ReportWire

Tag: misc people

  • Kari Lake doesn’t commit to accepting Arizona election result if she loses | CNN Politics

    Kari Lake doesn’t commit to accepting Arizona election result if she loses | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Arizona Republican Kari Lake would not commit Sunday to accepting the results of her upcoming election for governor if she loses.

    “I’m going to win the election, and I will accept that result,” the GOP nominee told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” after being asked three times whether she would accept the election’s outcome. Lake dodged the question the first two times.

    “If you lose, will you accept that?” Bash asked, to which Lake replied again: “I’m going to win the election, and I will accept that result.”

    Lake, who has the backing of former President Donald Trump, has repeatedly promoted his false claims about the 2020 election. A former news anchor at a local Fox station in Phoenix, she has said that she would not have certified President Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in Arizona, repeatedly calling the election “stolen” and “corrupt.” She said Sunday that the “real issue” is that “the people don’t trust our elections.”

    Lake is currently in a close race with her Democratic opponent, Katie Hobbs, who currently serves as Arizona’s secretary of state. Hobbs’ national profile rose in the aftermath of the 2020 election amid Republican efforts to sow doubt over the presidential result in Arizona.

    In a separate appearance on “State of the Union” on Sunday, directly following Lake’s interview, Hobbs said Lake’s refusal to say whether she would accept the results of their election was “disqualifying.”

    “This is somebody who will have a level of authority over our state’s elections, the ability to sign new legislation into law, the responsibility of certifying future elections. And she has not only, as you heard, refused to say if she will accept the results of this election, but also whether or not she would certify the 2024 presidential election if she’s governor,” Hobbs said.

    She continued, “This is disqualifying. This is a basic core of our democracy.”

    Hobbs on Sunday defended her refusal to debate Lake in the gubernatorial election, saying the Republican was “only interested in creating a spectacle.” Hobbs said she believed Arizonans would not base their voting decision on whether or not there was a debate between the two candidates.

    Lake had earlier slammed Hobbs’ decision not to engage in a debate, accusing her opponent of “cowardice.”

    Hobbs explains why she won’t debate Kari Lake

    Bash pressed Hobbs on her stance on abortion rights, and the Democrat declined to specify what, if any, restrictions she would support in an abortion law.

    “So just to be clear, if you become governor, you will push for a law that has absolutely no limits in any point of the pregnancy on abortion? That’s your position? That’s what you would want to be the law of the land in Arizona?” Bash asked.

    Hobbs responded: “The fact is right now that we have very limited options and that we need to get politicians out of the way and let doctors provide the care that they are trained to provide, the health care that their patients need. Politicians don’t belong in those decisions.”

    An Arizona appeals court earlier this month temporarily blocked the enforcement of a ban on nearly all abortions across the state. The ruling temporarily allows health care providers to perform abortions up to 15 weeks of pregnancy until Planned Parenthood Arizona’s appeal is resolved.

    Abortion has been a key issue in this year’s midterm elections following the US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn of Roe v. Wade that held there was no longer a federal constitutional right to an abortion. A recent survey from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that about half of US registered voters said they were more motivated to vote in the midterm elections because of the high court’s abortion ruling.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • White House economic adviser says US is ‘better positioned than most other countries’ to mitigate inflation | CNN Politics

    White House economic adviser says US is ‘better positioned than most other countries’ to mitigate inflation | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    White House economic adviser Cecilia Rouse on Sunday defended the limited progress the Biden administration has had on tamping down inflation, responding to comments from President Joe Biden last week that tried to put a positive spin on the high rate.

    “We’re starting to see signs that the actions they are taking is having an effect,” Rouse said of the Federal Reserve, which she said is focused on bringing down inflation.

    Rouse pointed to data from last month that employers are posting fewer job openings and the housing market is tapering off during an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union.”

    “So we’re starting to see signs that our red-hot economy is starting to cool. And so we know that because of that strength … we’re better positioned than most other countries for the Fed to achieve its goals,” Rouse said.

    Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics released earlier this week showed that annual inflation rose by 8.2% in September, a slower increase than the 8.3% rise seen in August. Economists had projected that the pace of price increases would slow to 8.1% last month, CNN reported last week. On a monthly basis, overall consumer prices increased by 0.4% from August.

    Asked by Bash about the high prices of food Americans are paying, Rouse pointed to the Inflation Reduction Act’s ability to lessen costs for Americans for prescription medicine – though she acknowledged it does nothing for food prices.

    But pushed on when it would start lowering inflation, Rouse said, “Many parts of the bill will start to take effect next year.”

    Rouse spoke about the energy tax credits in the law as having one of the most immediate tangible impact in lowering costs.

    “There are tax credits for energy to help people weatherize their homes and also bring down other forms of energy costs. So, we are focused on helping to make that transition to clean energy in a way that brings down energy costs for families,” Rouse said.

    “This is tough. There’s no question about it. This is a challenge,” she added about bringing down inflation generally.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How the filmmakers behind ‘Till’ depicted Black trauma without showing violence | CNN

    How the filmmakers behind ‘Till’ depicted Black trauma without showing violence | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Chinonye Chukwu didn’t want to make a movie about Black trauma.

    The director of the newly released film “Till,” which centers on Mamie Till-Mobley as she fights for justice after the killing of her son, said she wasn’t interested in depicting the moment that Emmett Till was brutally beaten to death in 1955 Mississippi.

    “The story is about Mamie and her journey, and so it wasn’t narratively necessary to show the physical violence inflicted upon Emmett,” Chukwu told CNN. “As a Black person, I didn’t want to see it. I didn’t want to recreate it.”

    In bringing the story of Till-Mobley to the big screen, Chukwu was intentional about what she chose to show and what she chose to omit. The film doesn’t dramatize the vicious and violent manner in which Emmett was killed, but it does depict his horrifically mangled body – an image that Till-Mobley famously shared with the world and that catalyzed the civil rights movement.

    Still, “Till” couldn’t avoid getting swept up into a debate about “Black trauma porn.” Soon after the release of the trailer, some corners of Black Twitter questioned why a movie about Emmett Till was even needed, swiftly characterizing it as the latest Hollywood project to capitalize on Black pain and tragedy. More than a few declared that they wouldn’t be watching.

    The filmmakers behind “Till” argue that this classification ignores the care and context that they’ve brought to this story. And they’re urging audiences not to look away.

    “Black trauma porn” – much like “disaster porn” or “poverty porn” – generally refers to graphic depictions of violence against Black people that are intended to elicit strong emotional responses. The implication is that these images can be needlessly traumatizing to Black viewers for whom violence is an inescapable fact of life.

    Increasingly, the term has been applied not just to videos of police shootings repeatedly shared online, but also to films and TV series. Amazon’s horror anthology series “Them” and the thriller film “Antebellum” are among recent projects criticized for depicting gratuitous violence against Black characters to make a point about the evils of racism. But the “Black trauma porn” label has also been leveled more broadly at historical dramas about slavery or Jim Crow, such as Barry Jenkins’ miniseries “The Underground Railroad” and now, “Till.”

    Given that wide umbrella, some experts feel that the term “Black trauma porn” is overused and dismissive, leaving little room for discussion about how creatives might explore traumatic events and experiences on screen thoughtfully.

    It’s not hard to understand where the impulse to use that label is coming from, said Kalima Young, an assistant professor at Towson University whose work focuses on representations of race and gender-based trauma in media. Black people are exhausted from constantly being subjected to real-life images of Black pain and death, and seeing that replicated on screen as entertainment can feel exploitative. Still, she said it’s important to separate viral videos from creative works.

    “When we use the term ‘trauma porn,’ we conflate the two, and we collapse what’s happening,” Young said. “It takes some of the nuance out of the conversation.”

    Janell Hobson, a professor of women’s, gender and sexuality studies at the University at Albany, understands why some Black viewers might not have the appetite for “Till.” The two White men accused of Emmett Till’s murder were ultimately acquitted, despite later admitting to the killing, while earlier this year a grand jury declined to indict the White woman who accused him of making advances toward her. Viewers know that there was no justice, and that’s painful.

    Chukwu said she deliberately didn't depict the brutal manner in which Emmett was killed in the film.

    But though Hobson hasn’t yet seen “Till,” she feels it’s a mistake to call it “Black trauma porn.”

    “There’s a difference between criticizing a film that is designed to exploit and to create titillation around images of Black trauma and Black pain versus a drama that is designed to raise awareness around a very troubling part of our history,” she said. “There’s a difference between telling a story of Black trauma and telling a story that is ‘Black trauma porn.’”

    What, then, is the line between a story of Black trauma and “Black trauma porn?”

    For Young, the distinguishing factor is context. Creators have a responsibility to justify why a particular Black character is being subjected to violence or why that violence is being depicted a certain way, she said – a balance that can be tricky to achieve in genres such as horror, in which violence has long been key. Failing to provide a clear and compelling case for those choices can contribute to a feeling that Young refers to as “empty empathy.”

    “Empty empathy,” according to Young, is when viewers are invited to empathize with characters who are experiencing trauma without being provided the space or context to process those visceral feelings. In other words, it’s when trauma is presented as mere spectacle.

    To avoid falling into that trap, filmmakers and TV producers have to think creatively about how they tell stories of trauma, Hobson said. That might involve subverting audience expectations as Jordan Peele’s “Get Out” does when a police cruiser pulls up at the end, or telling a familiar story from a different perspective, as “Till” does by highlighting the journey of Mamie Till-Mobley. Strong character development, as well as interspersing moments of humor or rest, can also help soften the blow, Young added.

    Despite its heavy subject matter,

    The team behind “Till” says they’ve worked hard to tell the story of Till-Mobley sensitively. In interviews leading up to its release, Chukwu has emphasized repeatedly that the film contains no physical violence against Black people. It also grounds Till-Mobley’s story in joy and dignity – the opening scene depicts Till-Mobley driving around Chicago with a carefree Emmett singing along to the radio. The ending also closes on a lighter moment between mother and son.

    But trauma, too, is integral here, and in giving this story the big screen treatment, the filmmakers are honoring the memory of the real-life Till-Mobley.

    Keith Beauchamp, a producer and co-writer of “Till” who was a mentee of Till-Mobley, has a deep connection to this history. He worked closely with Till-Mobley on a documentary about the case. “The Untold Story of Emmett Louis Till,” released in 2005, led to the federal government reopening an investigation into the crime. Recently, he helped unearth an unserved arrest warrant from 1955 for the woman whose accusations led to Emmett’s murder.

    Beauchamp said “Till” has been 29 years in the making for him personally, and that Till-Mobley herself wanted this story to be told through film. He sees “Till” as a continuation of her fight for justice – not just for Emmett, but for all those who came after him.

    “We’re not in the business of re-traumatizing America,” he said. “But this is the story of Emmett Louis Till, and it was that photograph that inspired generations of people and continues to inspire generations of people today.”

    When complaints of “trauma porn” are leveled, critics often ask who a particular work is for. Put bluntly, is that depiction of Black trauma intended to appeal to the sympathies of White people?

    Young considers that implication a knee-jerk reaction. While skeptics of “Till” might feel that they are plenty familiar with the history of Emmett Till, there are layers to that story that have not been fully unpacked.

    “Did they truly understand the context of why the situation occurred?” Young asked. “Have we had enough time to sit in the conversation of why Mamie Till would make that decision to have an open casket?”

    Whether someone considers a story about Black trauma too much to endure or whether they consider it imperative to witness is inherently subjective. It’s notable that many of the recent projects deemed to be “Black trauma porn” have been the work of Black creatives – an obvious reminder that Black people are not a monolith.

    At a time when Republican legislatures are attempting to prevent the nation's fully history from being taught in schools, the filmmakers behind

    Hobson also points out that Black creatives have only recently been given the platform to tell their own stories. Viewers, of course, can opt not to watch, but Black creators should be allowed the space to air their wounds, however imperfect their attempts.

    At a time when Republican state legislatures are trying to restrict discussions of race and history in schools, Young said it’s crucial that stories such as “Till” not be dismissed.

    “In a country right now that is trying so desperately to tamp down on the ghosts that are living under the soil of this country, it’s important that we keep on doing this digging – that we keep on doing the sowing, that we keep on allowing a myriad of voices to tell Black experiences of racial terror and history,” she added.

    Beauchamp, for his part, hopes viewers will give “Till” a chance. Till-Mobley was “the mother of the civil rights movement” – an unsung hero who never got her due. In revisiting her story now, he hopes to resurrect her spirit.

    “I just want to awaken the sleeping giant of revolutionary change once again that is desperately needed in this country right now.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Secret Service reached out to Oath Keepers ahead of January 6 riot | CNN Politics

    Secret Service reached out to Oath Keepers ahead of January 6 riot | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Secret Service agents were in contact with members of the Oath Keepers prior to January 6 an official with the agency tells CNN, as part of standard intelligence and response duties.

    The official said members of the Oath Keepers occasionally reached out to the Secret Service with questions about permissible items for rallies. Further, when agents learned the group planned to attend events, agents reached out and met with members. The official noted that is common when groups plan to demonstrate.

    The Washington Post first reported the agency’s outreach to the Oath Keepers ahead of January 6, 2021.

    “We are aware that individuals from the Oath Keepers have contacted us in the past to make inquiries,” Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi told CNN last week.

    It’s not uncommon for law enforcement agents to maintain contacts with groups that are of investigative interest. The Oath Keepers and other extremist groups that traveled to Washington for rallies after the 2020 election had numerous contacts with local and federal law enforcement agencies, testimony gathered in congressional and federal investigations has shown.

    The relationship between the Oath Keepers has come under increased scrutiny after testimony last week revealed the leader of the Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes, purported to be in touch with agents.

    John Zimmerman, a former North Carolina leader of the Oath Keepers, testified that he believed Rhodes was in touch with a Secret Service agent in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election.

    Zimmerman, who has not been charged with a crime, said members of the Oath Keepers – who are currently on trial for charges relating to the January 6 US Capitol attack, including seditious conspiracy – gathered in September in Fayetteville, North Carolina, for a campaign rally for former President Donald Trump

    Members of the Oath Keepers were recruiting at the rally and working as personal security details, he said.

    To prepare for the rally, Zimmerman testified, Rhodes said he was in contact with a member of the Secret Service who advised the leader on what weapons were allowed near the rally. Zimmerman said he did not hear the entire conversation, but that Rhodes repeatedly represented he was in touch with an agent.

    Rhodes allegedly told other members of the Oath Keepers in a group chat that if Trump called upon them as a militia, he believed the US Secret Service would be “happy” to have their help, according to evidence presented in court Thursday.

    The text was presented during the seditious conspiracy trial of Rhodes and four other defendants. All five have pleaded not guilty.

    “If he calls us up as a militia I think the secret service would be happy to have us out there,” Rhodes wrote, according to prosecutors. Rhodes went on to say this conclusion was based upon numerous positive contacts between Oath Keepers and the Secret Service before several Trump rallies before January 6.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury recommends life without parole for Nikolas Cruz | CNN

    Jury recommends life without parole for Nikolas Cruz | CNN

    [ad_1]

    The parents of Alyssa Alhadeff speak at a press conference on Thursday, October 13.

    (CNN)

    The parents of 14-year-old Alyssa Alhadeff, who was among the 17 people killed in the Parkland massacre, said they were “disgusted” with the jury’s decision to recommend life in prison over the death penalty for the gunman.

    Lori and Ilan Alhadeff spoke to reporters shortly after the recommendation was read in court.

    Ilan said his family was “beyond disappointed with the outcome,” adding it “should have been the death penalty — 100%.”

    “I’m disgusted with our legal system,” the visibly angry father said outside court. “I’m disgusted with those jurors.”

    Both parents questioned the purpose of the death penalty in Florida’s legal system if not for the case of a mass school shooter.

    “What is the death penalty for?” Lori asked.

    She also called on law enforcement to do more to prevent school shootings, and to act more aggressively to stop them.

    “Law enforcement needs to do their job,” the mother said. “Your job as a police officer is to go in, engage and take down the threat. And if you can’t do that, don’t do the job.”

    The Alhadeffs said they will continue to work through their nonprofit, Make Schools Safe, to advocate for tougher school safety policies.

    Ilan thanked the state for its prosecution of the Parkland gunman, while condemning the trial’s outcome.

    “The system continues to fail us,” he said.

    About Alyssa Alhadeff: Alyssa, 14, was a student at Stoneman Douglas and a soccer player for Parkland Travel Soccer.

    “Alyssa Alhadeff was a loved and well respected member of our club and community,” Parkland Travel Soccer said on Facebook. “Alyssa will be greatly missed.”

    Lori told HLN she dropped her daughter off at school the day of the shooting and said, “I love you.” When the mother heard about the attack, she hustled to school, but was too late.

    “I knew at that point she was gone. I felt it in my heart,” she said. 

    You can read about all of the victims here.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury awards nearly $1 billion to Sandy Hook families in Alex Jones case | CNN Business

    Jury awards nearly $1 billion to Sandy Hook families in Alex Jones case | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    (Pool/WFSB)

    Erica Lafferty, the daughter of Sandy Hook Elementary principal Dawn Hochsprung, who was killed during the school shooting, told reporters Wednesday that the verdict against Alex Jones is a moment “years in the making.”

    Lafferty recounted how difficult it was for her and her family to deal with the threats fueled by the conspiracy theories led by Jones.

    “As I was upstairs testifying about the rape threats that were sent to me, Alex Jones was standing right here holding a press conference. After almost a decade of threats and messages from conspiracy theorists led by Jones, this is a moment years in the making,” she said.

    Lafferty went on to say how she wished she could tell call her mother to tell her about the verdict and the years leading up to it.

    “And in this big moment, like in every big moment, since the shooting, I wish I could just call my mom and tell her about it. I would tell her about the horror of watching Alex Jones hold court with the press outside, right here. About the disappointment of so many news outlets who’ve known us since 12-14 run his words unfiltered. The heartbreak of reliving the shooting as so many families shared stories of their slain loved ones. But I would also like to tell her about the bright spots. News stations, like NBC Connecticut, refused to give a dangerous conspiracy theorist a platform throughout this trial, and I thank them. The jury bravely bore witness to our pain, sitting through hours upon hours of testimony that will never leave their minds,” she said.

    Lafferty then thanked the people in her life who were by my side throughout this trial… You guys were my guideposts and my shining lights throughout all of this and I cannot thank you enough for your compassion, extreme expertise, and your friendship. I wish I could tell ,my mom about all of this. I wish I could tell her about so many things that can happen, that have happened since she was murdered. Mostly that I’ll never stop missing her.”

    She added that while she hopes to put this chapter of her life behind her, she and her family are aware of the stain Jones’ actions have left on their lives.

    “I wish that after today, I could just be a daughter grieving her mother and stop worrying about conspiracy theorists sending me threats or worse. But I know that this is not the end of Alex Jones in my life. I know that his hates, his hate, lies and conspiracy theories will follow both me and my family through the rest of our days. But I’m also hopeful for what happened here today. That it may save other families from high-profile tragedies from the cycle of abuse and re-traumatization that we have all been put through as we simply tried to survive the hardest days, weeks, and years of our lives,” Lafferty said.

    She continued, “I’m incredibly proud and thankful for the message that was sent here today. The truth matters. And those who profit off of other people’s pain and trauma will pay for what they have done. There will be more Alex Joneses in this world, but what they learned here today is that they absolutely will be held accountable.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump can’t get out of deposition in E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit, judge rules | CNN Politics

    Trump can’t get out of deposition in E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit, judge rules | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A federal judge rejected former President Donald Trump’s attempt to pause his deposition in a defamation lawsuit scheduled for later this month saying Trump’s efforts to delay the case are “inexcusable.”

    Trump is scheduled to be deposed on October 19 in the defamation lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll, a former magazine columnist who accused Trump of raping her in a department store in the mid 1990s. Trump has denied the allegations.

    Judge Lewis Kaplan said the lawsuit wasn’t over yet and as they wait for a federal appeals court to rule on a key element of the case, “completing those depositions – which have already been delayed for years – would impose no undue burden on Mr. Trump, let alone any irreparable injury.”

    “The defendant should not be permitted to run the clock out on plaintiff’s attempt to gain a remedy for what allegedly was a serious wrong,” Kaplan wrote.

    The judge said that Carroll would face “substantial injury” from further delay, citing the lengthy appeal process, which has already taken 20 months and is still not over, and the ages of Carroll and Trump, who are both in their 70s. Carroll’s deposition is scheduled for this Friday.

    Kaplan noted Trump’s efforts to delay the lawsuit and said his production of “virtually” no documents was “inexcusable.”

    An attorney for Trump could not immediately be reached.

    “We are pleased that Judge Kaplan agreed with our position onto to stay discovery in this case. We look forward to filing our case under the Adult Survivors Act and moving forward to trial with all dispatch,” said Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney.

    Carroll’s attorney had suggested that Trump wanted to stop his deposition after learning that she intends to sue him in November under a new New York state law that allows victims of sexual assault to sue years after the encounter.

    The judge said the question of whether Trump raped Carroll is “paramount” to the current case and the future lawsuit and stopping the deposition now because it could be used in the future “would make no sense.”

    Carroll sued Trump for defamation in 2019 after he denied raping her in the mid-1990s and said that she wasn’t his type and accused her of fabricating the claim to boost sales of her book.

    Trump and the Justice Department argued Trump was a federal employee and his statements denying Carroll’s allegations were made in response to reporters’ questions while he was at the White House. They argued the Justice Department should be substituted as the defendant, which, because the government cannot be sued for defamation, would end the lawsuit. Judge Kaplan ruled against Trump and the DOJ. They appealed.

    Last month a federal appeals court ruled that Trump was a federal employee when he denied Carroll’s claim of rape and sexual assault. However, the federal appeals court in New York asked the DC appeals court to determine if Trump was acting in the scope of that employment when he made the allegedly defamatory statements. If the DC court finds that Trump was acting within his role, then the Justice Department would likely be substituted as a defendant.

    The DC appeals court has not yet taken up the matter.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden sends a careful but chilling new nuclear message to Putin in CNN interview | CNN Politics

    Biden sends a careful but chilling new nuclear message to Putin in CNN interview | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    It’s never going to feel normal to hear a president discussing the danger of “Armageddon” – especially now, on camera.

    But Joe Biden used an exclusive CNN interview on Tuesday to send another careful, yet clear and chilling message to Russian President Vladimir Putin about the disastrous consequences of using nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine.

    The first president since the 1980s to really have to game out calculations about nuclear arsenals and deterrence, Biden was asked by Jake Tapper whether he thought that Putin – who has warned he is prepared to use every option in Russia’s arsenal – might consider detonating one of the world’s most heinous weapons as an act of desperation in a losing war.

    Biden replied: “I don’t think he will.”

    But the President, who first touched on this subject at an off-camera fundraiser in New York last week, made crystal clear he was sending a public message to Putin about the dangers of thinking that using a lower yield, tactical nuclear bomb would be an isolated event.

    “What I am talking about, I am talking to Putin. He, in fact, cannot continue with impunity to talk about the use of a tactical nuclear weapon as if that’s a rational thing to do,” Biden said, before warning of dangerous consequences of such a move.

    “The mistakes get made, the miscalculation could occur, no one could be sure what would happen and it could end in Armageddon,” he said, again stressing that a nuclear blast that kills thousands of people could lead to events barreling way out of control.

    Biden is stating the fear of some strategists who warn about a ladder of escalation that could occur if a nuclear bomb is used and triggers reprisals by the West – even though any initial US response would certainly go no further than conventional military action.

    He also appears to be trying to create a narrative of deterrence around the specific situation in Ukraine. The logic of the US and Russia’s long-range strategic nuclear arsenals is that the use of them is deterred because a conflict would be suicidal for both sides. That equation does not exist in Ukraine, since the country has no nuclear arsenal and it’s hard to conclude that it represents a vital national interest that would lead Washington to respond in kind to Putin going nuclear. By stressing that even a tactical device – which could be small enough to destroy an airbase or large enough to reduce a city to ruins – could lead to something worse, Biden seems to be almost seeking to create a new chain of calculations in Putin’s mind.

    Two moments in Tapper’s interview brought home the burden now borne by the man who is followed everywhere he goes by a military officer carrying the nation’s nuclear codes.

    First the CNN anchor asked the President to state the US red line for the US and NATO in Ukraine and what Washington would do if Putin bombed a nuclear plant in Ukraine or set off a tactical nuclear weapon.

    “It would be irresponsible for me to talk about what we would or wouldn’t do,” Biden said.

    Then, Tapper prodded the President over whether the Pentagon had gamed out scenarios. Biden soberly replied: “The Pentagon didn’t have to be asked.”

    Watch the full exclusive interview with President Joe Biden

    Most experts and strategists estimate that there are many reasons why Putin would stop short of using a nuclear weapon – among them the possible risk of radioactive fallout crossing into Russia or the fact that the use of a tactical nuclear weapon may not actually be a sensible strategic option in the war.

    But the fact he’s pushed himself into a corner, along with his obliviousness to civilian loss of life underscored again by his callous assaults on Ukrainian cities this week, suggests that a humanitarian impulse is unlikely to be part of his calculation. And Biden himself said in the interview that while he believed Putin was a “rational actor,” he had made significant miscalculations and his objectives were not rational. That leaves open the possibility of even more decisions that appear irrational to the West but may seem reasonable in Putin’s warped logic.

    That is why Biden and experts who have dedicated their careers to staving off a nuclear apocalypse say the possibility that Putin may go nuclear must be taken so seriously – even if the chances remain very low and the US would likely be able to detect well ahead of time if Russia’s atomic devices were on the move.

    “It’s not a probable event. It’s not even likely,” said Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear non-proliferation expert and former president of the Plowshares Fund, said on CNN’s “Newsroom” on Tuesday.

    “But this is a low probability, high consequence event. If he uses even one nuclear weapon, he’s bringing us into a whole new world. He’s causing massive damage. And he’s running the risk of escalation with exchanges from the West that could lead to further exchanges, et cetera.”

    Cirincione explained that even if Putin’s saber rattling represented a political threat designed to scare the West, it cannot be discounted.

    “He has the means. He has the doctrine that allows him to use it. And he has the motive. He is losing this war. He has to do something to try to turn the tide of battle in desperation. He might turn to a nuclear weapon.”

    While some critics have faulted the President for mentioning words like “Armageddon” and comparing his rhetoric to that of Putin, the motivations of the two men are very different. At a minimum, the Russian leader is boasting about nuclear weapons to scare the world. Biden is speaking publicly to stave off the possibility of disaster.

    One reason the war in Ukraine is so dangerous is that nearly eight months in, there remains no prospect of any genuine diplomatic process that could defuse it. Ukraine’s forces, using US and allied weapons systems, are making remarkable progress on the battlefield and are determined to repel an unprovoked invasion that has caused carnage and extensive destruction. Putin has thrown so much personal prestige and Russian blood into the war he can hardly afford any outcome he cannot spin as a win, despite his autocratic grip on Russia.

    Biden signaled in the Tapper interview that he saw no real rationale to meet Putin when both leaders are expected to be at the G20 summit in Indonesia next month. But he did leave one intriguing door open to the Russian leader, saying he’d sit down with Putin if he were willing to discuss the fate of US basketball star Brittney Griner, who was sentenced in August to nine years in prison after pleading guilty to drugs smuggling. The US says Griner and another American, former US Marine Paul Whelan, have been wrongfully detained. Washington has offered to swap jailed Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout for the two Americans.

    “Look, I have no intention of meeting with him, but look, if he came to me at the G20 and said, ‘I want to talk about the release of Griner,’ I would meet with him, but that would depend,” Biden said.

    The President also downplayed the idea that more generally there was anything to talk about.

    “He’s acted brutally, I think he’s committed war crimes, and so I don’t… see any rationale to meet with him now.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden says Putin ‘totally miscalculated’ by invading Ukraine but is a ‘rational actor’ | CNN Politics

    Biden says Putin ‘totally miscalculated’ by invading Ukraine but is a ‘rational actor’ | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    Watch Jake Tapper’s exclusive interview with President Joe Biden on CNN Tonight with Jake Tapper at 9 p.m. ET Tuesday.



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden said in an exclusive CNN interview Tuesday he believed Russian President Vladimir Putin is a “rational actor” who nonetheless badly misjudged his ability to invade Ukraine and suppress its people.

    “I think he is a rational actor who has miscalculated significantly,” Biden told Jake Tapper as Russian bombardments on civilian targets in Ukraine signaled another turning point in the months-long war.

    Coming as the conflict in Ukraine approaches its eighth month, the interview with Biden provided fresh insight into his thinking as top US officials watch the fighting unfold in Ukraine with escalating concern.

    Biden, who warned last week the risk of “nuclear Armageddon” was at its highest level in 60 years, said in the interview that threats emanating from Russia could result in catastrophic “mistakes” and “miscalculation,” even as he declined to spell out how precisely the United States would respond if Putin deploys a tactical nuclear device on the battlefield in Ukraine.

    And he said there would “consequences” for Saudi Arabia after it partnered with Moscow to announce a cut in oil production, a move that could cause gas prices to increase as November’s midterm elections approach.

    Biden, his top officials and fellow Western leaders have spent the past several months debating what steps Putin may take as his troops suffer embarrassing losses on the battlefield in Ukraine.

    Whether Putin is acting rationally has been a subject of intense debate as leaders work to predict his next steps. While Biden said Tuesday he believed Putin himself was rational, he characterized the Russian leader’s aims in Ukraine – which Putin laid out in an angry speech as he launched the war in February – as ridiculous.

    “You listen to what he says. If you listen to the speech he made after when that decision was being made, he talked about the whole idea of – he was needed to be the leader of Russia that united all of Russian speakers. I mean, it’s just I just think it’s irrational,” Biden said.

    Going further, Biden said Putin wrongly believed Ukrainians would submit to Russian invasion – a misjudgment that’s been disproved by fierce resistance inside the country.

    “I think the speech, his objectives were not rational. I think he thought, Jake, I think he thought he was going to be welcomed with open arms, that this was the home of Mother Russia in Kyiv, and that where he was going to be welcomed, and I think he just totally miscalculated,” Biden said.

    Indeed, a counteroffensive launched by Ukraine last month was successful in retaking territory previously held by the Russians, including critical transportation hubs. The losses proved the latest major embarrassment for Russia, whose military has struggled over the course of the seven-month war.

    This week, however, Russia launched one of its fiercest bombing campaigns since invading in late February. At least 19 people have been killed and more than 100 wounded across the country, as far away as the western city of Lviv, hundreds of miles from the war’s main theaters in eastern and southern Ukraine.

    Asked whether he would meet Putin at next month’s Group of 20 summit in Indonesia, Biden said he didn’t see a good reason for a sit-down.

    “It would depend on specifically what he wanted to talk about,” Biden said, adding if Putin wanted to discuss the jailed American basketball star Brittney Griner then he would be open to talking.

    “But look, he’s acted brutally, he’s acted brutally,” Biden said. “I think he’s committed war crimes. And so I don’t, I don’t see any rationale to meet with him now.”

    Watch the full exclusive interview with President Joe Biden

    After Biden warned last week the risk of nuclear “Armageddon” was at its highest point since the Cuban Missile Crisis, he told Tapper he didn’t believe Putin would ultimately take that step.

    “I don’t think he will,” Biden said when asked by Tapper whether the Russian leader would use a tactical nuclear weapon – a prospect US officials have watched with concern as Russian troops suffer embarrassing losses on the battlefield.

    “I think it’s irresponsible for him to talk about it, the idea that a world leader of one of the largest nuclear powers in the world says he may use a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine,” Biden added.

    Biden said even Putin’s threats have a destabilizing effect, and warned of the potential errors in judgment that could ensue.

    “The whole point I was making was it could lead to just a horrible outcome,” he told Tapper. “And not because anybody intends to turn it into a world war or anything, but just once you use a nuclear weapon, the mistakes that can be made, the miscalculations, who knows what would happen.”

    “He, in fact, cannot continue with impunity to talk about the use of a tactical nuclear weapon as if that’s a rational thing to do,” Biden added later. “The mistakes get made. And the miscalculation could occur, no one can be sure what would happen and could end in Armageddon.”

    Biden refused to disclose what a US response would look like should Putin follow through on his nuclear threats. But he said the Department of Defense had proactively developed contingencies should the scenario come to pass.

    “What is the red line for the United States and NATO, and have you directed the Pentagon and other agencies to game out what a response would be if he did use a tactical nuclear weapon or if he bombed the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine or anything along those lines?” Tapper asked.

    “There’s been discussions of that, but I’m not going to get into that. It would be irresponsible of me to talk about what we would or wouldn’t do,” Biden said.

    “Have you asked the Pentagon to game it out, though?” Tapper asked.

    “The Pentagon didn’t have to be asked,” Biden said.

    Biden spoke to Tapper a few hours after meeting virtually with members of the Group of 7 industrialized nations, who heard from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on the need to bolster his country’s air defenses amid the new Russian bombardments.

    Zelensky told the meeting that “common efforts to create an air shield for Ukraine” must be intensified amid a barrage of Russian cruise missile and drone attacks.

    White House officials have said the US is prepared to further bolster Ukraine’s air defenses, including through missile defense systems that Biden expedited delivery of over the summer.

    Yet Russia’s intense aerial assault of the Ukrainian capital Kyiv and on civilian infrastructure suggested Putin could be employing new tactics meant to terrorize Ukrainians as the winter approaches.

    Biden speaks Tapper during the interview.

    Biden told Tapper he believed it was time to “rethink” the US relationship with Saudi Arabia after the kingdom partnered with Russia to cut oil production, a rebuke after intensive White House efforts to prevent such a decision.

    “I am in the process, when the House and Senate gets back, they’re going to have to – there’s going to be some consequences for what they’ve done with Russia,” Biden said.

    The decision by the Saudi-led OPEC+ oil cartel to cut production last week prompted anger at the White House, where officials said Biden was personally disappointed by what they called a “shortsighted” decision.

    The move, which came three months after Biden visited Saudi Arabia and met its de facto leader Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has the potential to raise gas prices in the weeks ahead of November’s midterm elections.

    “Let’s get straight why I went,” Biden said. “I didn’t go about oil, I went about making sure that we made sure that we weren’t going to walk away from the Middle East.”

    After reaching highs over the summer, gas prices had been steadily decreasing, providing Biden and his top aides a potent talking point in the lead-up to the elections.

    But a combination of factors, including rising demand and maintenance at some US refineries, has caused prices to begin ticking back up. The OPEC+ decision is poised to aggravate those factors.

    For Biden, the decision was a particular affront because of his efforts over the summer to repair ties with Saudi Arabia, despite the kingdom’s woeful human rights record and bin Salman’s role in the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

    This story has been updated with more from the interview with Biden.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors ask jury to recommend death sentence for Parkland shooter | CNN

    Prosecutors ask jury to recommend death sentence for Parkland shooter | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Prosecutors have called on a Florida jury to recommend the Parkland school shooter be put to death, saying in a closing argument Tuesday he meticulously planned the February 2018 massacre, and that the facts of the case outweigh anything in his background that defense attorneys claim warrant a life sentence.

    “What he wanted to do, what his plan was and what he did, was to murder children at school and their caretakers,” lead prosecutor Michael Satz said of Nikolas Cruz, who pleaded guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder for the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in which 14 students and three school staff members were killed. “That’s what he wanted to do.”

    But Cruz “is a brain damaged, broken, mentally ill person, through no fault of his own,” defense attorney Melisa McNeill said in her own closing argument, pointing to the defense’s claim that Cruz’s mother used drugs and drank alcohol while his mother was pregnant with him, saying he was “poisoned” in her womb.

    “And in a civilized humane society, do we kill brain damaged, mentally ill, broken people?” McNeill asked Tuesday. “Do we? I hope not.”

    With closing arguments, the monthslong sentencing phase of Cruz’s trial is nearing its end, marking prosecutors’ last chance to convince the jury to recommend a death sentence and defense attorneys’ last opportunity to lobby for life in prison without parole.

    Prosecutors have argued Cruz’s decision to commit the deadliest mass shooting at an American high school was premeditated and calculated, while Cruz’s defense attorneys have offered evidence of a lifetime of struggles at home and in school.

    Each side was allotted two and a half hours to make their closing arguments.

    Jury deliberations are expected to begin Wednesday, during which time jurors will be sequestered, per Broward Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer.

    If they choose to recommend a death sentence, the jurors must be unanimous, or Cruz will receive life in prison without the possibility of parole. If the jury does recommend death, the final decision rests with Judge Scherer, who could choose to follow the recommendation or sentence Cruz to life.

    In his remarks, Satz outlined prosecutors’ reasoning, including the preparations Cruz made. For a “long time” prior to the shooting, Satz said, Cruz thought about carrying it out.

    Revisiting ground covered in the trial, the prosecutor said Cruz researched mass shootings and their perpetrators, including those at a music festival in Las Vegas; at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado; at Virginia Tech; and at Colorado’s Columbine High School.

    Cruz modified his AR-15 to help improve his marksmanship; he accumulated ammunition and and magazines; and he searched online for information about how long it would take police to respond to a school shooting, Satz said.

    Then, the day of, Satz said, Cruz hid his tactical vest in a backpack and took an Uber to the school, wearing a Marjory Stoneman Douglas JROTC polo shirt to blend in. Based on his planning, he told the Uber driver to drop him off at a specific pedestrian gate, knowing it would be open soon before school let out.

    “All these details he thought of, and he did,” Satz said.

    Satz also detailed a narrative of the shooting, which he called a “systematic massacre,” recounting how the shooter killed or wounded each of his victims, whose families and loved ones filled the courtroom gallery. Prosecutors also showed jurors a video of the shooting, which was not shown to the public.

    Cruz, wearing a striped sweater and flanked by his public defenders, looked on expressionless, occasionally looking down at the table in front of him or talking to one of his attorneys.

    “The appropriate sentence for Nikolas Cruz is the death penalty,” Satz concluded.

    In her own statement, McNeill stressed to jurors that defense attorneys were not disputing that Cruz deserves to be punished for the shooting.

    “We are asking you to punish him and to punish him severely,” she said. “We are asking you to sentence him to prison for the rest of his life, where he will wait to die, either by natural causes or whatever else could possibly happen to him while he’s in prison.”

    The 14 slain students were: Alyssa Alhadeff, 14; Martin Duque Anguiano, 14; Nicholas Dworet, 17; Jaime Guttenberg, 14; Luke Hoyer, 15; Cara Loughran, 14; Gina Montalto, 14; Joaquin Oliver, 17; Alaina Petty, 14; Meadow Pollack, 18; Helena Ramsay, 17; Alex Schachter, 14; Carmen Schentrup, 16; and Peter Wang, 14.

    Geography teacher Scott Beigel, 35; wrestling coach Chris Hixon, 49; and assistant football coach Aaron Feis, 37, also were killed – each while running toward danger or trying to help students to safety.

    The lengthy trial – jury selection began six months ago, in early April – has seen prosecutors and defense attorneys present evidence of aggravating factors and mitigating circumstances, reasons Cruz should or should not be put to death.

    The state has pointed to seven aggravating factors, including that the killings were especially heinous, atrocious or cruel, as well as cold, calculated and premeditated, Satz said Tuesday. Other aggravating factors include the fact the defendant knowingly created a great risk of death to many people and that he disrupted a lawful government function – in this case, the running of a school.

    Together, these aggravating factors “outweigh any mitigation about anything about the defendant’s background or character,” Satz said.

    Satz rejected the mitigating circumstances presented during trial by the defense, including that Cruz’s mother smoked or used drugs while pregnant with him. Those factors would not turn someone into a mass murderer, Satz argued, adding it was the jury’s job to weigh the credibility of the defense witnesses who testified to those claims.

    Satz cast doubt on the defense’s other proposed mitigators. In response to a claim that Cruz has neurological or intellectual deficits, Satz pointed to the gunman’s ability to carefully research and prepare for the Parkland shooting.

    In response to claims Cruz was bullied by his peers, Satz argued Cruz was an aggressor, pointing to testimony that he walked around in high school with a swastika drawn on his backpack, along with the N-word and other explicit language.

    “Hate is not a mental disorder,” Satz said.

    During trial, prosecutors presented evidence showing the gunman spent months searching online for information about mass shootings and left behind social media comments sharing his express desire to “kill people,” while Google searches illustrated how he sought information about mass shootings. On YouTube, Cruz left comments like “Im going to be a professional school shooter,” and promised to “go on a killing rampage.”

    “What one writes,” Satz said, referencing Cruz’s online history Tuesday, “what one says, is a window to someone’s soul.”

    Public defenders assigned to represent Cruz have asked the jury to take into account his troubled history, from a dysfunctional family life to serious mental and developmental issues, contending he was born with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

    On Tuesday, McNeill reiterated the defense’s case, starting with one of the first witnesses called in August, Cruz’s older sister, Danielle Woodard. Woodard testified their mother, Brenda Woodard, used drugs and drank alcohol while pregnant with him.

    “Her brother, Nikolas Cruz never recovered from the drugs and the alcohol that Brenda put in her polluted womb,” McNeill said Tuesday.

    Several neighbors who knew Cruz when he lived with his late adoptive mother, Lynda Cruz, also testified about watching him grow up, McNeill reminded jurors Tuesday. They shared how they saw him behaving in ways they described as “strange” or “weird,” or saw him being bullied. One neighbor, McNeill said, had told jurors that “from the moment he set eyes on Nikolas, he could tell something was not right with him.”

    McNeill also revisited Cruz’s academic struggles throughout his childhood, recounting the “many people” – including educators and school counselors or psychologists – who testified they had concerns about his bad behavior or poor performance in school.

    Assistant Public Defender Melisa McNeill gives her closing argument in the trial of the Parkland shooter on Tuesday.

    Those struggles continued into adolescence, McNeill said: When he was 15 years old, Cruz’s skills in reading, writing and math were well below the levels they should have been. These academic struggles, along with his anxiety and depression, were indicators, McNeill said, of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

    Various counselors and psychiatrists also testified, McNeill reminded the jury, offering their observations from years of treating or interacting with Cruz. One, former Broward County school district counselor John Newnham, testified that while Lynda Cruz was a caring mother, after the death of her husband, she was “overwhelmed” and did not take advantage of the support available.

    This was a factor in Cruz’s failure to receive the proper help, McNeill told jurors Tuesday.

    “Everybody told you that Lynda never truly appreciated what was wrong with Nikolas … But the evidence has shown you that Lynda consistently minimized, enabled, ignored, excused, defended and ultimately lied to the very people that were trying to help Nikolas.”

    “Sometimes the people who deserve the least amount of compassion and grace and remorse are the ones who should get it,” she said.

    As part of the prosecution’s case, family members of the victims were given the opportunity this summer to take the stand and offer raw and emotional testimony about how Cruz’s actions had forever changed their lives. At one point, even members of Cruz’s defense team were brought to tears.

    “I feel I can’t truly be happy if I smile,” Max Schachter, the father of 14-year-old victim Alex Schachter, testified in August. “I know that behind that smile is the sharp realization that part of me will always be sad and miserable because Alex isn’t here.”

    The defense’s case came to an unexpected end last month when – having called just 26 of 80 planned witnesses – public defenders assigned to represent Cruz abruptly rested, leading the judge to admonish the team for what she said was unprofessionalism, resulting in a courtroom squabble between her and the defense (the jury was not present).

    Defense attorneys would later file a motion to disqualify the judge for her comments, arguing in part they suggested the judge was not impartial and Cruz’s right to a fair trial had been undermined. Prosecutors disagreed, writing “judicial comments, even of a critical or hostile nature, are not grounds for disqualification.”

    Scherer ultimately denied the motion.

    Prosecutors then presented their rebuttal, concluding last week following a three-day delay attributed to Hurricane Ian.

    Their case included footage of Cruz telling clinical neuropsychologist Dr. Robert Denney he chose to carry out the shooting on Valentine’s Day because he “felt like no one loved me, and I didn’t like Valentine’s Day and I wanted to ruin it for everyone.”

    Denney, who spent more than 400 hours with the gunman, testified for the prosecution that he concluded Cruz has borderline personality disorder and anti-social personality disorder.

    But Cruz did not meet the criteria for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, as the defense has contended, Denney testified, accusing Cruz of “grossly exaggerating” his “psychiatric problems” in tests Denney administered.

    When read the list of names of the 17 people killed and asked if fetal alcohol spectrum disorder explained their murders, Denney responded “no” each time.

    Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled the first name of defense attorney Melisa McNeill.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Louis Farrakhan Fast Facts | CNN

    Louis Farrakhan Fast Facts | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a look at the life of Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam.

    Birth date: May 11, 1933

    Birth place: The Bronx, New York

    Birth name: Louis Eugene Walcott

    Father: Percival Clark

    Mother: Sarah Mae (Manning) Clark

    Marriage: Khadijah Farrakhan, formerly Betsy (Ross) Walcott, (September 12, 1953-present)

    Children: Mustapha, Joshua Nasir, Abnar, Louis Junior, Donna, Hanan, Maria, Fatimah and Khallada

    Education: Attended Winston-Salem Teachers College, 1951-1953

    Farrakhan was named for Louis Walcott, the man his mother became involved with after his biological father, Percival Clark, deserted them.

    The Walcott family moved from the Bronx to the Roxbury neighborhood in Boston during the mid-1930s.

    He won a track scholarship to college in North Carolina.

    Farrakhan is an accomplished classical violinist who began playing at the age of 5. He is also a singer, songwriter, playwright and film producer. Farrakhan wrote two plays, “The Trial” and “Orgena.” (“A Negro” spelled backward).

    Farrakhan is known for having preached antisemitic, anti-White, anti-Catholic and anti-homosexual rhetoric.

    1955 – Joins the Nation of Islam (NOI) and adopts the name Louis X.

    December 4, 1964 – Condemns rival Malcolm X in the NOI newspaper, Muhammad Speaks, saying “the die is set and Malcolm shall not escape… such a man is worthy of death.”

    February 21, 1965 – Malcolm X is assassinated. Louis X replaces him as the national spokesman of the NOI.

    Late 1960s – Takes the name Louis Abdul Farrakhan.

    Late 1970s – Farrakhan has a falling out with NOI leader, Wallace Deen Muhammad, who wants to move the NOI away from racial separatist teachings to a more conventional and racially inclusive Islam. The dispute leads to the formation of two rival groups. Farrakhan becomes head of the NOI, while Muhammad becomes the head of the World Community of al-Islam.

    December 1983 – Accompanies Jesse Jackson and other clergy to Syria to negotiate the release of US Navy pilot Lt. Robert O. Goodman.

    1984 – Months after Jesse Jackson came under heavy fire for his off-the-record comments that were later published in the Washington Post, referring to Jews by the insulting nickname “Hymie” and New York as “Hymietown,” Farrakhan, during his weekly radio broadcast, comes to Jackson’s defense claiming Judaism is a “gutter religion” and supporters of Israel are criminals in the sight of God.

    May 1, 1985 – Announces acceptance of a $5 million interest-free loan from Libyan president Moammar Gadhafi.

    June 25, 1986 – Files a lawsuit against US President Ronald Reagan, Secretary of State George Schultz, Secretary of Treasury James Baker and Attorney General Edwin Meese, claiming the government’s economic sanctions and travel ban on Libya violate Farrakhan’s freedom to worship and freedom of speech.

    June 3, 1987 – Farrakhan’s lawsuit against the government is terminated after a district court judge upholds economic sanctions against Libya and prevents the repayment of the $5 million loan.

    1991 – Receives first prostate cancer diagnosis.

    October 16, 1995 – Organizes the Million Man March, also known as the Day of Atonement, on the Mall in Washington, DC. The event features 12 hours of speeches on the commitment of black men to take responsibility for improving themselves, their families and communities.

    April 1999 – Prostate cancer reoccurrence requires emergency surgery at Howard University.

    February 25, 2000 – Farrakhan makes peace with former NOI leader, Muhammad, who formed his own Islamic group in the wake of a dispute with Farrakhan on the direction of NOI. The men announce the unification of their groups during an event called the Savior’s Day Rally.

    May 10, 2000 – Appears on “60 Minutes” with Malcolm X’s daughter, Qubilah Bahiyah Shabazz, and says he regrets that his writing may have influenced others to assassinate Malcolm X.

    October 15, 2005 – Organizes and speaks at the Million More Movement at the Mall in Washington, DC, commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Million Man March.

    September 22, 2006 – Releases a letter stating he is giving up many day-to-day duties as leader of the NOI due to illness, but will remain its leader.

    January 6, 2007 – Farrakhan undergoes a successful surgery to remove his prostate and cancerous colon tissue.

    October 10, 2015 – Farrakhan speaks at the “Justice or Else” rally in Washington, DC, marking the 20th anniversary of the Million Man March.

    February 11, 2016 – Farrakhan speaks at a rally at Tehran University in Iran, marking the 37th anniversary of Iran’s Islamic revolution.

    May 2, 2019 – Facebook designates Farrakhan “dangerous,” and bans him from its social media platforms.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Gov. Bill Richardson suggests Brittney Griner and Paul Whelan may be released by end of year | CNN Politics

    Former Gov. Bill Richardson suggests Brittney Griner and Paul Whelan may be released by end of year | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former Gov. Bill Richardson said Sunday he is “cautiously optimistic” that two Americans wrongfully detained by Russia will be released and suggested they could be freed by the end of the year.

    Richardson, a former Democratic governor of New Mexico, and his namesake center privately work on behalf of families of hostages and detainees. He recently traveled to Russia to discuss with Kremlin officials the possible release of basketball star Brittney Griner and former US Marine Paul Whelan, and he said Sunday that he’s working with the families of both Americans and coordinating with the White House for their release.

    “I do think so. Now, I hate making predictions, but yes,” Richardson told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” when asked if he believed Griiner and Whelan may be released before the end of this year.

    “I know (the families are) very emotional and this is a very emotional time. All I can say is that the Biden administration is working hard on it,” added Richardson, who served as US ambassador to the United Nations in the Clinton administration. “So am I. We coordinate, but not always agree on every tactical decision. But I’m not going to interfere in their process. I’m just giving you my assessment after two visits to Russia on behalf of American hostages.”

    Griner was sentenced in August to nine years in a Russian jail after pleading guilty to drug-smuggling. The two-time US Olympic basketball gold medalist had been arrested at a Moscow airport and accused by Russian prosecutors of trying to smuggle less than 1 gram of cannabis oil in her luggage – which she said she had accidentally packed while in a hurry.

    Whelan was detained at a Moscow hotel in December 2018 and arrested on espionage charges, which he has consistently and vehemently denied. He was convicted and sentenced in June 2020 to 16 years in prison in a trial US officials denounced as unfair.

    President Joe Biden met separately with the families of Griner and Whelan at the White House last month, marking his first time personally meeting with them since their loved ones were detained in Russia.

    On Sunday, Richardson characterized his meetings in Russia as being with “senior Russian officials, individuals close to President (Vladimir) Putin.”

    “I am cautiously optimistic,” Richardson said of the negotiations over Griner and Whelan’s release.

    “I got the sense that the Russian officials that I met with, that I’ve known over the years, are ready to talk,” he said. “I got a good sense from the Russians – the vibrations – but I’m not a government official.”

    The Biden administration had previously distanced itself from Richardson’s efforts. Last month, a senior administration official told CNN that anyone “who’s going to Russia is going as a private citizen and they don’t speak for the US government.”

    “I’m not part of the government, the government channel. I’ve always made that clear. I respect that. I think any decision, for instance, a release, a prisoner exchange, has to be made by the President. And I think the administration has done a good job on that,” Richardson said on Sunday.

    Richardson on Sunday acknowledged the White House’s trepidation at him being involved in prisoner release negotiations, but cited his experience in past prisoner negotiations, including his role in the release of Trevor Reed from Russian custody earlier this year.

    A source familiar with the situation previously told CNN that members of the Richardson Center had traveled to Moscow in February, in the days immediately before the Russian war in Ukraine began, to meet with Russian leadership. Following that visit, the Richardson Center came away with a clear sense of what the Russians were willing to do and how they were willing to do it, which was presented to the White House. Reed was freed in a prisoner swap in April.

    “I’ve coordinated with the White House. I’ve coordinated as much as I can, but you know, sometimes they’re a little nervous about my doing this on my own,” he said.

    “But at the same time, we’ve had success recently with Trevor Reed, the American hostage in Russia some months ago. Danny Fenster, a journalist in Myanmar at the end of last year,” Richardson added. “So, I know what I’m doing.”

    Earlier this month, Biden announced the return of seven Americans who had been detained in Venezuela. The detainees were released in exchange for the release of two Venezuelans imprisoned in the US for conspiring to smuggle cocaine into the country, both nephews of the Venezuelan first lady.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kelly warns ‘wheels’ could ‘come off our democracy’ while Masters tries to tie him to Biden in Arizona Senate debate | CNN Politics

    Kelly warns ‘wheels’ could ‘come off our democracy’ while Masters tries to tie him to Biden in Arizona Senate debate | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    While trying to distance himself from his own party, Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly warned during an hour-long debate on Thursday that the “wheels” could “come off our democracy” if candidates like his GOP opponent, Trump-backed Blake Masters, are elected in November.

    But Masters aggressively pushed back on those attacks, portraying Kelly, who’s running for a full six-year term, as a rubber stamp for the Biden administration, while refusing to acknowledge that he has attempted to moderate his positions on abortion and the 2020 presidential election.

    The Arizona Senate race is among the most competitive in the country, and with the chamber currently split 50-50, every race matters. But Kelly appears to have strengthened his position over the past two months as Masters has struggled to keep up with the Democrat’s fundraising prowess. A new CNN poll released Thursday found that 51% of likely voters are behind Kelly, with 45% backing Masters.

    Masters – a venture capitalist and political novice who won the primary in large part because of former President Donald Trump’s endorsement and the financial backing of billionaire Peter Thiel (his former boss) – released a campaign video last year proclaiming that he believed Trump won the 2020 election. But after the primary, he removed language from his website that included the false claim that the election was stolen.

    Masters attempted to maneuver around questions about the election during Thursday’s debate – just days before Trump, whose 2020 loss in Arizona set off a cascade of election denialism in the state, heads there to campaign for Masters and other Republicans.

    When the moderator asked him whether President Joe Biden, who narrowly carried Arizona, is the “legitimately elected President of the United States,” Masters replied: “Joe Biden is absolutely the President. I mean, my gosh, have you seen the gas prices lately?”

    “Legitimately elected?” the moderator interjected.

    “I’m not trying to trick you,” Masters said. “He’s duly sworn and certified. He’s the legitimate president. He’s in the White House and unfortunately for all of us.”

    When the moderator followed up by using Trump’s language, asking whether the election was “stolen” or “rigged in any way” through vote counting or election results, Masters replied: “Yeah, I haven’t seen evidence of that.”

    But Kelly argued that Masters has espoused “conspiracies and lies that have no place in our democracy.”

    “I’m worried about what’s going to happen here,” Kelly said. “This election in 2024. I mean, we could wind up in a situation where the wheels come off of our democracy, and it’s because of folks like like Blake Masters that are questioning the integrity of an election.”

    Masters insisted that he does not want to get rid of mail-in voting as Kelly alleged. He said he believed military service members should be able to mail ballots back from overseas and said he’d be fine with other voters sending their ballots back by mail if they included a copy of their driver’s license.

    Masters and Kelly repeatedly clashed over immigration, with Masters claiming Kelly supports “open borders” and Kelly rejecting those attacks as he insisted that he’s brought more resources to Arizona to deal with that issue.

    When asked whether he had done enough to address immigration concerns, Kelly distanced himself from national Democrats.

    “When I got to Washington, DC, one of the first things I realized was that Democrats don’t understand this issue. And Republicans just want to talk about it, complain about it, but actually not do anything about it. They just want to politicize that. We heard this tonight from my opponent Blake Masters.”

    Masters charged that Biden and Kelly have put out “the welcome mat” to migrants. “We treat these people better than we treat our own US military service members. I find that shameful.”

    Kelly said he’s pushed back on the Biden administration multiple times on immigration issues, including when the administration planned to end Title 42, the pandemic-era policy that allowed border patrol agents to send migrants back to their home countries.

    “I’ve stood up to Democrats when they’re wrong on this issue … including the President.”

    “When the President decided he was going to do something dumb on this, and change the rules,” Kelly said, “I told him he was wrong.”

    Some of the sharpest exchanges were over abortion as the moderator and Libertarian candidate Marc Victor drew attention to the fact that Masters scrubbed some of the language about his anti-abortion stances from his website as he tried to pivot toward the general election.

    Abortion rights have been a subject of fierce controversy in Arizona since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, because there are conflicting abortion laws in the state – leading to debate over which one should take precedence.

    The state legislature passed a 15-week ban earlier this year that does not include exceptions for rape or incest, only medical emergencies. Masters has said he supports that plan, which was signed into law by Republican Gov. Doug Ducey.

    But Arizona also had a pre-statehood law on the books banning nearly all abortions that was enjoined in 1973 after the Roe decision. A Pima County Superior Court judge recently ruled that it could go back into effect at the urging of the state’s GOP attorney general.

    Kelly argued that Masters wants to make decisions for Arizona women and curtail their rights. “I think we all know guys like this,” said Kelly, also faulting Masters for supporting a national ban on abortion at 15 weeks that has been proposed by South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham.

    “You know, guys that think they know better than everyone about everything,” Kelly continued.

    “What I’m doing is I am protecting your constitutional rights,” he added.

    When the moderator pressed Kelly to explain what limits he would support on abortion, Kelly said he supports the kind of framework contemplated by the Roe v. Wade decision where “late term abortion in this country only happens when there is a serious problem.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Proud Boys member is first to plead guilty to seditious conspiracy | CNN Politics

    Proud Boys member is first to plead guilty to seditious conspiracy | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Jeremy Bertino, a top lieutenant to Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy in federal court on Thursday, and is cooperating with the Justice Department’s investigation into the far-right extremist group.

    Bertino, 43, also pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. He is the first member of the Proud Boys to plead guilty to seditious conspiracy – a major boost to the historic prosecution of the organization.

    He could spend more than five years in prison, according to his plea agreement, which was read aloud in court, though prosecutors could ask a judge for a lesser sentence depending on his level of cooperation with the investigation.

    The judge did not set a sentencing date. Bertino’s next hearing is scheduled for February 2023. Bertino will not be held in jail. He will not be able to have a passport or firearms, and will not be able to return to Washington unless it is to meet with prosecutors or participate in court proceedings.

    Bertino was listed in previous indictments as “PERSON-1,” but has not publicly faced charges. He is not alleged to have been in Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021. Prosecutors have previously outlined his involvement in Proud Boys leadership and extensive planning meetings and chats.

    Even though he was not present for the Capitol riot, Bertino could provide crucial testimony for prosecutors in the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial, which is set to begin in December of this year.

    According to the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy indictment, Bertino was in a number of encrypted group chats meant to plan for January 6. The groups, including the main “Boots on Ground” channel, included all of the Proud Boys sedition defendants – Tarrio, Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, and Zachary Rehl. They have pleaded not guilty.

    Bertino posted instructions for January 6 in the chats, prosecutors say, telling Proud Boys where to meet and to not wear the usual Proud Boys colors, though he ultimately did not travel to Washington because he was recovering from a stab injury from a previous DC rally.

    After 1 p.m. on January 6, Bertino, along with another member of the group posted messages in a Proud Boys chat to “Push inside! Find some eggs and rotten tomatoes!” and asking if “they deploy the mace yet,” according to the indictment.

    Bertino posted publicly to rioters, writing “DO NOT GO HOME. WE ARE ON THE CUSP OF SAVING THE CONSTITUTION.”

    Bertino also texted Tarrio on the evening of January 6, saying: “Brother. You know we made this happen” and “I’m so proud of my country today,” according to the indictment. “I know,” Tarrio allegedly replied.

    According to prosecutors, Bertino later replied “1776 motherf*****s” to Tarrio, adding later “Dude. Did we just influence history?”

    “They HAVE to certify today!” Bertino allegedly texted. “Or it’s invalid.”

    The same day Tarrio was arrested in March 2022, investigators executed a search warrant at Bertino’s house, according to court documents. Agents found six firearms, including an AR-15 rifle with a scope, and more than 3,000 rounds of ammunition, prosecutors said. Bertino had previously been convicted of a felony and was not allowed to own a firearm.

    Bertino previously testified to the House select committee investigating January 6, and a clip of his testimony was played at a public hearing in June.

    The committee used a clip from Bertino’s deposition to show how former President Donald Trump’s call for the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” during a 2020 presidential debate when asked if he was willing to condemn White supremacists and militia groups in turn energized individuals from the Proud Boys and other extremist groups.

    When asked if the membership to the Proud Boys increased after Trump’s “stand back and stand by” comment, Bertino testified, “Exponentially. I’d say tripled probably. With a potential for a lot more probably.”

    He also may be eligible for witness protection, according to his plea agreement.

    CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated the year of Enrique Tarrio’s arrest and the search of Jeremy Bertino’s residence. The events took place in March 2022. This story has also been updated with additional details.

    Jan. 6: Proud Boys, Oath Keepers

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • SpaceX, NASA to launch 3 astronauts and 1 cosmonaut to the ISS. Here’s everything you need to know | CNN

    SpaceX, NASA to launch 3 astronauts and 1 cosmonaut to the ISS. Here’s everything you need to know | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Sign up for CNN’s Wonder Theory science newsletter. Explore the universe with news on fascinating discoveries, scientific advancements and more.



    CNN
     — 

    SpaceX and NASA are set to launch a crew of astronauts who hail from all over the world on a trip to the International Space Station.

    The mission, which will include some historic firsts, is moving forward even as rising geopolitical tensions brew on the ground.

    The four crew members — astronauts Nicole Mann and Josh Cassada of NASA, astronaut Koichi Wakata of JAXA, or Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, and cosmonaut Anna Kikina of Roscosmos — are on track to launch aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft at 12 p.m. ET Wednesday from Kennedy Space Center in Florida. If bad weather or other issues interfere, the teams could try again Thursday at 11:38 a.m. ET.

    A live broadcast on NASA’s website kicked off just after 8:30 a.m. ET Wednesday. NASA will also stream a post-event briefing, tentatively scheduled for 1:30 p.m. ET, to discuss the launch.

    Dubbed Crew-5, the mission is the sixth astronaut flight launched as a joint endeavor between NASA and SpaceX, a privately held aerospace company, to the space station.

    The upcoming spaceflight marks a historic moment, as Mann will not only become the first Native American woman ever to travel to space. She’ll also serve as mission commander, making her the first woman ever to take on such a role for a SpaceX mission.

    What’s more, Kikina will be the first Russian to join a SpaceX mission as part of a ride-sharing deal NASA and Russia’s space agency, Roscosmos, inked in July. Her participation in the flight is the latest clear signal that, despite mounting tensions over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the decades-long US-Russia partnership in space will persist — at least for now.

    After the anticipated launch on Wednesday, the Crew Dragon spacecraft will separate from the SpaceX rocket that boosts it to orbit and begin a slow, precise trek to the ISS, which orbits about 200 miles (322 kilometers) above the Earth’s surface. The spacecraft is aiming to dock with the space station on Thursday around 5 p.m. ET.

    Launching NASA astronauts to the space station aboard a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft is nothing new. The space agency collaborated with SpaceX for years to transition the task of shuttling people to and from the space station after NASA retired its Space Shuttle Program in 2011.

    With the return of astronaut launches from US soil, SpaceX has offered a stage for several historic firsts. The Crew-4 Dragon mission, for example, carried NASA astronaut Jessica Watkins, the first Black woman ever to join the ISS crew.

    On this flight, Mann, a registered member of the Wailacki tribe of the Round Valley Reservation, will become the first Native American woman ever to travel to orbit.

    “I am very proud to represent Native Americans and my heritage,” Mann said. “I think it’s important to celebrate our diversity and also realize how important it is when we collaborate and unite, the incredible accomplishments that we can have.”

    In her role as commander, Mann will be responsible for ensuring the spacecraft is on track from the time it launches until it docks with the ISS and again when it returns home with the four Crew-5 astronauts next year. Never before has a woman taken on the commander role on a SpaceX mission, though a couple of women served in that position during the Space Shuttle Program.

    Kikina, the Roscosmos cosmonaut, will become the first Russian ever to launch on a SpaceX vehicle at a time when US-Russian relations are hitting near fever pitch over the Ukraine war.

    But officials at NASA have said repeatedly that joint operations with Russia on the ISS, where the two countries are the primary operators, will remain isolated from the fray. Kikina’s flight comes just weeks after NASA’s Dr. Frank Rubio launched to the ISS aboard a Roscosmos Soyuz capsule.

    “I really love my crewmates,” Kikina told reporters after she arrived at the Florida launch site on Saturday. “I really feel good, comfortable. … We will do our job the best way: happy.”

    READ MORE: Meet the space trailblazers of color who empowered others to dream

    Mann and her fellow NASA astronaut Josh Cassada, who grew up in White Bear Lake, Minnesota, both joined NASA in 2013. Cassada has described Mann as one of his “closest friends on the planet.”

    As with Mann, this mission will be the first trip to space for Cassada and Kikina.

    For veteran astronaut Wakata, who has previously flown on both NASA’s space shuttle and Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft, this trip marks his fifth spaceflight mission.

    “I still remember when I first flew and saw our beautiful home planet,” he recalled during an August press conference. “It was so wonderful, such a beautiful planet, then I felt very lucky to be able to call this planet our home.”

    After reaching the ISS, the crew will join the seven astronauts already aboard the ISS — including four NASA astronauts, a European Space Agency astronaut and two Russian cosmonauts.

    There will be a handover period, where the current ISS crew will help the newly arrived astronauts settle in before a separate Crew Dragon spacecraft brings the four astronauts who were part of SpaceX’s Crew-4 mission back home.

    Then the Crew-5 astronauts will set to work conducting spacewalks, during which astronauts exit the ISS, to maintain the space station’s exterior, as well as performing more than 200 science experiments.

    “Experiments will include studies on printing human organs in space, understanding fuel systems operating on the Moon, and better understanding heart disease,” according to NASA.

    Crew-5 is slated to return from space in about five months.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Teenage grandmaster ‘likely cheated’ in dozens of matches, top chess website claims | CNN

    Teenage grandmaster ‘likely cheated’ in dozens of matches, top chess website claims | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Teenage chess grandmaster Hans Niemann “likely cheated” in more than 100 online matches, including ones with prize money involved, according to an investigation by one of the sport’s most popular websites.

    The 72-page report by Chess.com was released on Tuesday, a month after controversy erupted at a top tournament when the world chess champion accused the 19-year-old American of cheating.

    According to the report, first referenced by the Wall Street Journal, Niemann privately confessed to cheating to the website’s chief chess officer in 2020, which led to him being temporarily banned from the platform.

    The report said Chess.com closed Niemann’s account in September given his previous acknowledgments of cheating, suspicions about his recent play and concerns about the steep, inconsistent rise in his rank.

    “While we don’t doubt that Hans is a talented player, we note that his results are statistically extraordinary,” the report said.

    Niemann has previously admitted publicly to cheating in online matches at the ages of 12 and 16 but the investigation alleged he had cheated more recently.

    Niemann has not responded to CNN’s request for comment.

    Chess.com has millions of users and hosts more than 10 million chess games a day, according to its owners. To detect suspected cheating, the website uses software that flags suspicious moves by comparing a player’s moves to those suggested by a chess engine. Fewer than 0.14% of players ever cheat on the site, according to the report.

    The controversy began last month, when world chess champion Magnus Carlsen accused Niemann of cheating at the $350,000 Sinquefield Cup in St. Louis, Missouri.

    “I believe that Niemann has cheated more – and more recently – than he has publicly admitted,” the 31-year-old Norwegian said in a statement posted to Twitter.

    “His over the board progress has been unusual, and throughout our game in the Sinquefield Cup I had the impression that he wasn’t tense or even fully concentrating on the game in critical positions, while outplaying me as black in a way I think only a handful of players can do. This game contributed to changing my perspective.”

    Carlsen pulled out of the tournament after losing to Niemann. Chess’ global governing body, FIDE, announced last week that it is investigating Carlsen’s allegations.

    Over the board chess is played face to face, rather than online. Carlsen did not provide details about how Niemann may have cheated.

    In an interview with the St. Louis Chess Club last month, Niemann said he had never cheated in over the board games.

    “I cheated on random games on Chess.com. I was confronted. I confessed. And this is the single biggest mistake of my life,” he said. ” And I am completely ashamed. I am telling the world because I don’t want misrepresentations and I don’t want rumours. I have never cheated in an over the board game. And other than when I was 12 years old I have never cheated in a tournament with prize money.”

    According to the Chess.com report, cheating in an over the board setting could involve “various methods such as: hand signals from a nearby coach or accessing a phone in the bathroom, a hidden device in a shoe, or a wire or buzzer taped to the body.”

    The report said Chess.com had not typically investigated cheating in over the board games, but it believed Niemann’s performances in some live games “merit further investigation based on the data.”

    “In our view, there is no direct evidence that proves Hans cheated at the September 4, 2022 game with Magnus, or proves that he has cheated in other OTB games in the past,” the report said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Secret recording played at trial shows Oath Keepers allegedly planning for violence in DC | CNN Politics

    Secret recording played at trial shows Oath Keepers allegedly planning for violence in DC | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Federal prosecutors played audio recording in court on Tuesday of an alleged November 2020 Oath Keepers planning meeting that discussed plans to bring weapons to Washington, DC, and prepare to “fight” on behalf of former President Donald Trump.

    The meeting lasted about two hours and was secretly recorded by an attendee, FBI agent Michael Palian told jurors during the second day of the trial of far-right militia Oath Keepers leaders on seditious conspiracy charges.

    The attendee, Palian said, sent a tip to the FBI later that month but was not contacted by agents. They then resubmitted the tip in March 2021, was interviewed with agents and gave them the recording.

    The recording, which is primarily of Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes, is the first major piece of evidence that prosecutors have used to establish a plan by the far-right group to allegedly descend on Washington and oppose the transfer of power.

    “We’re not getting out of this without a fight. There’s going to be a fight,” Rhodes said in the recording played in court. “But let’s just do it smart and let’s do it while President Trump is still commander in chief,” Rhodes said.

    Rhodes repeatedly said that people should put pressure on Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act, and that the Oath Keepers would be “awaiting the president’s orders.”

    “If the fight comes, let the fight come. Let Antifa go – if they go kinetic on us then we’ll go kinetic back on them. I’m willing to sacrifice myself for that,” Rhodes said in the recording. “If things go kinetic, good. If they blow bombs up and shoot us, great. Because that brings the President reason and rationale” to invoke the Insurrection Act.

    He continued, “so our mission going to be to go into DC, but I do want some Oath Keepers to stay on the outside and to stay fully armed and prepared to go in if they have to. So, if the s**t kicks off, then you rock and roll.”

    Two other defendants, Jessica Watkins and Kelly Meggs, are also on the recording discussing what weapons are legal to bring into the district, prosecutors said.

    “Pepper spray is legal. Tasers are legal. And stun guns are legal. And it doesn’t hurt to have a lead pipe with a flag on it,” Meggs said on the recording.

    After the meeting, Meggs and Watkins both told their state Oath Keeper delegations that they were going to go to Washington. Watkins wrote to Ohio members, “Anybody not on the call tonight. We have been issued a call to action for DC. This is the moment we signed up for.”

    All five defendants have pleaded not guilty to the seditious conspiracy charge they face, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years behind bars.

    Prosecutors submit secret recording of Oath Keepers founder during trial

    CNN national security analyst Carrie Cordero said Congress should look at how the FBI handled the initial tip about the Oath Keepers tape.

    That the Oath Keepers recording went uninvestigated by the FBI until after January 6 is an “additional piece of information that congressional investigators in particular on the January 6th committee and the other Homeland Security committees should be looking at to determine whether or not the FBI and other law enforcement organizations were doing enough on the prevention side,” Cordero told CNN’s Ana Cabrera on Tuesday.

    Cordero said that “lots of information that has come to light over the course of the last year that indicates there were all sorts of other indications that there would be violence on January 6th raises the question of why there wasn’t better warning in advance to those who were responsible for protecting the physical security of the Capitol.”

    During cross examination, attorneys for the defendants questioned Palian on the context of the recording.

    “Isn’t it true that all of the talk that Mr. Rhodes and others are doing … is related to going to DC on November 14th?” Rhodes’ attorney Phillip Linder asked Palian, referencing the so-called Million MAGA March that took place in Washington in November 2020.

    “I’d agree with that,” Palian responded. Prosecutors have previously said that some of the defendants, including Rhodes, Watkins and Thomas Caldwell attended the November march without incident.

    Palian also testified that the recording did not mention the date January 6.

    David Fischer, an attorney for Caldwell, asked Palian whether Caldwell explicitly stated that he was planning to attack the Capitol. Palian testified that “We have not come across a person that has told us that.”

    Fischer pushed Palian on whether Caldwell was actually a member of the Oath Keepers, but Palian testified that he was “part of the group” even if he didn’t formally pay dues.

    “It costs zero dollars to join a gang,” Palian testified.

    This headline and story have been updated with additional developments from Tuesday’s court proceedings.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The 10 Senate seats most likely to flip in 2022 | CNN Politics

    The 10 Senate seats most likely to flip in 2022 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The race for the Senate is in the eye of the beholder less than six weeks from Election Day, with ads about abortion, crime and inflation dominating the airwaves in key states as campaigns test the theory of the 2022 election.

    The cycle started out as a referendum on President Joe Biden – an easy target for Republicans, who need a net gain of just one seat to flip the evenly divided chamber. Then the US Supreme Court’s late June decision overturning Roe v. Wade gave Democrats the opportunity to paint a contrast as Republicans struggled to explain their support for an abortion ruling that the majority of the country opposes. Former President Donald Trump’s omnipresence in the headlines gave Democrats another foil.

    But the optimism some Democrats felt toward the end of the summer, on the heels of Biden’s legislative wins and the galvanizing high court decision, has been tempered slightly by the much anticipated tightening of some key races as political advertising ramps up on TV and voters tune in after Labor Day.

    Republicans, who have midterm history on their side as the party out of the White House, have hammered Biden and Democrats for supporting policies they argue exacerbate inflation. Biden’s approval rating stands at 41% with 54% disapproving in the latest CNN Poll of Polls, which tracks the average of recent surveys. And with some prices inching back up after a brief hiatus, the economy and inflation – which Americans across the country identify as their top concern in multiple polls – are likely to play a crucial role in deciding voters’ preferences.

    But there’s been a steady increase in ads about crime too as the GOP returns to a familiar criticism, depicting Democrats as weak on public safety. Cops have been ubiquitous in TV ads this cycle – candidates from both sides of the aisle have found law enforcement officers to testify on camera to their pro-police credentials. Democratic ads also feature women talking about the threat of a national abortion ban should the Senate fall into GOP hands, while Republicans have spent comparatively less trying to portray Democrats as the extremists on the topic.

    While the issue sets have fluctuated, the Senate map hasn’t changed. Republicans’ top pickup opportunities have always been Nevada, Georgia, Arizona and New Hampshire – all states that Biden carried in 2020. In two of those states, however, the GOP has significant problems, although the states themselves keep the races competitive. Arizona nominee Blake Masters is now without the support of the party’s major super PAC, which thinks its money can be better spent elsewhere, including in New Hampshire, where retired Army Brig. Gen. Don Bolduc is far from the nominee the national GOP had wanted. But this is the time of year when poor fundraising can really become evident since TV ad rates favor candidates and a super PAC gets much less bang for its buck.

    The race for Senate control may come down to three states: Georgia, Nevada and Pennsylvania, all of which are rated as “Toss-up” races by Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales. As Republicans look to flip the Senate, which Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has called a “50-50 proposition,” they’re trying to pick up the first two and hold on to the latter.

    Senate Democrats’ path to holding their majority lies with defending their incumbents. Picking off a GOP-held seat like Pennsylvania – still the most likely to flip in CNN’s ranking – would help mitigate any losses. Wisconsin, where GOP Sen. Ron Johnson is vying for a third term, looks like Democrats’ next best pickup opportunity, but that race drops in the rankings this month as Republican attacks take a toll on the Democratic nominee in the polls.

    These rankings are based on CNN’s reporting, fundraising and advertising data, and polling, as well as historical data about how states and candidates have performed. It will be updated one more time before Election Day.

    Incumbent: Republican Pat Toomey (retiring)

    Sarah Silbiger/Pool/Getty Images

    The most consistent thing about CNN’s rankings, dating back to 2021, has been Pennsylvania’s spot in first place. But the race to replace retiring GOP Sen. Pat Toomey has tightened since the primaries in May, when Republican Mehmet Oz emerged badly bruised from a nasty intraparty contest. In a CNN Poll of Polls average of recent surveys in the state, Democrat John Fetterman, the state lieutenant governor, had the support of 50% of likely voters to Oz’s 45%. (The Poll of Polls is an average of the four most recent nonpartisan surveys of likely voters that meet CNN’s standards.) Fetterman is still overperforming Biden, who narrowly carried Pennsylvania in 2020. Fetterman’s favorability ratings are also consistently higher than Oz’s.

    One potential trouble spot for the Democrat: More voters in a late September Franklin and Marshall College Poll viewed Oz has having policies that would improve voters’ economic circumstances, with the economy and inflation remaining the top concern for voters across a range of surveys. But nearly five months after the primary, the celebrity surgeon still seems to have residual issues with his base. A higher percentage of Democrats were backing Fetterman than Republicans were backing Oz in a recent Fox News survey, for example, with much of that attributable to lower support from GOP women than men. Fetterman supporters were also much more enthusiastic about their candidate than Oz supporters.

    Republicans have been hammering Fetterman on crime, specifically his tenure on the state Board of Pardons: An ad from the Senate Leadership Fund features a Bucks County sheriff saying, “Protect your family. Don’t vote Fetterman.” But the lieutenant governor is also using sheriffs on camera to defend his record. And with suburban voters being a crucial demographic, Democratic advertising is also leaning into abortion, like this Senate Majority PAC ad that features a female doctor as narrator and plays Oz’s comments from during the primary about abortion being “murder.” Oz’s campaign has said that he supports exceptions for “the life of the mother, rape and incest” and that “he’d want to make sure that the federal government is not involved in interfering with the state’s decisions on the topic.”

    Incumbent: Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto

    02 democrat immigration legislation 0717

    CNN

    Republicans have four main pickup opportunities – and right now, Democratic Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto’s seat looks like one of their best shots. Biden carried Nevada by a slightly larger margin than two of those other GOP-targeted states, but the Silver State’s large transient population adds a degree of uncertainty to this contest.

    Republicans have tried to tie the first-term senator to Washington spending and inflation, which may be particularly resonant in a place where average gas prices are now back up to over $5 a gallon. Democrats are zeroing in on abortion rights and raising the threat that a GOP-controlled Senate could pass a national abortion ban. Former state Attorney General Adam Laxalt – the rare GOP nominee to have united McConnell and Trump early on – called the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling a “joke” before the Supreme Court overturned the decision in June. Democrats have been all too happy to use that comment against him, but Laxalt has tried to get around those attacks by saying he does not support a national ban and pointing out that the right to an abortion is settled law in Nevada.

    Incumbent: Democrat Raphael Warnock

    Sen Raphael Warnock 10 senate seats

    Megan Varner/Getty Images

    The closer we get to Election Day, the more we need to talk about the Georgia Senate race going over the wire. If neither candidate receives a majority of the vote in November, the contest will go to a December runoff. There was no clear leader in a recent Marist poll that had Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock, who’s running for a full six-year term, and Republican challenger Herschel Walker both under 50% among those who say they definitely plan to vote.

    Warnock’s edge from earlier this cycle has narrowed, which bumps this seat up one spot on the rankings. The good news for Warnock is that he’s still overperforming Biden’s approval numbers in a state that the President flipped in 2020 by less than 12,000 votes. And so far, he seems to be keeping the Senate race closer than the gubernatorial contest, for which several polls have shown GOP Gov. Brian Kemp ahead. Warnock’s trying to project a bipartisan image that he thinks will help him hold on in what had until recently been a reliably red state. Standing waist-deep in peanuts in one recent ad, he touts his work with Alabama GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville to “eliminate the regulations,” never mentioning his own party. But Republicans have continued to try to tie the senator to his party – specifically for voting for measures in Washington that they claim have exacerbated inflation.

    Democrats are hoping that enough Georgians won’t see voting for Walker as an option – even if they do back Kemp. Democrats have amped up their attacks on domestic violence allegations against the former football star and unflattering headlines about his business record. And all eyes will be on the mid-October debate to see how Walker, who has a history of making controversial and illogical comments, handles himself onstage against the more polished incumbent.

    Incumbent: Republican Ron Johnson

    Sen Ron Johnson 10 senate seats

    Leigh VogelPool/Getty Images

    Sen. Ron Johnson is the only Republican running for reelection in a state Biden won in 2020 – in fact, he broke his own term limits pledge to run a third time, saying he believed America was “in peril.” And although Johnson has had low approval numbers for much of the cycle, Democrats have underestimated him before. This contest moves down one spot on the ranking as Johnson’s race against Democratic Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes has tightened, putting the senator in a better position.

    Barnes skated through the August primary after his biggest opponents dropped out of the race, but as the nominee, he’s faced an onslaught of attacks, especially on crime, using against him his past words about ending cash bail and redirecting some funding from police budgets to social services. Barnes has attempted to answer those attacks in his ads, like this one featuring a retired police sergeant who says he knows “Mandela doesn’t want to defund the police.”

    A Marquette University Law School poll from early September showed no clear leader, with Johnson at 49% and Barnes at 48% among likely voters, which is a tightening from the 7-point edge Barnes enjoyed in the same poll’s August survey. Notably, independents were breaking slightly for Johnson after significantly favoring Barnes in the August survey. The effect of the GOP’s anti-Barnes advertising can likely be seen in the increasing percentage of registered voters in a late September Fox News survey who view the Democrat as “too extreme,” putting him on parity with Johnson on that question. Johnson supporters are also much more enthusiastic about their candidate.

    Incumbent: Democrat Mark Kelly

    Mark Kelly AZ 1103

    Courtney Pedroza/Getty Images

    Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, who’s running for a full six-year term after winning a 2020 special election, is still one of the most vulnerable Senate incumbents in a state that has only recently grown competitive on the federal level. But Republican nominee Blake Masters is nowhere close to rivaling Kelly in fundraising, and major GOP outside firepower is now gone. After canceling its September TV reservations in Arizona to redirect money to Ohio, the Senate Leadership Fund has cut its October spending too.

    Other conservative groups are spending for Masters but still have work to do to hurt Kelly, a well-funded incumbent with a strong personal brand. Kelly led Masters 51% to 41% among registered voters in a September Marist poll, although that gap narrowed among those who said they definitely plan to vote. A Fox survey from a little later in the month similarly showed Kelly with a 5-point edge among those certain to vote, just within the margin of error.

    Masters has attempted to moderate his abortion position since winning his August primary, buoyed by a Trump endorsement, but Kelly has continued to attack him on the issue. And a recent court decision allowing the enforcement of a 1901 state ban on nearly all abortions has given Democrats extra fodder to paint Republicans as a threat to women’s reproductive rights.

    Incumbent: Republican Richard Burr (retiring)

    Sen Richard Burr 10 senate seats

    Demetrius Freeman/Pool/Getty Images

    North Carolina slides up one spot on the rankings, trading places with New Hampshire. The open-seat race to replace retiring GOP Sen. Richard Burr hasn’t generated as much national buzz as other states given that Democrats haven’t won a Senate seat in the state since 2008.

    But it has remained a tight contest with Democrat Cheri Beasley, who is bidding to become the state’s first Black senator, facing off against GOP Rep. Ted Budd, for whom Trump recently campaigned. Beasley lost reelection as state Supreme Court chief justice by only about 400 votes in 2020 when Trump narrowly carried the Tar Heel state. But Democrats hope that she’ll be able to boost turnout among rural Black voters who might not otherwise vote during a midterm election and that more moderate Republicans and independents will see Budd as too extreme. One of Beasley’s recent spots features a series of mostly White, gray-haired retired judges in suits endorsing her as “someone different” while attacking Budd as being a typical politician out for himself.

    Budd is leaning into current inflation woes, specifically going after Biden in some ads that feature half-empty shopping carts, without even mentioning Beasley. Senate Leadership Fund is doing the work of trying to tie the Democrat to Washington – one recent spot almost makes her look like the incumbent in the race, superimposing her photo over an image of the US Capitol and displaying her face next to Biden’s. Both SLF and Budd are also targeting Beasley over her support for Democrats’ recently enacted health care, tax and climate bill. “Liberal politician Cheri Beasley is coming for you – and your wallet,” the narrator from one SLF ad intones, before later adding, “Beasley’s gonna knock on your door with an army of new IRS agents.” (The new law increases funding for the IRS, including for audits. But Democrats and the Trump-appointed IRS commissioner have said the intention is to go after wealthy tax cheats, not the middle class.)

    Incumbent: Democrat Maggie Hassan

    Sen Maggie Hassan 10 senate seats

    Erin Scott/Getty Images

    A lot has been made of GOP candidate quality this cycle. But there are few states where the difference between the nominee Republicans have and the one they’d hoped to have has altered these rankings quite as much as New Hampshire.

    Retired Army Brig. Gen. Don Bolduc, who lost a 2020 GOP bid for the state’s other Senate seat, won last month’s Republican primary to take on first-term Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan. The problem for him, though, is that he doesn’t have much money to wage that fight. Bolduc had raised a total of $579,000 through August 24 compared with Hassan’s $31.4 million. Senate Leadership Fund is on air in New Hampshire to boost the GOP nominee – attacking Hassan for voting with Biden and her support of her party’s health care, tax and climate package. But because super PACs get much less favorable TV advertising rates than candidates, those millions won’t go anywhere near as far as Hassan’s dollars will.

    A year ago, Republicans were still optimistic that Gov. Chris Sununu would run for Senate, giving them a popular abortion rights-supporting nominee in a state that’s trended blue in recent federal elections. Bolduc told WMUR after his primary win that he’d vote against a national abortion ban. But ads from Hassan and Senate Majority PAC have seized on his suggestion in the same interview that the senator should “get over” the abortion issue. Republicans recognize that abortion is a salient factor in a state Biden carried by 7 points, but they also argue that the election – as Bolduc said to WMUR – will be about the economy and that Hassan is an unpopular and out-of-touch incumbent.

    Hassan led Bolduc 49% to 41% among likely voters in a Granite State Poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center. The incumbent has consolidated Democratic support, but only 83% of Republicans said they were with Bolduc, the survey found. Still, some of those Republicans, like those who said they were undecided, could come home to the GOP nominee as the general election gets closer, which means Bolduc has room to grow. He’ll need more than just Republicans to break his way, however, which is one reason he quickly pivoted on the key issue of whether the 2020 election was stolen days after he won the primary.

    Incumbent: Republican Rob Portman (retiring)

    Sen Rob Portman 10 senate seats

    TING SHEN/AFP/POOL/Getty Images

    Ohio – a state that twice voted for Trump by 8 points – isn’t supposed to be on this list at No. 8, above Florida, which backed the former President by much narrower margins. But it’s at No. 8 for the second month in a row. Republican nominee J.D. Vance’s poor fundraising has forced Senate Leadership Fund to redirect millions from other races to Ohio to shore him up and attack Rep. Tim Ryan, the Democratic nominee who had the airwaves to himself all summer. The 10-term congressman has been working to distance himself from his party in most of his ads, frequently mentioning that he “voted with Trump on trade” and criticizing the “defund the police” movement. Vance is finally on the air, trying to poke some holes in Ryan’s image.

    But polling still shows a tight race with no clear leader. Ryan had an edge with independents in a recent Siena College/Spectrum News poll, which also showed that Vance – Trump’s pick for the nomination – has more work to do to consolidate GOP support after an ugly May primary. Assuming he makes up that support and late undecided voters break his way, Vance will likely hold the advantage in the end given the Buckeye State’s solidifying red lean.

    Incumbent: Republican Marco Rubio

    Sen Marco Rubio 10 senate seats

    DREW ANGERER/AFP/POOL/Getty Images

    Democrats face an uphill battle against GOP Sen. Marco Rubio in an increasingly red-trending state, which Trump carried by about 3 points in 2020 – nearly tripling his margin from four years earlier.

    Democratic Rep. Val Demings, who easily won the party’s nomination in August, is a strong candidate who has even outraised the GOP incumbent, but not by enough to seriously jeopardize his advantage. She’s leaning into her background as the former Orlando police chief – it features prominently in her advertising, in which she repeatedly rejects the idea of defunding the police. Still, Rubio has tried to tie her to the “radical left” in Washington to undercut her own law enforcement background.

    Incumbent: Democrat Michael Bennet

    Sen Michael Bennett 10 senate seats

    DEMETRIUS FREEMAN/AFP/POOL/Getty Images

    Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet is no stranger to tough races. In 2016, he only won reelection by 6 points against an underfunded GOP challenger whom the national party had abandoned. Given GOP fundraising challenges in some of their top races, the party hasn’t had the resources to seriously invest in the Centennial State this year.

    But in his bid for a third full term, Bennet is up against a stronger challenger in businessman Joe O’Dea, who told CNN he disagreed with the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. His wife and daughter star in his ads as he tries to cut a more moderate profile and vows not to vote the party line in Washington.

    Bennet, however, is attacking O’Dea for voting for a failed 2020 state ballot measure to ban abortion after 22 weeks of pregnancy and arguing that whatever O’Dea says about supporting abortion rights, he’d give McConnell “the majority he needs” to pass a national abortion ban.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Whoopi Goldberg says she didn’t wear a fat suit for ‘Till,’ correcting a reviewer | CNN

    Whoopi Goldberg says she didn’t wear a fat suit for ‘Till,’ correcting a reviewer | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Whoopi Goldberg is correcting the record after a review of her new film, “Till,” purported that Goldberg was wearing a fat suit during filming.

    In a mixed review, a Daily Beast reporter mentions Goldberg only once, writing that Goldberg was “in a distracting fat suit” for her role as Emmett Till’s grandmother. The review has since been edited to omit that line and features an editor’s note.

    “I don’t really care how you felt about the movie, but you should know that was not a fat suit,” Goldberg said on Monday’s episode of “The View.” “That was me. That was steroids.”

    Goldberg was referring to the health challenges she experienced last year with sciatica, a type of nerve pain, for which she was hospitalized and started using a walker. She said on “The View” that at the time, she was taking steroids, which can be used to treat sciatica symptoms.

    “It’s OK to not be a fan of the movie, but you want to leave people’s looks out,” Goldberg said.

    It’s not uncommon for a popular and awarded actress in a prestigious film to wear a fat suit, though. Plenty of stars have donned fat suits, sometimes in demeaning ways. From Gwyneth Paltrow as an obese woman in 2001’s “Shallow Hal” to Sarah Paulson as Linda Tripp in last year’s “American Crime Story: Impeachment,” the actors inside the fat suits are often not fat. Men, too, have worn fat suits, largely in comedic roles, including John Travolta in “Hairspray,” Ryan Reynolds in “Just Friends” and Eddie Murphy in “Norbit.”

    This year alone has seen a surge of famous actors wearing fat suits: Renée Zellweger in “The Thing About Pam” and Tom Hanks in “Elvis” are two examples of Oscar winners who have worn fat suits for roles. Emma Thompson wears one in the musical adaptation of “Matilda” due out later this year, and in the awards season vehicle “The Whale,” Brendan Fraser plays an obese man at the end of his life under several pounds of prostheses.

    Viewers often criticize the practice, particularly when a filmmaker chooses not to cast an actor whose body type already matches that of the character. In a recent interview with the New York Times, retired professor and media researcher J. Kevin Thompson said that uses of fat suits in media – particularly when the characters portrayed by actors in fat suits are made fun of or portrayed in an unflattering light – can be psychologically damaging to viewers and that women disproportionately incur most of that damage.

    “These roles were most often associated with ‘humor,’ which, of course, might not be so funny if one were the butt of the joke,” Thompson told the Times.

    For its part, “Till” ostensibly does not feature actors in fat suits. The film, which focuses on Mamie Till’s activism and her contributions to the civil rights movement after the murder of her son, Emmett, will be released on October 14.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Baseball great Alex Rodriguez reflects on steroid abuse, his past with J-Lo | CNN

    Baseball great Alex Rodriguez reflects on steroid abuse, his past with J-Lo | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Watch “Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?” on CNN TV Sundays at 7pm ET. New episodes with full-length interviews are availble on HBO Max each Friday.



    CNN
     — 

    Baseball great Alex Rodriguez is opening up about mistakes in his personal and professional life, and how they are shaping his growing business empire.

    In an interview on CNN and HBO Max’s “Who’s Talking to Chris Wallace?”, Rodriguez said the performance-enhancing drug scandal that marred his legacy was “the most embarrassing moment of my career.”

    “The hardest thing I’ve ever had to do in my life was face my daughters Natasha and Ella and tell them this is the mistake that Daddy made,” he told host Chris Wallace

    Rodriguez said that because of the stringent culture of professional baseball, he was denied a happy ending to his otherwise legendary baseball career.

    “I understood my mistake, and I’ve taken full responsibility for it,” he added.

    The 14-time Major League Baseball all-star said he was “bullish” about the future of baseball despite warning signs that viewers are less motivated to watch games.

    Rodriguez, who just last week was passed by Albert Pujols on the MLB’s home run list, says if he were MLB commissioner he would “open the floodgates,” and give fans more access to America’s pastime.

    “We have to be proactive, meaning I would put cameras on guys,” he told Wallace. “The players that are driving to the park, I want to see them at home.”

    Rodriguez wanted coverage to expand so that fans have insight into the clubhouses, batting cages and bullpens.

    The World Series winner also advocated for Major League Baseball to plant its flag on America’s Independence Day, much like the National Football League does with Thanksgiving.

    “If you look at July 4, it’s a wide-open day. There’s no football, there’s no basketball, there’s no soccer,” he said, noting that the MLB should make the Fourth of July “all about baseball.”

    “Every game, we’re going to wire (put a microphone on) these guys and we’re going to have interviews, and everybody is at home watching baseball at a barbecue with their families.”

    Another change that Rodriguez wanted to make to baseball included increasing financial literacy education for players – like teaching them about capital markets, investments and the importance of balancing a checkbook.

    “I read something where it was over 50% of athletes were going bankrupt after their playing days,” Rodriguez said. “That’s a tragedy.”

    In his post-playing career, Rodriguez has turned his own focus to business. He told Wallace his investment firm, A-Rod Corp, is a “mini-Berkshire Hathaway” – referring to the multinational conglomerate owned by billionaire Warren Buffett, who Rodriguez considers a mentor.

    A-Rod Corp is an investment firm that houses his vast real estate holdings, as well as private equity and venture capital investments.

    “If you were to put value in our enterprise, it’s probably somewhere between 1 billion and 2 billion,” Rodriguez told Chris Wallace.

    The former shortstop also discussed his break-up with pop icon Jennifer Lopez. Lopez married actor Ben Affleck in July 2022 after she and Rodriguez ended their multi-year relationship the year prior.

    “With Jennifer, look, it was a good experience. And I wish her and the children – who are smart, and beautiful and wonderful – I wish them the very best,” Rodriguez said.

    Telling CNN’s Chris Wallace that, despite his multiple high-profile relationships, he now feels that his previous relationships and the impact of his 2014 suspension from the MLB have made him “husband material” in the future.

    Wallace asks A-Rod if he thinks he’s ‘good husband material.’ See his response

    “I think I’m going to make a wonderful partner or husband and father post-suspension because of the lessons learned of my biggest mistakes.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link