ReportWire

Tag: unrest

  • 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

  • How an American hero ‘lit his legacy on fire’ | CNN Politics

    How an American hero ‘lit his legacy on fire’ | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    Watch “Giuliani: What Happened to America’s Mayor?” on CNN at 9 p.m. ET/PT on Sunday, January 8.



    CNN
     — 

    The evolution of Rudy Giuliani is an epic tale. A celebrated crime fighter who brought down mafia bosses and put Wall Street crooks behind bars, he traded on trust and integrity to prove Republicans could still get elected as mayors of big cities.

    His empathy and leadership on 9/11 in New York City made him a global figure and a bona fide hero.

    How that man, who used to get standing ovations whenever he entered a room, morphed into former President Donald Trump’s conspiracy theory lackey peddling lies about the 2020 election is the subject of the new CNN Original Series, “Giuliani: What Happened to America’s Mayor?”

    The images of Giuliani’s early success paired with his later disgrace are striking and sad.

    I reached out to one key voice in the series, CNN political analyst John Avlon, who was Giuliani’s chief speech writer during his second term as mayor, including on 9/11, and later worked for Giuliani’s presidential campaign.

    Excerpts of our conversation about Avlon’s perceptions of the series and what happened to his old boss are below.

    WOLF: The Giuliani of today is at the fulcrum of so many of Trump’s problems. Giuliani’s dirt digging in Ukraine contributed to the first Trump impeachment. Giuliani helped enable the election denialism that led to the second Trump impeachment. How would you describe his place in Trump’s political history?

    AVLON: I think that among some hard-core Trump true believers, Rudy will be scapegoated as the source of Trump’s multiple problems. I think that’s an attempt to evade Trump’s responsibility for the chaos he himself caused.

    But you have got to hand it to him – Rudy is the first presidential lawyer whose actions contributed to not one, but two impeachments. That’s a special place in American history. And unfortunately, I think this tragic last chapter in his life will overwhelm the very positive, constructive role he played in different chapters of his life.

    I don’t think it’ll ultimately eclipse 9/11 and his leadership on that day. But he lit his legacy on fire in service of Donald Trump and got nothing in return except disgrace, ignominy, (possible) disbarment and a gutting of his personal fortune.

    WOLF: I think a lot of people will be surprised to learn about those earlier chapters. He’s this prosecutor who brought down mafia families and insider traders. He’s the mayor who cleaned up the city. How does that guy become the conspiracy theory pusher?

    AVLON: That’s, to a large extent, what the documentary is about. I think it is important for people to remember he was a leading lawyer of his generation, with an objective record of success in terms of dismantling the mob and taking on Wall Street.

    That alone would have made him a major figure in contemporary American politics. But then what he did as mayor was absolutely remarkable. George Will called it America’s most successful case of conservative governance.

    I worked for him in City Hall in his second term as chief speechwriter, and if you just look at the data of what he did, it’s remarkable:

    He cut murders by 68%, crime by 56%.

    He turned a $2 billion deficit into a multibillion-dollar surplus.

    He cut taxes for New Yorkers.

    He improved the quality of life.

    I think his policies ushered in an era of resurgence for urban America. In New York City, I think 20 years of Rudy and (Michael) Bloomberg together really helped turn around the city in fundamental ways.

    The tragedy – and I use the term advisedly because it’s self-inflicted, but it is tragic – is that the guy who believed that the law is a search for the truth ended up trying to defend his client in the court of public opinion using the law in pursuit of a lie.

    I think that he got caught in a right-wing echo chamber ecosystem, where he was totally invested in an alternate reality that was fundamentally hyperpartisan and therefore they couldn’t even conceive of losing fairly.

    And so at the end of the day, they tried to overturn an election, overturn our democracy on the basis of a pretty self-evident lie with no evidence.

    I’m not going to try to diagnose how he’s changed. But the filter in the judgment of the man I knew and was proud to work for is fundamentally off.

    WOLF: The perception is that he has changed as a person, but there are these interesting moments in the documentary that presage the Rudy of today. We see a riot of police officers at City Hall in 1992 that is compared with the riot at the Capitol. In ’89, he suggested but did not pursue the idea that there had been fraudulent voting. Has he actually changed, or has he just been uncovered?

    AVLON: Robert Caro has a great line about how power doesn’t corrupt, power reveals. I’m always more inclined to believe the adage that as people grow older, they get more so. There are moments, and the documentary makes a lot of them, to draw a narrative connection between the police riot and January 6th. The person I knew and worked for – those incidents did not define him on a day-to-day basis.

    Character counts. One of the things for good or for ill about Rudy, and something that I learned on 9/11, is you don’t have to be perfect to be a hero. Rudy was not one of these politicians who pretended to be perfect.

    He understood that he was a flawed human being and was actively interested in figuring out his flaws and what motivated him in certain low times. He was someone who thought philosophically about politics.

    If you talked to him about his position on abortion, for example, he would, in an unpretentious way, start talking about St. Thomas Aquinas, the debate about when life begins.

    He was also the kind of human who thought about becoming a priest and ended up becoming a prosecutor. But I think there has been a change in his judgment.

    The Trump orbit tends to attract people who are not at their best in terms of stability. Rudy found attention and relevance at the expense of his legacy and reputation.

    WOLF: It was instructive for me to revisit just how much of a national hero he was after 9/11. How do you think that specifically affected him? You saw it happen.

    AVLON: First of all, there is a misperception that’s partly partisan nature that Rudy was deeply unpopular before 9/11. That is statistically not true.

    That’s not to say he wasn’t controversial and divisive at times. What he would say is that when you’re turning around a ship at sea, you’ve got to throw your shoulder to the wheel.

    9/11 was a classic case of the man meeting the moment. The New York Observer, which was often critical of Rudy, said that he distinguished himself almost overnight as New York’s greatest mayor.

    He became seen as sort of a modern-day Churchill and that was because of his instinctive response to an unprecedented massive attack.

    And it was also because of his empathy and his honesty. He was able to channel grief in a constructive direction. He was resolute. He said the number of people who died was more than any of us can bear, and he was an inspiration to a fundamentally shaken and horrified world.

    And it was extraordinary. For months and years afterward, he would be greeted with standing ovations when he walked in the room.

    I think it’s a little too simple to say that creates a presumption of that kind of reception wherever you go. But I think what it does is highlight how tragic the fall has been.

    And if he had kept his credibility as sort of a centrist Republican senior statesman who was tough on the issues that a lot of people care about – law and order, fiscal discipline, etc., including on social issues – he could have played a major stabilizing force within the Republican Party.

    He could have been somebody who parks and statues and streets would have been named after across the nation, because of his example of leadership on that day, which was the apotheosis of his career. That was a reflection of the true mettle and character.

    WOLF: You talked about him being a Republican in a Democratic city. He wasn’t the only big city Republican mayor. Los Angeles had one at the time. Republicans put up John McCain for president in 2008. Mitt Romney tried to be severely conservative, but these days he’s just about as moderate as Republicans get. Do you think Republicans are interested in moving back into that middle ground and governing a big city as opposed to just using it as a foil for their national ambitions?

    AVLON: It’s a great and important question. If you take the biggest possible step back at America’s historical political divisions, you’ll see that much bigger than Democrat / Republican or liberal / conservative is urban vs. rural.

    We need urban Republicans and rural Democrats to help bridge divides. When there were progressive Republicans back in the day, particularly in the Northeast, and conservative Democrats, there were a ton of problems. But you could always find governing majorities within divided government. You could cobble together coalition.

    The decline of urban Republicans and rural Democrats is enormously disruptive for the country in terms of further inflaming hyperpartisanship and polarization and the kind of distrust that already exists culturally kind of in our America.

    Republicans should care about playing in urban areas, and Democrats should care a hell of a lot more about playing in rural areas in red states.

    WOLF: We tend to think that it was proximity to Trump that radicalized Rudy, but there’s a riff in the documentary about Giuliani’s visceral reaction to the Barack Obama presidency, similar to how Trump reacted to Obama’s presidency, actually. I wondered how you felt about seeing that portion.

    AVLON: After his presidential campaign, he becomes more and more sort of isolated in that bubble. That right-wing ecosystem. It’s a form of acculturation where the hyperpartisan environment becomes kind of assumed.

    It’s the places you’re giving speeches. It’s the television networks you watch. You spend all your time with partisans. It isolates you from the act of responsibility of governing and uniting a very diverse city – even certainly he had challenges with that.

    I think that his animus toward Hillary Clinton and the Clintons was one of the things that drove him to embrace Donald Trump late in the (2016) campaign.

    By the way, he never endorsed (former New Jersey Gov.) Chris Christie or (former Florida Gov.) Jeb Bush, but he really was inclined to support either of them first, because they’re the kind of Republicans that he was.

    After he made that comment about Obama, I believe it was a fundraiser for (then-Wisconsin Gov.) Scott Walker, he actually called me at home to explain himself. (Read CNN’s report from 2015, when Giuliani said he didn’t think Obama “loves America.”)

    It was strange, because I think we just had our first son, and Margaret and I met working on his presidential campaign. (Avlon is married to the CNN political commentator and host of PBS’ “Firing Line,” Margaret Hoover). And he called me to, like, explain what he meant.

    I thought it was revealing of the right-wing media he had been ingesting, and also that somewhere there was a degree of guilt that he felt the need to explain himself to me, who worked for him before, a long time ago.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Times Square machete attack suspect indicted on terrorism charges | CNN

    Times Square machete attack suspect indicted on terrorism charges | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Trevor Bickford, the 19-year-old accused of attacking New York Police Department officers with a machete on New Year’s Eve, was indicted Friday on more than a dozen charges, including several terrorism charges, prosecutors announced.

    Bickford now faces three counts of attempted murder in the first degree, as well as three counts of attempted murder in the first degree in furtherance of an act of terrorism, one count of assault in the first degree as a crime of terrorism, one count of aggravated assault on a police officer as a crime of terrorism, two counts of attempted assault in the first degree as a crime of terrorism, and several other charges related to assault and attempted assault.

    “We are grateful for our NYPD officers who put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe, as well as our Joint Terrorism Task Force partners,” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a statement Friday evening.

    “All eyes are on Times Square on New Year’s Eve and these charges reflect the seriousness of this alleged threat to the safety of our city and our officers,” Bragg added.

    Rosemary Vassallo-Vellucci, Bickford’s attorney with the Legal Aid Society, said Wednesday her client should be presumed innocent.

    Bickford allegedly went to the Times Square checkpoint just after 10 p.m., authorities said. At the security area, he allegedly pulled out a machete, struck one officer with the blade and another officer in the head with the handle, and then swung the blade at a third officer, who shot Bickford in the shoulder, according to law enforcement sources and the NYPD.

    The three officers were hospitalized in stable condition and released, the department previously said.

    At his arraignment on Wednesday, prosecutors said the suspect tried to grab a gun from an officer during the attack but could not get it out of the holster.

    Prosecutors also alleged the suspect said all government officials were his target because in his mind, they “cannot be proper Muslims because the United States government supports Israel.”

    According to law enforcement sources briefed on the investigation, Bickford told officers he went to Times Square that night prepared to kill, but only agents of the government, not civilians.

    Bickford said he was about to attack a police officer who was talking to a woman with a small child, but did not want to risk injuring the woman and child so he attacked the next officer from behind and then engaged the other two officers who came to his aid, the sources said.

    Prosecutor Lucy Nicholas also alleged in court Wednesday the suspect “admitted that he purposefully waited until he saw a moment when the officer was isolated and not near any civilian when he could attack him.”

    Multiple law enforcement sources with direct knowledge of the case also previously told CNN a diary which was found in the suspect’s backpack expressed a desire to join the Taliban and it criticized his brother for joining the US military.

    The suspect also worried his mother would not repent to Allah, according to another writing in the diary, the sources said.

    Bickford had also been interviewed by FBI agents in Maine last month after he said he wanted to travel overseas to help fellow Muslims and was willing to die for his religion, according to multiple law enforcement sources.

    Bickford’s mother and grandmother became increasingly concerned about his desire to travel to Afghanistan to join the Taliban and reported this to the Wells, Maine, police department out of concern for him on December 10, the sources said.

    When the FBI opened its wider investigation, they also placed him on a terrorist watch list, according to sources. Because the Taliban is not designated a foreign terrorist entity, planning to travel to Afghanistan to join the group does not constitute the federal crime of “attempted material support of a terrorist group.”

    Multiple law enforcement sources told CNN Bickford traveled to New York via Amtrak, so those travels would not have tripped any watch list databases.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Michigan attorney general re-opens criminal probe into fake electors for Trump | CNN Politics

    Michigan attorney general re-opens criminal probe into fake electors for Trump | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has re-opened her criminal investigation into fake electors who signed a certificate claiming former President Donald Trump won the state in the 2020 election when he did not, she said on Friday.

    Nessel, a Democrat who previously referred the matter to federal prosecutors, told reporters that she is “a little worried” that more than a year has passed since she referred cases related to the false slates of electors to the Justice Department and believes there is “clear evidence” to support charges against the fake electors from Michigan.

    “What we have seen from the January 6 committee is an overwhelming amount of evidence. I thought that there was already a substantial amount of evidence in that case. But now, there is just clear evidence to support charges against those 16 false electors, at least in our state,” Nessel said.

    “Quite candidly, yes, we are re-opening our investigation because I don’t know what the federal government plans to do,” she added.

    CNN has reached out to the Justice Department for comment.

    Nessel said last January that her office had been evaluating charges related to the effort to put forward a slate of fake electors from Michigan. At the time, Nessel said publicly she was “confident we have enough evidence to charge” people under state law for “forgery of a public record,” and other crimes. But ultimately, she decided to ask the Justice Department to investigate.

    On Friday, the second anniversary of the January 6 attack on the US Capitol in Washington, DC, Nessel confirmed the state investigation has been re-opened, noting it’s unclear how the Justice Department probe is proceeding.

    Witness emails, text messages and testimony from the House January 6 committee – all of which are now in the possession of DOJ prosecutors working under special counsel Jack Smith, show Trump’s role in pushing alternate slates of electors, pressing battleground state officials to overturn the election results, attempting to replace the acting attorney general with someone who would embrace election fraud claims, and laying the early groundwork to call his followers to the US Capitol.

    The committee’s investigation has given a fuller and more nuanced picture of the interconnected plots that the DOJ has been investigating, including the scheme to put forward slates of illegitimate Trump electors from battleground states that Joe Biden won to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence and Congress to halt the certification of the results.

    That includes the Trump team’s efforts in Michigan, as newly released testimony from state officials revealed new details about the involvement of the former president’s campaign and legal team.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why Colombia was forced to backtrack on a promising ceasefire announcement | CNN

    Why Colombia was forced to backtrack on a promising ceasefire announcement | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNNE
     — 

    What began as a hopeful announcement of a six-month ceasefire with the National Liberation Army (ELN) and other armed groups in Colombia, has ended in a political entanglement that casts doubts on the armed groups’ desire for peace – and raises questions about Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s future announcements regarding the ongoing peace process.

    The Colombian government’s own chief negotiator, Otty Patiño, has since acknowledged that the agreement was not reached bilaterally. On Wednesday, the Colombian government spokesman announced that the executive order for the ceasefire had been suspended.

    Analysts agree that it was a mistake to make the announcement without reaching a bilateral agreement, and believe that Petro’s government now faces a long way to go to right the wrong.

    Here is a summary of what happened in recent days regarding the agreement of a bilateral ceasefire – that never happened – and what may happen in the future.

    President Petro announced the ceasefire on December 31, giving hope to many sectors, especially communities plagued by violence.

    He said that for six months, starting January 1, there would be a ceasefire with the ELN and four other armed groups: la Segunda Marquetalia (the Second Marquetalia), el Estado Mayor Central (High Command of the FARC), Autodefensas Gaitanistas de Colombia (the Gaitanista Self-Defense Forces of Colombia) and the Autodefensas de la Sierra Nevada (Self-Defence Forces of the Sierra Nevada).

    “The main objective of the ceasefire will be to stop the humanitarian impact… to halt offensive actions and to avoid armed incidents between law enforcement and unlawful organizations,” the statement said.

    The announcement was applauded by many, including United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who in a statement indicated that he “welcomes” the announcement of the bilateral ceasefire since it “brings renewed hope for comprehensive peace to the Colombian people as the New Year dawns.”

    According to Petro, the Organization of American States (OAS), as well as the Catholic Church and the Ombudsman’s Office, would oversee the bilateral ceasefire.

    But the bilateral agreement did not happen.

    Three days later, the ELN said in a statement that there was no bilateral ceasefire agreement with the Colombian government as Petro had announced on December 31.

    “The ELN Dialogue Delegation has not discussed with the administration of Gustavo Petro any proposal for a bilateral ceasefire, therefore there is still no agreement on that matter,” says the January 1 statement.

    The guerrillas said that “the ELN only complies with what is discussed and agreed upon at the Dialogue Table where we participate,” adding that the announcement is understood to be “a proposal to be reviewed in the next cycle” that will be carried out in Mexico.

    Reuters reported that the announcement completely shocked the public, and after the announcement, Petro convened a meeting with the ministers of defense, interior and the high commissioner for peace to analyze the position of the rebel group, made up of some 2,400 fighters.

    Colombian Interior Minister and government spokesman Alfonso Prada Gil on Wednesday announced at a press conference that the executive order establishing a ceasefire with the ELN had been suspended.

    A new meeting between the parties is expected at negotiations between the ELN and the government of Colombia that will resume in Mexico

    “We became aware of the statement of the ELN, and last night we made the decision to suspend the legal effects of that executive order until the negotiation table is reactivated in the coming days, and at that table we are going to bring that request of the protocols on behalf of the government, and we hope that the ELN will bring theirs, so that we can reactivate the dialogue,” he said.

    Prada Gil invited the ELN to agree to a temporary ceasefire, while the next round of negotiations begin in Mexico.

    After the uproar caused by the announcement, the head of the government’s delegation for the negotiation, Otty Patiño, did not clarify that Petro made a unilateral announcement without consulting the guerrillas, but instead “celebrated” the ELN’s decision to “examine the terms” that could make the ceasefire possible.

    Interior minister Alfonso Prada speaks next to the High Commissioner for Peace, Danilo Rueda (L), and the Minister of Defense, Ivan Velasquez (R), during a press conference in Bogota on January 4, 2023.

    He also ventured to “interpret” Petro’s failed announcement as a “first step towards a new understanding and a new future.”

    Analysts have agreed that Petro’s announcement of a bilateral ceasefire was a mistake, but some posit that it was the president’s way of pressuring the guerillas and, trying to advance the peace process with the ELN.

    “It is evident that it is a mistake to proclaim a ceasefire with several organizations without having agreed to do so with all of them and without having the protocols for the oversight either. It is a mistake to commit the international community to something that is not yet agreed by the parties, but we are already in it,” political analyst Leon Valencia said Tuesday.

    Meanwhile, retired Army Colonel Luis Alberto Villamarín said, Petro’s bilateral announcement was a move that backfired.

    “He considered that by making a move like this he was going to subdue the ELN. Because the only means the ELN has to put pressure on the negotiating table is precisely their terrorist actions. And if the ELN commits to a bilateral ceasefire, that will prevent them from being strong on the negotiating table,” Villamarín said in an interview on CNNE’s Conclusiones.

    “The only argument the ELN has is terrorism and Mr. Petro thought that he could take that away from them, tying their hands,” said the retired Army Colonel. “It was calculated but the ELN responded in kind,” he added.

    Petro’s goal is to achieve what he calls “total peace,” which is also a political goal of his government.

    He wants to disarm armed groups and organized crime and put an end a decades-long armed conflict that has left at least 450,000 dead and millions displaced.

    And with that in mind, Petro’s administration has a two-prong approach: a peace negotiation with ELN guerrillas that have a political agenda, and legal processes with criminal organizations, which have no political agenda, said political analyst Ariel Avila, who is also a senator for the Green Party.

    “This ceasefire includes the five organizations, the largest armed groups, and therefore safety could improve in about 180 municipalities… in the country,” Avila said in an interview with CNNE’s Conclusiones. “There will be areas where relief will be very low, as there are others where these groups (sic) have total relief where relief will be much greater.”

    Despite Petro’s mistake of making that announcement without a bilateral agreement in place, he should still try and reach to reach a similar agreement, say experts, since the proposal was made public and it has been welcomed by the international community.

    “Gustavo Petro made the bold move to propose a bilateral ceasefire without discussing it with the armed forces and with the ELN. Now it is known and widely accepted and supported by the international community. What is appropriate now is to agree on it urgently,” said León Valencia.

    And if this agreement is reached, it would be twice as good, according to Avila, it will entail signing an agreement with the ELN, and implementing a law abiding process with the criminal organizations.

    “The criminal delivers truth and delivers goods and in return the state offers a reduction of the sentence,” he pointed out.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McCarthy takes desperation for speakership to new level | CNN Politics

    McCarthy takes desperation for speakership to new level | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Kevin McCarthy is so desperate to be speaker, he’s ready to gut his own power just to get the job.

    The California Republican unveiled major concessions on Wednesday evening after he was stung by right-wing radicals who blocked his bid for power in six humiliating votes – a farcical debut for the new GOP-led House.

    The moves – just proposals for now that have not been agreed upon – could not only enshrine the chaotic instability of the tiny new Republican majority, they could also make him a permanent hostage of his party’s most extreme voices. And a neutered speaker unable to force his members into hard votes could have grave implications with Congress facing critical decisions later this year, including a need to raise the government’s borrowing limit – a duty that if not fulfilled could pitch the US and global economies into crisis.

    CNN’s Manu Raju and Melanie Zanona reported late Wednesday that McCarthy had agreed to a rule change that would allow a single member to call for a vote to oust a sitting speaker, according to two sources familiar with the matter. The top Republican also agreed to more power for the far-right Freedom Caucus, which would help shape how and when bills get to the floor. The concessions are likely to concern many more moderate members of the incoming majority, who fear their electorates in swing seats will be turned off by more extremism.

    The proposals surfaced after the new House majority finally agreed on something Wednesday: following another day of feuding and insults, they narrowly voted to adjourn their futile search for a speaker until Thursday.

    Cheers that erupted from Republican benches when the vote closed reflected the risible state of the House’s new GOP management, which is unable to perform the only task it currently has – choosing a leader – and is holding up the functioning of the chamber.

    The idea that a fresh new majority is riding into town to do the American peoples’ business is in tatters. The mess in the new House on Tuesday and Wednesday suggested that every tough vote, and even easy ones, in the new House could be gummed up by the reality of a dysfunctional majority when small groups of members could shut the chamber down.

    On one side is McCarthy, who is refusing to cede his personal aspirations for power despite growing evidence he may never win the votes he needs in his own party. Even if he does squeak through after caving repeatedly to his critics, he will be a fatally weakened speaker.

    “The country or Kevin McCarthy. Which should have more weight?” said recently retired GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who is now a CNN political analyst.

    On the other side is a band of right-wing zealots, holding their party, the House and the country hostage – some with no clear objective other than to destroy the idea of governance itself. For them, chaos is the point.

    “He’s a desperate guy whose vote share is dropping with every subsequent vote and I’m ready to vote all night, all week, all month, and never for that person,” Matt Gaetz, the Florida congressman leading the “Never Kevin” caucus, said.

    But as humiliation piled on humiliation for the California lawmaker, there was the merest hint of a lifeline as a divide inside the anti-McCarthy block began to open.

    Several lawmakers who want far-reaching changes to the way the House works reported genuine progress in talks with McCarthy. One of their number, Texas Rep. Chip Roy, predicted he could bring over 10 votes if the talks pan out.

    Still the math looks tough for McCarthy since the Gaetz bloc is holding firm and McCarthy can only afford to lose four GOP votes and still win the speakership.

    Even as he nurses hopes that intense talks with rebels could still provide a narrow path to victory, pressure is building inexorably on McCarthy.

    The question is whether another day of pointless voting on Thursday will prompt members to begin to consider whether he should step aside for a more universally trusted colleague – perhaps Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, for instance. Many Republicans are complaining that their hopes for quickly wielding power and throttling the Biden administration have been dashed.

    While another Groundhog Day in the House didn’t produce a new speaker, it did offer hints on how an endgame in the battle for the speaker’s gavel may develop. It also provided insight into the new balance of power in Washington and how Congress will work (or won’t) in the months ahead.

    If the Republican leader cannot demonstrate progress when the House meets for yet another vote on the speaker on Thursday, he will be in deep trouble. After just staving off what would have been a humiliating roll call vote on Wednesday evening, it emerged that McCarthy had made yet more concessions.

    McCarthy also met Roy, a holdout who has been demanding changes to the procedures that govern House business, and freshman members among the 20 or so Republicans who have been voting against him. GOP Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, who is supporting McCarthy, said that the 20 lawmakers who opposed the would-be speaker were split into two groups – those who want substantive rules changes and those who just don’t like the longtime GOP leader.

    “If it’s the latter, it’s not as constructive because it shouldn’t be about the personality, it should be about the process, but I don’t know. I have no sense of how many are in either camp,” he told CNN.

    But sources also admitted that the new proposals, even if accepted, would not win over all the holdouts McCarthy needs. And the continuing brouhaha raises a deeper question of why the GOP leader, who has had weeks to get his majority solidified, still cannot get it done. Any incoming speaker who has proven so incapable of getting his coalition in line will be perennially at risk of being swept out of office.

    In impassioned floor speeches and interviews, Roy has argued that the House is finally having consequential debates. Under recent Democratic and Republican speakers, normal order and the sequencing of new laws through the committee process and debates on the House floor have been curtailed as severe partisanship and gridlock causes leaders to enforce ruthless party-line discipline.

    Often, multiple funding bills on everything from farming to defense and transportation to space are lumped together in massive end-of-year omnibus bills like the mammoth $1.7 trillion spending package that Congress finally passed in December. Multiple Republican members appeared on CNN on Wednesday making reasoned arguments about the need to mend a broken institution, to open the House’s business to the public and to conduct a proper appropriations process through committees with time for full debates, budget assessments and amendments.

    “I really think this is democracy in action,” North Carolina Republican Rep. Dan Bishop told CNN’s Jake Tapper. “If you are not satisfied with Washington as it is, then you can’t just be satisfied doing the same thing.”

    The problem, however, is that Congress has resorted to omnibus bills in recent years for a reason – it has been so polarized and dysfunctional that the only way to get any bill to the president’s desk is to cram all the spending in together.

    So while well intentioned, the aspirations for reform could just cause more dysfunction.

    The other block of anti-McCarthy votes looks a lot harder to sway. The likes of Gaetz, Reps. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Bob Good of Virginia and Ralph Norman of South Carolina appear no closer to voting to make him speaker.

    “I’m not going to support Kevin,” another holdout, Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona, said on Wednesday, reinforcing his hard no position.

    Apart from securing a concession from McCarthy that would make him almost a toothless speaker – with the return of a rule that would allow any member to call for a vote to unseat him – it’s not often clear what these members want. Or if there’s anything that McCarthy could give them that would change their minds.

    Some Republicans accuse their colleagues of grandstanding and of using the spotlight to raise campaign cash and to drum up appearances on conservative media. If there’s a philosophical grounding to the opposition, it’s as the latest expression of the longtime anti-establishment wing of the GOP that seeks to neutralize government itself.

    This politics of destruction was sent into overdrive by ex-President Donald Trump, with his vows to drain the Washington “swamp.” And it was expressed most eloquently by Steve Bannon at the start of the Trump administration as “the deconstruction of the administrative state.” The problem for McCarthy – who has cozied up to Trump and often appeased the zealots – is how to negotiate with someone whose main aspiration is chaos.

    The elephant wasn’t in the room.

    Early on Wednesday, Trump delivered the kind of full-throated endorsement of McCarthy that the Californian must believe he was owed after his obsequious support of the ex-president following the January 6, 2021, insurrection.

    “VOTE FOR KEVIN, CLOSE THE DEAL, TAKE THE VICTORY,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “REPUBLICANS, DO NOT TURN A GREAT TRIUMPH INTO A GIANT & EMBARRASSING DEFEAT.”

    It was the kind of social media blast that once would have had Republican members leaping into line. But no longer. It didn’t appear to change a single vote.

    Norman, for instance, rebuffed the ex-president’s call.

    “I disagree with Trump. This is our fight. This isn’t Trump’s – and I support Trump. I disagree with it. Kevin is the one who’s going to censor him,” Norman said. In another sign that Trump’s spell may have broken, Boebert said that her “favorite president” had called rebels opposing McCarthy and told them to knock it off.

    “I think this needs to be reversed, the president needs to tell Kevin McCarthy that, ‘Sir you do not have the votes and it’s time to withdraw.’”

    Her rebuke was the latest sign that after two years in political exile, a disastrous intervention in the midterms and a low energy 2024 campaign launch, Trump’s juice isn’t what it once was in GOP ranks in the House. While the ex-president’s rapport with the Republican base surely remains intact, this kind of insubordination is unlikely to have gone down well in Mar-a-Lago.

    The spectacle in the House on Wednesday had more in common with the chaos and recrimination that unfolds in parliaments in Europe or Israel, where it can sometimes take weeks or months to arrive at a leader or governing majority, than in the US House, where the vote for speaker is normally a formality.

    And this is just not some internecine struggle. The speaker is, after all, second in the line of presidential succession behind the vice president.

    “It’s embarrassing for the country,” President Joe Biden said on Wednesday, as he capitalized on the chaos in an event in Kentucky highlighting bipartisan political leadership over his massive infrastructure package, appearing with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

    “I’m not making a partisan (point), that’s the reality – that to be able to have a Congress that can’t function is just embarrassing.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Poland says Germany refused talks on World War II reparations | CNN

    Poland says Germany refused talks on World War II reparations | CNN

    [ad_1]



    Reuters
     — 

    Germany has rebuffed the latest push by Poland’s nationalist government for vast reparations over World War II, saying in response to a diplomatic note that the issue was closed, the foreign ministry in Warsaw said on Tuesday.

    A spokesperson for the German foreign ministry said it had responded to a letter sent by Poland on the subject in October and did not comment on the contents of diplomatic correspondence.

    Poland estimates its World War II losses caused by Germany at $1.4 trillion and has demanded reparations, but Berlin has repeatedly said all financial claims related to the war have been settled.

    “This answer, to sum it up, shows an absolutely disrespectful attitude towards Poland and Poles,” Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Poland’s deputy foreign minister, said in an interview with the Polish Press Agency.

    “Germany does not pursue a friendly policy towards Poland, they want to build their sphere of influence here and treat Poland as a vassal state.”

    When asked about further dialog with Germany regarding compensation, Mularczyk said it would continue “through international organizations.”

    Some six million Poles, including three million Polish Jews, were killed during the war and Warsaw was razed to the ground following a 1944 uprising in which about 200,000 civilians died.

    In 1953, Poland’s then-communist rulers relinquished all claims to war reparations under pressure from the Soviet Union, which wanted to free East Germany, also a Soviet satellite, from any liabilities.

    Poland’s ruling nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) party says that agreement is invalid because Poland was unable to negotiate fair compensation. It has revived calls for compensation since it took power in 2015 and has made the promotion of Poland’s wartime victimhood a central plank of its appeal to nationalism.

    The combative stance toward Germany, often used by PiS to mobilize its constituency, has strained relations with Berlin.

    In a joint press conference with Polish Foreign Minister Zbigniew Rau last October, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said the pain caused by Germany during World War II was “passed on through generations” in Poland but that the issue of reparations was closed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NYC subway shooter pleads guilty to terrorism charges | CNN

    NYC subway shooter pleads guilty to terrorism charges | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The man who opened fire on a crowded New York City subway train last April and wounded 10 people pleaded guilty in federal court Tuesday to terrorism charges, admitting his intention “was to cause serious bodily injury to the people on the train.”

    After initially pleading not guilty last May, Frank James, 63, on Tuesday admitted to 10 counts – one for each gunshot victim – of committing a terrorist attack and other violence against a mass transportation system and vehicle carrying passengers and employees. He also pleaded guilty to one count of discharging a firearm during a crime of violence.

    James’ plea comes nearly nine months after prosecutors said he put on a gas mask, set off a smoke device and fired a handgun at least 33 times on a crowded N train traveling toward the 36th Street station in Brooklyn’s Sunset Park neighborhood on April 12. Along with the 10 people wounded by gunfire, others were injured by the smoke. In all, 29 people were hospitalized.

    “While it was not my intention to cause death, I was aware that a death or deaths could occur as a result of my discharging a firearm in such an enclosed space as a subway car,” James said.

    In a statement after the hearing, James’ attorneys said he has accepted responsibility for the shooting “since he turned himself in to law enforcement.”

    “A just sentence in this case will carefully balance the harm he caused with his age, his health, and the Bureau of Prisons’ notoriously inadequate medical care,” attorneys Mia Eisner-Grynberg and Amanda David said in their statement.

    James is expected to be sentenced at a later date. He faces a maximum sentence of life in prison, but prosecutors, who have argued James aimed to kill when he fired, are willing to recommend a sentence in the range of 31 to 37 years in prison if James shows enough remorse, per a letter from Breon Peace, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, to District Court Judge William Kuntz.

    If James “does not clearly demonstrate acceptance of responsibility,” prosecutors will recommend a sentence of 40 years to life, the letter said.

    In a statement on Tuesday, Peace said the guilty plea was an “important step toward holding James fully accountable and helping the victims of the defendant’s violence and our great city heal.”

    The shooting rattled the city, which was already on edge as commuters started to return to the subway following the Covid-19 pandemic.

    One of the wounded, Hourari Benkada, 27, said he was on the N train and sat next to a man with a duffel bag and reflective vest who let off a “smoke bomb.”

    “And all you see (is) smoke – black smoke … going off, and then people bum-rushing to the back,” Benkada said. “This pregnant woman was in front of me. I was trying to help her. I didn’t know there were shots at first. I just thought it was a black smoke bomb.

    “She said, ‘I’m pregnant with a baby.’ I hugged her. And then the bum-rush continued. I got pushed, and that’s when I got shot in the back of my knee.”

    James was arrested a day later in Manhattan’s Lower East Side after calling in a tip on himself. Items left behind at the scene, including a credit card, a set of keys, a construction jacket and a gun – were tied back to James by investigators.

    The accused has a lengthy criminal history and had posted rambling videos on a YouTube channel in which he talked about violence and mass shootings, and said he’s thought about killing people who have presumably hurt him.

    In one posted just a day before the shootings, James talked about someone who engaged in violence and ended up in jail. He said he could identify but talked about the consequences.

    “I’ve been through a lot of s**t, where I can say I wanted to kill people. I wanted to watch people die right in front of my f**king face immediately. But I thought about the fact that, hey man, I don’t want to go to no f**king prison.”

    In another video posted in February criticizing New York Mayor Eric Adams’ plan to address safety and homelessness in the subway, James spoke about his negative experience with city health workers during a “crisis of mental health back in the ’90s ‘80s and ‘70s.”

    Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated James’ age. He is 63.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Diary investigators believe belongs to Times Square machete attack suspect includes last will and testament, sources say | CNN

    Diary investigators believe belongs to Times Square machete attack suspect includes last will and testament, sources say | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A diary investigators believe belongs to the suspect in the attack on three police officers outside Times Square on New Year’s Eve ends with a last will and testament.

    According to multiple law enforcement sources, the last entry, dated December 31, begins with, “This will likely be my last entry,” and goes on to leave instructions on how to divide the author’s belongings among his family and instructions for his burial, according to sources familiar with the diary’s contents.

    Even before the attack, Trevor Bickford was on the FBI’s radar.

    Bickford, the 19-year-old being held by New York City police as a suspect in the machete attack against the officers, was interviewed by FBI agents in Maine in mid-December after he said he wanted to travel overseas to help fellow Muslims and was willing to die for his religion, according to multiple law enforcement sources.

    Bickford’s mother and grandmother became increasingly concerned about his desire to travel to Afghanistan to join the Taliban and reported this to the Wells, Maine, police department out of concern for him on December 10, the sources said.

    When the FBI opened its wider investigation they also placed him on a terrorist watch list, according to sources. Because the Taliban is not designated a foreign terrorist entity, planning to travel to Afghanistan to join the group does not constitute the federal crime of “attempted material support of a terrorist group.”

    Multiple law enforcement sources told CNN Bickford traveled to New York via Amtrak, so those travels would not have tripped any watch list databases.

    His original destination was Miami, the sources said, but he stopped in New York and checked in at the Grand Hotel near the Bowery in Manhattan on December 29. He checked out on New Year’s Eve with all his luggage before allegedly conducting the Times Square machete attack, the sources said.

    The suspect has not been charged, and it is unclear whether he has an attorney. The US Attorney’s office declined to comment. CNN has reached out to the Manhattan DA’s office for comment.

    Just after 10 p.m. he went to the Times Square checkpoint at West 52nd Street and 8th Avenue where officers would check bags for weapons or suspicious items, NYPD Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell and police said.

    Bickford pulled out a machete, striking one officer with the blade and another officer in the head with the handle before swinging the blade at a third officer, who then shot him in the shoulder, according to the sources and the NYPD.

    The diary expressed his desire to join the Taliban and was found in a bag he discarded before carrying out the attack, according to sources.

    Bickford remains in custody and under police guard at Bellevue Hospital, where he is being treated for a gunshot wound to the shoulder sustained during the attack, sources said.

    The three officers – injured at one of New York’s most high-profile events just a day after their department had warned of an “ISIS-Aligned” video calling for “Lone Offender Attacks” – have all been treated and released, according to the New York Police Department.

    On Sunday, federal authorities from the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, and the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office were discussing whether to charge Bickford federally or under state law or both in relation to the attack, the sources said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ukraine claims hundreds of Russian troops killed in strike; Moscow says 63 died | CNN

    Ukraine claims hundreds of Russian troops killed in strike; Moscow says 63 died | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    An apparent Ukrainian strike in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine appears to have killed a large number of Russian troops, according to the Ukrainian military and pro-Russian military bloggers and former officials.

    The strike took place just after midnight on Sunday, New Year’s Day, on a vocational school housing Russian conscripts in Makiivka, in the Donetsk region, according to both Ukrainian and pro-Russian accounts.

    The attack has led to vocal criticism of Moscow’s military from pro-Russian military bloggers, who claimed that the troops lacked protection and were reportedly being quartered next to a large cache of ammunition, which is said to have exploded when Ukrainian HIMARS rockets hit the school.

    The Ukrainian military claimed that around 400 Russian soldiers were killed and further 300 were wounded, without directly acknowledging a role. CNN cannot independently confirm those numbers or the weapons used in the strike. Some pro-Russian military bloggers have also estimated that the number of dead and wounded could run in the hundreds.

    The Russian defense ministry on Monday acknowledged the attack and claimed that 63 Russian servicemen died, which would make it one of the deadliest single episodes of the war for Moscow’s forces.

    Video reportedly from the scene of the attack circulated widely on Telegram, including on an official Ukrainian military channel. It shows a pile of smoking rubble, in which almost no part of the building appears to be standing.

    “Greetings and congratulations” to the separatists and conscripts who “were brought to the occupied Makiivka and crammed into the building of vocational school,” the Strategic Communications Directorate of the Chief Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine said on Telegram. “Santa packed around 400 corpses of [Russian soldiers] in bags.”

    The Russian defense ministry said the Ukrainian attack used US-made HIMARS rockets.

    Daniil Bessonov, a former official in the Russia-backed Donetsk administration, said on Telegram that “apparently, the high command is still unaware of the capabilities of this weapon.”

    “I hope that those responsible for the decision to use this facility will be reprimanded,” Bessonov said. “There are enough abandoned facilities in Donbas with sturdy buildings and basements where personnel can be quartered.”

    A Russian propagandist who blogs about the war effort on Telegram, Igor Girkin, claimed that the building was almost completely destroyed by the secondary detonation of ammunition stores.

    “Nearly all the military equipment, which stood close to the building without the slightest sign of camouflage, was also destroyed,” Girkin said. “There are still no final figures on the number of casualties, as many people are still missing.”

    Girkin has long decried Russian generals whom he claims direct the war effort far from the frontline, calling them “unlearned in principle” and unwilling to listen to warnings about putting equipment and personnel so close together in HIMARS range. Girkin was previously minister of defense of the self-proclaimed, Russian-backed Donetsk People’s Republic, and was found guilty by a Dutch court of mass murder for his involvement in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine in 2014.

    Sergey Markov, another pro-Russian military blogger, said there was “a great deal of sloppiness” on the part of the Russian command.

    Boris Rozhin, who also blogs about the war effort under the nickname Colonelcassad, said that “incompetence and an inability to grasp the experience of war continue to be a serious problem.”

    “As you can see, despite several months of war, some conclusions are not made, hence the unnecessary losses, which, if the elementary precautions relating to the dispersal and concealment of personnel were taken, might have not happened.”

    Donetsk has been held by pro-Russian separatists since 2014 and it is one of four Ukrainian regions that Moscow sought to annex in October in violation of international law.

    The news comes after the Ukrainian military claimed that more than 700 Russian soldiers had been killed Saturday, but did not specify where.

    Russian forces “lost 760 people killed just yesterday, (and) continue to attempt offensive actions on Bakhmut,” the military’s general staff said Sunday.

    Russian units have been pressing an offensive towards the city of Bakhmut in Donetsk for months but have suffered heavy losses as Ukrainian forces have targeted them in what is largely open rural territory.

    Air raid sirens sounded across Ukraine over the weekend as fresh rounds of Russian missile strikes hit several regions. The attacks killed at least six people in the Donetsk, Kharkiv and Chernihiv regions, while a man was injured early Monday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Five political trends that could make 2023 a momentous year | CNN Politics

    Five political trends that could make 2023 a momentous year | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Republicans’ take over of the House this week will usher in a two-year political era that threatens to bring governing showdowns and shutdowns as a GOP speaker and Democratic president try to wield power from opposite ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

    The unprecedented possibility that former President Donald Trump, who’s already launched another bid for the White House, could face indictment could tear the nation further apart at a moment when American democracy remains under grave strain. The already stirring 2024 presidential campaign, meanwhile, will stir more political toxins as both parties sense the White House and control of Congress are up for grabs after the closely fought midterms.

    Abroad, the war in Ukraine brings the constant, alarming possibility of spillover into a NATO-Russia conflict and will test the willingness of American taxpayers to keep sending billions of dollars to sustain foreigners’ dreams of freedom. As he leads the West in this crisis, President Joe Biden faces ever more overt challenges from rising superpower China and alarming advances in the nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea.

    If 2022 was a tumultuous and dangerous year, 2023 could be just as fraught.

    Washington is bracing for a sharp shock. Since November, the big story has been about the red wave that didn’t arrive. But the reality of divided government will finally dawn this week. A House Republican majority, in which radical conservatives now have disproportionate influence, will take over one half of Capitol Hill. Republicans will fling investigations, obstruction and possible impeachments at the White House, designed to throttle Biden’s presidency and ruin his reelection hopes.

    Ironically, voters who disdained Trump-style circus politics and election denialism will get more of it since the smaller-than-expected GOP majority means acolytes of the ex-president, like expected House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, will have significant sway. The new Republican-run House represents, in effect, a return to power of Trumpism in a powerful corner of Washington. If House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy wins his desperate struggle against his party’s hardliners to secure the speakership, he’ll be at constant risk of walking the plank after making multiple concessions to extreme right-wingers.

    A weak speaker and a nihilistic pro-Trump faction in the wider GOP threaten to produce a series of spending showdowns with the White House – most dangerously over the need to raise the government’s borrowing authority by the middle of the year, which could throw the US into default if it’s not done.

    As Democrats head into the minority under a new generation of leaders, government shutdowns are more likely than bipartisanship. The GOP is vowing to investigate the business ties of the president’s son, Hunter Biden, and the crisis at the southern border. The GOP could suffer, however, if voters think they overreached – a factor Biden will use as he eyes a second term.

    In the Senate, Democrats are still celebrating the expansion of their tiny majority in the midterms. (After two years split at 50-50, the chamber is now 51-49 in their favor). Wasting no time in seeking to carve out a reputation among voters as a force for bipartisanship and effective governance, the president will travel to Kentucky this week. He’ll take part in an event also featuring Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, to highlight the infrastructure package that passed with bipartisan support in 2021.

    Attorney General Merrick Garland could shortly face one of the most fateful decisions in modern politics: whether to indict Trump over his attempt to steal the 2020 election and over his hoarding of classified documents.

    A criminal prosecution of an ex-president and current presidential candidate by the administration that succeeded him would subject the country’s political and judicial institutions to more extreme strain than even Trump has yet managed. The ex-president has already claimed persecution over investigations he faces – and an early declaration of his 2024 campaign has given him the chance to frame them as politicized.

    If Trump were indicted, the uproar could be so corrosive that it’s fair to ask whether such an action would be truly in the national interest – assuming special counsel Jack Smith assembles a case that would have a reasonable chance of success in court.

    Yet if Trump did indeed break the law – and given the strength of the evidence of insurrection against him presented in the House January 6 committee’s criminal referrals – his case also creates an even more profound dilemma. A failure to prosecute him would set a precedent that puts ex-presidents above the law.

    “If a president can incite an insurrection and not be held accountable, then really there’s no limit to what a president can do or can’t do,” outgoing Illinois GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a member of the select committee, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday.

    “If he’s not guilty of a crime, then I, frankly, fear for the future of his country because now every future president can say, ‘Hey, here’s the bar.’ And the bar is, do everything you can to stay in power.”

    Like it or not, with his November announcement, Trump has pitched America into the next presidential campaign. But unusual doubts cloud his future after seven years dominating the Republican Party. His limp campaign launch, bleating over his 2020 election loss and the poor track record of his hand-picked election-denying candidates in the midterms have dented Trump’s aura.

    Potential alternative figureheads for his populist, nationalist culture war politics, like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, are emerging who could test the ex-president’s bond with his adoring conservative base. Even as he fends off multiple investigations, Trump must urgently show he’s still the GOP top dog as more and more Republicans consider him a national liability.

    Biden is edging closer to giving Americans a new piece of history – a reelection campaign from a president who is over 80. His success in staving off a Republican landslide in the midterms has quelled some anxiety among Democrats about a possible reelection run. And Biden’s strongest card is that he’s already beaten Trump once. Still, he wouldn’t be able to play that card if Trump fades and another potential GOP nominee emerges. DeSantis, for example, is roughly half the current president’s age.

    As 2023 opens, a repeat White House duel between Trump and Biden – which polls show voters do not want – is the best bet. But shifting politics, the momentous events in the months to come and the vagaries of fate means there’s no guarantee this will be the case come the end of the year.

    Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year showed how outside, global events can redefine a presidency. Biden’s leadership of the West against Moscow’s unprovoked aggression will be an impressive centerpiece of his legacy. But Russian President Vladimir Putin shows every sign of fighting on for years. Ukraine says it won’t stop until all his forces are driven out. So Biden’s capacity to stop the war from spilling over into a disastrous Russia-NATO clash will be constantly tested.

    And who knows how long US and European voters will stomach high energy prices and sending billions of taxpayer cash to arm Ukraine if Western economies dip into recession this year.

    Biden has his hands full elsewhere. An alarming airborne near miss between a Chinese jet and US military jet over the South China Sea over the holiday hints at how tensions in the region, especially over Taiwan, could trigger another superpower standoff. Biden also faces burgeoning nuclear crises with Iran and North Korea, which, along with Russia’s nuclear saber rattling, suggests the beginning of a dangerous new era of global conflict and risk.

    Rarely has an economy been so hard to judge. In 2022, 40-year-high inflation and tumbling stock markets coincided with historically low unemployment rates, which created an odd simultaneous sensation of economic anxiety and wellbeing. The key question for 2023 will be whether the Federal Reserve’s harsh interest rate medicine – designed to bring down the cost of living – can bring about a soft landing without triggering a recession that many analysts believe is on the way.

    Washington spending showdowns and potential government shutdowns could also pose new threats to growth. The economy will be outside any political leader’s capacity to control, but its state at the end of the year will play a vital role in an election that will define America, domestically and globally after 2024.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Highlights from the latest release of January 6 transcripts | CNN Politics

    Highlights from the latest release of January 6 transcripts | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The House January 6 committee on Sunday released another wave of witness interview transcripts.

    The new release is part of a steady stream of transcript drops from the House select committee in recent days, complementing the release of its sweeping 845-page report.

    The latest transcript drop comes as the panel winds down its work with the House majority set to change hands from Democrats to Republicans on Tuesday at the start of the new Congress.

    The transcripts released so far have shed new light on how the House committee conducted its investigation of the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol – and new details about what key witnesses told the panel.

    Here are some of the highlights from the latest disclosures:

    Mark Meadows, former President Donald Trump’s White House chief of staff, provided the select committee with 6,600 pages of email records and approximately 2,000 text messages, according to a transcript of a deposition for which Meadows did not appear in December 2021.

    Investigators ran through some of the items they had hoped to ask Meadows about if he had appeared, including a December 2020 email from Meadows stating, “Rudy was put in charge. That was the President’s decision,” according to the committee transcript.

    The committee also hoped to ask Meadows about certain passages in his book, specific text message exchanges and his outreach to the Justice Department “encouraging investigations of suspected voter fraud.” The committee also planned to ask Meadows about his communications regarding deploying the National Guard on January 6, “including a January 5th email from Mr. Meadows in which he indicates that the Guard would be present at the Capitol to, quote, ‘protect 153 pro-Trump people,’ end quote.”

    The committee similarly convened no-show deposition meetings for former Trump aide Dan Scavino, former Trump administration official Peter Navarro and right-wing media personality Steve Bannon, who previously worked in the Trump White House. The brief transcripts of those meetings document the failure of the witnesses to appear and communications the committee had with the witnesses or their representatives.

    In a transcript with Alexandra Preate, who worked as a spokeswoman for Bannon, the committee asked about their text exchanges. In one, the two appeared to be discussing – days after the Capitol was attacked – 1 million people surrounding the Capitol after Joe Biden’s inauguration on January 20, 2021.

    The committee interviewer quotes Bannon’s text as saying, “I’d surround the Capitol in total silence.”

    When asked if she and Bannon talked about bringing people back to Washington, DC, even after January 6, Preate said, “I don’t recall that” and it was “not my deal.” Preate also said she believes Trump lost the election.

    Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel told the committee that the former president called her on January 1, 2021, and asked her about her relationship with then-Vice President Mike Pence.

    “I do have a recollection of him asking me what my relationship was with the Vice President, and I said I didn’t know him very well,” McDaniel told the select committee, according to a transcript.

    McDaniel said she could not recall if they specifically discussed the role Pence would play in certifying the Electoral College vote five days after that call. But McDaniel said that later on, after the US Capitol attack, Trump conveyed to her privately “in one way or another that, you know, the Vice President had the authority to – I don’t know the correct legal term, but he had the authority to not accept the electors.”

    She also said Trump called her on January 7 but they did not talk about the attack.

    The panel revealed during its hearings over the summer that Trump called McDaniel directly in December to tell her about the plan for a group of states to submit alternate slates of electors and connected her to his elections lawyer John Eastman, but her full transcript reveals more details about what was shared between the RNC, Trump White House and the Trump campaign at the time.

    In the lead-up to January 6, McDaniel testified that she did not know that the alternate slates of electors were being considered for anything other than contingent electors in case legal challenges changed state election results. She added she was not privy to a lot of those discussions and that she was going through ankle surgery around the time of the Capitol attack.

    McDaniel told committee investigators that after that December call, she called the Trump campaign’s counsel Justin Clark, who gave her the impression that the campaign was aware of the so-called alternate elector plan and was working on it. She also testified that on December 14, when she was informed that false electors met, she sent a note to former Trump White House aide Molly Michael.

    As for fundraising emails from the RNC about the 2020 election, McDaniel said the RNC worked closely with Clark but that once Giuliani took over Trump’s legal efforts, he “was doing his own thing and didn’t really reach out to the RNC.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How Josh Shapiro rode his record as Pennsylvania attorney general to the governor’s mansion | CNN Politics

    How Josh Shapiro rode his record as Pennsylvania attorney general to the governor’s mansion | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Josh Shapiro had a massive spending advantage and a weak Republican opponent, but the incoming Pennsylvania governor thinks Democrats should still take note of how he made voters see his fight-for-the-little-guy speeches as more than just talk – and racked up the party’s biggest margin in any swing-state race of 2022.

    “My sense is people don’t think government will have the courage to take on the powerful and then be able to deliver,” Shapiro said in an interview with CNN. “So I think some people are like, ‘This guy really did take on the big guy, and he really did deliver something.’”

    What he’s talking about is a wide record of six years as Pennsylvania attorney general. He didn’t just bemoan the opioid crisis but secured $3.25 billion for treatment and other services in the state. And he wasn’t just complaining about corruption but overseeing the arrests of more than 100 corrupt officials from both parties.

    In a midterm year in which Democrats lost the House but still did better than expected, Shapiro – who will be sworn in January 17 – dominated every day of his race in a state that was key to both Donald Trump’s and Joe Biden’s presidential wins.

    Former President Barack Obama told Shapiro directly that he’s among the 2022 generation of Democrats who need to have a voice in the future of the party, according to people familiar with the conversation. Famed consultant James Carville called Shapiro’s campaign the best of 2022. He’s already being chattered about by many Democrats as perhaps the future first Jewish president.

    As Democrats start planning for what’s next – what they stand for, instead of just what they stand against with Trumpism – even White House aides who now rave about Biden’s accomplishments being on par with Lyndon Johnson’s acknowledge that they’re still struggling to make many voters see the direct impact on their lives. Happy as they are about how well Democrats did in the midterms, they see most of that as a rejection of Republicans and Trumpism, with top Democrats telling CNN they know they have a different task in front of them as they head into preparations for an expected Biden reelection campaign and efforts to hold the Senate and win back the House in 2024.

    Pollsters John Anzalone and Matt Hogan said in memo last month that while the party should be “understandably encouraged,” Democrats “should be careful not to interpret the results as evidence that voters liked the party more than pre-election polls suggested.”

    From MAGA crowds to Bernie Sanders rallies in Pennsylvania and beyond, voters in interviews often express a common feeling that a small group is getting away with what regular Americans never could, and a cynicism that any politician is even trying to do anything to stop them.

    Put Shapiro’s tight-rimmed glasses and studied Obama-style speaking rhythms next to Democrat John Fetterman’s Carhartt shorts, tattoos and bouncer chin beard and few would see the incoming governor rather than the already iconic Pennsylvania senator-elect as the one with populist appeal. Yet it was Shapiro, who grew up the son of a pediatrician in the Philadelphia suburbs and has been measuring each step on his path to Harrisburg since law school – and some around him say grade school – who got more votes in November.

    Focus groups conducted by Shapiro’s campaign as he was preparing to launch last year had people saying he was “polished,” according to people familiar with the findings. Worried that could slip to “boring,” or just being written off as a career politician, aides packed his stump speeches full of more references to cases or parts of the $328 million in relief, restitution, penalties and other payments his office says he obtained over six years on the job.

    When Shapiro talked about climate change, he talked about getting to affordable energy costs and about the fracking companies he sued as attorney general because the pollution was endangering Pennsylvanians’ health. When he talked about student loans, he talked about the $200 million in debt he got canceled by suing a big lender. He was just as likely to bring up the massive investigation his office did into decades of sexual abuse in Catholic dioceses across the state as he was a local construction company from which he recovered $21 million in stolen wages, knowing that either effort would give him credibility and appeal to voters who don’t think much about politics, or rarely think about voting for Democrats.

    “They don’t want to hear you talk,” said a top Shapiro aide. “They want to see what you can do.”

    He had a running start heading into his gubernatorial campaign: Since his election as attorney general in 2016, Shapiro and his team had made publicizing the work he was doing a central part of the strategy, from pressuring a huge state insurance company by having news conferences with women who’d been through breast cancer treatment, to mounting campaigns to have supporters write open letter op-eds to CEOs they were after, to setting up a hotline for church abuse victims to call in with their stories.

    With Republicans all over the country stoking crime fears throughout the midterms, Shapiro would talk about the 8,200 drug dealers he’d locked up in his six years on the job. He’d then immediately follow up, saying that the opiates many of them were selling were part of a crisis “manufactured by greed” and how he’d also gone after those companies with the power of his office.

    “Look at his model,” said Rep. Dwight Evans, a Democrat who represents much of Philadelphia. “What he says is, people deserve to be safe and feel safe. You got to have a way of showing outcomes. And he does that.”

    Shapiro’s Republican opponent, Doug Mastriano, raised only $7 million, had an account full of QAnon-friendly tweets, was seen in a picture dressed up in a Confederate uniform, held events where men claiming to be security blocked reporters from entering and paid consulting fees to the antisemitic website Gab. But in a swing state that Biden only narrowly won in 2020 – and had gone to Trump four years earlier – Shapiro’s eventual victory was far from a guarantee.

    In reflective moments during the campaign, Shapiro would talk about the “heaviness” he felt while campaigning and about the way his wife would poke him in the chest or voters would grab him by the arm and tell him, “You have to win.” An observant Jew, whose campaign debated whether to feature a shot of a challah bread in an opening video in which he spoke about getting home every Friday night for dinner with his family (it ultimately did) and who often cited an old Jewish teaching that “no one is required to complete the task, nor are we allowed to refrain from it,” he said he felt the weight both politically and personally.

    Voters ended up rejecting election-denying Republicans in nearly every competitive midterm race around the country. Shapiro, though, didn’t wax on about the abstract wonders of democracy or voting rights, but detailed the 43 challenges to the 2020 vote count that he defeated in court.

    He went on offense, mocking Mastriano for talking a “good game” about freedom, then saying “real freedom” is about freedom of choice in abortion rights, freedom to not have banned books, freedom to not feel targeted by guns on the streets and freedom to have job opportunities.

    He talked about the events of January 6, 2021, but only to say that Mastriano’s presence in the crowd outside the US Capitol ahead of rioters storming the building showed that he didn’t “respect” Pennsylvanians enough to care what they thought.

    He never went more than a few words without drawing a direct line back to what he’d already accomplished.

    Rallygoers cheer for Democratic Senate candidate John Fetterman during an event with Shapiro in Newtown, Pennsylvania, on November 6, 2022.

    Part of Shapiro’s standard routine is always insisting he doesn’t pay attention to national politics and doesn’t think much about what other Democrats beyond Pennsylvania are doing or saying. One of his favorite lines during the campaign was how his focus was on Washington County, just southwest of Pittsburgh, and not Washington, DC.

    So when asked about other Democrats being wary of going after corporations over fears they’d be tagged as socialists, or about Biden’s only sporadic attacks on oil companies for profiting as gas prices were high, Shapiro pleaded ignorance – pointedly.

    “I don’t have a frame of reference,” he said, “but I guess I am surprised they wouldn’t talk about it as well.”

    The result for Shapiro: He set a record of winning the most votes ever for a Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate. As his campaign has proudly pointed out, his win was so big that he could have gotten there even without a single vote from Philadelphia and its suburbs: In Erie County, which Biden won by 1 point in 2020, Shapiro won by 21 points; and in Washington County, which Biden lost by 22 points, Shapiro only lost by 2.

    His coattails helped keep the Senate race tilted to Fetterman even when the candidate was sidelined by a stroke. He also helped his party hold three swing US House seats and narrowly win a majority in the state House of Representatives for the first time in more than a decade.

    “He was able to represent everyday consumers against the big guys,” said North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, the outgoing chair of the Democratic Governors Association and a former state attorney general himself. “People remember that, when you stood up on their behalf.”

    As attorney general, Shapiro faced the corny political joke: “AG” really stands for “aspiring governor.” While many have made the jump, few have done it successfully.

    Shapiro knows he’s going to have to adjust.

    “When we were in the AG’s office, these cases would come to us,” said the Shapiro aide. “Now we’re in the position of, we drive the agenda.”

    They’re still trying to sort out what exactly that the shift in mentality will mean.

    “It’s hard to accuse me of not doing things,” Shapiro said. “I feel a responsibility to now be able to take what I did, that type of approach in the AG’s office and show that government can work.”

    Shapiro arrives to deliver his victory speech in Oaks, Pennsylvania, on November 8, 2022.

    There’s only so far most Democrats can go in following the Shapiro model. Members of Congress can’t go to grand juries. A president can’t negotiate legal settlements.

    But with Shapiro and fellow Democratic Attorney General Maura Healey of Massachusetts winning their governor’s races, other Democratic attorneys general are gearing up for more.

    Even in states with multiple competitive races, every Democratic attorney general was reelected in 2022, except in rapidly reddening Iowa, and the party picked up the office in the key swing state of Arizona.

    Those and other state AGs are already moving individually and in small groups on more investigations they expect to soon go public in a big way, including more pharmaceutical inquiries, privacy and data protection, and online consumer fraud. Also now rising on the list of targets: cryptocurrency.

    “It certainly works. It gets the attention of corporate America. They know they have to contend with us,” said Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, who also co-chairs the Democratic Attorneys General Association and just won a second term back home. “And the voters appreciate it, and it’s recognized.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kinzinger: I ‘fear for the future of this country’ if Trump isn’t charged over Jan. 6 | CNN Politics

    Kinzinger: I ‘fear for the future of this country’ if Trump isn’t charged over Jan. 6 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Outgoing Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger said Sunday he fears for the future of the country if former President Donald Trump isn’t charged with a crime related to the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, though he believes the Justice Department will “do the right thing.”

    “If this is not a crime, I don’t know what is. If a president can incite an insurrection and not be held accountable, then really there’s no limit to what a president can do or can’t do,” the Illinois lawmaker told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union.”

    “I think the Justice Department will do the right thing. I think he will be charged, and I frankly think he should be,” Kinzinger said of Trump. “If he is not guilty of a crime, then I frankly fear for the future of this country.”

    Kinzinger served as one of two GOP members on the House select committee investigating the Capitol riot. The panel concluded its work last month and laid out a case for the DOJ and the public that there is evidence to pursue charges against Trump on multiple criminal statutes.

    The committee referred Trump to the department on at least four criminal charges: obstructing an official proceeding, defrauding the United States, making false statements, and assisting or aiding an insurrection. The panel also said in its executive summary that it had evidence of possible charges of conspiring to injure or impede an officer and seditious conspiracy.

    In practice, the referral is effectively a symbolic measure. It does not require the Justice Department to act, though special counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate Trump, has requested evidence collected by the select committee.

    “The Republican Party is not the future of this country unless it corrects,” Kinzinger told Bash, adding that he views GOP leader Kevin McCarthy as responsible for Trump’s political resurrection following January 6.

    “Donald Trump is alive today politically because of Kevin McCarthy,” he said. “He went to Mar-a-Lago a couple weeks after January 6 and resurrected Donald Trump. He is the reason Donald Trump is still a factor.”

    Kinzinger said that while he is “fearful in the short term” for American democracy, he is more hopeful in the long run.

    “I feel honored to be at this moment in history and to have done the right thing,” said the congressman, who has faced intraparty criticism for his stance on Trump.

    The Illinois Republican, who did not seek reelection last year, said he would not do “one thing differently” but would not miss being in Congress. And while he said it would be “fun” to debate Trump, Kinzinger told Bash he doesn’t intend to run for president in 2024.

    Another retiring House Republican, meanwhile, expressed optimism about the future of Congress.

    “I know who I work with in Congress. There is a middle class. You don’t see them or hear them much because like the middle class, they’re serious about their jobs,” Texas’ Kevin Brady said on “Fox News Sunday.”

    “I think if people could see more of that working class in Congress, you would have more confidence, as I do,” he added.

    Brady, the outgoing top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, also said it was his “hope” that McCarthy wins his speakership bid.

    “I think Kevin McCarthy understands this conference in a big way. He’s worked with folks across the whole spectrum,” Brady said. “I am confident he can pull these final votes together.”

    With House Republicans only having a narrow majority in the next Congress, McCarthy has struggled to lock down the votes needed on Tuesday to be the next speaker, even after making a number of significant concessions to GOP critics in recent days.

    House Republicans are holding a conference call on Sunday as McCarthy continues his quest to secure the support of at least 218 lawmakers in the upcoming floor vote, according to two sources familiar.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Roberts calls for judicial security in year-end report while avoiding mention of ethics reform or abortion draft leak | CNN Politics

    Roberts calls for judicial security in year-end report while avoiding mention of ethics reform or abortion draft leak | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Chief Justice John Roberts urged continued vigilance for the safety of judges and justices in an annual report published Saturday, after a tumultuous year at the US Supreme Court.

    “A judicial system cannot and should not live in fear,” Roberts wrote.

    While drawing attention to judicial security, however, the chief justice bypassed other controversies, including calls for new ethics rules directed at the justices, and an update on an investigation launched eight months ago into the unprecedented leak of a draft abortion opinion last spring that unleashed nationwide protests.

    Avoiding direct mention of any specific controversy, Roberts praised judges who face controversial issues “quietly, diligently and faithfully,” and urged continued congressional funding devoted to security.

    Roberts said that while there is “no obligation in our free country” to agree with decisions, judges must always be protected.

    “The law requires every judge to swear an oath to perform his or her work without fear or favor, but we must support judges by ensuring their safety,” he wrote.

    Besides his duties on the high court, Roberts presides over the Judicial Conference, a body responsible for making policy regarding the administration of the courts, and he releases a report each New Year’s Eve on the state of the judiciary.

    Some critics of the court were hoping that Roberts would use his annual report to concretely address other concerns that arose over the last several months.

    The report comes as public opinion of the court has reached an all-time low. The justices, who are on their winter recess, took on blockbuster cases this fall concerning the issues of voting rights and affirmative action. In the second half of the term, they will discuss issues such as immigration and President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program.

    Roberts made no direct mention, for instance, of the status of an ongoing investigation into the leak last May of the draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

    The disclosure – and the eventual opinion released the following month – triggered protests across the country, including some staged outside of the justices’ homes. In June, a man was arrested near the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and later charged with attempted murder of a Supreme Court justice. According to court documents, the man, Nicholas Roske, told investigators that he was upset over the leaked draft opinion overturning Roe.

    In addition, the court building was surrounded by 8-foot security fences that were only brought down ahead of the new term at the end of August.

    In May, Roberts launched an investigation into the leak, but has not provided any public updates.

    Roberts did not bring up ethics reform in the year-end report, but others had hoped he would use it to address the ongoing calls for a more formal code of ethics directed at the justices.

    “There is no doubt that judicial security is paramount,” said Gabe Roth, the executive director of a group called Fix the Court, which is dedicated to more transparency in federal courts. Roth said he thought Roberts should have done more this year to shore up the public’s faith in the ethics of the court.

    “As things stand now, there is no formal code of conduct for the Supreme Court and justices themselves get to decide how they conduct themselves both on and off the bench without any formal guiding principles,” Roth said.

    Back in 2011, Roberts dedicated his year-end report to the issue of ethics, addressing such criticism.

    “All Members of the Court do in fact consult the Code of Conduct in assessing their ethical obligations,” Roberts at the time. He noted that the justices can consult a “wide variety” of other authorities to resolve specific ethical issues including advice from the court’s legal office.

    Federal law also demands a judge should disqualify himself if his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

    Roth said that this year the court’s integrity has been tested in ways it rarely has in the past, between the leaked opinion and the activities brought to light concerning Virginia “Ginni” Thomas – a long-time conservative activist and the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas.

    In March, the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol had in its possession more than two dozen text messages between Ginni Thomas and former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

    The text messages, reviewed by CNN, show Thomas pleading with Meadows to continue the fight to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.

    Roth and others say that Justice Thomas should have recused himself – including from a January case in which the high court cleared the way for the release of presidential records from the Trump White House to the committee. Thomas was the sole dissenter.

    “Federal law says that recusal is required when a justice’s impartiality could be reasonably questioned, and that was clearly the case here,” Roth said.

    Ginni Thomas ultimately voluntarily testified before the committee, but she was not mentioned in the panel’s final report released last week.

    Thomas told the committee that she regretted the “tone and content” of the messages she was sending to Meadows, according to witness transcripts the panel released on Friday, and that her husband only found out about the messages in March 2022.

    Thomas said she could “guarantee” that her husband never spoke to her about pending cases in the court because it was an “ironclad” rule in the house, according to the transcript. Additionally, she said that Justice Thomas is “uninterested in politics.”

    Ginni Thomas’ lawyer, Mark Paoletta, released a statement last week saying she was “happy to meet” with the committee to “clear up misconceptions” but that the committee had “no legitimate reason to interview her.”

    He called her post-election activities after Trump lost in 2020 “minimal.”

    “Mrs. Thomas had significant concerns about potential fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election, and her minimal activity was focused on ensuring that reports of fraud and irregularities were investigated,” Paoletta said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s what happens to the January 6 committee’s work once the new Congress takes over | CNN Politics

    Here’s what happens to the January 6 committee’s work once the new Congress takes over | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol is set to expire next week, but its work will remain accessible to the public.

    The House select committee will end with the conclusion of the current Congress on January 3, but the Government Publishing Office has created an online repository to house what the committee produced.

    The site currently features the committee’s final report and a variety of video exhibits.

    The site is expected to include all of the records the committee has made public and some material that has not yet been publicly released, including documents that may have been referenced in footnotes in the committee’s final report.

    The report and other materials produced by the committee are already being transmitted to the National Archives and Records Administration, but congressional records do not become available via the archives for years. The GPO website stands as a way to make the records public in the meantime.

    With the House majority set to change hands from Democrats to Republicans next week, the committee in recent days has been winding down its work, including releasing a steady stream of interview transcripts that complement the panel’s sweeping 845-page report and shed new light on how it conducted its investigation of the Capitol riot.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Gas prices had a wild ride this year, making 2023 tough to predict | CNN Business

    Gas prices had a wild ride this year, making 2023 tough to predict | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    US drivers have never seen a year quite like 2022.

    Wild price swings at the gas pump throughout the year make predicting prices for 2023 even more difficult.

    Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the sanctions that it sparked on Russian oil sent the price of crude soaring in February at the beginning of the conflict. And even though relatively little Russian crude oil was ever exported to US refineries, the fact that oil prices are set on global commodity markets meant that US drivers were not spared a spike in gas prices.

    Prices were far more volatile throughout 2022 than they were in other recent years, both during and before the pandemic roiled oil markets.

    By June, the average US gas price crossed $5 a gallon for the first time ever, hitting a record $5.02 on June 14. But after that came a prolonged slide in gas prices, prompted by a number of factors, including the release of oil from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve, concerns about the possibility of a recession in both the US and global economies, and a surge in Covid cases that caused renewed lockdowns in Asia. By the end of the year, the national average price of a gallon of regular gas had fallen to just over $3, well below the pre-invasion price, back to the average price of late summer of 2021.

    But there was not the same level of relief for the price of diesel. Diesel prices fell 20% from their peak in June, only about half the decline for gasoline during the same period. And while gasoline is cheaper than it was a year ago, diesel remains close to the pre-2022 record price set in 2008. Greater demand for North American diesel by Europe in the wake of the war in Ukraine kept diesel prices so high.

    While relatively few US drivers use diesel for their private cars, it is still the fuel used by most heavy trucks, so it had an impact on the average American’s wallet. Most trucking companies charge a fuel surcharge to their customers when diesel prices increase. Because virtually all goods purchased by Americans are on a truck at some point before those purchases, that was a factor driving inflation higher.

    The wild swings in oil and gasoline prices were a major factor in battered consumer confidence during the year. But those swings were not felt evenly across the nation and throughout the year. Many of the western states faced much higher gas prices because of more limited refining capacity. But there were a number of refinery accidents throughout the year that caused spikes in other regions as well. So, everyone saw wide swings in prices, though not always at the same time.

    There is also the wide variation in gas taxes, from 68 cents a gallon in California to only 15 cents a gallon in Alaska. Some states temporarily halted their state gas taxes during the year in the face of high prices.

    But the difference in average income in the different states meant that drivers in some of the states with relatively low prices had to work almost as many hours to buy 15 gallons of gas as those drivers in high-priced states.

    For example, in Mississippi, where the hourly average wage in November was $24.52, according to the Labor Department, it took 1 hour and 41 minutes of work to earn enough to pay for 15 gallons at $2.75 a gallon at year’s end. In California, where the average price of regular was $4.38 a gallon, or about 60% more than in Mississippi, the average hourly wage of $37.61 meant that they only had to work four more minutes to buy those 15 gallons.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • READ: Former Trump White House aide’s testimony to House January 6 committee | CNN Politics

    READ: Former Trump White House aide’s testimony to House January 6 committee | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The House January 6 committee released another batch of transcripts Tuesday, including two more of its interviews with blockbuster witness Cassidy Hutchinson.

    The transcripts shed new light on how then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows regularly burned documents during the presidential transition period, according to Hutchinson, a top Meadows aide, who was interviewed by the committee several times.

    Read the transcripts of her May 17 and June 20 depositions below.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Convicted member of plot to kidnap Michigan governor sentenced to nearly 20 years in federal prison | CNN Politics

    Convicted member of plot to kidnap Michigan governor sentenced to nearly 20 years in federal prison | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A Michigan federal judge sentenced a man convicted of plotting to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to nearly 20 years in prison Wednesday.

    Barry Croft Jr. was part of a plan to kidnap the Democratic governor from her summer home in 2020 and practiced detonating explosives in preparation, prosecutors have said.
    Croft, who was sentenced to 235 months in federal prison, the longest sentence of the people convicted, is the last of the defendants in federal court to be sentenced in connection to the plot. Prosecutors had asked the judge to sentence Croft to life in prison.
    Explaining his sentencing decision, Judge Robert Jonker said, “I’m not somebody who’s willing ever to give up on somebody. And that’s why I think, in particular, life sentences are very unusual.”
    “Because, by definition, you’re not giving people a chance to come back into the fold,” he said.
    But Jonker also agreed with prosecutors that Croft was a leader to others involved in the plot, and noted his previous criminal history when handing down the sentence.
    A Delaware resident, Croft had traveled to Michigan to work with the local militia members to plan and surveil Whitmer’s summer home in the summer of 2020. Croft discussed using his grenade launcher and a mounted machine gun to thwart law enforcement response to the scene as a part in the kidnapping plot, jurors heard at trial.
    Trial evidence also showed that Croft practiced detonating an explosive filled with shrapnel at a training event using human silhouettes made of paper.

    Croft’s attorney, Joshua Blanchard, had asked the court Wednesday to administer a sufficient sentence but “not longer than it needs to be.”
    In a lengthy plea to the court, Blanchard asked the judge to consider Croft’s history of substance abuse and mental health concerns related largely to his significant marijuana use and family medical history.
    He blamed much of Croft’s behavior in 2020 to intoxication and said Croft ended up in the courtroom having fell down a “conspiracy rabbit hole” during solo rides as a long-haul truck driver before his arrest.
    Blanchard acknowledged his client is “a bit more susceptible to fringe ideas” and said he understands that Croft should serve a fair prison sentence – but not a life sentence.
    Croft declined to speak on his own behalf at the sentencing hearing, citing advice from his attorney.
    But the prosecutor pushed back on the defense arguments Wednesday, telling the court, “This man is thoroughly radicalized.”

    “He hasn’t changed his viewpoint,” prosecutor Nils Kessler said.

    Kessler said during his argument that Croft was the “spiritual leader” of the group “putting himself in the role of prophet.”

    He also went on to argue that Croft encouraged the other participants by saying they would be the “new founding fathers.”

    “People believed it” Kessler said.
    Croft has long been known to law enforcement for his extreme anti-government views. And in his sentencing memo, prosecutors noted a jail call recorded earlier this month during which Croft discussed his preferences for a violent lawless society with an associate.

    Jonker on Tuesday had sentenced Adam Fox, considered to be a leader of the plot with Croft, to 16 years in prison.
    “There is need for public understanding of the cost of this kind of wrongdoing and certainly for specific deterrence as well. And there is impact on our overall governmental system, not just physical threat to our sitting governor, it’s the emotional baggage that now our governor will have to carry and that she’s written about in her report,” Jonker said in court before issuing Fox’s prison sentence.
    And, earlier this month, three other men – Pete Musico, Joseph Morrison and Paul Bellar – were all sentenced in state court on charges of gang participation, support of a terrorist act and carrying or possessing a firearm during the commission of a felony, according to the Michigan attorney general’s office.
    Musico and Bellar must serve a minimum of 12 years and seven years, respectively. The alleged “commander” of the group, Morrison – who, according to affidavits filed with the attorney general’s office, went by the online moniker “Boogaloo Bunyan” – must serve a minimum of 11 years.
    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meet the dissident Russians living the ‘nightmare from which it is impossible to wake up’ | CNN

    Meet the dissident Russians living the ‘nightmare from which it is impossible to wake up’ | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    For Andrei Soldatov and his friends, February 24 marked the end of Russia as they knew it.

    In the early hours of that day, President Vladimir Putin announced that he had ordered Russian troops into Ukraine. “And all of a sudden, everything we still believed in got completely compromised,” Soldatov, a Russian investigative journalist who lives in self-imposed exile in London, told CNN.

    Life in Russia had for many years been getting more difficult for dissidents, independent journalists and anyone speaking up against Putin’s regime, but Soldatov said people like him still had some hope to hold on to. The war changed that, he said.

    “It was horrible to live under Putin and it was very far from the idea of democracy, but you still had some established institutions which you would almost take for granted that they would exist no matter what, and all of a sudden, everything collapsed,” he said, pointing to the near complete eradication of any remaining independent media, civil society and human rights groups.

    One woman who still lives in Moscow and whom CNN will call Olga, described February 24 as the point of no return. “Life turned into a nightmare from which it is impossible to wake up, round-the-clock reading of the news, protests at which there were more security forces than civilians,” she told CNN via an encrypted messaging service, describing the shame and hopelessness she feels. “The aggressor is our country. On our behalf, on my behalf, this terrible massacre is being waged,” she said.

    CNN is not publishing the woman’s name and is using a pseudonym at her request because of the risks to her personal safety. Speaking to foreign journalists about her involvement in the demonstrations – and even the use of the word “war” as opposed to the Kremlin-approved term “special military operation” – puts her at risk of arrest and potentially a lengthy prison sentence.

    While Russian state media gives the impression that everyone in Russia supports the war and Putin, many of the country’s more liberal, educated and well-traveled citizens have spent the past nine months horrified about the violence inflicted on Ukraine by their own country.

    But with the increasingly repressive regime cracking down on any signs of opposition, the choices of those who dissent are extremely limited.

    Hundreds of thousands of Russians have left the country, some out of principle or because they were facing persecution, others to avoid Western sanctions or the risk of being drafted into the military. Thousands have been detained, according to rights groups. Many others have been forced to withdraw from public life or lost their jobs, after hundreds of western companies withdrew from Russia and many local and foreign NGOs and campaign groups were shuttered.

    The repression of dissent has been brutal. According to independent human rights monitor OVD-Info, there have been more than 19,400 detentions for protesting against the war in Russia and dozens are prosecuted every week under a new law that made it illegal to disseminate “fake” information about the invasion.

    A court in Moscow used the law earlier this month when it sentenced Kremlin critic Ilya Yashin to more than eight years in prison for speaking up about the alleged killing of civilians by Russian troops in the Ukrainian town of Bucha, outside Kyiv. The Kremlin has denied any involvement in the mass killings, while reiterating baseless claims that the images of civilians bodies were fake.

    Soldatov spoke to CNN on the day he received, in London, an official letter from the Russian authorities detailing criminal charges against him.

    Like Yashin and hundreds of others, he is accused of spreading false information about the Russian military and law enforcement and is now on Russia’s wanted list. He denies the charges and says he was simply reporting the truth about the actions of the Russian government in the run up to and during the invasion of Ukraine.

    Any remnants of a free press have been wiped out since the war started. Western publications and social media sites have been blocked online, forcing Russians seeking alternatives to the official propaganda to go underground using virtual private networks, or VPNs, which allow people to browse the internet freely by encrypting their internet traffic. Data from Sensortower, an apps market research company, show the top eight VPN apps in Russia were downloaded almost 80 million times in Russia this year, despite the government’s efforts to crack down on their use.

    Ilya Yashin stands inside a defendant's glass cage during a hearing at the Meshchansky district court in Moscow on December 9, 2022.

    The clampdown has forced many people to reconsider their future in Russia. According to official statistics published by the Russian government, more than half a million people left Russia in the first 10 months of the year – more than twice as many in the whole of 2021.

    The true number might be much higher, as many would have likely left unofficially.

    It is unclear how many have left for political reasons, but almost 50,000 Russian citizens requested asylum in another country in the first six months of the year, according to the UN refugee agency, UNHCR. That’s more than the annual figure for any of the past 20 years.

    The US Border Patrol recorded 36,271 encounters with Russian citizens between October 2021 and September 2022. The number includes people who were apprehended or expelled by the border force and is significantly higher than the 13,240 and 5,946 recorded in the two previous fiscal years.

    OK Russians, a non-profit helping Russian citizens fleeing persecution, said its surveys suggest those who are leaving are on average younger and more educated than the general Russian public.

    “If you take the Moscow liberal intelligentsia, and of course, I’m talking only about the people I know and I know of, I would say that maybe 70% left. It’s journalists, it’s people from universities, sometimes schools, artists, people who have clubs and [foundations] in Moscow that got closed down,” Soldatov said.

    The numbers that have left Russia pale in comparison to the more than 4.8 million Ukrainians who have registered as refugees across Europe because of the war, but the huge outflow of mostly educated people is having a significant impact on Russian society.

    “If you are losing the educated middle-class portion of the population, then it matters for your economic prospects, but it also matters for the potential political reconstitution of the country,” said Kristine Berzina, a Russia expert at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. She pointed to the exodus of liberal, educated Iranians following the country’s 1979 revolution as an example of what can happen when large numbers from such demographics leave the country.

    “You don’t need to have a fully radicalized population to be able to support a radical regime,” she said.

    Maria only has one friend left in Moscow. Everybody else fled following President Vladimir Putin’s decision to launch an invasion into Ukraine.

    “They all left right at the beginning of March,” she said. “[For them] it is impossible to live in a country that started a war.”

    Maria has asked CNN not to publish her full name or details of her employer because of personal security concerns. The NGO for which Maria works is deemed a foreign agent under Russia’s recently expanded law on foreign agents, which means she is at risk of being persecuted.

    “Everyone who is against the war saw their lives simply destroyed,” she told CNN. “We can’t complain now, because someone will immediately tell you – and quite reasonably so – that no one is interested in you right now. It’s Ukrainians who suffered the most. Of course, they are in much worse conditions now. But that doesn’t mean we’re okay.”

    Maria said she remains determined to stay in Russia, even though all of her friends and her son have left. Her elderly mother can’t – and doesn’t want to – travel abroad, and Maria is not willing to leave her. “If I knew for sure that the borders would not be closed and I could come at any time if my mother needed my help, it would probably be easier for me to leave. But knowing that something else could happen at any moment scares me,” she told CNN.

    She still believes her work is important, but said she is struggling to see any hope for the future. Like Olga, she described her own life as a perpetual cycle of panic, horror, shame and self-doubt.

    “You’re constantly torn apart: Are you to blame? Did you not do enough? Can you do something else or not, and how should you act now?” she said. “There are no prospects. I’m an adult, and I didn’t exactly have all my life figured out, but all in all I understood what would happen next. Now nobody understands anything. People don’t even understand what will happen to them tomorrow.”

    Soldatov said he had begun to question his own identity. “The things we held dear, like the memory of the Second World War, for instance, became completely compromised,” he said, referring to Putin’s baseless claim that Russian forces are “denazifying” Ukraine.

    “It’s part of the Russian national identity that the Russian army helped to win the war (against Hitler’s Germany) and now it feels absolutely wrong because this message was used by Putin. You start questioning the history,” he said, adding that the favorable reaction by some parts of the Russian society to the invasion prompted him to research pre-war rhetoric in Germany.

    Speaking about Russians as “us” had begun to feel wrong because he deeply disagreed with Russia’s actions, he said. But saying “Russians” didn’t seem right either. “Because of course, I’m Russian, I also have some partial responsibility for what is going on and I do not want to hide from it.”

    Finnish border guard officers look at cars queueing at the Vaalimaa border crossing between Finland and Russia on September 30, 2022.

    Maria, a historian by training, has spent years taking part in anti-government protests, describing herself as a liberal deeply opposed to Putin, a former KGB agent. “I always knew that our country should not be led by a person from the KGB. It is too deeply rooted with horrors, deaths and all that,” she said.

    She said that when the war broke out, she grew more worried about attending demonstrations and stopped when it became too dangerous. She doesn’t see a scenario under which the regime in Russia could be overthrown any time soon, she said, pointing out that all of the opposition leaders “are in jail or have been killed.”

    Berzina said that the expectation of some in the West – that “once people start feeling as though their leaders are doing wrong, that there is an immediate wave of protests on the streets and call for government change that actually has an effect” – does not reflect the reality of life in Russia.

    “The Putin regime has done a very good job of either forcing out or imprisoning all viable alternatives that are of the more democratic fashion and then on the other side you have fear of going out into the streets if there’s no clear path forward,” she said.

    Olga, the woman who lives in Moscow and has regularly attended protests against the war, has also lost hope.

    “Almost all opposition leaders and opinion leaders are now either in prison or abroad. People have a huge potential for political action, but there is no leader and no power base,” she said, adding that civilians will not come out against the armed police, the National Guard, and other security forces.

    “It is probably difficult for people from democratic countries to understand the realities of life in a powerful autocracy,” she said. “It’s a terrifying feeling of one’s own insignificance and helplessness in front of a gigantic machine of death and madness.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link