ReportWire

Tag: terrorism and counter-terrorism

  • Meta says it will restore Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts | CNN Business

    Meta says it will restore Donald Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Facebook-parent Meta said on Wednesday that it will restore former President Donald Trump’s accounts on Facebook and Instagram in the coming weeks, just over two years after suspending him in the wake of the January 6 Capitol attack.

    “Our determination is that the risk [to public safety] has sufficiently receded,” Meta President of Global Affairs Nick Clegg said in a blog post. “As such, we will be reinstating Mr. Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts in the coming weeks. However, we are doing so with new guardrails in place to deter repeat offenses.”

    Trump could be suspended for as much as two years at a time for violating platform policies in the future, Clegg said.

    With his Facebook and Instagram accounts reactivated, Trump will once again gain access to huge and powerful communications and fundraising platforms just as he ramps up his third bid for the White House.

    The decision, which comes on the heels of a similar move by Twitter, could also further shift the landscape for how a long list of smaller online platforms handle Trump’s accounts.

    It was not immediately clear whether Trump will seize the opportunity to return to the Meta platforms. Trump’s reps did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    In a post on his own platform, Truth Social, Trump acknowledged Meta’s decision to reverse its suspension of his account and said “such a thing should never again happen to a sitting President, or anybody else who is not deserving of retribution.”

    Former President Trump’s team was not given advance notice of Meta’s decision, a source familiar with the matter told CNN. Many of his aides and advisers learned of the decision from media reports. Shortly before the announcement, Meta asked for a last-minute meeting with Trump’s lawyers this evening to discuss his possible reinstatement, but were not told what the final decision was. They were still in the meeting when Meta released the news, the source said.

    Twitter restored Trump’s account in November following its takeover by billionaire Elon Musk, but the former president has not yet resumed tweeting, opting instead to remain on Truth Social.

    But Trump’s campaign earlier this month sent a letter to Meta petitioning the company to unblock his Facebook account, a source familiar with the letter told CNN, making his return more likely. Although Twitter was always Trump’s preferred platform, he has a massive reach on Facebook and Instagram — 34 million followers and 23 million followers, respectively, ahead of his reinstatement. Previous Trump campaigns have lauded the effectiveness of Facebook’s targeted advertising tools and have spent millions running Facebook ads.

    Meta’s decision was quickly criticized by a number of online safety advocates and democratic lawmakers. Congressman Adam Schiff said in a tweet that restoring Trump’s “access to a social media platform to spread his lies and demagoguery is dangerous,” noting that Trump has shown “no remorse” for his actions around the January 6 attack. NAACP President Derrick Johnson called the decision “a prime example of putting profits above people’s safety.”

    But ACLU Director Anthony Romero called the decision “the right call,” joining several other groups in praising the move. He added: “The biggest social media companies are central actors when it comes to our collective ability to speak — and hear the speech of others — online. They should err on the side of allowing a wide range of political speech, even when it offends.”

    The company made the landmark decision to bar Trump from posting on Facebook and Instagram the day after the January 6 attack, in which his supporters stormed the US Capitol in a bid to overturn the 2020 election results.

    Many other platforms did the same in quick succession, but Facebook was clear that it planned to revisit the decision at a later date. After Facebook’s independent Oversight Board recommended that the company clarify what was initially an indefinite suspension, Facebook said the former president would remain restricted from the platform until at least January 7, 2023.

    Meta earlier this month was considering whether to restore Trump’s accounts with the help of a specially formed internal company working group made up of leaders from different parts of the organization, a person familiar with the deliberations told CNN. The group included representatives from the company’s public policy, communications, content policy, and safety and integrity teams, and was being led by Clegg, who previously served as UK Deputy Prime Minister.

    The company said in June 2021 that it would “look to experts to assess whether the risk to public safety has receded” in January 2023 to make a determination about the former president’s account.

    “If we determine that there is still a serious risk to public safety, we will extend the restriction for a set period of time and continue to re-evaluate until that risk has receded,” Clegg, then-vice president of global affairs at Meta, said in a statement at the time.

    Clegg said in his Wednesday post that the company believes “the public should be able to hear what their politicians are saying — the good, the bad and the ugly — so that they can make informed choices at the ballot box.” But, he said, “that does not mean there are no limits to what people can say on our platform.”

    In light of his previous violations, Trump will now face “heightened penalties for repeat offenses,” Clegg said, adding that the policy will also apply to other public figures whose accounts are reinstated following suspensions related to civil unrest.

    Clegg told Axios in an interview published Wednesday that the company does not “want — if he is to return to our services — for him to do what he did on January 6, which is to use our services to delegitimize the 2024 election, much as he sought to discredit the 2020 election.”

    “In the event that Mr. Trump posts further violating content, the content will be removed and he will be suspended for between one month and two years, depending on the severity of the violation,” Clegg said. However, the possibility of permanent removal of Trump’s accounts — which Clegg had previously indicated could be a consequence of future violations if his account were to be restored — no longer appears to be on the table.

    For content that doesn’t violate its rules but “contributes to the sort of risk that materialized on January 6th, such as content that delegitimizes an upcoming election or is related to QAnon,” Meta may limit distribution of the posts, Clegg said. The company could, for example, remove the reshare button or keep the posts visible on Trump’s page but not in users’ feeds, even for those who follow him, he said. For repeated instances, the company may restrict access to its advertising tools.

    If Trump again posts content that violates Meta’s rules but “we assess there is a public interest in knowing that Mr. Trump made the statement that outweighs any potential harm” under the company’s newsworthiness policy, Meta may similarly restrict the posts’ distribution but leave them visible on Trump’s page.

    –CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan, Kaitlan Collins and Kristen Holmes contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Closing arguments conclude in trial of accused NYC bike path terror suspect | CNN

    Closing arguments conclude in trial of accused NYC bike path terror suspect | CNN

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Closing arguments concluded Tuesday in the trial of Sayfullo Saipov, the man prosecutors say was radicalized by ISIS propaganda before he allegedly drove a rented truck down a bike path in New York, killing eight pedestrians in 2017.

    The judge is expected to charge the jury with the case Wednesday morning. He indicated the reading of the jury instructions will take several hours before deliberations begin.

    Defense attorney David Patton acknowledged in his closing argument that the defense does not dispute facts of the attack Saipov is accused of committing on Halloween in 2017.

    “It is no defense ‘I was convinced by others to do it,’ nobody forced him to do this and he’s guilty of murder and assault among many other crimes,” Patton told the jury.

    Six foreign tourists and two Americans were killed in the attack, the deadliest terrorist attack New York had seen since 9/11.

    The defense attorney disputed, however, prosecutors’ claim that Saipov was motivated to commit the attack to gain entry to ISIS.

    He argued that was not Saipov’s goal, and that the attack was spurred by religious fervor to please his God and “ascend to paradise” in his religion.

    Patton also noted ISIS does not call its members “soldiers of the Caliphate” as Saipov has referred to himself, according to trial evidence, but rather identifies its members by another term.

    The defense attorney said Saipov’s claim that an ISIS leader told him to commit the attack likely comes from a propaganda video recovered on his phone. Buying into ISIS propaganda does not suggest Saipov had any direct contact or coordination with ISIS members ahead of the attack, Patton said.

    In this courtroom sketch, Saipov listens during closing statements Tuesday.

    The people communicating with Saipov in “The House of the Caliphate” messaging group could have been anywhere, according to the defense attorney, and were not necessarily ISIS members in Syria or other territories occupied by the terrorist organization.

    Saipov faces eight capital counts of murder in aid of racketeering activity that could result in the death penalty if he’s convicted. The jury must determine in part whether the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that gaining entrance to ISIS was a substantial motivating factor for Saipov’s attack.

    “I just hope you will see why it is so important for you to get that right,” Patton told the jury in closing.

    Prosecutors told the jury in the government’s rebuttal Tuesday evening that Saipov must be convicted on all counts as they stand.

    “People who ISIS relies upon to conquer territory and kill non-believers, those are its soldiers. Of course they are part of ISIS. That is common sense,” prosecutor Amanda Leigh Houle said. “An organization engaged in a worldwide war needs its soldiers and its soldiers are part of the group.”

    The trial is the first federal death penalty case heard under President Joe Biden, who previously pledged to eliminate the death penalty at the federal level.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Accused El Paso Walmart shooter intends to plead guilty to federal charges, court docs show | CNN

    Accused El Paso Walmart shooter intends to plead guilty to federal charges, court docs show | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The man accused of killing 23 people and wounding nearly two dozen others in the 2019 mass shooting at a Texas Walmart in 2019 intends to plead guilty to federal charges, according to court filings.

    Days after the US government indicated it would not seek the death penalty, attorneys for Patrick Crusius filed a motion for a rearraignment, indicating he would change his earlier plea of not guilty.

    “Defendant notifies the Court of his intention to enter a plea of guilty to the pending indictment,” the motion reads, and court records show the motion was granted.

    Crusius, who is due back in court February 8, was indicted on 90 federal charges, including hate crimes and the use of a firearm to commit murder. The shooting, which took place in El Paso on August 3, 2019, marked one of the deadliest attacks on Latinos in modern US history.

    Crusius previously pleaded not guilty to a state capital murder charge. The district attorney’s office in that case filed a notice indicating it would seek the death penalty.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Russian intelligence agents believed to have directed White supremacists to carry out bombing campaign in Spain, US officials say | CNN Politics

    Russian intelligence agents believed to have directed White supremacists to carry out bombing campaign in Spain, US officials say | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    US officials believe that Russian intelligence officers directed a Russian White supremacist group to carry out a letter-bombing campaign that rocked Madrid late last year, targeting the prime minister, the American and Ukrainian Embassies as well as the Spanish defense ministry, according to current and former US officials.

    Spanish authorities have yet to make any arrests in connection with the attacks, which wounded one Ukrainian Embassy employee, but they were widely suspected at the time to be linked to Spain’s support for Kyiv.

    Some details of how, exactly, the campaign was directed and carried out remain fuzzy, two US officials said. It’s not clear how much knowledge – if any – the Kremlin or Russian President Vladimir Putin himself had.

    Still, US officials now believe that the attack was likely a warning shot to European governments which have rallied around Ukraine since Russia’s invasion in February of last year.

    The New York Times first reported on the alleged involvement of Russian intelligence in the attacks.

    A State Department spokesperson declined to comment “on matters involving leaked intelligence or active law enforcement investigations,” and referred to the Spanish government “for information related to their ongoing investigation.”

    “We condemn all attempts by entities to harm and intimidate government officials and foreign embassies,” the spokesperson added.

    As the war rages on – and particularly if Russia’s battlefield position deteriorates – US officials expect Russia to try to look for proxy groups it can work with to drive up fear of possible terrorist attacks carried out by Russian-backed groups in Europe and the Middle East, one US official explained.

    The State Department designated the White supremacist group, the Russian Imperial Movement, as a global terror organization in 2020. The group is believed to have connections to Russian intelligence agencies and has been used as a proxy force before, current and former officials familiar with US intelligence told CNN. But those connections are murky, these people emphasized, in part because the US lacks good visibility inside RIM.

    But the possibility that an organ of the Russian government – the military intelligence agency, the GRU – appears to have been involved in the attacks is likely to drive up pressure on the Biden administration to name Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism, according to one current and one former US official. The administration has so far been loathe to take such a step, despite pressure from key congressional officials, including former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

    There are drawbacks to taking that step, one US official noted, in particular that it limits the administration’s ability to engage with Russia in areas where it might want to.

    The White supremacist group, RIM, has associates across Europe and operates military-style training centers within Russia but is not formally affiliated with the Russian government. But, one former US official said, “There’s no question that RIM operates in Russia because it’s allowed to operate in Russia.”

    The GRU, meanwhile, has carried out increasingly bold operations across Europe and beyond, including assassination attempts. It is also believed to have offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing US troops in Afghanistan, although in that instance, too, the intelligence reporting remained murky, and the Kremlin’s involvement was unclear.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US strike kills approximately 30 al-Shabaab fighters in Somalia | CNN Politics

    US strike kills approximately 30 al-Shabaab fighters in Somalia | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The United States carried out a strike in Somalia that killed approximately 30 al-Shabaab fighters, US Africa Command said in a statement Saturday.

    US forces on Friday “conducted a collective self-defense strike” in support of Somalia National Army forces who were “engaged in heavy fighting following a complex, extended, intense attack by more than 100 al-Shabaab fighters,” the statement said, referring to the terror group linked to al Qaeda.

    There were no US military present on the ground when the airstrike occurred, a US defense official said.

    The strike occurred about 260 kilometers northeast of the Somalian capital of Mogadishu, near Galcad. US Africa Command assessed that no civilians were injured or killed due to the remote location.

    The US has provided ongoing support to the Somali government since President Joe Biden approved a Pentagon request to redeploy US troops to the area in an attempt to counter the terrorist group in May 2022. The approval to send fewer than 500 troops was a reversal of former President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw all US troops from the country in 2020.

    “Somalia remains central to stability and security in all of East Africa. U.S. Africa Command’s forces will continue training, advising, and equipping partner forces to help give them the tools they need to defeat al-Shabaab, the largest and most deadly al-Qaeda network in the world,” the US military said in Saturday’s statement.

    In recent months, US forces have conducted numerous strikes in the region that have resulted in dozens of al-Shabaab casualties.

    In October, a US strike killed two al-Shabaab members about 218 kilometers north-northwest of Mogadishu. A subsequent November strike killed 17 al-Shabaab fighters approximately 285 kilometers northeast of Mogadishu. And in late December, another US strike killed six al-Shabaab militants near the city of Cadale, which is about 150 miles northeast of the capital.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US government won’t seek death penalty for accused Walmart shooter | CNN

    US government won’t seek death penalty for accused Walmart shooter | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The US government said it would not seek the death penalty in its case against Patrick Crusius, who allegedly killed 23 people and wounded close to two dozen others at a Walmart in El Paso more than three years ago.

    In the short, one-line-filing, First Assistant US Attorney Margaret Leachman did not include a reason for declining the death penalty.

    In Texas, though, the district attorney’s office filed a notice last summer that it would seek the death penalty in the state’s case against Crusius.

    The federal government indicted Crusius on 90 charges, including hate crimes and the use of a firearm to commit murder. The shooting, which took place on August 3, 2019, marked one of the deadliest attacks on Latinos in modern US history.

    According to court documents, jury selection in the federal case is set to start in January 2024.

    Back in September 2022, the US District Court for the Western District of Texas agreed to a January 17 deadline for the government to file notice on whether it would seek the death penalty.

    The Texas case, meanwhile, has been bogged down by drama involving the former district attorney, Yvonne Rosales, who resigned in November. A trial date has not been set in that case.

    Crusius has pleaded not guilty to the state capital murder charge and the federal charges.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Command your troops, damn it!’ How a series of security failures opened a path to insurrection in Brazil | CNN

    ‘Command your troops, damn it!’ How a series of security failures opened a path to insurrection in Brazil | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A sea of people, draped in the yellow and green of the Brazilian flag, surge onto the roof of the country’s modernist congressional building in the capital Brasilia, a video shared on social media shows.

    In the foreground, officers from the military police of Brazil’s Federal District, which includes Brasilia, can be seen standing, chatting or filming the crowds in the distance.

    Their calm belies the chaos unfolding on January 8. For around four hours, thousands of far-right supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro stormed all three branches of Brazil’s government – Congress, the Supreme Court, and presidential palace – overwhelming security forces and calling for the leftist incumbent Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to be ousted.

    The violence has shocked the country, with many wanting answers as to how so many people managed to enter some of the most highly securitized buildings in the country, with practically no resistance. Questions are mounting as to whether members of the security forces tasked with protecting the area and their leaders were just overstretched, incompetent or even actively assisted the protesters.

    Top Brazilian officials say that pre-agreed security plans were not carried out on the day.

    CNN has analyzed a series of videos and livestreams posted on social media to explore the security failures that allowed an insurrection to take place with such extraordinary ease and found that some officers appeared friendly to the rioters, while many others seem woefully underprepared for the angry mob. CNN has not identified and spoken to the officers in the videos.

    Videos show some police officers standing and watching the protestors as they stormed Congress, one even filmed the events. Credit: YouTube, Twitter and Telegram.

    Authorities investigating the riots, like the Supreme Court, have pointed fingers at officials in Brasilia, and several Federal District security chiefs have been fired or issued with arrest warrants for alleged collusion since the Sunday riots.

    “The Brasilia police neglected [the attack threat], Brasilia’s intelligence neglected it,” Lula claimed one day after the siege. He said that from the footage it was easy to see “police officers talking to the attackers. There was an explicit connivance of the police with the demonstrators.”

    Suspicions of “connivance” have been fueled by his predecessor Bolsonaro’s close relationship with the military during his presidency, filling his then-cabinet with military chiefs. In the weeks leading up to the siege, supporters of the ex-leader and former army captain – who never explicitly conceded his election loss in October – camped outside army barracks across Brazil, calling for a military intervention to overturn Lula’s victory.

    Bolsonaro has made false claims of election fraud, sowing doubt in the legitimacy of the election. He left for Florida more than a week before the insurrection.

    Lula on Thursday also accused some people in the armed forces of complicity. “There were many people complicit in this. There were many from the (military police), many from the armed forces complicit,” he said during a press conference.

    The Brazilian president said he doesn’t think of the events of January 8 as a “coup” but as a “smaller thing, a band of crazy people who haven’t realized that the election is over.”

    The military police of the Federal District have not responded to CNN’s questions about the alleged security failures of their forces. Nor has the Army Command in Brasilia – which has yet to make a public statement on the riots.

    Videos taken on January 8 suggest a reduced security presence compared to Lula’s inauguration a week before, at the same government complex, when more than 8,000 troops from military and civil forces were deployed.

    On January 8, there were just 365 military police officers working in the area. After Lula authorized a federal intervention at around 6 p.m. local that evening, another 2,913 were summoned, a caretaker Federal District spokesperson told CNN. The leadership of the office has changed since the January 8 riots.

    The army and civil police forces did not respond to CNN’s request for information on how many army troops and police forces were deployed to the area on Sunday.

    The military police are investigating the events on January 8 and “will start procedures to investigate” the alleged conduct of “police agents who behaved differently from (how) they were supposed to,” Ricardo Cappelli, the caretaker head of security for the Federal District of Brasilia, who got the role Sunday after his predecessor was fired, said this week.

    Sunday’s protests had been openly organized online days before and intelligence services were aware of their plans. Telegram conversations seen by CNN show people messaging as early as January 5 about their intentions to storm Brazil’s Congress.

    One post mentions a plan to use the Zello phone app, which works like a walkie talkie, if the internet was disrupted. The same app was used by some US Capitol rioters on January 6, 2021.

    Several others shared detailed maps of the parliamentary area, labeling clearly the Congress and Senate buildings as the assembly point.

    Brazil’s intelligence agency said it issued daily alerts ahead of January 8 to the government and the federal district government, warning the protests would be large and violent, CNN Brasil reports.

    Their intelligence was based on a warning raised by the country’s transport agency that an unusual volume of buses had been chartered to Brasilia. Both the Minister of Justice Flávio Dino and then-Federal District Governor Ibaneis Rocha, a Bolsonaro ally, were notified, said the intelligence agency.

    Despite the warnings, on January 7, Rocha told a Federal District news portal, Metropoles, that the protest would go ahead on the Esplanade – a grassy stretch surrounded by governmental buildings that leads directly to Brazil’s seats of power.

    In a press conference a day after the riot, Justice Minister Dino said special security plans had been agreed upon with the Federal District – which handles the defense of the governmental complex and was led by Rocha – but did not materialize on January 8. There was a “change in administrative orientation yesterday in which the planning, which did not allow people to enter the Esplanade, was changed at the last minute,” he said.

    Rocha was removed from his post for three months on Sunday. He said he respected the decision in an official statement and had also apologized to officials, including Lula, for what happened that day, saying his team “did not believe at all that the demonstrations would take on the proportions that they did.” CNN has reached out to Rocha for comment.

    When protesters, as planned, turned out in droves on January 8, they were met with little resistance.

    Beginning from their encampment outside the army headquarters, they walked over 7 kilometers (4.3 miles) down Brasilia’s main avenue, the Monumental Axis, to Congress.

    Prior to the breach of Congress, a long line of protesters march to the government complex. In one video, a military police officer appears to give a thumbs up while shaking hands with the pro-Bolsonaro crowd walking down the avenue. Some are even patting officers on the back.

    Military police attempted to stop the protesters by the Esplanade of Ministries along Eixo Monumental at around 2:25 p.m. local time, live video posted on YouTube by a protester and reviewed by CNN shows. But they were quickly over-run by protesters, who broke through the barricades. Police attempted to pepper spray a few of them as they tried to maintain the barricade but were overwhelmed.

    The time the crowds arrived outside Congress at around 2:45 p.m. local time. Videos showed some federal and military police units further attempting to block their way, but they were severely outnumbered.

    Chaos ensued.

    Another attempt by Brasilia’s military police to use pepper spray on protesters failed. The officers, standing behind a line of metal barricades, were quickly overwhelmed as the crowd surged through, tossing the barricades to the ground.

    Police confront protestors with pepper spray as they approach Congress but are quickly overwhelmed. Credit: Twitter

    Free to roam in Praça dos Três Poderes (Three Powers Square), thousands of Bolsonaro supporters climbed the ramp leading to the Congress, which houses the Senate and Chamber of Deputies. They entered the buildings just before 3 p.m.

    Videos from inside show overturned chairs and documents strewn on the floor as the crowds march through chanting pro-Bolsonaro slogans.

    With the barricades gone, several military police officers simply watched the scene. One even filmed the protesters climbing onto the roof of Congress.

    Meanwhile, outside the Congress building two federal police vans sat with smoke billowing from their windows, video shows. One has swerved off the road half-submerged in a lake.

    The swarm of protesters also moved to the Supreme Court and the Presidential Palace. Officers seemed once again unable to control the situation. Some on horseback were attacked near the Supreme Court, pulled to the ground and pummeled by rioters.

    In the end, the crowd managed to break inside these buildings as well and wreak havoc.

    Videos showed little coordination between police divisions and left some officers overwhelmed by the crowds. Credit: TikTok and Telegram

    Lula has suggested that someone deliberately left the doors to the palace unlocked. It was “opened for these people to enter because there is no broken door. It means someone facilitated their entry here,” he told reporters Thursday.

    While he waits for the dust to settle, “I want to see all the tapes recorded inside the Supreme Court, inside the palace. There were a lot of conniving agents. There were a lot of people from the MP (Military Police) conniving,” he added.

    The January 8 videos found online seem to convey the chaos of the moment.

    In one video, responders seem to struggle to coordinate and communicate as security forces seem overwhelmed as they try to gain control.

    A military police officer shouts at soldiers from the presidential guard battalion to fight the invaders as they stand by the presidential Planalto Palace.

    “Command your troops, damn it!” he yells at the battalion commander.

    But the soldiers appear hesitant, and their leader remains silent as they struggle to make decisions while confronted by the horde.

    As it approaches 7 p.m. local time, the police and army finally have things under control. A YouTube livestream shows crowds filing off the roof of Congress and leaving the governmental compound.

    Two hours later, Bolsonaro condemns the day’s events, saying “peaceful demonstrations, respecting the law, are part of democracy. However, depredations and invasions… escape the rule.”

    Brazil’s response to the riots has been swift. The pro-Bolsonaro encampments outside army barracks were cleared, and a new round of protests on January 11 never materialized.

    The Supreme Court agreed to prosecutor’s requests on Friday to investigate Bolsonaro for the alleged involvement in the attacks. His lawyer has rebutted the accusations, saying Bolsonaro always “rejected all illegal and criminal acts … and has always been a defender of the constitution and democracy.”

    High level officials have aimed their sights on Bolsonaro allies still working in government, including Anderson Torres, who was effectively in charge of security for the Three Powers Square, where the governmental buildings were located.

    Brazil’s Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the arrest of Torres, who was previously Bolsonaro’s justice minister and assumed the role of security secretary of the Federal District in January, and the district’s former military police commander Fabio Vieira.

    The order accuses the pair of attempting a coup d’état, terrorist acts, damage to public property, criminal association, and violent abolition of the rule of law. It also argues “the absence of the necessary policing” during the riots happened due to the “omission and connivance of several authorities in the area of security and intelligence.”

    Torres, who was fired on Sunday with Vieira, had traveled to Florida on January 7, a day before the riots. It is unclear if he met with Bolsonaro, who was also in Florida, having left Brazil in December, days before the inauguration of Lula.

    The former security secretary has strenuously denied any involvement in the riots. “I deeply regret these absurd hypotheses of any kind of collusion on my part,” he tweeted on Sunday, and wrote days later that he would return to Brazil and fight the charges.

    He was arrested on his return to Brazil on Saturday, CNN Brasil reports.

    On Thursday, the Federal Police announced that during a search of Torres’ home, it found a draft decree proposing to overturn October’s presidential election. Torres has denied being the author.

    CNN has reached out to his lawyer for comment.

    Investigators are looking for funders and leaders of the riots, an unenviable task due to the protesters lack of formalized leadership, Michele Prado, an expert on the Brazilian far right, told CNN.

    “Despite this fluidity of (protest) leaders and horizontality,” there are thousands of people online who continue to share extremist positions, she added.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Victory smoke in the Capitol, boys,’ Proud Boys member said on Jan. 6, prosecutors say as trial begins | CNN Politics

    ‘Victory smoke in the Capitol, boys,’ Proud Boys member said on Jan. 6, prosecutors say as trial begins | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Dozens of messages, social media posts and videos show that leaders of the far-right Proud Boys not only planned for the January 6, 2021, US Capitol attack but recruited others to help stop Joe Biden from becoming president, federal prosecutors said Thursday during opening statements in the seditious conspiracy trial.

    “Let’s bring this new year with one word in mind…revolt,” defendant and then-Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio wrote to others in the group on January 1, 2021, according to prosecutors. “New year’s revolution.”

    Prosecutor Jason McCullough told the jury that Proud Boys leaders were afraid a Biden presidency would mean the end of the organization and that, after President Donald Trump infamously said in a presidential debate in 2020, to “stand back and stand by,” the organization reached a turning point.

    “In that moment, some battle lines were drawn. President Trump was for the proud boys, and Joe Biden was for antifa,” McCullough said.

    “The defendants’ mission threatened the very foundations of our government,” McCullough told the jury. “These five defendants had agreed – by any means necessary including use of force – to stop Congress” from certifying the election for Biden.

    The defendants – Tarrio, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Dominic Pezzola and Ethan Nordean – have all pleaded not guilty to charges, including seditious conspiracy, conspiracy to obstruct and obstructing an official proceeding.

    According to McCullough, the five defendants planned to stop the transfer of power to Biden that day and communicated and organized through messaging apps. McCullough played video of several defendants allegedly tearing down police barricades, attacking officers and ultimately being the first to break into the Capitol, celebrating along the way.

    Why did some Proud Boys dress up like Antifa on January 6?


    09:50

    – Source:
    CNN

    “Victory smoke in the Capitol, boys,” Pezzola, who prosecutors say was the first to break into the Capitol using a riot shield he stole from a police officer, said inside the building, according to a video shown in court. “This is f**king awesome. I knew we could take this mother**ker over [if we] just tried hard enough. Proud of your motherf**king boy.”

    “Don’t f**king leave,” Tarrio allegedly wrote in a public post during the riot.

    Prosecutors played a video of Nordean allegedly celebrating the riot.

    “I was part of f**king storming the Capitol of the most powerful country in the f**king world,” Nordean said.

    On January 7, Rehl allegedly wrote to other Proud Boys: “I’m proud as f**k at what we accomplished yesterday.”

    In their opening statements, defense attorneys repeatedly told jurors that the Proud Boys had no plan to storm the Capitol building on January 6, and were instead caught up in a mob mentality.

    “You will see at trial no evidence that supports the government’s conspiracy claim that these defendants plotted before January 6 to do what the government alleges,” Nordean’s attorney Nick Smith told the jury.

    “It’s only human to say something phenomenal must have caused this,” Smith said of the deadly riot. “But as we often see, that’s not true.”

    But because it is “emotionally unsatisfying” to admit that a mob mentality took over, Smith said, prosecutors “selectively presented messages” to make the Proud Boys a “scapegoat.”

    Tarrio’s attorney Sabino Jauregui also said that his client, who was not in Washington, DC, on January 6, is being blamed for other people’s actions.

    “You see Trump, President Trump, told them the election was stolen,” Jauregui said. “It was Trump that told them to go [to the Capitol]. And it was Trump that unleashed them on January 6. He’s the one that told them to march over there and ‘fight like hell.’”

    He continued: “It’s too hard to blame the politicians on the left and on the right, the ones that use us for their fundraising and their reelection., the ones that pit us against each other… Instead, they go for the easy target, they go for Enrique Tarrio.”

    Jauregui highlighted for the jury that Tarrio, according to Jauregui, had no communication with members of the group that were at the Capitol and never called for attacking the building.

    Rehl’s attorney, Carmen Hernandez, implored the jury to forget everything they had heard about the Proud Boys’ reputation, including allegations that the group is violent or racist.

    “Americans express a lot of opinion about politics, about politicians, about elections, about other public issues,” Hernandez said. “The fact that we state these opinions, I would submit to you, isn’t evidence of a crime.”

    “You all swore to the court that you would put aside any theories, any views you had about the Proud Boys,” Hernandez said, adding, “I am dependent on that.”

    Smith, Jauregui and Hernandez all said that the government has spoken to FBI informants and cooperating Proud Boys who were at the Capitol on January 6. Those witnesses repeatedly emphasized the group had no plan, the attorneys said.

    While several defense attorneys condemned the Capitol riot, Pezzola’s attorney, Roger Roots, used his opening statement to downplay the attack, repeatedly saying that the Proud Boys case is simply about a six-hour delay of Congress.

    “The government makes a big deal of this six-hour recess, from about two o’clock to eight o’clock,” Roots said of Congress’ forced recess on January 6 as rioters stormed the Capitol.

    “Some have called it an attack or even an insurrection,” Roots continued. “The evidence will show that if it was an attack, it might have been one of the lamest attacks that you can imagine.”

    Roots also said his client didn’t “steal” a riot shield from a police officer, as prosecutors have alleged, and suggested that “someone chose not to” fortify the Capitol windows, one of which Pezzola allegedly broke open with the shield.

    Roots closed by asking the jury to question whether Pezzola’s motivation that day was truly to stop Congress from certifying the 2020 election, and to look closely at what his client saw as the “victory” that day.

    “Mr. Pezzola described victory, simply, as taking this motherf**ker,” Roots said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • First weeks of Proud Boys sedition trial marked by courtroom drama and fighting | CNN Politics

    First weeks of Proud Boys sedition trial marked by courtroom drama and fighting | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The preliminary stage of the trial of five Proud Boys charged with seditious conspiracy related to the 2021 US Capitol attack has been a chaotic wind-up that included contentious fights during jury selection, debates over evidence and defense lawyers threatening to withdraw from the case.

    But while opening arguments are expected Thursday, the bickering in the courtroom is likely to continue.

    Tensions between federal prosecutors, defense lawyers and the judge have grown increasingly hostile and confrontational over the past three weeks, and the judge has repeatedly pushed back the start of the trial to deal with the endless fighting.

    District Judge Timothy Kelly delivered a stark warning to all the lawyers on Wednesday: “Everyone take note – you talk over me, and contempt will be coming down the line. It’s going to be a long trial.”

    The five defendants – Enrique Tarrio, Zachary Rehl, Ethan Nordean, Dominic Pezzola and Joseph Biggs – have all pleaded not guilty.

    The three weeks of courtroom drama began before Christmas with the jury selection process, which was plagued by a constant struggle for prosecutors and defense attorneys to agree on jurors who didn’t have strong opinions on the far-right Proud Boys group.

    Some defense attorneys, like Rehl’s lawyer Carmen Hernandez, fought for the dismissal of nearly every potential juror who mentioned previous knowledge, however slight, of the Proud Boys. Other attorneys, including Tarrio’s lawyers Nayib Hassan and Sabino Jauregui, said they were suspicious that people who claimed to not know much about the Proud Boys could be lying so they can get on the jury and find their client guilty.

    Wednesday, Kelly mediated fights over potential exhibits. During one heated moment, Hernandez said she would withdraw from the case if Kelly allowed prosecutors to show the jury a specific video.

    The video has not been shown publicly, but Hernandez said it was taken before January 6, 2021, and was “highly prejudicial.”

    Kelly was not pleased by the inference the lawyer would quit.

    “You, Ms. Hernandez, had said something like you were going to withdraw from the case if I didn’t make certain decisions,” Kelly said. “And I want to make it clear that I don’t really care about that… it’s not even clear if I would let you out of the case.”

    “It isn’t a threat,” Hernandez replied. “I’m not in the habit from threatening to withdraw from a case.”

    Another defense attorney, Nick Smith, said that he too would leave the case over a video the government wants to play for the jury, though Kelly did not address his threat.

    Kelly did allow prosecutors to use video of a 2020 presidential debate when then-President Donald Trump said the Proud Boys should “stand back and stand by.” The comments, Kelly said, showed “an additional motive to advocate for Mr. Trump (and) engage in the charged conspiracy” to keep Trump in power.

    Roger Roots, a defense lawyer who joined Pezzola’s legal team just before the trial, also got in hot water with the judge. Roots suggested that he planned to tell the jury Pezzola was acting in self-defense on January 6 against police officers who were high on pepper spray.

    “I know you just joined the case last week but there is no evidence of that,” Kelly said, telling Roots the time had passed to make any self-defense arguments.

    Meanwhile, Biggs’ attorney Norman Pattis had his law license suspended last week for six months.

    Pattis, representing right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones in the defamation case brought by parents of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, had improperly released court documents.

    The files included two years of Jones’ text messages, medical records from some of the Sandy Hook families and other confidential discovery items.

    Kelly has not yet ruled on Pattis’ status, but he did allow two other attorneys who had defended other Proud Boys and therefore had potential conflicts to serve on the case.

    Pattis, however, tweeted Wednesday that “six months off sounds good about now.”

    The constant turmoil has left some defense attorneys repeatedly asking for the trial to be moved to a different courthouse or further delayed, though they don’t all agree (Smith said he wouldn’t consent to delaying the trial for any reason “up to and including a zombie apocalypse”).

    Prosecutors have not been saved from the judge’s scrutiny either – most notably when they claimed they couldn’t provide evidence binders to defense lawyers because their office had run out of dividers, and they hadn’t been authorized to buy new ones.

    In the past three weeks, lawyers for the five defendants have repeatedly criticized government lawyers for how they have handled the case.

    Hernandez said the prosecutors were acting “immature” and said, “it reminds me of when my kids were little.”

    Roots told Kelly that the department was using “cutthroat strategies.”

    By Wednesday evening, Assistant US Attorney Jason McCullough asked the judge to reiterate his “order on decorum” in the courtroom.

    “We are going to be in front of a jury soon and we need to take this up a couple levels,” McCullough said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How much should people worry about Covid’s newly-dominant XBB.1.5 variant? Our medical analyst explains | CNN

    How much should people worry about Covid’s newly-dominant XBB.1.5 variant? Our medical analyst explains | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A new Covid-19 variant, XBB.1.5, is spreading rapidly throughout the United States. In December 2022, the proportion of new Covid-19 infections due to this Omicron offshoot have increased from 4% to 18%, according to a January 6 release from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and is projected to rise further still. In some parts of the country, it constitutes more than half of all new infections. According to the World Health Organization, XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of Omicron yet.

    What should people know about XBB.1.5? Do vaccines and treatments work against it? Can tests pick it up? Will hospitals become overwhelmed again? Should kids wear masks to school again? And could there be even more worrisome variants that emerge in the future?

    To guide us through these questions, I spoke with CNN Medical Analyst Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician, public health expert and professor of health policy and management at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health. She is also author of “Lifelines: A Doctor’s Journey in the Fight for Public Health.”

    CNN: What should people know about the latest Covid-19 variant, XBB.1.5?

    Dr. Leana Wen: People should not be surprised that there is a new variant. The more viruses replicate, the more they mutate. Most mutations do not confer evolutionary advantage and won’t spread further, but some do.

    There are three key questions to ask about new variants. First, is it more contagious? Second, does it cause more serious disease? And third, is it more immune-evasive, meaning it undercuts the protection of existing vaccines and treatments?

    The mutations XBB.1.5 has acquired have made it more contagious. A more transmissible strain has the evolutionary advantage that it will spread faster than others, and therefore could displace other strains. This is a trend seen throughout the coronavirus pandemic — new, even more transmissible strains replacing their predecessors and becoming dominant.

    The good news is that, thus far, this strain does not appear to cause more severe disease. Like other Omicron descendants, it probably causes milder illness compared with the Delta variants that predated Omicron.

    There are some studies that suggest XBB.1.5 is more immune-evasive compared with previously dominant Omicron strains. Further research is underway to identify the degree of immune protection afforded by existing vaccines; the White House’s Covid-19 response coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha said that “data suggests that if you’ve been vaccinated, if you’ve gotten that updated bivalent booster, you’re still going to have a good amount of protection,” during an interview Friday with CNN’s Kate Bolduan.

    But even if it turns out these vaccines don’t hold up as well against infection with XBB.1.5, they will probably protect well against severe illness — which underscores the need for people to receive the updated booster if they are eligible.

    CNN: Can tests pick up this new variant?

    Wen: PCR tests definitely can, and there’s no reason to think that this variant won’t be picked up by rapid home antigen tests. If you have symptoms or are exposed to someone with the coronavirus, you should certainly get tested. The tests won’t show you which strain you picked up, but they should detect circulating variants.

    CNN: Do existing treatments work against XBB.1.5?

    Wen: Antiviral treatments like Paxlovid should work against XBB.1.5. Unfortunately, monoclonal antibody treatments probably don’t. In November, the US. Food and Drug Administration withdrew their authorization of the last remaining monoclonal antibody because of its lack of efficacy against new variants. And on January 6, the agency issued a statement that the preventive antibody Evusheld may be ineffective against XBB.1.5.

    On a policy level, it’s critical there are urgent investments into better treatments. There are many people vulnerable to severe outcomes due to Covid-19, and we need to have a wider range of effective treatments available for them.

    CNN: Could hospitals become overwhelmed again?

    Wen: Covid-19 infections could rise in the coming weeks due to a combination of this new variant and the fact that many people will have traveled and gathered over the holidays. I don’t think the surge will be nearly as bad as the initial Omicron wave in early 2022, though, because of the large proportion of Americans who have by this point already contracted Covid-19 and have some baseline immunity to it.

    If you have symptoms or are exposed to someone with the coronavirus, you should certainly get tested, says Dr. Leana Wen.

    Increasing booster rates, particularly among the elderly, will help blunt the rise in hospitalizations. It’s a major problem that only about a third of Americans ages 65 and older have received the updated bivalent booster, which has been shown in a recent study to reduce hospitalization by 73% in this age group.

    CNN: How much should people worry about XBB.1.5?

    Wen: It depends on the individual. There are many people who are not concerned about contracting Covid-19. They may be young and healthy and unlikely to become severely ill due to the coronavirus. Maybe they have just recovered from a previous infection and are protected against serious illness for several months. Or maybe the downside of continuing precautions is significant to them. I don’t think it’s wrong for people to proceed with their pre-pandemic routines, considering that XBB.1.5 is not likely to be the last variant of concern we see — and that it doesn’t appear to cause more severe disease.

    On the other hand, there are many people who are worried about becoming severely ill from Covid-19. People who are elderly or who have underlying health conditions should speak with their physician about their risk of severe illness due to Covid-19. If they are at high risk even after getting the bivalent booster, they should consider additional precautions to avoid infection while this highly transmissible variant is circulating. That includes asking others to take a rapid test prior to socializing and wearing a high-quality N95 or equivalent mask while in crowded indoor places.

    CNN: Some school districts are bringing back mask mandates. Should kids wear masks to schools again?

    Wen: This will depend on the family. If everyone is generally healthy, the parents or caregivers are going to work without a mask and all members are socializing freely with others outside of school, then it wouldn’t add much more protection to mask in the classroom.

    On the other hand, families that are still taking many precautions because of, for example, a severely immunocompromised household member might decide to all mask while in in crowded indoor spaces.

    My children have not been masking in school since the beginning of this school year, and I don’t currently plan for this to change. We would reconsider if a new variant emerges that causes much more severe disease, but that does not appear to be the case with XBB.1.5.

    CNN: Could there be even more worrisome variants that emerge in the future?

    Wen: Yes. This is the reason why genomic surveillance is so important. We need to identify and study new variants as they emerge. This is part of our “new normal”— there will be new variants that, from time to time, lead to surges of infections. The key is to make sure people are still protected against severe disease and to keep hospitals from becoming overwhelmed. And we must make sure everyone makes use of the tools we have available, including vaccines.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Musk’s Twitter restores accounts of prominent election deniers two years after Jan. 6 attack | CNN Business

    Musk’s Twitter restores accounts of prominent election deniers two years after Jan. 6 attack | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Elon Musk’s Twitter has restored the accounts of two prominent election deniers who were banned from the platform following the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol.

    “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander’s account was restored on Monday. Alexander assumed a leadership role in the movement that discredited the 2020 election in the weeks leading up to January 6.

    Asked by the January 6 Committee what platform he used to promote events in the lead-up to that day, Alexander responded, “Primarily Twitter,” according to his deposition to the committee made public last month. He has not been charged with a crime.

    In the months since Musk took ownership of Twitter, the self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” has restored the accounts of high-profile figures who were banned from the platform following the January 6 attack, including former President Donald Trump, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, and others.

    As unrest unfolded in Brazil on Sunday, Alexander appeared to cheer on the attack, posting on his Truth Social account a Brazilian flag emoji and the message, “I do NOT denounce unannounced impromptu Capitol tours by the people.”

    Overnight on Monday, Twitter also restored the account of Ron Watkins – a prominent conspiracy theorist who then-President Trump retweeted multiple times in the days before the assault on the Capitol.

    Watkins played a central role in spreading conspiracy theories about voting machine and the 2020 election.

    Watkins’ father, Jim, is the owner of the hate-filled online message board 8kun that is home to the QAnon conspiracy theory. An HBO documentary in 2021 identified Ron as potentially being the anonymous figure behind the conspiracy theory, an assertion that Ron has denied.

    Jim Watkins was interviewed by the January 6 committee last year, where he denied under oath that he or his son Ron posed as “Q.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Giuliani subpoenaed amid special counsel investigation into Trump’s fundraising | CNN Politics

    Giuliani subpoenaed amid special counsel investigation into Trump’s fundraising | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Special counsel Jack Smith’s team has subpoenaed Donald Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani, asking him to turn over records to a federal grand jury as part of an investigation into the former president’s fundraising following the 2020 election, according to a person familiar with the subpoena.

    The subpoena, which was sent more than a month ago and has not been previously reported, requests documents from Giuliani about payments he received around the 2020 election, when Giuliani filed numerous lawsuits on Trump’s behalf contesting the election results, the person said.

    Prosecutors have also subpoenaed other witnesses who are close to Trump, asking specifically for documents related to disbursements from the Save America PAC, Trump’s primary fundraising operation set up shortly after the 2020 election, according to other sources with insight into the probe.

    Taken together, the subpoenas demonstrate prosecutors’ growing interest in following the money after the 2020 election as part of their sweeping criminal probe around Trump’s efforts to overturn his loss of the presidency.

    Save America was part of broader fundraising efforts by Trump and the Republican Party that raised more than $250 million after the election. Since then, the political action committee has compensated several lawyers who now represent Trump and his allies in January 6-related investigations.

    The subpoenas to other witnesses in addition to Giuliani were sent in late December, according to the other sources.

    The information the prosecutors seek is still being collected, the sources said. With Giuliani, the investigators have prioritized getting financial information from him, one person said.

    The inquiry to Giuliani came from David Rody, a former top prosecutor in New York who specializes in gang and conspiracy cases and is assisting Smith with examining a broader criminal conspiracy after the election, according to some of the sources.

    In response to being informed of CNN’s reporting on Giuliani’s subpoena and asked for a statement, Ted Goodman, his adviser, said, “The mayor is unaware of the specific claims by this so-called ‘anonymous source,’ and therefore is not in position to respond.”

    A spokesman for the special counsel’s office declined to comment.

    A representative for Trump has not responded to a request for comment.

    CNN previously reported the Justice Department in September subpoenaed witnesses for financial details about the Save America PAC, and that a portion of Smith’s office would dig into possible financial and campaign contribution crimes. The Giuliani subpoena and other December subpoenas represent a new round of inquiry, now from Smith’s office, which took shape over the holidays.

    After the election, Trump and the Republican National Committee raked in millions of dollars as they told supporters the election was being stolen, marketing the fundraising effort as election defense. At the time, some officials working on the fundraising effort knew that Joe Biden’s electoral win was legitimate, despite Trump’s insistence it was fraudulent, the House Select Committee found in its own investigation.

    Smith’s office hasn’t brought any charges. Federal prosecutors in New York previously investigated Giuliani for activities in Ukraine during the Trump presidency. While that led to prosecutors accessing his electronic devices, they declined to charge him with any crime.

    Giuliani is likely to be a central figure in any probe of Trump’s close political circles after the election. After serving as Trump’s private attorney during the Mueller investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, the former chief federal prosecutor and mayor of Manhattan dove into Trump’s attempts to claim electoral victory. He unsuccessfully argued a case before a federal judge in Pennsylvania – where Trump sought to throw out the popular vote – and connected with state lawmakers as he tried to convince them of election fraud.

    In the weeks after the 2020 election, Giuliani also held freewheeling press conferences, repeating allegations that he never could prove.

    A Trump campaign attorney told the January 6 committee that Giuliani had asked to be paid $20,000 a day for his post-election work for Trump. The campaign declined to pay him that, according to election and House select committee public records.

    Subpoenas issued last year to a wide swath of Trump-connected witnesses also asked questions about the Save America PAC, including how its funds were used in 2020 and early 2021, and about Giuliani, as CNN previously reported.

    Giuliani hasn’t personally received distributions directly from the PAC, according to campaign finance records. Yet his company, Giuliani Partners, was paid $63,400 for travel reimbursement by Trump’s campaign committee in mid-December 2020. Giuliani’s New York-based security company also received a $76,500 payment from another Trump-backed entity, the Make America Great Again PAC, for travel expenses, in early February 2021, according to the records.

    In addition to the financial inquiry, Smith’s office is also pursuing possible criminal cases around the Trump campaign’s use of fake electors in battleground states and the pressure on Congress and then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the election’s result. In all of those schemes, Giuliani was a central player.

    In his House select committee testimony, Giuliani explained that his team working with Trump pivoted to focus on state legislatures that could block the election result after his attempts failed in the courts. The New York state bar suspended him from practicing law because of his 2020 election efforts, and he’s also facing an attorney discipline proceeding in Washington, DC.

    He declined to answer some questions the House asked about his work for Trump after the election, citing attorney confidentiality. Giuliani could try to make similar claims in the federal investigation, though the Justice Department has legal mechanisms in which it can try to overcome witness refusals to answer questions.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The most chilling warning for Americans from Brazil’s version of January 6 | CNN Politics

    The most chilling warning for Americans from Brazil’s version of January 6 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    On the face of it, the mob storming of government buildings in Brazil in support of a defeated ex-president making false claims of electoral fraud looks like a copycat assault on democracy inspired by the US Capitol insurrection.

    But for Americans, the reality of the comparison between the insurrection inspired by the 45th US president on January, 6, 2021, and the latest revolt by supporters of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, dubbed “Trump of the Tropics,” is even more troubling. Brazil is in turmoil after hundreds of Bolsonaro supporters stormed congressional buildings, the Supreme Court and the presidential palace in the capital Brasilia. The assault came a week after the inauguration of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who returned to power after a 12-year hiatus following a victory over Bolsonaro in a run-off election on October 30.

    While many elements of the situation in Brazil overlap with the populist conservatism epitomized by former President Donald Trump’s inner circle in the US, it also poses the question of whether the US, under assault from its own anti-democratic movement, is beginning to resemble the political turmoil that has long raged in less stable regions of the world.

    For now, there are growing questions over whether key extremists in Trump’s inner circle, like Steve Bannon, helped fan the violence in Brasilia and doubts over the Brazilian election, as part of a bid to destabilize democracies worldwide.

    Bolsonaro did not explicitly provoke the gathering of protesters as Trump did, and was not in the country at the time of the riot. He did, however, adopt the Trump playbook, sowing doubt about the vote’s legitimacy, refusing to concede his election loss and profiting from disinformation spread on social media. But his behavior is not necessarily an outlier in a nation and a continent where democracy is perpetually fragile and at risk.

    Brazil was a military-run dictatorship until 1985 after the crushing of an earlier attempt at democracy, and civilian self-government since then has often been rocked by corruption, fears of military takeovers and prosecutions of former presidents. The erosion of democracy and the use of violence as a political tool were a feature of much of the Western Hemisphere long before Trump latched onto them.

    So, while it may look like Brazilian extremists are copying their brethren in the US, the world’s most important democracy could actually be importing the characteristics of malfunctioning and chaotic political societies abroad.

    Violence had long been feared following October’s election. Bolsonaro supporters, spurred by his false claims of electoral fraud, that mirrored Trump’s own behavior after the 2020 election, clearly incited his supporters. Just as in the United States, there are elements among Brazilian legislators and in political power in the states who support Bolsonaro and his efforts to undermine democracy.

    The new House majority in Washington is packed with Republican members who voted not to certify President Joe Biden’s election victory in 2020 based on false claims of ballot fraud. And the new Speaker Kevin McCarthy only finally won the job on a 15th ballot after an intervention from Trump – poignantly on the night that marked the second anniversary of Congress returning to work after the Capitol riot.

    In other echoes of January 6, Bolsonaro – like his populist, nationalist political cousin Trump – is currently in Florida. Like the 45th US president, he also prepared to undermine the election in advance and refused to concede defeat after making complaints about voting machines that were rejected by judges. The closest he got was when he said he would comply with the Constitution.

    So far, Brazil’s democracy, as America’s did two years ago, has held firm, and protesters have been flushed out of government buildings. But the Biden administration has been concerned from the start about the implications of Bolsonaro’s election denialism in a nation that is a political and economic fulcrum in Latin America. It warned publicly and in private, weeks before the election that then-President Bolsonaro should not sabotage democracy, clearly understanding the parallels with Trump and more broadly the dangers facing Brazilian democracy since the end of military rule in the 1980s.

    Biden, who has put the threats to global democracy at the center of his foreign policy, condemned the assault on democracy and on the peaceful transfer of power in a tweet. “Brazil’s democratic institutions have our full support and the will of the Brazilian people must not be undermined,” Biden wrote. “I look forward to continuing to work with @LulaOficial,” he wrote, referring to the current president.

    But the violence in Brazil came as a jolt after the last year in which democracy appeared to be making a comeback around the world, including in the United States where voters in some swing states rejected election denialism pushed by many of Trump’s political proteges in the midterm elections.

    The most powerful example that Washington can send to Brazil, and other nations where political systems are under duress, is that democracy bent but didn’t break in 2021, and that those who threatened it are starting to be held to account.

    But two dates, January 6 in the US and January 8 in Brazil, now stand as flashing warning signs that the health and survival of free elections anywhere cannot be taken for granted.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House GOP select panel will target DOJ and FBI and their ‘ongoing criminal investigations’ | CNN Politics

    House GOP select panel will target DOJ and FBI and their ‘ongoing criminal investigations’ | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Republicans are gearing up to investigate the Department of Justice and the FBI, including their “ongoing criminal investigations,” setting up a showdown with the Biden administration and law enforcement agencies over their criminal probes, particularly those into former President Donald Trump.

    The new House GOP majority has proposed that a new select subcommittee be formed – a result of one of the key concessions House Speaker Kevin McCarthy made to his opposition to secure the gavel.

    In addition to having the power to investigate all ongoing criminal probes of the executive branch, the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government would also “be authorized to receive information available to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,” giving it access to the most highly classified information in Congress, according to the proposal.

    An earlier draft of the select subcommittee proposal gave it less power and was much narrower in scope: It would have only been able to focus on the FBI, DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security, and made no mention of getting access to ongoing criminal investigations.

    Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, an early holdout against McCarthy who became a key negotiator for the hard-liners, said on Fox News that changes made to the select subcommittee proposal, particularly seeking a budget as big as the January 6 select committee, was key to getting those initially opposed to McCarthy on board.

    “So we got more resources, more specificity, more power to go after this recalcitrant Biden administration,” Roy said Friday. “That’s really important.”

    The select subcommittee would be under the jurisdiction of the House Judiciary Committee, which is partly why Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the committee’s incoming chairman, was crucial to the negotiations last week that led to the proposal. As Judiciary chair, Jordan would oversee the subpoenas of the select panel. By contrast, the House select committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol made subpoena decisions unilaterally. Jordan has foreshadowed that he will make investigating assertions that the FBI and DOJ have been politicized a key focus of the House Judiciary Committee as chairman.

    “We’re going to get into what’s going on at the FBI,” Jordan said Sunday on Fox.

    If the proposal passes, McCarthy would be able to select 13 lawmakers to serve on the subcommittee, five of whom would be chosen in consultation with House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries. McCarthy would also pick the subcommittee chair. This was similar to the setup of the January 6 select committee, for which then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave then-Minority Leader McCarthy five spots to fill. But when Pelosi rejected two of McCarthy’s picks, the California Republican pulled all his members from serving on the panel.

    Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky said Friday on Fox, “It looks like I will probably be on that committee but I can’t say that I will run it.”

    Another Republican, Pennsylvania Rep. Scott Perry, who is being investigated by federal prosecutors for his role in trying to impede the transfer of presidential power in 2020, would not rule out serving on the select panel.

    “Why should I be limited? Why should anybody be limited just because someone has made an accusation?” Perry, who chairs the hard-line conservative Freedom Caucus, said Sunday in an interview on ABC’s “This Week.” “Everybody in America is innocent until proven otherwise.”

    The proposal for the subcommittee panel is included in the House rules package, which establishes the rules and committees for the 118th Congress, and is set to receive a vote on Monday.

    The select subcommittee would be required to issue a final report by January 2, 2025, and dissolve shortly after.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • El Paso shelter says video of officer slamming person on ground shows ‘excessive force’ | CNN

    El Paso shelter says video of officer slamming person on ground shows ‘excessive force’ | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A homeless shelter in El Paso, Texas, released a video showing what the group said was Customs and Border Protection officials apprehending a person outside of its welcome center.

    The Opportunity Center for the Homeless posted the surveillance video, which shows someone who appears to be in law enforcement pushing the person up to the teal windows at the entrance of the building and then slamming the person to the ground and handcuffing them.

    Another person who appears to be in law enforcement stands over them.

    The group says the surveillance video was taken at 11:50 a.m. on January 6.

    It is unclear what led up to the incident. CNN reached out to the Opportunity Center for the Homeless Sunday night to inquire about the person’s whereabouts or condition following the January 6 incident and whether there was any additional video taken before or after the footage that was shared on social media.

    Opportunity Center for the Homeless founder Ray Tullius issued a statement saying, “Through the years, the Opportunity Center for the Homeless has had a respectful and long-standing working relationship with law enforcement officials in the community.

    “[On Friday], an individual receiving services at the Welcome Center, located at 201 E. 9th Avenue, was apprehended in front of the facility by Customs and Border Protection officials with what seems to us to be excessive force.

    “To our knowledge, this is an isolated incident. However, it raises our concerns for the well-being of the individual taken into custody and all the guests receiving services in our homeless programs. As we have done it for the last twenty-nine years, the Opportunity Center for the Homeless will continue to extend a helping hand to those in need of help,” the statement reads.

    In a statement, US Customs and Border Protection said its Office of Professional Responsibility is reviewing the incident.

    “Although, at the moment we do not have all the details of what occurred during this incident, CBP takes all allegations of misconduct seriously, investigates thoroughly, and holds employees accountable when policies are violated,” the agency said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Republican Sen. Ben Sasse resigns to become University of Florida president, opening seat for appointment by Nebraska governor | CNN Politics

    Republican Sen. Ben Sasse resigns to become University of Florida president, opening seat for appointment by Nebraska governor | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Sen. Ben Sasse, a Republican who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump after the attack on the US Capitol, officially resigned from the Senate Sunday, opening up his seat for appointment by Nebraska’s Republican Gov. Jim Pillen.

    Sasse announced last year that he would step down from his position to become the University of Florida’s next president. His academic appointment by Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis was approved by the university’s Board of Trustees in November despite criticism from students and faculty over the secretive search process, Sasse’s limited relevant experience and his past criticisms of same-sex marriage.

    “I’m here rather than at some other school, or rather than trying to claw to stay in the United States Senate for decades, because I believe that this is the most interesting institution in the state that has the most happening right now, and is therefore the best positioned to help lead our country through a time of unprecedented change,” Sasse told the UF board at the time.

    Sasse made little secret of the frustration he felt with the Senate and the changing nature of the Republican Party. He explained his decision to vote to convict Trump by saying that the former president’s lies about the election “had consequences” and brought the country “dangerously close to a bloody constitutional crisis.” He was one of seven Republican senators to vote to convict Trump after the House of Representatives impeached him for incitement of an insurrection.

    Before his election to the Senate in 2014, Sasse was president of Midland University, a private Lutheran liberal arts school in Nebraska with an enrollment of about 1,600 students. He graduated from Harvard and earned a PhD in American history at Yale and also worked at Boston Consulting Group, McKinsey and private equity firms, according to his website.

    The University of Florida has an enrollment of over 60,000 students on a 2,000-acre campus with over a thousand buildings. Unlike Sasse, the university’s most recent presidents had extensive careers as administrators at major universities prior to taking the school’s top job.

    Sasse was reelected to another six-year term in 2020. His resignation will not change the balance of power in the Senate. The seat will temporarily filled by an appointment made by Pillen, who was elected in November and was sworn in on Thursday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kevin McCarthy, the view from home | CNN Politics

    Kevin McCarthy, the view from home | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The young man smiling in the last Bakersfield High School student newspaper for the 1983 school year was captioned – “Most Likely to Succeed.”

    That graduating student wasn’t then-senior Kevin McCarthy, the California Republican who on Saturday became the House speaker for the 118th US Congress, a powerful position that puts him second in line to the American presidency.

    “I was most likely to succeed,” laughs Marshall Dillard, McCarthy’s classmate and friend. “I’m sure he’s surprised some of his teachers. You’d have never thought this if you saw Kevin in high school.”

    The lighthearted teasing traces back to Dillard and McCarthy on the high school football field in Bakersfield, California. The team was and is still called “The Drillers,” a reference to the oil industry of the district. Bakersfield sits in the southern end of California’s Central Valley and is one of the largest cities in the state’s 20th Congressional District.

    It’s the district McCarthy represents as one of the most powerful Republican lawmakers in the country. With House Republicans holding a slim majority in the 118th Congress, a group of GOP hard-liners prompted a messy and historic floor fight for control of the speaker’s gavel. After voting had spilled into a fifth day, McCarthy broke through by conceding to a series of demands that weakened the power of the speakership. But ultimately, he won the gavel.

    This was the sort of well-worn political knuckle fight of the DC scene – but far from the region that raised a young Kevin McCarthy.

    Here, he’s known as the son of a firefighter whose less-than-stellar grades would suggest a far less powerful career path. But like the working town that raised him, the lack of polish would impart lessons that follow McCarthy today and offer clues into his speakership.

    Marshall Dillard played football with Kevin McCarthy at Bakersfield High School in Bakersfield, California.

    “He made up for it because he was scrappy, and he worked hard,” says Dillard. “In football, he wasn’t the biggest person. He wasn’t the fastest person. He wasn’t the strongest person. But he was going to give it his all.”

    Rather than being seen by classmates as most likely to succeed, McCarthy was voted one half of Bakersfield High’s “Best Couple.” His girlfriend, Judy, would become his wife.

    “Before he was going to ask her out, that’s the only time I saw him nervous,” remembers Dillard. The rest of the time, McCarthy charged into classes, sports or clubs with an ambition that eclipsed his apparent credentials.

    Fellow students gravitated to McCarthy, not just for his humor and confidence, but for his friendship.

    Kevin McCarthy and his wife, Judy, pose in front of Air Force One in 1992.

    Dillard, now the principal of William Penn Elementary in Bakersfield, says a single moment from their teenage years speaks to the man who now leads the US House of Representatives. Dillard, who is Black, was the star player on the Bakersfield High School football team. He recalls a time when their high school was scheduled to play against a team from a notoriously racist rival high school. McCarthy and a couple of other White football teammates reassured Dillard, “They’re going to have to come through us before they get to you.”

    “That cemented our bond,” says Dillard. The men have remained friends through the years, sharing their struggles, successes and tales of parenthood. Dillard declined to share his political leanings or say if he even agrees with McCarthy’s politics: “He always gets my vote. Politics is politics. They do what they do. I know Kevin on a personal level.”

    On the 1983 yearbook’s local business sponsorship pages, “McCarthy’s Frozen Yogurt” takes up half a page. McCarthy has spoken about the yogurt shop belonging to his uncle and the place where he opened his first small business, “Kevin O’s Deli.”

    Dillard, who would attend Stanford University, remembers Kevin O’s as a couple of tables in the corner of the yogurt shop. When Dillard would return home on school breaks, his friend always gave him a free sandwich.

    Catherine Fanucchi, a farmer in Bakersfield, also grew up with McCarthy and calls him a friend today. She, like Dillard, left the Central Valley for school and a career – hers was as a lawyer. But home beckoned, and she joined her family farm, which traces its Bakersfield origins 100 years back.

    “I would never see him staying down,” Fanucchi says of McCarthy. “He’s not that guy. He sees the sunny side of the street, and he’ll manage to find it.”

    McCarthy would not stay at that sandwich shop long, sending in an application while he was in college to be a 1987 summer intern in Washington with then-Rep. Bill Thomas, a Republican from California.

    Cathy Abernathy, who used to be chief of staff for US Rep. Bill Thomas, hired Kevin McCarthy as an intern in 1987.

    His application came across the desk of Thomas’ chief of staff, Cathy Abernathy.

    “He didn’t make the cut for summer,” recalls Abernathy, who would hire him for the fall in the Bakersfield district field office. “He will mention in speeches often: ‘I’m the congressman from the district that turned me down to be an intern.’ It’s a true story.”

    McCarthy became Thomas’ protégé, learning about constituent work and then the politics of Sacramento and Washington. Ambition and an ability to engage with nearly everyone separated him from others.

    “Well, he’s probably the best homegrown candidate for public office that we have. Born and raised, then community college, college, and his masters’ degree – all from here,” says Abernathy, who remains a longtime ally. They have a symbiotic political, yet deeply personal, relationship. She recalls how just months after her husband died, McCarthy officiated her daughter’s wedding, offering counsel and solace to the family.

    “He’s in a bigger job, but he hasn’t forgotten small town America.”

    Kevin McCarthy marries Cathy Abernathy's daughter Margaret and Josh Brost in 2018.

    Thomas left Congress in 2007 and was succeeded by McCarthy. In the December 26 issue of The New Yorker, Thomas blasted his former protégé, saying, “Kevin basically is whatever you want him to be. He lies. He’ll change the lie, if necessary.”

    “The Kevin McCarthy who is now, at this time, in the House, isn’t the Kevin McCarthy I worked with,” Thomas was quoted as saying.

    The criticism came on top of Thomas’ first harsh public comments about his former staffer and friend shortly after the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol. Thomas gave an interview to a local TV station accusing McCarthy of rolling over for Donald Trump and his election lies for political expediency.

    McCarthy declined to speak with CNN for this story.

    McCarthy did condemn Trump soon after the attack on the Capitol, saying, “The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on Congress by mob rioters.”

    But not long after, McCarthy made a stunning reversal, saying, “I don’t believe he (Trump) provoked if you listened to what he said at the rally.”

    Since then, McCarthy has catered to some of his party’s contentious members, vowing to reinstate Reps. Paul Gosar of Arizona and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia on committees if Republicans won back the House.

    And despite the back-and-forth on Trump, the former president supported McCarthy’s run for speaker and made calls on his behalf for the holdout votes. Trump has publicly referred to McCarthy as “My Kevin.”

    The political malleability is familiar to Bakersfield conservative Paul Stine. The men have known each other since 1995, battling when they were young Republicans. “Kevin is the most adaptable politician I have ever seen in my life,” says Stine.

    Bakersfield conservative Paul Stine has known Kevin McCarthy since 1995.

    When they were younger, Stine viewed McCarthy as too centrist, like Thomas and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

    “If the Kevin of today had been the Kevin of the 1990s, I doubt he and I would have ever had an adversarial relationship. I think he knows how to evolve his positions enough to stay viable in the political game. Do I consider him a conservative ideologue? No, not at all,” Stine says.

    Dave Noerr, the mayor of Taft, a city in McCarthy’s district, brushes off the criticism, calling it a part of today’s politics. Noerr, who has worked with McCarthy since the early 2000s, calls him “unique and thorough in understanding energy and agriculture.”

    Noerr has worked in and around the oil industry for most of his life. His town and the entire district relies on the energy industry for jobs and money but is seeing a rapid evolution as oil production gets slammed.

    “By Kevin McCarthy coming from this area, understanding the need and the opportunity to integrate all those resources for the betterment of mankind, that is going to be critical to getting rid of the fantasies being peddled of some and the misunderstanding of so many,” says Noerr.

    Dave Noerr is the mayor of Taft, a city in Kevin McCarthy's district.

    Fanucchi, the Bakersfield farmer, declines to express her politics and state whether she agrees with McCarthy’s positions. More important to her is having a powerful representative in Washington who understands the challenges of feeding the nation in today’s economy.

    “He comes from here,” Fanucchi says of McCarthy. “We have direct access to him, and he has access to people to help us tell our story. Our story is that the lifeblood of the Central Valley, of California, is Ag, which requires water and requires space. I don’t ascribe to the belief that you have to be like me to think like me, to do something great for us in Kern County or for our nation. I think you have to have clear eyes and a strong mind and work hard.”

    Catherine Fanucchi, a farmer in Bakersfield, grew up with Kevin McCarthy.

    A Republican, Noerr has hopes that the slim majority his party now holds in the House will be a blessing to help his district, rather than a challenge.

    “The deep rifts that currently exist and unfortunately have been exacerbated recently, he’s (McCarthy) got to get rid of. We can find the common ground,” Noerr says. “Instead of having arguments, we have conversations. We will find that common ground. Do I think he can do that? Absolutely, I think he can.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Germany detains Iranian national suspected of planning a terror attack | CNN

    Germany detains Iranian national suspected of planning a terror attack | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    German police have detained an Iranian national on suspicion of planning a terror attack, authorities in the country said Sunday.

    Police in the western city of Munster said the 32-year-old man is believed to have procured unspecified amounts of the toxins cyanide and ricin in preparation for an “Islamist-motivated attack.”

    The suspect was detained following an investigation by the North Rhine-Westphalia Central Office for the Prosecution of Terrorism, a unit of the Düsseldorf Public Prosecutor’s Office, according to police.

    Police retrieved materials during a search of the suspect’s home in the city of Castrop-Rauxel and an investigation is ongoing, police said.

    Another person is also being held in connection with the case, police said, without providing more details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How McCarthy survived the House chaos to win the speaker’s gavel | CNN Politics

    How McCarthy survived the House chaos to win the speaker’s gavel | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz strode into House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy’s office on Monday night with a list of demands. Among them: The chairmanship of a key House Armed Services subcommittee.

    McCarthy rejected the offer. That decision set in motion a chain of events that left Gaetz and McCarthy locked in open confrontation on the House floor late Friday night. Gaetz, McCarthy’s staunchest opponent, dramatically denied McCarthy the final vote he needed to become speaker – then Gaetz and the last holdouts abruptly changed course allowing McCarthy to win the speaker’s gavel on his 15th attempt.

    See the moment Rep. Kevin McCarthy was elected House speaker

    Before the final vote, pandemonium erupted on the House floor after Gaetz waited until the very end of the 14th ballot to vote “present” when McCarthy needed one more “yes” vote. Stunned after believing he had the votes, McCarthy faced his most embarrassing defeat yet. McCarthy’s allies encircled Gaetz to try to find a way forward. McCarthy soon made a bee-line for discussion and started engaging Gaetz, too.

    After McCarthy walked away from Gaetz, looking dejected, Armed Services Chairman Mike Rogers moved toward the conversation and lunged at Gaetz, having to be physically restrained by Republican Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina. Rogers, a Republican from Alabama who earlier in the week warned the GOP dissidents they would lose their committee assignments, told Gaetz he would be “finished” for continuing to wreck the speaker’s vote.

    Nearby, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia was trying to convince Rep. Matt Rosendale of Montana, another McCarthy holdout, to take her cell phone and speak to former President Donald Trump, who was on the line.

    Finally, the House clerk announced for the 14th time that no one had the votes to be speaker. Republicans moved to adjourn the chamber until Monday. As the vote timer counted down, 218 Republicans had voted yes, a majority that would have sent McCarthy home for the weekend and left the House in paralysis at the hands of Gaetz and his allies.

    The sign at McCarthy's office is installed on Capitol Hill in Washington, early Saturday on January 7, 2023.

    But with less than a minute left to go in the vote, Gaetz moved toward the front of the chamber, grabbing a red index card to change his vote on adjournment. Gaetz walked toward McCarthy, and the two briefly exchanged words. McCarthy then raised his hand and yelled out, “One more!” as he triumphantly walked toward the front of the chamber to change his vote, too. It was the GOP leader’s final negotiation capping an emotional roller coaster over the course of four days as he was held hostage by a narrow faction of his conference. Dozens of Republicans followed McCarthy and Gaetz to defeat the adjournment measure, and McCarthy’s victory, at last, was at hand.

    The six Republican holdouts all voted present on the 15th ballot, giving McCarthy a 216-212 victory to end the longest speaker’s race since 1859. Rep. Tom Emmer, one of McCarthy’s top deputies, went up and down the aisles telling Republicans on the House floor not to clap for Gaetz or Rep. Lauren Boebert when they announced their votes, like they had for other holdouts who had flipped to McCarthy earlier in the day.

    Asked why he reversed course on McCarthy, Gaetz said, “I ran out of things I could even imagine to ask for.”

    McCarthy expressed relief as he left the floor: “I’m glad it’s over.”

    McCarthy denied Gaetz was offered the subcommittee gavel he had sought earlier in the week in exchange for his vote. “No one gets promised anything,” McCarthy said.

    Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., left, pulls Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., back as they talk with Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and other during the 14th round of voting for speaker as the House meets for the fourth day to try and elect a speaker and convene the 118th Congress in Washington, Friday, Jan. 6, 2023. At right is Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

    GOP lawmaker had to be restrained while confronting Gaetz. Hear what he told him

    The chaotic scramble to the speakership came after days of marathon negotiations that exposed deep divides within the GOP and threw into question their ability to govern effectively in the 118th Congress. But McCarthy’s victory after facing 20 defectors on Tuesday also highlighted the successful strategy concocted by McCarthy and his top lieutenants to defeat the self-proclaimed “Never Kevin” movement led by Gaetz.

    McCarthy’s strategy led to a breakthrough over two votes Friday afternoon, when McCarthy flipped 14 Republicans who had voted against him following marathon talks over House rules – setting the stage for the 11th-hour chaos with the final six holdouts.

    It’s too soon to say whether the four-day speaker drama will become little more than an historical footnote for the 118th Congress, or if it’s an early indicator of even more bruising fights to come. But the fight over the speaker’s gavel exposed the bitter fault lines bubbling up in the Republican Party for the better course of a decade that will hover over the House for the next two years.

    McCarthy’s concessions to the GOP dissidents are significant and could ultimately cut his tenure as speaker short. Among the rules changes: McCarthy agreed to restore a rule allowing a single Republican member to call for a vote to depose him as speaker, the same rule that led to John Boehner’s decision to resign as speaker in 2015.

    Still, McCarthy’s victory Friday now gives him the long-sought speaker’s gavel and the chance to lead a House that will quickly turn its focus to investigating President Joe Biden, his administration and his family. More challenging for McCarthy and his conference are the looming fights later this year over government spending and the debt ceiling, where McCarthy cut deals on spending during this week’s negotiations likely to be unacceptable both to Democrats and the White House as well as Senate Republicans.

    This account of how McCarthy finally won the fifth longest speaker’s fight in history is based on dozens of interviews throughout the week as the drama played out on and off the House floor with the fate of McCarthy’s political career and the legislative body itself hanging in the balance.

    WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 06: U.S. Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) offers a phone to Rep.-elect Matt Rosendale (R-MT) in the House Chamber during the fourth day of voting for Speaker of the House at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 06, 2023 in Washington, DC. The House of Representatives is meeting to vote for the next Speaker after House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) failed to earn more than 218 votes on several ballots; the first time in 100 years that the Speaker was not elected on the first ballot. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    Analysis: Dana Bash reacts to McCarthy thanking Trump for speaker role

    The morning following McCarthy’s Monday meeting with Gaetz, things got even worse for the GOP leader.

    In a tense meeting in the basement of the Capitol with the full House GOP Conference, McCarthy and Gaetz got into a screaming match. McCarthy called out his detractors for asking for personal favors, including Gaetz, whom he said informed him he didn’t care if Democrat Hakeem Jeffries was elected speaker so long as he didn’t get the job.

    Afterward, the Florida Republican accused McCarthy of acting in bad faith by asking him for a list of demands – and then by later berating him over it.

    “It was very unseemly,” Rep. Dan Bishop of North Carolina, one of the 20 who initially opposed McCarthy.

    That meeting – where Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado called out “bulls**t” on McCarthy and where the GOP leader engaged in heated exchanges with Reps. Chip Roy of Texas and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania – set the stage for the furious four-day battle.

    Afterward, McCarthy and his allies knew they had a problem. They saw his opposition growing amid anger over McCarthy’s threats and tough talk. So they began to work on a strategy: Take the temperature down and divide the opponents away from Gaetz and provide concessions to far-right members of the conference who want more say in the legislative process.

    mccarthy statuary hall

    McCarthy explains tense House floor discussion with Gaetz

    At noon, the House gaveled in the 118th Congress, and lawmakers swarmed the House floor, children in tow, for what was supposed to begin a day of pageantry. In a sign of the new Republican rules, the magnetometers installed by outgoing Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the wake of the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol were removed from the doors to the House floor.

    The first order of business quickly revealed the depth of the GOP opposition to McCarthy’s speakership bid.

    McCarthy needed 218 votes, a majority of the House, meaning he could only lose four of the 222 Republicans as long as all Democrats voted for Jeffries. The clerk called out the names of all 434 members to vote in alphabetical order. McCarthy was denied a majority before the House clerk was through the “C’s,” and 19 Republicans voted for someone other than McCarthy – leaving him 15 votes short.

    Jeffries, the new Democratic leader, got the most votes with 212.

    McCarthy’s camp hunkered down, preparing to go through multiple votes for speaker for the first time in a century. “We’re going to war,” a senior GOP source told CNN.

    McCarthy’s opponents were just as dug in. “We will never cave,” said Rep. Bob Good of Virginia.

    On the second ballot, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio – the Republican rabble-rouser turned McCarthy ally – rose to nominate McCarthy, after he had received six votes from the holdouts. Gaetz followed Jordan by nominating the Ohio Republican himself as a candidate. All 19 Republicans holdouts consolidated around Jordan, and the count ended in the same place as the first ballot.

    Before the third vote, Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida, who had voted for McCarthy on the first two ballots, told CNN that McCarthy failed to “close the deal.” When his name was called minutes later, Donalds announced he was voting for Jordan, McCarthy’s first defection.

    The list of McCarthy’s opponents grew to 20 when the third vote was announced, and the House adjourned for the day.

    Rep. Lauren Boebert stands next to Rep. Byron Donalds as she casts her vote in the House chamber during the second day of elections for speaker at the US Capitol on January 4, 2023.

    After the Tuesday’s three failed votes, McCarthy had debated having another GOP conference meeting. But the California Republican was advised not to, worried it would not be productive and would lead to another heated venting session that was leaked to the press in real time.

    WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 07: U.S. Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (D-CA) celebrates with the gavel after being elected in the House Chamber at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 07, 2023 in Washington, DC. After four days of voting and 15 ballots McCarthy secured enough votes to become Speaker of the House for the 118th Congress. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

    Hear Kevin McCarthy’s first speech as House speaker

    Instead, McCarthy’s camp ultimately decided small meetings would be more fruitful after the two factions retreated to their corners. McCarthy made his own round of calls Tuesday evening, including to former President Donald Trump. Before leaving the Capitol, McCarthy claimed to reporters he believed he was “not that far away” from the votes he needed.

    McCarthy said that the former president “reiterated support” for his speaker bid.

    The day before the vote for speaker, the former president had declined to issue a statement reiterating his endorsement of McCarthy despite a behind-the-scenes effort from several McCarthy allies to get Trump to do so.

    Finally, on Wednesday morning, Trump did release a statement on his social media site urging the House GOP to “VOTE FOR KEVIN.”

    The former president’s message had little effect.

    “I disagree with Trump. This is our fight. This isn’t Trump’s,” said South Carolina GOP Rep. Ralph Norman, one of the McCarthy dissenters.

    Trump continued to keep the House drama at arms’ length until Friday, when he made calls to Gaetz and Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona while they were on the House floor. After McCarthy won the speakership, Trump congratulated him on his social media site.

    Rep. Patrick McHenry, left, and Rep. Tom Emmer speak with McCarthy in the House chamber on January 4, 2023, as lawmakers meet for a second day to elect a speaker and convene the 118th Congress.

    When the House gaveled back into session Wednesday, McCarthy lacked the votes to adjourn the session, as some of his allies had wanted in order to keep negotiating. So McCarthy headed toward a fourth ballot.

    Jordan urged McCarthy’s opponents not to nominate him again. Instead, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas stood instead to nominate Donalds – the very Republican who had defected the day prior.

    While the McCarthy opponents did not grow their ranks – a sigh of relief for McCarthy – the California Republican still lost one vote: Rep. Victoria Spartz, an Indiana Republican, who voted present. Spartz told reporters her vote was intended to encourage the two sides to get back to the negotiating table.

    There were other signs that some of McCarthy’s backers weren’t willing to stick by him forever. Rep. Ken Buck, a Colorado Republican and House Freedom Caucus member, told CNN that “at some point” McCarthy needed to step aside and let now-Majority Leader Steve Scalise run. “What I’ve asked is that if Kevin can’t get there, that he step aside and give Steve a chance to do it,” Buck said.

    The atmosphere on the House floor on Wednesday was buzzing by the second vote. While Tuesday’s session was relatively calm, the opposing factions gathered on the floor to hold talks in real time in between the speaker votes.

    At the same time the House was taking vote after vote for speaker, Biden was speaking in Kentucky at an event with Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell promoting the 2021 infrastructure bill McConnell helped pass. Biden’s speech gave the White House – and Senate Republicans – a split screen that laid bare the vast contrast with the House Republican infighting.

    “It’s embarrassing for the country,” Biden said of the House chaos.

    President Joe Biden greets Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on arrival at Cincinnati Northern Kentucky International Airport in Hebron, Kentucky, on January 4, 2023.

    After the sixth vote ended with an identical outcome as the fifth, the House adjourned for several hours. The break gave the two sides more time to negotiate, and some of the hardliners said they saw some progress.

    A group of Republicans decamped to the office of Minnesota Rep. Tom Emmer, the new House majority whip. Bishop said things had changed over the past couple of hours and he was “encouraged” by the talks.

    But it wasn’t clear that the meeting would lead to a breakthrough. Gaetz pledged that the McCarthy dissenters could continue to hold votes “until the cherry blossoms fall off the trees.” Boebert said the “boats are burned” when it comes to any future negotiations with McCarthy.

    When the House gaveled back into session, Republicans moved to adjourn for the night rather than take another failed speaker vote. GOP leaders were hopeful that the ongoing talks would convince McCarthy’s opponents to vote for adjournment, but with just four votes to spare, the roll-call vote was tight.

    All Democrats and four McCarthy opponents voted against adjourning, and the motion was in danger of failing – which would have forced the House to keep voting for speaker. But two Democrats weren’t in attendance, and the House clerk gaveled an end to the vote, 216 to 214.

    McCarthy had at least one more day to try to get his detractors to yes.

    Rep. Jim Jordan talks with  McCarthy in the House chamber as the House meets on January 4, 2023, to elect a speaker.

    On Wednesday evening, McCarthy agreed to several key concessions to try to flip at least some of his opponents.

    McCarthy had been in talks with Roy, who told GOP leaders he thought he could get 10 holdouts to come along with him. McCarthy also met separately Wednesday evening with freshman members who voted against him.

    In perhaps the biggest concession, McCarthy agreed to allow just one member to call for a vote to oust a sitting speaker. McCarthy had initially proposed a five-member threshold, down from current conference rules that require half of the GOP to call for such a vote.

    McCarthy also pledged to allow more members of the Freedom Caucus to serve on the Rules Committee and to hold votes for bills that were priorities for the holdouts, including on border security and term limits.

    In another sign of a breakthrough, a McCarthy-aligned super PAC, the Congressional Leadership Fund, agreed to not get involved in open primaries in safe seats – one of the demands conservatives had asked for but McCarthy had resisted.

    “I think we’re making progress,” McCarthy said Thursday morning as he arrived at the Capitol for a third day of votes.

    The GOP dissidents also sounded a positive note. “We’re making some progress,” Bishop told CNN as he was walking into a meeting Thursday morning with other GOP hardliners.

    McCarthy leaves a private meeting room off the floor at the US Capitol on January 5, 2023, as he negotiates with lawmakers in his own party to become the speaker of the House.

    Despite the optimistic chatter Thursday morning, the House gaveled into session at noon without a deal. And while McCarthy’s allies had considered trying to postpone additional votes so a deal could be finalized, McCarthy lacked the votes to adjourn.

    Instead, lawmakers followed two tracks into the evening: taking vote after vote on the House floor for speaker, while negotiations continued behind closed doors.

    The outcome did not change with each floor vote. While the GOP holdouts shifted who received their anti-McCarthy votes – Boebert nominated Rep. Kevin Hern of Oklahoma on vote No. 9, and Gaetz nominated Trump on the 11th ballot – none shifted to McCarthy’s side.

    Twenty-one Republicans didn’t support McCarthy on ballot number seven. Same with eight, nine, 10 and 11.

    Behind the scenes, however, the holdouts who weren’t in the “never Kevin” camp continued talking with McCarthy and his allies, inching closer to a deal.

    By the early evening Thursday, there was an offer “on paper.” Three of the key negotiators – Emmer, Roy and Donalds – huddled with McCarthy in his ceremonial office, following a session in Emmer’s office for one group to review the written agreement to break the stalemate. Another group huddled in the member’s dining room on the first floor of the Capitol to discuss a separate part of the written deal.

    “We’re still working through it,” Roy said leaving Emmer’s office.

    “Each meeting is more positive than the last. And that’s a very nice sign,” Rep. Patrick McHenry, a key negotiator on McCarthy’s side, told reporters.

    The discussions in Emmer’s office continued late into the evening Thursday in an attempt to get to yes. Chipotle was wheeled in for dinner.

    One factor complicating the talks was a handful Republicans were expected to leave Washington due to various family issues. Buck left Thursday afternoon for a planned medical procedure. Rep. Wesley Hunt flew back to Texas to be with his wife and newborn, who had to spend some time in the neonatal intensive care unit.

    McCarthy reacts after losing the 14th vote in the House chamber as the House meets on January 6, 2023, for the fourth day to elect a speaker and convene the 118th Congress.

    On Friday morning, House Democrats marked the second anniversary of the January 6, 2021, attack on the steps of the Capitol. Just one Republican attended: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.

    Republicans huddled once again as a conference for the first time since the heated Tuesday meeting. This time, McCarthy organized a conference call, which could be more easily managed, rather than an in-person session. On the call, McCarthy told his conference that a deal had not yet been finalized but that progress had been made. He specifically thanked Roy, a key holdout, for his role.

    Before the House gaveled back into session, McCarthy predicted he would win over some holdovers, though there were still reasons for him to be pessimistic the finish line was in sight.

    “I’ll be voting for Byron Donalds,” Norman told CNN on his way to the floor, saying he was still reviewing the emerging agreement.

    The 12th vote for speaker began the same as the 11 before it. Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona was the first Republican to vote against McCarthy. Then Bishop, the next McCarthy opponent in the roll call, rose to cast his vote.

    “McCarthy,” Bishop said, prompting his fellow Republicans to leap from their seats with a standing ovation.

    Freshman Rep. John Brecheen of Oklahoma was the next to flip, prompting another round of Republican cheers. By the end of the roll call, 14 holdouts, including Norman, had called McCarthy’s name. He was still short of the votes he needed for speaker, but the tide had turned. Only seven McCarthy opponents remained.

    On the 13th vote, the GOP leader peeled off one more detractor, Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland. The House voted to adjourn until 10 p.m. ET – providing time both for the two missing McCarthy supporters time to return to Washington and for McCarthy’s allies to turn up the heat on the remaining holdouts.

    McCarthy needed two more votes. McCarthy and his allies focused on Rep. Matt Rosendale of Montana and freshman Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona either to support McCarthy or vote present, lowering the vote threshold to win a majority.

    There were multiple avenues to a majority and the speakership for McCarthy. The simplest path was to peel off two more votes and hit 218. But if McCarthy’s remaining GOP opponents would not vote for him, the California could still obtain a majority if three of the six detractors voted “present.” In addition to Rosendale and Crane, McCarthy’s allies looked to Boebert as a potential present vote.

    Gaetz and Boebert appeared to acknowledge the end of the speaker fight was near before the House returned to session, sitting for a joint interview with Fox’s Sean Hannity and expressing vague optimisms for the rules changes the holdouts had won.

    But as the House gaveled back into session, Gaetz went to McCarthy’s senior aide and asked whether the House could adjourn until Monday. Gaetz offer was rejected, leading to the final chaos over the course of the 14th and 15th votes for speaker.

    Early Saturday morning, following 14 losses and more than 84 hours after the beginning of the 118th Congress, the House clerk finally announced McCarthy was elected House speaker.

    Before the chaos over the final vote, McCarthy earlier Friday had sounded an optimistic note that the lengthy fight over the gavel would actually help Republicans. “So this is the great part. Because it took this long, now we’ve learned how to govern,” McCarthy said. “So now we’ll be able to get the job done.”

    Gaetz, however, suggested the historic fight would have a different impact on McCarthy’s speakership. Due to the concessions, Gaetz argued, McCarthy will be governing in a “straitjacket.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Marcy Kaptur breaks new record in Congress with a familiar warning for the Democratic Party | CNN Politics

    Marcy Kaptur breaks new record in Congress with a familiar warning for the Democratic Party | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Rep. Marcy Kaptur becomes the longest-serving woman in Congress this week after winning her first competitive race in decades. But she sees her work in Washington as far from over.

    “I operate in a different way than many of my colleagues simply because of what I have lived,” said the Ohio Democrat, who was the first in her family to graduate from college and represents the kind of Rust Belt community slipping away from her party.

    “So why do I stay? It isn’t just to get a title that she stayed the longest. But to use every ounce of strength I have to try to hammer this message: You’re leaving us out. You’re not seeing us.”

    First elected in 1982, Kaptur became the longest-serving woman in the US House of Representatives in 2018. But now she’s breaking the record of former Maryland Sen. Barbara Mikulski, a fellow Democrat who retired at the end of 2016 after 40 years in Congress. Throughout that time, Kaptur has urged her party – especially leadership, which has often been dominated by lawmakers from the coasts – to wake up to the plight of “industrial and agricultural America,” not only for the survival of the party, but also for democracy.

    In an interview with CNN late last year, Kaptur recalled approaching a “very high-ranking member of the House” and warning that the federal government needed to invest in the middle of the country. “We are going to have political unrest. I even used a stronger word. I said even perhaps fascism,” she said.

    That was before the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.

    Kaptur won a 21st term in November in a district that was redrawn from heavily Democrat to more Republican, defeating an election denier who was at the Capitol on January 6.

    J.R. Majewski has said he went to protest peacefully and left when “it got ugly,” but the House GOP’s campaign arm eventually cut off spending for him in the district after revelations about him misrepresenting his military record. Kaptur, although she faced criticism from some constituents that she’d been in Washington too long, won by 13 points.

    “I view myself like the Statue of Freedom on top of the Capitol. It is a woman and she looks east to the rising sun,” said Kaptur, who counts among her proudest achievements the 17-year struggle for the construction of the World War II memorial. It was one of her constituents, a letter carrier from the village of Berkey, who pushed her to introduce legislation for it.

    Kaptur left a doctorate program at MIT to run for Congress, having already worked for President Jimmy Carter as a domestic policy adviser. She was one of just 24 women in Congress when she arrived. Today there are 149.

    “So that is really consequential progress – in one generation,” Kaptur said of the record number of women serving this year. She wrote a book in 1996 about women in Congress in the 20th century, joking that she’s been too busy to update it.

    But having more women in Congress is less important to Kaptur than where the women are from and the kinds of communities they represent.

    “As a woman, let me just say, if you come from the part of America where I do – and I don’t just mean geographically, but I mean economically – we still don’t have a majority.”

    “What’s the difference between a very rich woman and man in Congress?” asked Kaptur, who lives in the same Toledo house she grew up in. “People like us, we’re there. We’re there. We are radishes in a salad. … But we’re important voices because what we have experienced enlightens the dialogue.”

    She fought for years to get a spot on the House Appropriations Committee – eventually going up against Nancy Pelosi. “I was so offended,” Kaptur said, casting it as the “fight of a hardscrabble working-class person” against a former head of the Democratic Party of California.

    Kaptur has occasionally been at odds with Pelosi in leadership races – even briefly challenging her for party leader in 2002 – although the two women have recently praised and supported each other. Kaptur’s voting record on abortion has also evolved to be more in line with the national party.

    When the Ohio Democrat got to the Appropriations Committee in the early 1990s, she was one of only three women. Democratic then-Rep. Lindy Boggs of Louisiana had to tell her to stand up when addressing the panel.

    She’s unsuccessfully sought to lead the committee – losing out to women from more coastal states. But in 2019, she became the first woman to chair the subcommittee on energy and water development and her bill to create the Great Lakes Authority – a federal regional commission to address environmental and economic issues – recently passed as part of the omnibus spending package.

    Still, she said, it can be hard to be heard.

    This Capitol Hill duo has worked on family issues for nearly 30 years

    “When you’re not in leadership, you don’t have a seat at the table – maybe you have your subcommittee or your committee, something like that – but it almost is impenetrable,” she said of the institution. “And the American people know it. They feel it and that’s why they’re becoming radical in their political expressions.”

    But she credits President Joe Biden for visiting Lorain, a city in Northeast Ohio, last year. “That is unheard of. Joe Biden is trying. He’s in a party that can’t see places like Lorain and Cleveland and Toledo.”

    She laments the defeat of Democrat Tim Ryan, whom she backed in last year’s Ohio Senate race, and blames the national party for long ignoring disaffected voters who ultimately backed the Republican nominee.

    “So my struggle is unending. And I hope God gives me the years, maybe I can pound some of this sense into the institution, but I don’t know,” Kaptur said.

    And then, with a laugh, later added, “I gotta stay as long as Mitch McConnell.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link