ReportWire

Tag: international-us politics

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

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

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • First US senator to give birth in office offers heartfelt Mother’s Day message: ‘You’re what keeps this country strong’ | CNN Politics

    First US senator to give birth in office offers heartfelt Mother’s Day message: ‘You’re what keeps this country strong’ | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth, the first sitting US senator to give birth while in office, offered a heartfelt Mother’s Day message on Sunday, celebrating moms nationwide for “growing the next generation for our nation.”

    “Hang in there, sister. We’re in this together, and nobody has perfect work-life balance, everybody struggles, and so do the best that you can,” the Democrat told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union.”

    “You’re what keeps this country strong.”

    Duckworth and her husband, Bryan Bowlsbey, are the parents of two daughters, Abigail and Maile. Abigail was born while Duckworth was serving in the US House as a Chicago-area congresswoman.

    In 2018, after giving birth to Maile, Duckworth became the first US senator to cast a vote on the floor with her newborn by her side.

    Her vote came just one day after the Senate changed long-standing rules to allow newborns on the chamber floor during votes. The rule change, voted through by unanimous consent, was done to accommodate senators with newborn babies and lets them bring children under 1 year old onto the Senate floor and breastfeed them during votes.

    “It feels great,” Duckworth told reporters at the time. “It is about time, huh?”

    The Illinois Democrat on Sunday spoke about Democratic efforts to pass legislation to address rising child care costs.

    “Families spend as much as a quarter to half of their income on child care, and there’s no way for working families to survive under those burdens,” Duckworth said.

    “We keep trying,” she added when asked by Bash about finding bipartisan solutions.

    Duckworth is a retired Army lieutenant colonel who was a helicopter pilot during the Iraq War. She was the first female double amputee from the war after suffering severe combat wounds when her Black Hawk helicopter was shot down.

    Duckworth served in the Obama administration as an assistant secretary of Veterans Affairs. She was first elected to the US House in 2012 and the Senate four years later.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • CNN projects Republican Carolyn Carluccio will advance to fall Pennsylvania Supreme Court race against Democrat Daniel McCaffery | CNN Politics

    CNN projects Republican Carolyn Carluccio will advance to fall Pennsylvania Supreme Court race against Democrat Daniel McCaffery | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Republican voters in Pennsylvania made a candidate supported by the GOP establishment their nominee for an open state Supreme Court seat, rejecting another Republican contender more closely aligned with former President Donald Trump’s wing of the party.

    CNN projected the victory of Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas Judge Carolyn Carluccio in Tuesday’s primary, which marks a rebound for the more traditional elements of the GOP in this presidential battleground state. She will defeat Commonwealth Court Judge Patricia McCullough, who briefly halted the certification of the state’s election results in 2020, and had the backing of a key Trump ally, Republican state Sen. Doug Mastriano in this election.

    Mastriano had pushed the falsehood in his failed 2022 bid for governor that election fraud led to Trump’s 2020 loss in the state. Last year, the Trump-endorsed Mastriano bested the Republican field to win his party’s nomination in the governor’s race, only to suffer a double-digit defeat to Democrat Josh Shapiro in the general election.

    Carluccio now will face Democrat Superior Court Judge Daniel McCaffery in the fall.

    The Republican and Democratic nominees are vying for an open seat on Pennsylvania’s high court, following the death of former Chief Justice Max Baer, a Democrat, last year.

    The outcome of November’s election will not tip the partisan balance on the high court, where Democrats currently hold a 4-2 majority on the seven-member body, but it could narrow the gap and start to lay the foundation for a shift in power in future election cycles, experts say.

    “It could create a situation where, very shortly, the partisan balance on this court could be up for grabs,” said Douglas Keith, who researches judicial elections at the liberal-leaning Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s law school.

    State supreme courts are the final arbiters on key issues, ranging from election ground rules to abortion policies. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has upheld the state’s no-excuse mail voting law, and last year selected the state’s congressional map, breaking an impasse between the then-Republican controlled legislature and the state’s Democratic governor.

    Justices on Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court serve 10-year terms. After the first election, they run in so-called retention elections without opponents.

    Much of the attention in the Pennsylvania contest centered on the GOP primary between Carluccio and McCullough, who halted certification of the 2020 results – including Joe Biden’s victory in the state – in a ruling that was swiftly overturned by the state Supreme Court.

    McCullough, who lost a 2021 bid for the Supreme Court, calls herself “a strict constitutionalist judge,” and touted her rulings against pandemic restrictions and the state’s mail-in voting law in the campaign.

    But Carluccio had the backing of the state Republican Party and a national GOP group that’s active in judicial elections, the Republican State Leadership Committee’s Judicial Fairness Initiative, which has weighed in with $600,000 in advertising to boost Carluccio.

    In a statement to CNN this week, Carluccio said she would leave “personal and political opinions at the door and look at each case without bias and only determine the constitutionality of what’s before me.”

    Carluccio said she hasn’t questioned the outcome of any election, but she said she is concerned by what she called the “conflicting, and sometimes unclear,” decisions on the state’s mail-in voting law in recent years by the state Supreme Court.

    In 2019, the state legislatures passed a no-excuse mail-in voting law, known as Act 77, with bipartisan support. But it has become the target of criticism from some Republicans after it was employed in the contentious 2020 election that saw Biden flip the state. The high court has weighed in on aspects of the law multiple times. In 2020, for instance, the court ruled that ballots in two counties with missing dates on the outside of the ballot return envelope could be counted. In the 2022 election, however, the court ordered that mail ballots with missing or improper dates on the return envelopes should be kept out of the count and deadlocked on the underlying legal questions.

    “Our election laws must be applied consistently across all counties, regardless of the election year,” Carluccio said in her statement. “And, when part of our electorate has concerns about the integrity of our elections, rather than dismiss their concerns, the response should be bold transparency in the administration of our elections.”

    The modest spending in the under-the-radar Pennsylvania high court race stood sharp contrast to the record-setting spending that candidates and outside groups plowed into a Wisconsin Supreme Court election last month that, in the end, flipped control of that state’s high court to liberals. (A Kantar Media/CMAG analysis for the Brennan Center found that the ad spending for the Wisconsin high court seat hit $28.8 million as of early April, and some estimates put the likely final tally of all spending in that election even higher.)

    In an interview ahead of Tuesday’s election, Penn State political scientist Michael Nelson said the GOP primary represented a “good opportunity to get a sense of where the energy in the party is, what segment of the party is able to get their people to go on the polls on a random Tuesday in May when there hasn’t been wall-to-wall television advertising.”

    “Given that the Mastriano wing of the Republican Party was so dominant in the elections last fall, it will be interesting to see whether they can keep up that momentum or whether the standard-issue conservative wing of the party is able to rebound,” he added.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden picks Air Force general to lead NSA and Cyber Command | CNN Politics

    Biden picks Air Force general to lead NSA and Cyber Command | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden has nominated an Air Force general to head the nation’s powerful electronic spying agency and the US military command that conducts offensive cyber operations – a crucial position as the US continues to battle Russia, China and other foes in cyberspace.

    Lt. Gen. Timothy Haugh, who has served for years in senior US military cyber positions, is Biden’s choice to replace outgoing Army Gen. Paul Nakasone as head of the National Security Agency and US Cyber Command, an Air Force official confirmed to CNN.

    Politico first reported on Haugh’s nomination.

    The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

    Haugh’s nomination could face a roadblock in the Senate after Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama put a hold on senior military nominations because he objects to the department’s abortion travel policy.

    Haugh is currently deputy of US Cyber Command, a command of thousands of US military personnel who conduct offensive and defensive cyber operations to protect US critical infrastructure. Officials from the command traveled to Ukraine in late 2021 to prepare Kyiv for an onslaught of Russian cyberattacks that accompanied the full-scale Russian invasion.

    The command and NSA also have taken an increasingly active role in helping defend American elections from foreign interference under Nakasone’s leadership over the last five years.

    During the 2020 election, Iranian hackers accessed a US municipal website for reporting unofficial election results and Cyber Command kicked the hackers off the network out of concern that they might post fake results on the website, a senior US military official revealed last month.

    Haugh’s nomination signals a continued emphasis on election security work at Fort Meade, the sprawling military base in Maryland where the NSA and Cyber Command are housed. As a senior US military cyber official, Haugh has been involved in election security discussions in recent midterm and general elections.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Manhattan district attorney urges court to reject Trump bid to move criminal case | CNN Politics

    Manhattan district attorney urges court to reject Trump bid to move criminal case | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Manhattan District Attorney’s office is arguing that former President Donald Trump’s criminal case involving hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels should not be moved to federal court because it had nothing to do with Trump’s official duties as president.

    In a court filing late Tuesday, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, used Trump’s own statements against him, citing Trump’s 2018 tweets about the hush money payments to Daniels as a “private contract” and “private agreement.” The filing also pointed to Trump’s then-lawyer Rudy Giuliani saying in 2018 that the payment “was made to resolve a personal and false allegation.”

    Trump was charged in April with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records over the repayments to then-lawyer Michael Cohen for hush money payments made during the 2016 campaign to women who claimed they had extramarital affairs with Trump, which he denies. Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges.

    Earlier this month, Trump’s attorneys sought to move the criminal case against Trump from New York into federal court, arguing the Manhattan district attorney’s charges against Trump were tied to his duties as president.

    But the district attorney’s filing urges a federal judge to reject that bid, saying that the payments at question related to his personal business and were made to “conceal criminal conduct that largely occurred before his inauguration.”

    “The objective of the alleged conduct had nothing to do with defendant’s duties and responsibilities as President,” the Manhattan district attorney’s office wrote. “Instead, the falsified business records at issue here were generated as part of a scheme to reimburse defendant’s personal lawyer for an entirely unofficial expenditure that was made before defendant became president.”

    The motion from Trump’s attorneys to move the criminal case out of New York has not paused the case there. Last week, Trump appeared virtually at a hearing in which Judge Juan Merchan read Trump an order about what he can and cannot say publicly about the case and evidence that his legal team will receive from prosecutors to prepare for trial.

    At that hearing, Merchan set a trial date of March 25, 2024, potentially setting the trial to occur during the middle of the Republican presidential primary season early next year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Instagram lifts ban on anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after launch of presidential bid | CNN Business

    Instagram lifts ban on anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after launch of presidential bid | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Instagram announced Sunday it had lifted its ban on Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the anti-vaccine activist who has launched a presidential bid, two years after it shut down Kennedy’s account for breaking its rules related to Covid-19.

    “As he is now an active candidate for president of the United States, we have restored access to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s, Instagram account,” Andy Stone, a spokesperson for Instagram’s parent company Meta said in a statement.

    Kennedy, who has a long history of spreading vaccine misinformation, was banned from Instagram in February 2021.

    A company spokesperson at the time said Instagram had removed his account for “repeatedly sharing debunked claims about the coronavirus or vaccines.”

    While Kennedy’s Instagram account was banned, his Facebook account remained active. Both platforms are owned by Meta.

    Kennedy was a leading anti-vaccination voice during the Covid-19 pandemic, using his social media platforms to sow doubt and misinformation about the shots.

    He has promoted false claims about vaccine links to autism and in 2022 compared vaccine mandates to Nazi Germany.

    His wife, actress Cheryl Hines, publicly condemned Kennedy’s remark as “reprehensible” after he invoked Anne Frank, who was murdered by Nazis as a teenager.

    Hines distanced herself from him in January 2022, tweeting: “His opinions are not a reflection of my own.”

    Kennedy’s return to Instagram, first reported by The Washington Post, will give him access to his more than 769,000 followers.

    The decision comes as traditional media and social media companies attempt to navigate a 2024 election campaign fraught with accusations of misinformation and censorship.

    On Friday, YouTube announced it would no longer remove content featuring false claims that the 2020 US presidential election was stolen, reversing a policy instituted more than two years ago amid a wave of misinformation about the election.

    The decision to reinstate Kennedy comes amid a flurry of activity between the candidate and Silicon Valley.

    On Sunday, Twitter

    (TWTR)     founder Jack Dorsey appeared to endorse Kennedy for president, tweeting a YouTube video titled, “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. argues he can beat Trump and DeSantis in 2024.” Dorsey added in the tweet, “He can and will.”

    On Monday, Kennedy is due to take part in a live audio chat on Twitter with the company’s owner Elon Musk.

    Meta’s decision to allow Kennedy back on Instagram came a few days after the Democratic presidential candidate publicly complained that the platform was blocking his campaign from creating a new account.

    Stone, the Meta spokesperson, told CNN on Sunday that the restriction was a mistake and that the company had resolved the issue.

    Meta executives have long maintained they believe political candidates should be able to use its platforms to reach voters, even if those candidates sometimes break rules that would get other users banned from its platforms.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The US Senate is working to get up to speed on AI basics ahead of any legislation | CNN Business

    The US Senate is working to get up to speed on AI basics ahead of any legislation | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The US Senate is inching forward on a plan to regulate artificial intelligence, after months of seeing how ChatGPT and similar tools stand to supercharge — or disrupt— wide swaths of society.

    But despite outlining broad contours of the plan, senators are still likely months away from introducing a comprehensive bill setting guardrails for the industry, let alone passing legislation and getting it signed into law. The deliberate pace of progress contrasts with the blistering speed with which companies and organizations have embraced generative AI, and the flood of investment into the industry.

    The Senate’s plan calls for briefing lawmakers on the basic facts of artificial intelligence over the summer, before beginning to consider legislation in the following months, even as some senators have begun to pitch proposals.

    The efforts reflect how, despite urgent calls by civil society groups and industry for guardrails on the technology, many lawmakers are still getting up to speed.

    To help educate members, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on Tuesday announced a series of three senators-only information sessions to take place in the coming weeks.

    The closed-door briefings will cover topics ranging from AI’s current capabilities and competition in AI development to how US national security and defense agencies are already putting the technology to use. The latter session, Schumer said, will be the first-ever classified senators’ briefing on AI.

    “The Senate must deepen our expertise in this pressing topic,” Schumer wrote in a letter to colleagues announcing the briefings. “AI is already changing our world, and experts have repeatedly told us that it will have a profound impact on everything from our national security to our classrooms to our workforce, including potentially significant job displacement.”

    Schumer had earlier kicked off a high-level push for AI legislation in April, when he proposed shaping any eventual bill around four principles promoting transparency and democratic values.

    The information sessions are expected to wrap up by the time Congress breaks for August recess, according to South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds, one of three other senators Schumer has tapped to lead on a comprehensive AI bill.

    By that point, Rounds told reporters Wednesday on the sidelines of a Washington conference, there may be “lots of different ideas floating” but not necessarily a bill to speak of.

    Schumer, Rounds and the other leading lawmakers on the AI working group — New Mexico Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich and Indiana Republican Sen. Todd Young — haven’t settled on how to coordinate various legislative proposals yet.

    Options include forming a select committee to craft a comprehensive AI bill, or “splitting out and having lots of different committees come up with different pieces of legislation,” Rounds said.

    The AI hype has produced high-profile hearings and scattershot policy proposals. Last month, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman testified before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee, wowing lawmakers by asking for regulation and by giving a technical demonstration to enthralled members of the House the evening before.

    Sen. Michael Bennet has introduced legislation to create a new federal agency with authority to regulate AI, for example. And on Wednesday, Sen. Josh Hawley unveiled his own framework for AI legislation that called for letting Americans sue companies for harms created by AI models.

    Rounds told reporters Schumer has not set a timeframe for coming up with AI legislation, adding that the current goal is to allow ideas to “melt for a while.”

    But he predicted that with AI’s expected impact on many agencies and industries, it would be impossible not to foresee a wide-ranging and open legislative process reflecting input from many sources, akin to how the Senate crafts the annual spending package known as the National Defense Authorization Act.

    “You bring in all of these ideas, and then you very quietly start to meld this bill together, kind of behind the scenes in a way,” he said. “You go through a committee process in which you deliver a bill that says this could pass, and then you allow other members to come in and offer their amendments to it as well. That has worked well year-in and year-out for the NDAA.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Maybe they don’t exist’: Republicans question legitimacy of alleged audio recordings of Biden bribery scheme | CNN Politics

    ‘Maybe they don’t exist’: Republicans question legitimacy of alleged audio recordings of Biden bribery scheme | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa claimed on the Senate floor earlier this week that the foreign national who allegedly bribed then-Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter has 17 audio recordings of their conversations but questioned whether those tapes even existed in an interview with CNN days later.

    “I don’t even know where they are. I just know they exist, because of what the report says. Now, maybe they don’t exist. But how will I know until the FBI tells us, are they showing us their work?” Grassley said Thursday.

    And Grassley is not the only Republican questioning the validity of the supposed tapes.

    House Oversight Chairman James Comer of Kentucky, who is overseeing the GOP investigation into the Biden family business dealings and has been quick to make the alleged bribery scheme a focus of his work, admitted to not knowing whether the tapes were legitimate.

    “We don’t know if they’re legit or not, but we know that the foreign national claims he has them,” Comer said of the alleged recordings during a Tuesday interview on Newsmax.

    House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, who also serves on the Oversight panel and has made the Department of Justice and FBI a target of his investigative efforts, told CNN of the tapes, “I have no reason to doubt anything Senator Grassley says, but I don’t know if they exist or not.”

    And Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, who led his own investigation into the Biden family in 2020 and has long peddled the notion of wrongdoing, said in a separate Newsmax interview, “I’m not even aware that we verified those recordings exist.”

    The tapes are the latest unverified allegations Republicans have raised as they’ve launched investigations into the Biden family’s business dealings as well as the work of the FBI. While Republicans have used their subpoena power to go after the Biden family’s foreign business dealings, they have still not established a direct link to President Biden.

    Grassley first raised the existence of audio recordings after the FBI document that memorializes these allegations redacted them in the version shown to House Oversight Committee members.

    Prior to the full committee viewing the redacted document, Comer and the top Democrat on the panel, Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, had viewed a version of the document that included mention of the recordings, according to two sources familiar with their briefing.

    In a statement to CNN the chairman said, “The FBI’s Biden bribery record contains several investigative leads, but it is unclear what, if anything, the FBI has done to verify these allegations.”

    The FBI document at the heart of this debate, known as an FD-1023, summarizes multiple conversations a trusted FBI informant had with a foreign national alleging that an executive with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma offered both Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden bribes of $5 million.

    Former Attorney General Bill Barr, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump to serve during his administration, said when these bribery allegations came to light he tapped Pittsburgh US Attorney Scott Brady to look into the 1023 form and other claims. Barr has described this effort as a “screening, clearing house function” and said once the information was checked out the allegations were passed on to Delaware US Attorney David Weiss, who is overseeing an ongoing criminal investigation into Hunter Biden. Investigators were unable to corroborate the claims in the 1023.

    “That information was checked out, and it was determined that it was not likely to have been disinformation. It doesn’t say whether it’s true or not, but there was no sign there was disinformation. And so it was provided to the ongoing investigation in Delaware to follow up on and check out,” Barr said on Fox last week.

    Acting assistant director for the FBI’s office of congressional affairs Christopher Dunham has explained in previous correspondence with Congress that an FD-1023 form is “used by FBI agents to record unverified reporting from a confidential human source,” and noted that there are strict Justice Department guidelines about when that information can be provided outside of the FBI.

    Comer subpoenaed the document last month, and House Republicans have railed against the FBI for continuing to keep an unclassified document under close hold.

    “Congress still lacks a full and complete picture with respect to what that document really says. That’s why it’s important that the document be made public without unnecessary redactions for the American people to see,” Grassley said on the floor earlier this week.

    House Republicans were poised to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress earlier this month for his refusal to turn over the document, but a last-minute deal between Comer and Wray that included allowing the full committee to view the form halted the contempt proceedings. They are still publicly clamoring for the FBI to provide more detail about what steps were taken to investigate the claims in the document.

    Democrats meanwhile continue to dismiss the allegations. The White House continues to frame Republicans’ investigative efforts as politically motivated. White House spokesman Ian Sams said in a statement to CNN, “Everything in their so-called investigation seems to be mysteriously missing: informants, audio tapes, and most importantly of all – any credible evidence.”

    Raskin, who has painted the allegations as secondhand, told CNN, “It was thoroughly checked out by the Trump Justice Department, and they couldn’t find anything there. And if anybody would have an incentive to find something there it would have been the Trump Justice Department.”

    Another Democrat on the panel, Rep. Jared Moskowitz of Florida, accused Republicans of having alternative motives for surfacing the allegations in the first place.

    “What they’re trying to do is they’re trying to muddy the water because Trump is in so much trouble. They got to distract from that and pretend like, you know Joe Biden, which they say he’s sleepy and boring, is now somehow Tony Soprano,” he said.

    But Republicans who viewed the version of the FD-1023 form that redacted mention of the audio recordings are continuing to raise questions.

    One of those members, GOP Rep. Russell Fry of South Carolina, told CNN, “My assumption was that if they were going to redact things in that document that it would have been names and places and not actual corroborating evidence. So I think it’s unfortunate that the FBI decided to do that. And I look forward to seeing hopefully an unredacted copy of that 1023.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

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

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

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden says Putin has ‘absolutely’ been weakened after revolt in Russia | CNN Politics

    Biden says Putin has ‘absolutely’ been weakened after revolt in Russia | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden told CNN on Wednesday his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin has “absolutely” been weakened by the short-lived mutiny over the weekend.

    It was his most definitive comment to date on how the rebellion by Wagner Group boss Yevgeny Prigozhin affected the Russian leader’s stature.

    Biden and his team have been cautious in commenting on the events, wary of providing Putin pretext for claiming a western plot to oust him. But on Wednesday, Biden expanded on his views of Putin’s diminished stature.

    Asked whether the Russian president had been weakened, Biden said: “Absolutely.”

    Later, expanding on the extent of Putin’s weakness, Biden said it was difficult to ascertain.

    “It’s hard to tell but he’s clearly losing the war,” Biden told reporters on the White House South Lawn, mistakenly referring to the war in Iraq instead of Ukraine.

    “He’s losing the war at home. He’s become a bit of a pariah around the world. And it’s not just NATO, it’s not just the European Union, it’s Japan,” he added.

    Asked again if Putin is weaker today than he was last week, Biden said: “I know he is.”

    Earlier this week, Biden sought to distance the United States from the weekend rebellion in Russia, insisting in his first public remarks since the episode that the West had nothing to do with the mutiny.

    Still, American intelligence agencies were able to determine ahead of time that Prigozhin was preparing to challenge the Russian military, a sign of how closely the US had been monitoring tensions between Moscow and the Wagner boss.

    Speaking from the White House, Biden suggested it was too early to say how the situation would unfold going forward.

    “It’s still too early to reach a definitive conclusion about where this is going,” he said in the East Room. “The ultimate outcome of all this remains to be seen, but no matter what comes next I will keep making sure that our allies and our partners are closely aligned in how we are reading and responding to the situation.”

    Biden has spoken to the leaders of France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada and Italy since the events over the weekend. He also spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

    Earlier Wednesday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that Prigozhin’s rebellion could be beneficial to Ukraine’s counteroffensive.

    “To the extent that Moscow is distracted by its own internal divisions, that may help,” Blinken said in an interview with MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

    “To the extent that the Wagner forces themselves are no longer on the front lines, that could help, because they have been effective. They just literally throw people into a meat grinder of Putin’s own making, but that’s had some effect,” Blinken continued.

    This story has been updated with additional reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden’s student loan forgiveness program was rejected by the Supreme Court. Here’s what borrowers need to know | CNN Politics

    Biden’s student loan forgiveness program was rejected by the Supreme Court. Here’s what borrowers need to know | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Supreme Court struck down President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program Friday, blocking millions of borrowers from receiving up to $20,000 in federal student debt relief, just months before student loan payments are set to restart after a yearslong pause.

    Biden had announced the student loan forgiveness program last August, but it never took effect, having been tied up in the courts for months.

    Later Friday, the president announced that his administration will pursue another pathway to providing some student debt relief, which is based on a different law than the one the now-defunct student loan forgiveness program was linked to.

    This pathway requires the Department of Education to undertake a formal rule-making process, which typically takes months. Details were not released Friday on who might benefit if that process is successful.

    Biden also announced that the administration will take steps to ease the transition period for borrowers when monthly student loan repayments resume in October. This “on-ramp” period will help borrowers avoid penalties if they miss a payment during the first 12 months.

    The Biden administration has made it easier for many borrowers to seek federal student loan forgiveness from several existing debt cancellation programs.

    New rules set to take effect in July could broaden eligibility for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which is aimed at helping government and nonprofit workers.

    And a new income-driven repayment plan proposal is meant to lower eligible borrowers’ monthly payments and reduce the amount they pay back over time. The administration said this plan was finalized Friday and borrowers will be able to take advantage of it this summer, before loan payments are due.

    The Department of Education has also made it easier for borrowers who were misled by their for-profit college to apply for student loan forgiveness under a program known as borrower defense to repayment, as well as for those who are permanently disabled.

    Altogether, the Biden administration has approved more than $66 billion in targeted loan relief to nearly 2.2 million borrowers.

    Regardless of the way the Supreme Court ruled on the one-time forgiveness program, the Biden administration had said that student loan payments will be due starting in October.

    Most student loan borrowers have not been required to make payments on their federal student loans since March 2020, when Congress passed a sweeping aid program to help people struggling financially because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

    Since then, the pause has been extended eight times – under both the Trump and Biden administrations.

    A law passed in early June that addresses the debt ceiling prohibits another extension of the pause.

    But the Biden administration said Friday that it will provide a 12-month on-ramp period for borrowers reentering payment.

    “Borrowers who can make payments should do so as payments will resume and interest will accrue,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said in a statement.

    “But the on-ramp to repayment will help borrowers avoid the harshest consequences of missed, partial, or late payments like negative credit reports and having loans referred to collection agencies,” he added.

    Borrowers will not be reported to credit bureaus, be considered in default or referred to collection agencies for late, missed or partial payments during the on-ramp period, according to a fact sheet from the White House.

    Student loan experts recommend that borrowers reach out to their student loan servicer with any questions about their loans as soon as possible.

    After such a long pause, many borrowers may be confused about how much they owe, when to pay and how. Millions of borrowers will have a different servicer handling their student loans since the last time they made a payment.

    Borrowers should also reach out to their servicer if they are worried they will not be able to afford their monthly payment. They may be eligible for an income-driven repayment plan, which set payments based on income and family size, but require borrowers to submit some paperwork.

    Federal student loan borrowers can check the FSA website for updates on resuming payments.

    Borrowers will also have to reauthorize the automatic debit from their accounts to pay their monthly loan bill even if they authorized the withdrawals before the pause began.

    The National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators warns that borrowers may need to have patience when contacting their student loan servicer, which might be overwhelmed with a high volume of inquiries at this time.

    “It is possible you may not reach your servicer via phone the first time you call, and you may need to call a few times before getting connected,” the group says.

    No debt had been canceled, even though the Biden administration had received about 26 million applications for relief last year and approved 16 million of them.

    The forgiveness program, estimated to cost $400 billion, would have fulfilled a campaign promise of Biden’s to cancel some student loan debt. But a group of Republican-led states and other conservative groups took the administration to court over the program, claiming that the executive branch does not have the power to so broadly cancel student debt in the proposed manner.

    Critics also point out that the one-time student loan forgiveness program does nothing to address the cost of college for future students and could even lead to an increase in tuition. Some Democrats joined Republicans in voting for a bill to block the program. Both the Senate and the House passed the measure, but Biden vetoed the bill in early June.

    Under Biden’s student loan forgiveness proposal, individual borrowers who made less than $125,000 in either 2020 or 2021 and married couples or heads of households who made less than $250,000 a year would have seen up to $10,000 of their federal student loan debt forgiven.

    If a qualifying borrower also received a federal Pell grant while enrolled in college, the individual would have been eligible for up to $20,000 of debt forgiveness.

    Pell grants are awarded to millions of low-income students each year, based on factors including their family’s size and income and the cost charged by their college. These borrowers are also more likely to struggle to repay their student debt and end up in default.

    The administration estimated that roughly 20 million borrowers would have seen their entire federal student loan balance wiped away.

    An independent analysis from the Penn Wharton Budget Model found that about two-thirds of the student debt cancellation would have gone to households making $88,000 a year or less.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Americans should reconsider travel to China due to the risk of wrongful detention, US State Department warns | CNN Politics

    Americans should reconsider travel to China due to the risk of wrongful detention, US State Department warns | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Americans should reconsider travel to China due to the risk of wrongful detention, the US State Department warned in an updated travel advisory issued Friday.

    Although the previous advisory also listed mainland China as a “Level 3: Reconsider Travel” destination, it was due to the risk of “arbitrary enforcement of local laws.” The risk of wrongful detention was listed as a reason for US travelers to “exercise increased caution” in that advisory, which was issued in March.

    A State Department spokesperson explained that because the Chinese government “continues to engage in this practice” of wrongful detention, “the Travel Advisory has been updated to advise U.S. citizens to reconsider travel to Mainland China due to the risk of wrongful detention.”

    “The Department of State has determined the risk of wrongful detention of U.S. nationals by the PRC government exists in the PRC,” both the late June and March advisories noted.

    The updated advisory comes amid a period of heightened tensions between the United States and China.

    Secretary of State Antony Blinken traveled to Beijing last month in an effort to stop relations from continuing to plummet at a time of lingering distrust. At a news conference at the conclusion of the visit, Blinken said the US and China had made “progress” toward steering relations back on track as both sides agreed on the need to “stabilize” the bilateral relationship between the two superpowers.

    The top US diplomat also said he raised the cases of the three Americans known to be wrongfully detained in China: Kai Li, Mark Swidan and David Lin, and noted that there are negotiations underway to try to secure their release.

    Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen will travel to the Chinese capital this week as part of continued efforts to stabilize the relationship between China and the US.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Russian aircraft harass US drones over Syria for third time this week | CNN Politics

    Russian aircraft harass US drones over Syria for third time this week | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Russian aircraft once again harassed US MQ-9 Reaper drones over Syria Friday, the Air Force said, in a sign of increasing friction between the two countries in Middle East airspace.

    The incident marked the third time this week that US drones over Syria were intercepted by Russian aircraft.

    “Earlier today three MQ-9 drones were once again harassed by Russian fighter aircraft while flying over Syria,” commander of US Air Forces Central Lt. Gen. Alex Grynkewich said in a news release. “During the almost two hour encounter, Russian aircraft flew 18 unprofessional close passes that caused the MQ-9s to react to avoid unsafe situations.”

    “We continue to encourage Russia to return to the established norms of a professional Air Force so we can all return our focus to ensuring the enduring defeat of ISIS,” Grynkewich added.

    On Thursday, Russian fighter jets harassed a US MQ-9 Reaper drone that was conducting a mission against ISIS targets in northwest Syria. One of the Russian jets dropped flares in front of US drone in an apparent attempt to hit the drone, forcing it to take evasive maneuvers, the Air Force previously said.

    And earlier in the week, three Russian jets dropped parachute flares in front of three US drones, forcing the drones to take evasive maneuvers. One Russian jet also lit its afterburner in front of a US drone, limiting the drone operator’s ability to safely operate the aircraft.

    Russia is operating in Syria in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while the US maintains its presence as part of the anti-ISIS coalition.

    While the two countries have used a deconfliction line in Syria over the last several years to avoid unintentional mistakes or encounters that can inadvertently lead to escalation, Russian military actions have increasingly violated the deconfliction protocols, including flying too close to US military bases in Syria.

    But the US wasn’t the only target of harassment from the Russian military this week. On Thursday, a Russian SU-35 fighter jet conducted a “non-professional interaction” with two French Rafale fighter jets that were flying a mission near the Iraq-Syria border, according to the official Twitter account of the French Armed Forces.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

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

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

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Key Senate Dems want Supreme Court funding tied to an ethics code for justices | CNN Politics

    Key Senate Dems want Supreme Court funding tied to an ethics code for justices | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Key Senate Democrats are calling for next year’s funding for the Supreme Court to be conditioned on the creation of an ethics code for the justices.

    Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat who leads the appropriations subcommittee charged with writing the annual funding bill for the judiciary, has expressed support for the idea, but doing so will ultimately need the backing of GOP lawmakers, and the top Republican on the subcommittee is signaling opposition to the proposal.

    Van Hollen is weighing in as 15 other members of the Democratic caucus – including Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat who chairs the Senate Judiciary subcommittee that oversees the federal bench – are proposing language to be attached to next year’s funding bill that would require the Supreme Court to adopt more transparent processes for recusals and for investigating ethics allegations lodged against the justices.

    They did so in a new letter, obtained by CNN, to Van Hollen and Tennessee Sen. Bill Hagerty, who is the top Republican on the appropriations subcommittee with jurisdiction over the judiciary.

    “It is unacceptable that the Supreme Court has exempted itself from the accountability that applies to all other members of our federal courts, and I believe Congress should act to remedy this problem,” Van Hollen said in a statement shared with CNN Monday. His comments were first reported by The Washington Post.

    Democrats’ interest in leveraging the funding Congress appropriates to the high court is the latest volley in the debate over whether a stronger code of conduct is needed at the Supreme Court, which is not beholden to many of the ethics procedures imposed on lower court judges.

    Van Hollen noted that including an ethics code requirement in the annual appropriations bill will require bipartisan support given the current make-up of Congress, but said he didn’t “see any reason why ensuring that the Supreme Court establish a code of ethics should be a partisan issue.”

    A spokesperson for Hagerty said that an ethics code is a “policy question that is separate from the funding levels for Supreme Court operations and security.”

    “Moreover, Senator Hagerty strongly believes in preserving the independence of the Judicial Branch from political interference intended to force the Court to change its rulings or policies,” the spokesperson said in a statement Monday evening. “Threats to hold the personal security of the justices and their families hostage in exchange for favored policies are no different from court-packing proposals or protests outside the homes of Justices.”

    Some Republicans in the House have indicated openness in the past to pushing for an ethics code for the justices, but congressional GOP leaders have defended conservative justices in the face of claims that they had run afoul of ethical norms.

    The new letter from the Democrats pointed to recent reports that have raised questions about potential conflicts-of-interests issues with the political activities of Justice Clarence Thomas’ spouse, and about an alleged well-financed, secret campaign seeking to influence the high court’s conservatives.

    “The Supreme Court has the tools and authority it needs to develop and implement these changes, including adopting a code of conduct, creating fairer and more transparent recusal rules, and setting up procedures – based on longstanding procedures in the lower courts – to receive and investigate complaints of judicial misconduct,” the letter said. “The only obstacle keeping the Court from adopting these reforms is the Court’s own unwillingness to see them through.”

    They argued that the annual funding bill should withhold $10 million of the Supreme Court’s funding unless the justices adopted an ethics code. The Supreme Court is asking for nearly $151 million in the coming appropriations process for 2024.

    The ethics language the new letter is proposing for the annual appropriations legislation would create more concrete standards for when a justice must disqualify him or herself from a case, as well as a system “for receiving and investigating complaints alleging violations of such public code of ethics or other misconduct by justices of the Court.”

    Currently, justices decide for themselves whether they must recuse themselves from a case. It is unclear what procedures, if any, the Supreme Court uses to review ethics allegations brought against the justices.

    In the past, Chief Justice John Roberts has written that the justices have taken the steps necessary to maintain transparency and the public’s trust.

    “I have complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted,” he wrote in a 2011 year-end report. His 2021 report stressed the need for the judicial branch to have “institutional independence,” while implying that the federal bench could be trusted to police itself without the interference of Congress.

    With the Democrats’ new letter to the appropriators, the senators countered that “Congress has broad authority to compel the Supreme Court to institute these reforms, which would join other requirements already legislatively mandated.”

    “And Congress’s appropriations power is one tool for achieving these changes,” the Democrats’ letter said, while citing DC Circuit cases where judges – including Republican appointees – asserted that Congress could use the power of the purse to pressure the Executive Branch to make certain changes.

    The Supreme Court’s press office did not immediately respond to CNN’s inquiry about the funding bill proposal.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden issues second veto of presidency to save his administration’s hallmark water rule | CNN Politics

    Biden issues second veto of presidency to save his administration’s hallmark water rule | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden on Thursday vetoed a resolution that would have rescinded his administration’s hallmark water rule, with proponents of the rollback arguing that the regulation places a burden on the agriculture community by being too restrictive in defining what is a navigable waterway.

    Biden’s announcement marked both the second veto of his presidency and the second veto he’s issued in recent weeks, illustrating how power dynamics in Washington have shifted since Republicans became the majority party in the House of Representatives at the beginning of this year.

    “I just vetoed a bill that attempted to block our Administration from protecting our nation’s waterways – a resource millions of Americans depend on – from destruction and pollution,” the president wrote in a tweet on Thursday. “Let me be clear: Every American has a right to clean water. This veto protects that right.”

    When the White House issued a veto threat over the Republican-led resolution, the administration argued that the legislation would “leave Americans without a clear ‘waters of the United States’ definition.”

    “The increased uncertainty would threaten economic growth, including for agriculture, local economies, and downstream communities. Farmers would be left wondering whether artificially irrigated areas remain exempt or not. Construction crews would be left wondering whether their waterfilled gravel pits remain exempt or not,” a statement of administration policy said in advance of the veto.

    By comparison, proponents of the resolution argued that Biden’s water rule constituted overreach by the executive branch and say it creates burdensome red tape that would lead to confusion within a variety of industries, including agriculture.

    “By vetoing this Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval, President Biden is ignoring the will of a bipartisan majority in Congress, leaving millions of Americans in limbo, and crippling future energy and infrastructure projects with red tape,” West Virginia Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, who led the joint resolution in the Senate, said in a statement on Thursday. “There’s a reason those who work in agriculture, building, mining, and small businesses of all kinds across America strongly supported our effort to block the Biden waters rule, and I’m disappointed the president chose to stand by his blatant executive overreach.”

    The waterways resolution cleared the House in March and the final Senate vote was 53-43, with Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen of Nevada, Jon Tester of Montana, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Arizona independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema joining Republicans in support of the legislation.

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell released a statement in support of the bill on Wednesday saying, “If the President vetoes it, Americans will need to hope the Supreme Court makes it clear that these EPA bureaucrats are way outside the authority that Congress actually provided in the Clean Water Act.”

    Manchin, who backed the repeal, was asked last month if he would vote to overturn the administration’s new EPA rule. He said: “Oh yeah, that’s ridiculous. It can’t be just a ditch that dries up. They’ll grab everything and make it miserable for you. The overreach.”

    Earlier this year, Biden issued the first veto of his presidency on another environment-focused resolution which aimed to overturn a retirement investment rule that allows managers of retirement funds to consider the impact of climate change and other environmental, social and governance factors when picking investments.

    Republican lawmakers led the push to pass the resolution through Congress, arguing the rule is “woke” policy that pushes a liberal agenda on Americans and will hurt retirees’ bottom lines, while Democrats say it’s not about ideology and will help investors.

    Biden has frequently promised to veto legislation passed by the GOP-controlled House he disagrees with. Even before Republicans took control of that chamber, Biden often mentioned his ability to nix their priorities. “The good news is I’ll have a veto pen,” he told a group of donors in Chicago just days before November’s midterm elections.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Justice Department asks Supreme Court to reverse ruling striking down bump stock ban | CNN Politics

    Justice Department asks Supreme Court to reverse ruling striking down bump stock ban | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Justice Department on Friday asked the Supreme Court to take up an appeals court ruling that struck down a Trump-era federal ban on so-called bump stocks.

    The request comes as the high court has repeatedly declined to disturb those rulings that favor the restriction on the device, including not considering a challenge to the federal ban in October. Bump stocks are attachments that essentially allow shooters to fire semiautomatic rifles continuously with one pull of the trigger.

    “Like other machineguns, rifles modified with bump stocks are exceedingly dangerous; Congress prohibited the possession of such weapons for good reason.” US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in the new filing with the Supreme Court. “The decision below contradicts the best interpretation of the statute, creates an acknowledged circuit conflict, and threatens significant harm to public safety.”

    The January appellate court ruling concluded that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, ATF, did not have the authority to classify the devices as machine guns, a classification that had effectively banned them. But in the new filing, the Justice Department argued that prior to the ruling, three other appeals courts had upheld the bump stock regulation.

    In 2018, the ATF classified the devices as machine guns under the National Firearms Act after then-President Donald Trump ordered a review of bump stocks – which were used in the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting a few months prior.

    But the appellate majority in January argued that bump stocks were not covered by the law.

    “A plain reading of the statutory language, paired with close consideration of the mechanics of a semi-automatic firearm, reveals that a bump stock is excluded from the technical definition of ‘machinegun’ set forth in the Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act,” Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod wrote in the majority’s opinion.

    In 2010, the ATF had determined that bump stocks were merely accessories, or firearms parts – and therefore not regulated as a firearm.

    But following the Las Vegas shooting that killed over 50 people and injured hundreds, the Justice Department said that the “devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger,” similar to automatic rifles.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Americans hold mixed views on getting back to ‘normal’ after Covid-19, new polling shows | CNN Politics

    Americans hold mixed views on getting back to ‘normal’ after Covid-19, new polling shows | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Three years after the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, Americans’ views of the disease’s impact have stagnated into a complex set of mixed feelings, recent polling suggests, with few believing that the pandemic has ended but most also saying that their lives had returned mostly – if not entirely – to normal.

    The US Senate passed a bill last week that would end the national Covid-19 emergency declared in March 2020. The US House approved the measure earlier this year, and the White House has said President Joe Biden will sign it despite “strongly” opposing the bill. The administration had already planned to wind down the emergency by May 11.

    In a recent Kaiser Family Foundation survey about the Biden administration’s original plan to end the public health emergency by May, 59% of Americans said they expected the decision to have no impact on them or their family, with the remainder about evenly split between the 20% who thought it would have a positive effect and the 21% who thought the impact would be negative.

    Only 24% of Americans personally feel that the pandemic is over, a recent Monmouth University poll found, with 20% saying it will end eventually and 53% saying that it’ll never be over. Those numbers were very similar to Monmouth’s polling last fall, suggesting that a sense of some lingering abnormalcy may well be the new normal.

    Relatively few Americans say either that their lives have completely returned to a pre-pandemic normal or that their lives are still completely upended by it. The Monmouth poll found a 69% majority saying that their daily routine was at least mostly back to what it was pre-pandemic – but only about a third, 34%, say that things were completely the same as they were three years ago. Another 20% said things were partially back to normal, and 11% that they were still not normal at all.

    Declaring to pollsters that the pandemic is over may be something of a political statement for ordinary Americans as well. Republicans were 17 points likelier than Democrats to say that their own routines were mostly back to normal, the Monmouth poll found, and 28 points likelier to say that the pandemic had completely ended.

    The results of the Monmouth survey echo a February Gallup poll that found 33% of Americans saying that their life was completely back to pre-pandemic normal, 20% saying that they expected it would eventually return to normal and nearly half that their life would never fully return to the way it was pre-pandemic. Gallup also found that views about the pandemic’s trajectory were nearly unchanged from their polling in October, when 31% thought normalcy had completely returned.

    “The 47% who don’t foresee a return to normalcy may be getting used to a ‘new normal’ that, for some, means occasional mask use, regular COVID-19 vaccines and avoidance of some situations that may put them at greater risk of infection, particularly at times when COVID-19 infections are spiking,” Gallup’s Megan Brenan wrote.

    About half of Americans, 48%, are continuing to mask up in public on at least some occasions, the Monmouth poll found, though only about 21% said they do so most or all of the time. In KFF polling from earlier this year, 46% of Americans said they’d taken some form of precautions – including mask-wearing or avoiding large gatherings, travel or indoor dining – over the winter due to news about the triple threat of Covid-19, the flu and RSV.

    In KFF’s latest poll, just over half the American public said they’d been boosted against Covid-19, but only 23% reported receiving the latest bivalent version of the booster vaccine.

    At the broader societal level, in a CNN poll last fall, more than 6 in 10 Americans said they believed the pandemic had permanently reshaped multiple aspects of the American landscape, from healthcare (66%) and education (63%) to the economy (61%) and the way most people do their jobs (69%).

    But while the public sees the pandemic’s effects as far-reaching and ongoing, they’re also not top of mind. In a Quinnipiac University survey released last week, fewer than 1% of Americans picked Covid-19 as “the most urgent issue facing the country.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors tell judge information Teixeira took ‘far exceeds’ what has been reported | CNN Politics

    Prosecutors tell judge information Teixeira took ‘far exceeds’ what has been reported | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Federal prosecutors asked a judge Wednesday to continue the detention of the Air National Guardsman accused of posting a trove of classified documents to social media, saying that he posed a flight risk and that the government was still grappling with the amount of stolen classified information.

    In a court filing Wednesday evening, prosecutors said that the information Jack Teixeira allegedly took “far exceeds” what has been reported, and that releasing him from jail could pose a grave threat to national security.

    Teixeira, prosecutors alleged, viewed hundreds of classified documents – which the government said he may still have access to – and conducted hundreds more keyword searches “in what appears to be a deliberate effort to disseminate this country’s secrets.”

    “The Defendant knows where the information is,” prosecutors wrote. “He knows how to access it. And based on his specialized IT skills, he presumably knows how to disseminate that information without being immediately noticed.”

    They continued: “Put simply, there is nothing a court can do to ensure the Defendant’s compliance with his conditions of release other than take the Defendant at his word. And the Defendant’s history of honoring similar types of agreements is abysmal.”

    The filing is the most detailed look yet into what government prosecutors have uncovered about the 21-year-old’s alleged efforts to steal and disseminate classified information. Teixeira is slated to stand before a magistrate judge in Massachusetts on Thursday, who will decide whether he will have to stay behind bars while he awaits trial.

    He has not yet entered a formal plea.

    The filings also come with new allegations about Teixeira’s conduct once the leak was publicized, including allegedly destroying his electronics and acquiring a new phone number and email address.

    “Not only does the Defendant stand charged with having betrayed his oath and his country but—when those actions began to surface—he appears to have taken a series of obstructive steps intended to thwart the government’s ability to ascertain the full scope of what he has obtained and the universe of unauthorized users with whom he shared these materials,” prosecutors wrote.

    Those steps, prosecutors say, included telling others on social media to “delete all messages” and that “[i]f anyone comes looking, don’t tell them shit.”

    In addition, prosecutors say that when law enforcement searched Teixeira’s house following his arrest, authorities found “a tablet, a laptop, and an Xbox gaming console, all of which had been smashed” in a dumpster at the home. Prosecutors argued that this showed Teixeira’s willingness to destroy evidence.

    In seeking to continue detaining him, prosecutors argued that Teixeira is an “attractive candidate” for a foreign government to recruit in an effort to procure classified information.

    “The same adversaries have every incentive to contact the defendant, to seek additional information he may have physical access to or knowledge of, and to provide him with the means to help him flee the country in return for that information.”

    Prosecutors also flagged concerns about Teixeira’s alleged history of violent threats, saying that he “regularly made comments about violence and murder.”

    In comments cited in court filings, Teixiera spoke of wanting to “kill a [expletive] ton of people” because it would be “culling the weak minded,” and discussed wanting to make a minivan into an “assassination van.” Teixeira also allegedly searched for the terms “Ruby Ridge,” “Las Vegas shooting,” “Mandalay Bay shooting,” “Buffalo Tops shooting” and “Uvalde.”

    At his home in Massachusetts, prosecutors say, Teixeira had access to an “arsenal” of weapons and accessories – including handguns, bolt-action rifles, shotguns, an AK-style high-capacity weapon, a gas mask, ammunition, tactical pouches, and a “silencer-style accessory” – all of which he kept in his bedroom.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Navy commander removed from job early after death of SEAL candidate last year | CNN Politics

    Navy commander removed from job early after death of SEAL candidate last year | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A Navy commander reprimanded over the death of a SEAL candidate last year has been removed from his job early, according to two Navy officials, as the Navy prepares to release a broader investigation into the notoriously difficult SEAL training course.

    Capt. Brian Drechsler, who served as commander of Naval Special Warfare Center, was relieved in a change of command ceremony on Tuesday, the Navy said. The change of command came two months early for Drechsler, an official said, who was one of three Navy officers to receive administrative action after the death of Navy SEAL candidate Kyle Mullen in February 2022.

    In a brief statement Tuesday, the Navy made no mention of Mullen. “Capt. Mark Burke relieved Capt. Brian Drechsler as commander of the Naval Special Warfare Center (NSWCEN),” the Navy said. Naval Special Warfare Center’s mission includes the “assessment, selection, and training of SEALs and [Special Warfare Combatant-Craft Crewmen].”

    One of the officials said Drechsler is expected to retire soon.

    Mullen, 24, died of bacterial pneumonia in the hours after completing what is known as “Hell Week” during the special operations force’s demanding basic training program. In the 24 hours before he completed his training, Mullen had breathing issues and coughing up fluid, but he was not pulled from training or sent to a hospital upon the course’s completion.

    Navy investigators concluded Mullen died in the “line of duty, not due to his own misconduct,” Naval Special Warfare Command said in a statement at the conclusion of a line of duty investigation in October.

    A separate, broader investigation into the grueling SEALs selection course is expected soon, one of the Navy officials said.

    Initiated by the previous Vice Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. William Lescher, the investigation is examining oversight of the most difficult and punishing elements of the SEALs selection course, including a look at the use of performance enhancing drugs within basic training to complete the course.

    Mullen’s death drew increased scrutiny of the policies, staff preparation and safety measures around one of the military’s most elite units.

    [ad_2]

    Source link