologetic statement from Beijing calling it a “civilian airship” that had “deviated far from its planned course.” The US Navy and Coast Guard are taking part in an effort to recover the aircraft. which may yield evidence of its true purpose.

    Some Republicans criticized the President for not shooting it down sooner. China called the downing of the balloon an “obvious overreaction” and said it “reserves the right” to act on “similar situations.”

    In May 1937, the golden age of transcontinental passenger airships came to a catastrophic end in roughly 30 seconds after a spark set the hydrogen fuel on the Hindenburg ablaze, killing 36. But balloons for other uses survived, and they remain a tool of surveillance, even in the era of spy satellites.

    “The question is whether China carefully considered the consequences of its actions,” wrote David A. Andelman. “Intentional or otherwise, if it was indeed monitoring air flows, their engineers might have suspected these weather phenomena would eventually take these balloons over the United States.”

    He pointed out that China has an enormous fleet of satellites which can surveil other nations. “Between 2019 and 2021, China doubled the number of its satellites in orbit from 250 to 499.”

    In the Washington Post, Sebastian Mallaby observed, “To understand how a balloon — at once menacing and farcically Zeppelin-retro — might become a defining image of the new cold war, consider how this alleged Chinese spy contraption captures both sides of the present moment. It is provocative enough to cause Secretary of State Antony Blinken to postpone a much-anticipated trip to Beijing. It is clumsy enough to symbolize China’s immense capacity to blunder — a tendency that President Biden’s team has lately exploited, to devastating effect.

    05 opinion cartoons 020423

    02 Marie Kondo tidying

    “It is not hard to tidy up perfectly and completely in one fell swoop,” Marie Kondo wrote in the 2011 book that sold more than 13 million copies worldwide and launched her career as a Netflix star and curator of “joy.”

    “In fact, anyone can do it.”

    It was an apt sentiment at a time when striving for perfection at home and at work was the norm, despite it being a sometimes soul-crushing aspiration — and one that began to vanish with the arrival of the pandemic in 2020.

    So it was understandable that people took notice when Kondo, who gave birth to her third child in 2021, recently said, “My home is messy, but the way I am spending my time is the right way for me at this time at this stage of my life.”

    As Holly Thomas wrote, “Her benign comment, while welcomed with relief in some circles, prompted a surprisingly febrile reaction in others. … Kondo’s success was built on tidying, and encouraging us to tidy in turn. Where was her loyalty to tidying? How dare she pivot out of her well-ordered lane after selling us a way to live?”

    But that’s the wrong way to look at it, Thomas added. “The discomfort … with Kondo’s personal rebrand demonstrates a rigidity that’s reflected across many areas of life. … On a more sinister level, there can be an implicit sense that once you’ve established a particular trait or activity as inherent to your identity, it is somehow greedy or unfaithful to try your hand at something new.”

    Jura Koncius wrote in the Washington Post, “Kondo, 38, has caught up with the rest of us, trying to corral the doom piles on our kitchen counters while on hold with the plumber and trying not to burn dinner. The multitasker seems somewhat humbled by her growing family and her business success, maybe realizing that you can find peace in some matcha even if you drink it in a favorite cracked mug rather than a porcelain cup.”

    The new Kondo might welcome a bill in Maryland that would provide tax breaks to companies that switch to four-day work weeks as a pilot project. “We are three years into a pandemic that upended work life (and life-life) as many of us knew it,” wrote Jill Filipovic. “We are living in an era in which out-of-work demands, most especially parenting and other forms of caregiving, are more extreme than ever. And we are living in a country that, unlike other nations, provides meager support as its people strive to balance it all…”

    “No wonder so many workers report being fed up and burned out. No wonder so many women, who continue to do the lion’s share of the nation’s parenting, drop out of the workforce.”

    03 opinion cartoons 020423

    The 2024 presidential campaign is just starting to come into focus. Former President Donald Trump has locked on to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis as the biggest threat to his campaign for the GOP nomination.

    Trump “mercilessly slammed DeSantis again … first at a South Carolina campaign rally and then in remarks to the media,” Dean Obeidallah noted. “On his campaign plane, Trump berated DeSantis as ‘very disloyal’ and accused him of ‘trying to rewrite history’ in recent pronouncements about Covid-19 policy in Florida.”

    If DeSantis enters the race, Obeidallah observed, “he’ll need to show the red meat-loving GOP base that he can punch back against Trump.

    Yet Trump’s derisive nicknames for DeSantis haven’t stuck, as SE Cupp said. “I know we’re just getting started, but this Trump doesn’t seem to pack the punch that 2016 Trump did. … Maybe he’s lost his touch as he’s faced one political storm after the other.”

    Some other potential rivals are queueing up, with Nikki Haley, the former US ambassador to the United Nations, planning to announce her candidacy on February 15 and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo mulling a possible run.

    “Haley is a formidable candidate who brings the executive experience from her days as governor as well as the foreign policy experience from her time as ambassador,” wrote Gavin J. Smith, who worked in both the Trump administration and Haley’s executive office in South Carolina. “This experience, paired with her ability to bring people together, her background as a mom and a military spouse, and her track record of fighting the uphill battle of running against old White men — is exactly why she is the right candidate, at the right moment, for Republicans to rally behind as we look to win back the White House in 2024.”

    Mike Pompeo has lost 90 pounds on a diet and exercise regimen. He has a new book out that attacks the media and lambastes some of his Trump administration colleagues. “Based on a close reading of his book,” Peter Bergen wrote, “I bet he will take the plunge. Pompeo could be looking to benefit as Trump loses altitude among some Republicans, and at 59, Pompeo is a spring chicken compared with President Joe Biden and Trump, so if it doesn’t work out well this time around, he sets himself up for other runs down the road.”

    When Biden sums up the State of the Union Tuesday evening, the camera will reveal one change from last year, reflecting divided party control of Congress: Republican Speaker Kevin McCarthy — rather than Nancy Pelosi — will be in the backdrop, alongside Vice President Kamala Harris, as Biden speaks from the House podium.

    David Axelrod, who served as a strategist and adviser to former President Barack Obama, has some advice for Biden: “Acknowledge the stress people feel, explain how you’ve tried to help but don’t tell them how great things are. Or worse, how great YOU are. You can’t persuade people of what they don’t feel — and will lose them if you try.”

    “Rather than claim his place in history, the President should paint the picture of where we’ve been and, even more important, where we’re going…

    Biden met with McCarthy last week, as each staked out their positions on the coming battle over America’s debt limit.

    In 2011, Obama and GOP leaders in Congress narrowly averted a default in US debt payments. Republican Lanhee J. Chen pointed out that one of the people “who facilitated the 2011 deal was none other than Joe Biden. Now, many in Washington are trying to predict what might unfold over the next several months as the once-and-future dealmaker approaches yet another debt ceiling crisis — but this time as commander in chief.”

    “The current crisis presents an opportunity for moderates in both parties to unite around the need both to raise the debt ceiling but also to put in place lasting changes that will fundamentally improve America’s fiscal trajectory.

    01 opinion cartoons 020423

    For CNN Politics, Zachary B. Wolf spoke with Robert Hockett, a Cornell University law professor, who argues that the President would have legal grounds to ignore the debt ceiling entirely. Moreover, Hockett disputed the notion that US government debt is on an unsustainable path: “When we measure a national debt, we look at it as a percentage of GDP. It’s much, much lower than the Japanese national debt is, for example, relative to Japanese GDP. And you don’t see anybody worrying about the integrity or the worthiness of the Japanese national debt or whether Japan’s economy can sustain its debt.”

    Following Biden’s speech on Tuesday, the new Arkansas governor, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, will give the GOP response. “The 40-year-old certainly provides a contrast to the 76-year-old former President Donald Trump by virtue of her age and gender,” wrote Julian Zelizer.

    But the Trump approach is still in the background, he added. “Sanders represents a new generation of Republicans eager to weaponize the same outrage machine with familiar talking points about the threats of immigration, the so-called radical left’s attacks on education, and an economy in shambles under Biden — while showing that they can govern without the self-defeating chaos and tumult that rocked the nation from 2017 to 2021.”

    For more on politics:

    Elliot Williams: I had a security clearance. It’s easier to lose classified documents than you think

    Frida Ghitis: The most important of George Santos’ secrets

    06 opinion cartoons 020423

    The death of a young man after a traffic stop and brutal police beating in Memphis cries out for a response to a national problem, wrote Maya Wiley, CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. “Tyre Nichols, who was laid to rest on Wednesday, was killed for driving while Black,” she wrote. “The former Memphis police officers fired for his killing will get an opportunity to defend themselves in court against the criminal charges, as they should. Nichols got no such opportunity…”

    “The question we should be asking now is, why are Black people stopped so often for traffic violations? Why are so many across the United States dying at the hands, or tasers or guns of police officers during these stops? And what can be done to change this horrific situation?”

    “Here’s one thing we know: Body cameras are not the answer. Body camera footage is not prevention; there was body camera footage of Nichols’ killing. It is evidence, not a prophylactic.”

    In the summer of 1966, when the young civil rights leader Stokely Carmichael “climbed onto the back of a truck with generator-powered lights below, he looked as though he had stepped onto a floodlit stage.” Carmichael lamented that after six years of shouting for freedom, “We ain’t got nothing. What we’re going to start saying now is ‘Black Power!’”

    Mark Whitaker, who wrote about that moment for CNN Opinion, is the author of a forthcoming book, “Saying It Loud: 1966 – The Year Black Power Challenged the Civil Rights Movement.”

    The day after Carmichael spoke, “a short Associated Press story describing the scene was picked up by more than 200 newspapers across America. Overnight, the Black Power Movement was born. … In 1966, the Black Power pioneers established the principle that all Black lives deserve to matter.

    Florida’s governor is engaging in a bad faith attack on the College Board’s “proposed Advanced Placement African American Studies course, citing concerns about six topics of study, including the Movement for Black Lives, Black feminism and reparations,” wrote Leslie Kay Jones, assistant professor in the sociology department at Rutgers University. “Gov. Ron DeSantis said the course violates the so-called Stop WOKE Act, which he signed last year, and the state criticized the inclusion in the course of work by a number of scholars, including me.”

    “By villainizing CRT (critical race theory) and then representing African American Studies as synonymous with CRT, the DeSantis administration paved the way to convince the public that the accurate teaching of African American Studies as a field of research was a Trojan horse for teaching students ‘to hate.’ … I must ask where ‘hate’ is being stoked in African American Studies? Is it in the factual teaching that enslaved Black people were considered 3/5ths of a human being?”

    04 opinion cartoons 020423

    Manish Khanduri: ‘Blisters inside my blisters.’ Why we walked the entire length of India

    Lev Golinkin: Germany’s quiet betrayal of victims of the Holocaust

    Darren Foster: After 15 years of reporting on opioids, I know this to be true

    Joyce Davis: How Russia outmaneuvered the US in Africa

    AND…

    Judy Blume

    Young adult author Judy Blume is the subject of a new documentary, set to air in April on Amazon Prime. One of her books, “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret” is the basis for a new film, also aimed for an April release.

    “To say Blume is widely loved would be an understatement, as the documentary shows,” wrote Sara Stewart. “It features interviews with some of the author’s more famous adoring fans, including Molly Ringwald, Samantha Bee and Lena Dunham. It also showcases her correspondence with now-adult women who wrote to Blume, initially, as teenagers — and she wrote back, beginning friendships that would last decades.”

    “All of these women speak about the ways Blume’s books changed them, made them feel seen and understood in a way that their parents often did not.” At a time when books touching the topics she covers are increasingly being banned in schools, Blume’s voice rings out.

    At 84, she “is still fighting the good fight,” wrote Stewart. At the Key West, Florida, bookstore Blume co-founded, “the shelves bear signs proclaiming, ‘We Sell Banned Books.’”

    Source link