Tag: International News

  • Feinstein is back, and so is the California Senate race

    Feinstein is back, and so is the California Senate race

    [ad_1]

    senate feinstein 53816

    Rep. Barbara Lee stood to benefit from that outcome more than Reps. Adam Schiff or Katie Porter. Newsom angered some Black voters by replacing the newly elevated Vice President Kamala Harris with Sen. Alex Padilla, the state’s first Latino senator — a choice that left the Senate without any Black women. The governor later committed to appointing a Black woman if he got another Senate pick. Lee was vetted to replace Harris and was widely seen as the logical choice if Feinstein stepped down.

    Feinstein had been facing increasing calls to return or resign, including from some Democratic colleagues, as her prolonged absence prevented the Senate Judiciary Committee from advancing judicial nominations and threatened further chaos as a nearly-tied Senate faces a looming debt fight.

    But now it looks more likely that she stays through the end of her term, preserving the basic dynamics of the Senate race to date. Lee, Porter, and Schiff have all rolled out star endorsers and worked to map a path through a complex primary. Assuming Feinstein holds on, none of them will be getting Newsom’s nod or the awesome powers of incumbency.

    And what of Feinstein’s imprimatur? She hasn’t endorsed a favored successor yet or indicated she will, although she is closer to Schiff than the other contenders. But her blessing may not move the needle. Indeed, it could be a liability with the many progressive voters who are ready to put the Feinstein era in the past and shift California’s Senate representation to the left.

    This article first appeared in an edition of the California Playbook PM newsletter.

    [ad_2]
    #Feinstein #California #Senate #race
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Trump’s defeat in Carroll case presages more legal peril

    Trump’s defeat in Carroll case presages more legal peril

    [ad_1]

    With one jury verdict in the books — complete with a $5 million award to Carroll — here’s a look at what’s coming next in Trump’s legal travails.

    Indictment watch in Fulton County

    Key date: July 11

    Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is investigating efforts by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia, a state that President Joe Biden won narrowly. Willis recently told local law enforcement to prepare for potential indictments between July 11 and Sept. 1.

    Willis’ charging decisions are rooted in the work of a special grand jury she convened to determine whether Trump violated state election laws in his bid to remain in power. That special grand jury probed Trump’s effort to reverse the outcome in Georgia, as well as his broader effort to subvert the election in Washington. The panel focused specifically on Trump’s effort to press state election officials to “find” just enough votes to put him over the top in the state.

    The special grand jury — a quirk of Georgia criminal law — has no power to indict but made recommendations about potential prosecutions earlier this year. Willis is not bound to follow those recommendations but said in January that charging decisions were “imminent.” She must now present the evidence gathered by the special grand jury — as well as additional information she’s been gathering in subsequent months — to a traditional grand jury that can issue charges.

    Pre-trial motions in the Manhattan hush-money case

    Key date: Aug. 8

    Manhattan District attorney Alvin Bragg made history when he obtained the first ever criminal indictment of a former president, charging Trump with dozens of felony counts for allegedly cooking his company’s books to secure the silence of a porn star who accused him of an affair.

    The judge overseeing the case recently asked lawyers for both sides to agree on a trial date in February or March 2024. In the meantime, expect a long series of pre-trial motions and bids by Trump to dismiss, delay or relocate the proceedings to another district or to federal court. The next major milestone is Aug. 8, when Trump is due to file expected motions to challenge the indictment.

    Upcoming trial in New York civil case against the Trump Organization

    Key date: Oct. 2

    Trump’s eponymous company has already been convicted of tax crimes by a Manhattan jury. But New York isn’t finished with the Trump Organization yet.

    Attorney General Letitia James has brought a civil case accusing Trump and the company of misleading banks, insurers and government agencies about the value of their assets in a scheme to obtain favorable tax treatment.

    The case is scheduled to go to trial on Oct. 2. It could result in Trump losing his ability to do business in New York.

    The federal probe of Trump’s bid to subvert the 2020 election

    Special counsel Jack Smith has been on a tear. In recent weeks, he’s hauled in former Vice President Mike Pence to testify to a grand jury, as well as former top aides in the Trump White House — from social media adviser Dan Scavino to policy adviser Stephen Miller to personnel chief Johnny McEntee. Former chief of staff Mark Meadows is expected to appear before the grand jury imminently as well.

    These interviews followed a series of intense, secretive legal battles in which Trump fought to stave off their testimony by asserting executive privilege. And in each case, he lost swiftly in both the district court and the court of appeals — setting new precedents for the separation of powers along the way.

    The witnesses were key players in the final weeks of Trump’s administration, as he worked desperately to seize a second term despite losing the 2020 election to Biden. When his efforts failed, a mob of his supporters — assembled in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021 at Trump’s call — bashed their way into the Capitol and sent Pence and lawmakers fleeing for their lives.

    Of all the investigations Trump faces, the timeline here remains murkiest. Smith is still working to prevail in a long-running legal battle to access the communications of Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), whose phone was seized by the FBI last August. Several other sealed legal fights, which are still unresolved, could unlock additional troves of evidence for Smith and his team of prosecutors — each of which could prolong the investigation by identifying new leads.

    The federal probe of Trump’s handling of classified documents

    Smith’s work isn’t limited to Jan. 6. He’s also probing Trump’s handling of scores of classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate more than a year after Trump left office. This probe appears significantly more advanced than the Jan. 6 probe, in part because it involves a smaller universe of potential witnesses, many of whom have already appeared before Smith’s grand jury.

    One of those recent appearances came from one of Trump’s own lawyers, Evan Corcoran, who was forced by the courts to testify despite Trump’s effort to assert attorney-client privilege. Observers both inside and outside Trump’s orbit have viewed this investigation as closer to completion than the Jan. 6 probe.

    Another lawsuit from E. Jean Carroll

    Amid Trump’s sprawling legal thicket, Carroll may get another chance to haul him into court. She has sued him over comments he made about her in 2019 — a lawsuit distinct from the case she won on Tuesday (which involved sexual assault and defamation for comments he made in 2022). A trial has been delayed as courts have weighed whether Trump can be sued in his personal capacity over comments he made while president.

    [ad_2]
    #Trumps #defeat #Carroll #case #presages #legal #peril
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Hochul issues emergency order for migrant crisis

    Hochul issues emergency order for migrant crisis

    [ad_1]

    signature bank 25972

    The city and the state are preparing for another wave of migrants when the federal Title 42 immigration policy lifts.

    “It is a crisis situation, especially with the suspension of Title 42 on Thursday,” Hochul told reporters Tuesday on Long Island. “It’s no surprise that there will literally be thousands of more individuals coming across the border and ultimately finding their way to the state of New York.”

    Hochul’s order might also seek to quell frustration in the suburbs after Adams’ announcement Friday that he would look to move some migrants to other counties to alleviate overcrowding and strained city resources.

    The Republican county executives in Orange and Rockland issued state of emergency orders that will try to bar hotels from contracting with the city to house migrants, setting up a showdown among local governments.

    Hochul seemed Tuesday to try to calm the fervor, suggesting she would work to find new locations, perhaps state-owned facilities, for the asylum-seekers in the city or with municipalities willing to accept them.

    “We are in communication with the mayor’s team and also helping him find locations within the city limits, opening up state property and talking to other counties that are interested in having people come,” she told reporters when asked about the counties’ concerns.

    The state budget approved last week included $1 billion to help the city with the surge as Adams has urged more outside resources, criticizing the federal government for not doing more.

    Hochul said that the state had already deployed about 1,000 members of the National Guard to help the city, and the executive order will allow the state more easily buy food and supplies for the migrants.

    She said one of the main obstacles is getting the migrants the approvals necessary to start working legally. She noted that farmers in New York, in particular, need about 5,000 more workers.

    “The number one priority for those here is to be able to get a job,” Hochul said. “We want them to get employment, but there’s constraint at the federal level as far as their designation.”

    [ad_2]
    #Hochul #issues #emergency #order #migrant #crisis
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Biden says he’s exploring 14th amendment to defuse debt ceiling standoff

    Biden says he’s exploring 14th amendment to defuse debt ceiling standoff

    [ad_1]

    image

    “I said I would come back and talk,” he said. “The one thing I’m ruling out is default, and I’m not going to pass a budget that has massive cuts.”

    The president’s remarks came at the White House shortly after a meeting he called “productive” with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the three other top congressional leaders. But Biden leveled criticism at McCarthy for sometimes making remarks during the meeting that were “maybe a little bit over the top” and for not knowing what he had proposed in his GOP bill.

    “Three of the four participants [were] very measured and low key,” Biden said.

    Back at the Capitol, McCarthy laughed off the comment, saying: “If you ever spend time with [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer, you’ll find out who the fourth is.”

    On a more serious note, Biden warned that not everyone at the negotiating table pledged to avoid default.

    Among only “three of the five, there was substantial movement that everyone agreed that deficit — defaulting on the debt was off the table,” Biden said.

    The president is scheduled to meet again Friday with McCarthy, Schumer, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Until then, White House staff and aides to the four congressional leaders would continue to hold discussions, those involved said.

    Biden is scheduled to leave for Japan in a week for the G-7 summit, but the president said he’d consider delaying his trip if an agreement appeared to be in reach. Underscoring the seriousness of the debt discussions, he called it “the single most important thing that’s on the agenda.”

    Canceling the trip, he said, is possible, but not likely.

    “In other words, if somehow we got down to the wire and we still hadn’t resolved this and the due date was in a matter of, when I was supposed to be away. I would not go. I would stay till this gets finished,” he said.

    White House and congressional appropriations staff are to begin discussions on a budget, which could form the outlines of an agreement. The Biden administration has insisted that the budget talks would be separate from a debt limit increase.

    Biden expressed openness to one key GOP ask: Rescinding tens of billions of dollars in Covid funding.

    “The answer is, I’d take a hard look at it,” Biden said, adding that the government “didn’t need it all” but needed to determine how much of that pot has been committed to various projects. “It’s on the table.”

    Still, Biden made clear that an agreement is not imminent.

    “There’s a lot of politics, posturing and gamesmanship and it’s going to continue for a while, but I’m squarely focused on what matters,” he added.

    Sarah Ferris and Adam Cancryn contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #Biden #hes #exploring #14th #amendment #defuse #debt #ceiling #standoff
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Read the full jury verdict form from the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial

    [ad_1]

    screenshot 2023 05 09 180432

    A federal jury on Tuesday found that Donald Trump sexually abused and defamed E. Jean Carroll, a writer who accused the former president of attacking her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.

    The verdict in the civil trial marks the first time that Trump, who has been accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women, has been held legally responsible for sexual assault. And it adds fresh tarnish to the former president’s reputation as he seeks to regain the White House amid a tide of legal troubles.

    [ad_2]
    #Read #full #jury #verdict #form #Jean #Carroll #defamation #trial
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • New Jersey representatives vow fight against New York’s ‘cash-grabbing’ congestion pricing plan

    New Jersey representatives vow fight against New York’s ‘cash-grabbing’ congestion pricing plan

    [ad_1]

    gettyimages 1442616188

    “New York City wants this because they want cash in their pockets,” Menendez said. “We’re going to keep fighting the cash-grabbing MTA.”

    The congestion tax shifts money from the Port Authority to the MTA, Menendez said, which could threaten the Port Authority’s ability to improve the PATH service and add more riders.

    New York’s plan also includes no expansion of New York City subway’s seven line to Secaucus Junction, a proposed solution that would provide a commuting alternative and get cars off the road, Menendez said.

    Gottheimer, who co-chairs the Congressional Anti-Congestion Tax Caucus, called the tax plan “absurd” and “anti-environment.” He said a full environmental study should be done and he intends to submit a comment during the 30-day review period demanding the Biden administration reconsider the decision.

    The MTA hasn’t determined how much to charge drivers, but options include fares ranging from $9 to $23 for passenger vehicles.

    Gottheimer has introduced legislation in the meantime intended to aid commuters, which includes laborers, nurses and restaurant workers who can’t afford the added costs.

    “It’s not right to suddenly drop a $23 dollar-a-day, or $5,000-a-year bill, on top of the $17 dollars they pay to enter this tunnel every day, not including gas or nearly $35 dollars to park,” Gottheimer said.

    The environmental assessment of the plan found that the congestion tax, if implemented this year, would increase pollutants in the Bronx, Staten Island, Nassau and Bergen Counties. It also showed there would be increases in particulate matter, nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide in Bergen County this year.

    “New York’s congestion pricing plan stands to push traffic and pollution to our communities,” Menendez said. “While New York is funding environmental mitigation in the Bronx, they refuse to do so for our communities.”

    The MTA plans to spend $130 million in revenue to mitigate environmental impacts in New York, but will not do so in New Jersey.

    New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy called the Biden administration’s approval of the plan “unfair and ill-advised.” Murphy said his administration is looking into legal options to fight the plan.

    “Everyone in the region deserves access to more reliable mass transit, but placing an unjustified financial burden on the backs of hardworking New Jersey commuters is wrong,” Murphy said in a statement.

    [ad_2]
    #Jersey #representatives #vow #fight #Yorks #cashgrabbing #congestion #pricing #plan
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Santos set to face federal criminal charges

    Santos set to face federal criminal charges

    [ad_1]

    george santos 90543

    Santos and aides in his congressional office also did not reply to requests for comment on the imminent charges, first reported by CNN. But some of Santos’ already fierce critics in the New York GOP took the fresh opportunity to reiterate their insistence that he isn’t welcome in their ranks.

    “These charges bring us one step closer to never having to talk about this lying loser ever again,” first-term Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) said when asked about the Santos charges.

    “Resign,” fellow New York Republican first-term Rep. Mike Lawler simply said.

    Rep. Marc Molinaro (R), another first-term New Yorker, echoed Lawler: “He should have resigned in January. He should resign now.”

    Lawler, LaLota and Molinaro are among the handful of House Republicans — mostly those who helped the party cruise in Empire State swing districts last fall — who have called for Santos to resign. Those fellow Republicans began turning against him after an avalanche of reports showed he had lied about his background and resume, both on the campaign trail and before his run.

    While Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.) has not called for him to resign, she said she was “not surprised” by the news and she looks forward to someone new filling Santos’ seat.

    “I figured this was where it was headed,” Malliotakis said Tuesday. “I would love to see someone new run because I could tell you that we will hold that seat. The sooner George Santos leaves, the sooner we can get someone in there that’s not a liar.”

    In fact, Republicans beyond New York were openly stunned by his willingness to hang onto his battleground seat.

    “I’m surprised he made it as long as he did,” said Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.).

    In New York, the GOP and the conservative parties don’t expect him to resign, according to a Republican familiar with their thinking who spoke candidly on condition of anonymity. Instead, this person said they expect Santos to try and use resignation as a bargaining chip, as they presume he is guilty of the charges set to be filed.

    But Speaker Kevin McCarthy has been far more quiet, particularly given that Santos’ vote is integral to his four-seat majority as he wages a major fight with the Biden administration over the debt ceiling.

    Speaking to reporters Tuesday night, the California Republican declined to put pressure on Santos. McCarthy noted that the New Yorker has already ceded his committees, adding that in past cases he has waited until a guilty verdict before calling on a member to resign.

    Oddly enough, Santos became House Republicans’ deciding vote as the party Republicans moved to pass their debt ceiling plan. That vote saw four defections, but absences helped push them to victory.

    Jordain Carney contributed.

    [ad_2]
    #Santos #set #face #federal #criminal #charges
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • A Stunning Result in Trump’s Sexual Assault Trial

    A Stunning Result in Trump’s Sexual Assault Trial

    [ad_1]

    correction aptopix trump columnist lawsuit 99285

    The verdict came, however, with an important qualification: The jury concluded that Carroll did not prove that Trump had raped her, as Carroll had alleged, but that Trump had nevertheless sexually abused her. A finding of rape would have required the jury to conclude that Trump had engaged in non-consensual sexual intercourse with Carroll, but the jury apparently opted to conclude that something short of that — but nevertheless disturbing, illegal and sexually abusive — had happened.

    Still, the jury’s verdict in Carroll’s favor is a stunning result, though for people who have been following the case closely, it was not particularly surprising. Carroll had very capable lawyers, who moved their case forward briskly and professionally and kept the pressure on Trump, who tried to dodge the case in pretty much every conceivable way. (Disclosure: I used to work with Carroll’s lead attorney, Roberta Kaplan, and remain friendly with her.)

    At the trial, according to reporting from journalists who watched the proceedings, Carroll’s lawyers presented an efficient, well-constructed and coherent case — including testimony from Carroll herself, from two witnesses who spoke with Carroll shortly after her encounter with Trump, from a former Bergdorf Goodman employee who testified that the relevant area in the store at the time matched Carroll’s description, and from another employee of the store who testified that there were no security cameras in the area at the time.

    Other witnesses for Carroll included Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff, who testified that Trump had sexually assaulted them as well. In short, Carroll’s lawyers presented her account, they corroborated it with testimony from other witnesses close to Carroll or who had had their own encounters with Trump, and they addressed head on some of Trump’s lawyers’ dubious claims in defense, which included questioning why there was no video available of an assault that occurred more than 25 years ago.

    For their part, Trump’s lawyers struggled to put up much of a defense. In the run-up to the trial, they made multiple long-shot efforts to get the trial adjourned, which the presiding judge — a long-serving, well-regarded judge in the district — repeatedly rejected. At trial, Trump’s lawyers vigorously cross-examined Carroll, though this clearly did not fully persuade the jurors, and Trump’s lawyers put on no witnesses of their own. Trump did not testify in his own defense, even though nothing prevented him from doing so if he had a compelling response to offer to Carroll’s claims. Instead, Carroll’s lawyers played excerpts from Trump’s deposition, which was a debacle that effectively made Trump a witness against himself.

    Of course, Trump is not the only politician — he is not even the only president — to face allegations of sexual assault. Former President Bill Clinton, for instance, has also been accused of rape — a point that Trump has raised before in trying to deflect from the more voluminous and broader array of allegations against him. President Joe Biden has also been accused of sexual assault, though that claim faded from mainstream news coverage after questions emerged about the credibility of the accuser. (Both Clinton and Biden have denied the allegations against them.)

    Needless to say, every allegation needs to be taken and judged on its own terms, but even if you hate Clinton or Biden, Trump’s case now exists in a distinct realm: The allegations by Carroll were subject to a legitimate and robust adversarial legal process; the case was overseen by a highly competent judge and litigated by competent attorneys on both sides; and the claims were adjudicated by a jury of Trump’s peers pursuant to the law.

    It is true that Manhattanites strongly dislike Trump, but there is no indication at this time that the jury did anything less than listen to the evidence and to the judge’s instructions. During the trial, Trump’s lawyers sought to lay the groundwork for an appeal by complaining about alleged bias on the part of the judge, but the arguments raised so far do not appear to be particularly strong.

    By itself, the verdict in Carroll’s case is a remarkable and ugly turn of events for Trump, but there are broader implications as well.

    Most notably, the verdict serves as at least partial vindication for many other women who have lodged their own allegations against Trump. Trump has been accused of sexual misconduct by dozens of women over the years. Carroll’s allegations were particularly shocking and horrifying, so the case served both as a referendum on Carroll’s specific case — albeit one that the jury resolved in somewhat mixed fashion — but also as a larger proxy battle over Trump’s mistreatment of women over the decades. Whether Trump likes it or not, the verdict lends further support to the credibility of all of those other allegations, which range in their substantive particulars but generally track Trump’s appalling comments on the Access Hollywood tape about how he can do pretty much whatever he wants to women, including assaulting them.

    There is, however, little reason to believe that there will be a cascade of litigation following Carroll’s victory, but that appears to have just as much to do with legal constraints as anything else. The statutes of limitations for any other civil and criminal claims based on other alleged sexual misconduct by Trump have probably largely if not entirely lapsed, which is fortunate for the former president. Carroll’s suit, however, managed to emerge for at least two reasons — first, because Trump offered very specific and repeated denials of her allegations even after he left office, and second, because New York passed a law last year that revived civil claims based on sexual assault that would otherwise have been too old to bring in court. Under the circumstances, it is safe to assume that anyone else with a viable legal claim against Trump for comparable conduct would likely have brought it by now.

    As a country, we also now have to grapple with the political implications of having a leading presidential contender who has been found liable for conduct as grotesque as sexual assault. Regardless of what one thinks of Trump’s fitness for the presidency, this is a qualitatively new development that could — or at least should — conceivably turn some voters away from him.

    In the political arena, Trump might offer some version of his usual bluster to defend himself — perhaps that the judge was systematically biased against him, that Carroll’s lawyer is some sort of covert political operative working on behalf of the Democratic Party, or that he was for some reason or another unable to defend himself in court. None of this is true, though that has never stopped Trump before. Indeed, after the verdict, his presidential campaign claimed: “In jurisdictions wholly controlled by the Democratic Party our nation’s justice system is now compromised by extremist left-wing politics.”

    Even before the verdict, there were assessments in the media of the political fallout — or lack thereof — from the case, but there is at least one important reason that the case did not attract more widespread or prominent coverage in the run-up to the trial: Carroll and her lawyers appear to have exercised extraordinary restraint in giving interviews or making public appearances in the months leading up to the trial, perhaps so as not to antagonize the judge, who was particularly concerned about ensuring that the case was decided based on the evidence in the courtroom rather than media coverage. Suffice to say that that may now change — both Carroll and Kaplan should now be free to give interviews if they like — now that the verdict is in.

    Still, we should also be prepared for the distinct possibility that the verdict will not significantly shift voters’ preferences. This may be a dispiriting prospect, but so far, his supporters do not appear particularly concerned about his many legal problems, and many of them are likely to hang much on either Trump’s denials or the jury’s rejection of Carroll’s specific claim of rape, even though sexual assault without intercourse is awful enough on its own terms.

    That political dynamic could always change, but at least one thing remains true. Trump, while often wrong, has always been right about something that the verdict on Tuesday confirmed once again. The former president is one of a kind — just not for the reason he might like.

    [ad_2]
    #Stunning #Result #Trumps #Sexual #Assault #Trial
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • It could’ve been worse: White House debt meeting ends with plans for a repeat

    It could’ve been worse: White House debt meeting ends with plans for a repeat

    [ad_1]

    aptopix biden 95134

    Aides to the four party leaders in each chamber of Congress and White House staff will continue talks during the week, McCarthy said, and the players will convene again on Friday. Democratic leaders said separately that party leaders would begin discussing a possible budget and spending deal as soon as Tuesday evening — a step closer to pairing the debt limit with another major headache for party leaders.

    Yet neither party’s leaders even edged away from their entrenched positions on the debt limit: Biden and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said there’s nothing to negotiate. And McCarthy dinged Biden for being unable to articulate any spending cut he might consider as part of a deal to increase the Treasury Department’s borrowing power.

    Instead, the speaker reiterated that the House is the only chamber that has passed a bill dealing with the topic — a measure packed with conservative priorities that Biden’s party has rejected.

    Biden actually went further after the meeting, saying he was “considering” the use of the 14th amendment as a means to circumvent the debt ceiling standoff. But he cast some doubt on whether it could work, saying it would “have to be litigated, and in the meantime without an extension it’d still end up in the same place.”

    Deal-making senators in both parties, however, appeared irked by the lack of progress. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who met with McCarthy himself and pressed Biden to negotiate, said he expected more.

    “To have five of the political leaders for our country walk out of the meeting and not one of them say that we made progress?” Manchin said. “Ridiculous.”

    Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said that whether the country defaults or not depends largely on Biden saving the day: “If the president shows leadership, I don’t think we’re going to default. If the president just kind of sits there and, you know, repeats the same thing over and over again, we’ve got an issue.”

    Despite that bleak result, Tuesday’s meeting ended as positively as anyone could have hoped for with a possible debt ceiling breach potentially a month or less away. After near-total silence since February between Biden and McCarthy, the two main negotiating partners, the duo is now set to meet twice in one week.

    As McCarthy returned to the Capitol after a week-long recess on Tuesday, the California Republican declared that party leaders should nail down the outlines of a deal in the next two weeks to ensure the U.S. doesn’t go careening off a fiscal cliff.

    “We now have just two weeks to go,” McCarthy said, offering little clarity on that timeline. While the Treasury Department has predicted the country could breach the debt limit as soon as June 1, the Senate is scheduled to leave Washington in just 10 days, with the House going on a separate recess the week of Memorial Day.

    Schumer described Tuesday as a “bad news and good news” meeting, blasting McCarthy for refusing to rule out default.

    McCarthy dodged reporters’ attempts to get him to promise the nation would make good on its debt, though Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said pointedly: “The United States of America is not going to default.”

    Despite McCarthy suggesting a firm deadline and both parties pooh-poohing the idea of a short-term hike, it remains unclear how seriously negotiators are taking Treasury’s projections of a default as soon as June 1. It took the White House and congressional leaders a week to sit down together after that estimate, and some in Congress are privately wondering whether the debt limit won’t get dealt with until after the Memorial Day holiday.

    “I believe the Treasury secretary when she names the X-date,” House Financial Services Committee Chair Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) said, referring to the department’s June 1 warning. “I think we have to be prepared to move in anticipation of that date being earlier in the month [of June].”

    McHenry, like McCarthy, said a short-term increase was off the table. But it may be difficult to negotiate a budget deal in time to avoid a debt ceiling breach without more breathing room.

    McConnell essentially backed McCarthy’s position during the meeting and the press availability afterward. Rather than raise alarms, he said the back and forth is normal and Washington is merely “having a debate here” on federal spending “in conjunction with raising the debt ceiling.”

    In the run-up to the meeting, the GOP hardened its position: 43 Republican senators signed on to a letter pledging to filibuster any bill raising the debt ceiling “without substantive spending and budget reforms.” McConnell signed onto that letter and has rhetorically locked arms tightly with McCarthy.

    Biden also has refused to budge from his opposition to negotiations on the debt ceiling. Democrats cite the 2011 debt limit crisis, and the spending cuts and credit downgrades that resulted from that era’s talks with the GOP, as an episode they are unwilling to repeat.

    “People have asked: Will the president give Speaker McCarthy an off-ramp, an exit strategy?” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said on Tuesday. “The exit strategy is very clear: do your job, Congress must act, prevent a default.”

    House Republicans had generally set low expectations for the meeting, given Democrats’ repeated insistence that they won’t entertain the GOP’s demands. One of the best scenarios possible, as they saw it, was simply that negotiators would agree to a second meeting.

    Some, however, are leaving it to McCarthy to decide what constitutes a win.

    “I’ll let him define that,” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), chair of the House Rules Committee, said of the speaker after McCarthy departed for the meeting.

    In the meantime, House GOP leaders have no plans to tee up any additional debt measures on the floor. Many privately feel that Biden has more to lose than Republicans, as his approval ratings teeter around 40 percent compared with McCarthy, whose conference has been in lockstep behind him.

    The Senate has not yet voted on the House’s bill or a clean debt ceiling bill introduced by Schumer.

    While both sides prepare to meet again, the parties are expected to keep duking it out in a messaging battle over who would shoulder the blame for the painful effects of a drawn-out debt crisis. That finger-pointing will only grow more tense as financial markets begin to respond to the specter of a potential default.

    The 2011 debt ceiling debacle, which stemmed from Tea Party Republicans pushing the Obama administration for steep spending cuts, ultimately resulted in a downgrade in the country’s credit rating — even after an 11th-hour deal to avoid a default.

    At the time, McConnell swooped in to work with Democrats and then-Vice President Biden to secure a plan they could all swallow. But he has stated clearly that won’t be the case this year: McCarthy is leading the charge this round.

    Adam Cancryn, Sam Stein and Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]
    #couldve #worse #White #House #debt #meeting #ends #plans #repeat
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Tucker Carlson to relaunch show on Twitter

    Tucker Carlson to relaunch show on Twitter

    [ad_1]

    “And you know if you bump up against those limits often enough, you will be fired for it,” Carlson said. “That’s not a guess; it’s guaranteed. Every person who works in English language media understands that. The rule of what you can’t say defines everything.”

    Carlson, the former host of “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on Fox News, exited the company after Fox News settled Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation lawsuit for $787.5 million.

    Carlson first joined Fox News as a contributor in 2009, and in 2017, Carlson took over the network’s 8 p.m. hour after Bill O’Reilly was forced out. Carlson was one of the most-watched hosts on the cable news network, with an average audience of 3.2 million viewers.

    Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) took to Twitter to say that she “can’t wait” for Carlson’s new show.

    “The truth will be unstoppable,” Greene said.



    [ad_2]
    #Tucker #Carlson #relaunch #show #Twitter
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )