Tag: Liz

  • Bennie Thompson: ‘I chose Liz Cheney over party’

    [ad_1]

    recast thompson jackson bw ap

    House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Thursday subpoenaed a former prosecutor who worked in the Manhattan DA’s office — a move Bragg characterized as an “attempt to undermine an active investigation” and “an unprecedented campaign of harassment and intimidation.”

    None of this is a surprise to Thompson, the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee.

    “I expect nothing less from my colleagues on the other side,” Thompson said during an exclusive interview with POLITICO for The Recast Power List 2023.

    “I’ve been in Congress almost 30 years and I’ve never seen a congressional committee attack a state official who’s doing his job. Basically crossing the line – from Bennie Thompson’s standpoint – intimidating an official not to do his job.”

    In an 845-page report, Thompson’s own committee concluded at the end of last year that there is enough evidence for the Department of Justice to convict the former president on charges including obstruction of an official proceeding and assisting and providing aid and comfort to an insurrection.

    In the interview, Thompson weighed in on the allegations that the myriad investigations Trump is at the center of — including two headed by special counsel Jack Smith at the DOJ and one by the Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney — are politically motivated. He also talked about why he opened the Jan. 6 hearings by connecting that attack to America’s long history of racism and slavery and explains the flak he received for picking former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) as the committee’s vice chair.

    This transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

    Booker: I want to jump into our conversation starting with what happened in Manhattan (this week) seeing the former president into a Manhattan courthouse and be charged with 34 felony counts in connection to a hush money payment to silence a porn star. I want to get your overall thoughts about what this says about where we are in our quest to uphold American democracy.

    Rep. Thompson: Well, I think the best phrase that we hear from some circles is: It proves that no one is above the law. In America, you can be president of the United States, but you are tasked with the responsibility of the rule of law, and when you don’t do that, you’re subject to the penalties and other things that are associated with it.

    So I allow that process to work itself [out]. Clearly, a group of citizens, in the form of a grand jury, heard evidence and ultimately made a decision to come forth with indictments. Now we’ll look at our system of justice in this country to see if, in fact, Donald Trump will be proven guilty or innocent.

    Booker: I just want to note that the former president pleaded not guilty to all the charges. Now, obviously, the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, has to convince a jury that Mr. Trump committed these alleged crimes. But, as someone who worked on the January 6th committee, are these legal proceedings of a former president, someone who is a leading candidate on the GOP side, good for American politics? You’ve talked about nobody’s above the law, but certainly there are allegations being levied on the right that all of these investigations, these legal probes, are politically motivated.

    Rep. Thompson: Well, I expect nothing less from my colleagues on the other side.

    Donald Trump is the titular head of the [Republican] Party. They have a fundamental right to defend that individual, and that’s what they’re doing. My concern is, in defense of it, they’re attacking the rule of law, and the rule of law in this country is clear. We have separation of powers in our Constitution.

    I’ve been in Congress almost 30 years and I’ve never seen a congressional committee attack a state official who’s doing his job. Basically crossing the line — from Bennie Thompson’s standpoint — intimidating an official not to do his job.

    I think that’s unfortunate.

    The other thing associated with the comment is my work on January 6th.

    Some of the conversation and vitriol that we’re hearing, we heard before January 6th. It’s very dangerous language. So before January 6th, people would say, “Oh, this would never happen in the greatest democracy on Earth.”

    Well, it did.

    And it happened because there were certain forces at work. Those forces were orchestrated — based on the work of our committee — by, at that time, the President of the United States and some other individuals.

    I would think that our committee made the case. We utilized primarily people who worked in the administration, people who identified with the party of the administration, but they chose patriotism and democracy over party. I thank them for that.

    But even with that, some of the individuals who are talking now are very critical of people in their own party for coming forth. This is our great democracy, we have an opportunity to speak our opinion, but sometimes we have to be cautious of what we say because others are listening, others are watching, and they, in many instances, interpret it a different way.

    Booker: Well, let me just follow up on this one point here. A CNN poll out this week indicated that 60 percent of those surveyed said they approved of the Trump indictment.

    But when broken down by race, 75 percent of those who identify as a person of color approved of the indictment, versus just 51 percent of white respondents who said they approved of this indictment.

    Why do you think there’s such a wide gulf in how white Americans and how people of color view this indictment of the former president?

    Rep. Thompson: Well, one of the things I’ve experienced over my political career is there’s a fundamental belief by the majority of African Americans that they actually believe in our system of government. They believe in the rule of law. So whatever it is that they have to do to demonstrate it, they do it on a regular basis.

    When elections go wrong, the majority of the Black people who lose elections don’t act like Donald Trump and his people. They basically will go to court. If they lose, then they’ll get their act together and come back next election.

    Donald Trump has taken losing an election to the worst level possible, and that worst level is deny, deny, deny and, ultimately, … go into a system of violence.

    I take myself, for instance. I’ve been in elective office for quite a while. When I first started, we had problems registering people to vote; we had problems having people go in polling places to help, even though it was the law. But at no point did we ever think about taking the law into our own hands. We made the law work based on what it said. And so I see that attitude right now in that CNN poll.

    People of color really want this system of government to work for all the people. And so they will, by and large, defend it. But I see a lot of white Americans who are somehow intimidated because of this growing minority, and the language that Donald Trump is saying, and his supporters, that we have to “make America great again.”

    Some of those code words are really creating havoc in the white community because of the gun laws that are being passed around the country. The underlying element in those gun laws is race. It’s not Second Amendment. It’s all about how we have to defend our communities, why we have to defend our schools, even though, by and large, those rationales for the defense are hollow.

    And so I’m comfortable in saying, even in the south, racial bloc voting occurs more among whites than it does Blacks. Black people in the South have voted, historically, at a greater percentage for white candidates than white voters have voted for Black candidates. So we have made some of that adjustment, and I think that poll reflects the maturing of the attitudes in the Black community toward defending the system.

    Booker: At The Recast, we focus on the intersection of race and identity and how it’s shaping American politics. Part of the reason why you were selected by a committee of my colleagues to be on this year’s Power List is how you placed race right at the center of the January 6th investigation.

    In your opening remarks in the first committee hearing … I’m going to read your quote back to you just to get your reaction to it because it was so powerful, it stuck out to me.

    You said: “I’m from a part of the country where people justify the actions of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan and lynching. I’m reminded of that dark history today as I hear voices today try and justify the actions of insurrectionists on January 6th, 2021.”

    Please break down why you wanted to start the conversation about the investigations into the attack on the Capitol with race.

    Rep. Thompson: Well, I think, as a country, we have to continue to reflect on our history.

    Even though we are the greatest country in the world, there have been some issues associated with our growth and maturity that we can’t overlook. So to remind people of that history is important.

    I think it was symbolic that an African American chaired the January 6th Committee, [whose] ancestors were brought to this country in the belly of ships, who for a number of years, toiled, building public courthouses and city halls all over this country for free, even our United States Capitol.

    What happened on January 6th was that sole reminder that, even though we are the greatest country in the world, we have to maintain vigilance in keeping it … otherwise, the potential for what occurred on January 6th could very well happen again.

    So I wanted to frame it [in that context and] I chose Liz Cheney as my vice chair. I didn’t have to. I could have picked anyone, but I think it was for the country. I chose Liz Cheney over party. And some of us, my friends, they took issue with it

    Booker: Really?

    Rep. Thompson: Oh, yeah, absolutely.

    But it was, more or less, “Why did you do it? You were in charge. You could have done a lot of things,” and I said, “Well, this was more than party. This was country.”

    And while my country has not always treated Bennie Thompson or my ancestors properly, I think there are some times you have to look beyond party and race to get to the next level, and so I’ve tried to do that.

    But I can still be truthful in the process. I don’t have to gloss over it, just be straightforward, and so my opening comments, truthful, straightforward. Some people might not [have understood] the place of it, but you have to set the tone for the seriousness of your hearing, and I thought that went a long ways toward establishing the tone.

    Booker: I wanted to ask a couple of questions since you are home in your district right now in the Jackson area. One, before the end of the year, Congress voted on an omnibus, allocating about $600 million to address the Jackson water crisis.

    I’d like to get an update on that from you about how that is progressing. And last week, President Biden was in your state, touring the devastation from natural disasters. If you could, give me a brief update about how the recovery efforts are going in that regard.

    Rep. Thompson: As most of you know, the Jackson water crisis was an ultimate culmination of a flooding event on our water system that really knocked out everything.

    But, as we started to look at it, there was a history of lack of state support toward the largest publicly-owned water system in the state. Part of that was associated with the fact that Jackson had become a majority African American city. And so, over time, that neglect led to a system that could no longer be maintained.

    The flood that occurred on that system, however, allowed us an opportunity to call on the federal government to help. We had a disaster declaration declared, and, ultimately, we looked at the omnibus disaster package. That provided money for wildfires in the West and flooding in the West also, as an opportunity to do the same thing for Jackson, Mississippi. And that’s what we did.

    The initial installment is 600 million. Not enough. It’ll take several years to spend the money, but the system, pardon the pun, was on life support, so we’re working through it. But, in order to work through it, we established a third-party manager who will run that system, and we are in the process of going through that and I thank everybody for their support.

    Unfortunately, 10 days ago, a tornado went through five counties in my district. We lost 13 in the city of Rolling Fork, Mississippi. We’re struggling. Those cities and counties, under the best of circumstances, were vulnerable. There’s no public transportation. In two of the counties, there’s no hospital. So we’re challenged in that respect, but our friends all over the country have stepped up. But there are still some vestiges of inequity.

    One is, the white kids attend an all-white segregated academy. Believe it or not, some of the resources for the community were sent to that all-white segregated academy where Black folk don’t go, and so we had to turn that around.

    The Biden administration has talked about equity and making sure that the response to whatever it is, education, housing, agriculture, is looked at through a colorblind lens. We fixed that.



    [ad_2]
    #Bennie #Thompson #chose #Liz #Cheney #party
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Bennie Thompson & Liz Cheney: The Recast Power List

    Bennie Thompson & Liz Cheney: The Recast Power List

    [ad_1]

    thompsoncheney

    Bennie Thompson, son of the segregated south and staunch liberal ally of Nancy Pelosi, and Liz Cheney, scion of a conservative political dynasty, would make unlikely partners in any context.

    But the pair teamed up to helm one of the most influential congressional investigations in history: Diving headfirst into Donald Trump’s effort to subvert the transfer of power after losing the 2020 election. And they did it by embracing bipartisanship, calling out white supremacy among the insurrectionists and highlighting the bravery of the women who came forward to testify at the hearings.

    Thompson, as chair of the committee, had the monumental task of casting the Jan. 6 attacks as an attempt at sedition — leaning on his own background as a Black Mississippian and drawing connections during the hearings between Trump’s “Stop the Steal” campaign and the “Lost Cause” effort to mythologize the Confederacy.

    Cheney, besides cloaking the committee in some legitimacy as a high-profile Republican, was a central player in a group of women — including Sarah Matthews and Alyssa Farah Griffin — who convinced Mark Meadows aide Cassidy Hutchinson to testify in front of the cameras.

    For 18 months, Thompson and Cheney used their complementary strengths, leaning into their own lived experiences to piece together a damning narrative about Trump and his allies’ continued efforts to overturn and plant doubt in the electoral process.

    “I’m convinced that our hearings reinforced the greatness of our country, that we settle our differences at the ballot box,” Thompson said.

    [ad_2]
    #Bennie #Thompson #Liz #Cheney #Recast #Power #List
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Liz Truss: UK should have ‘done more earlier’ to counter Vladimir Putin

    Liz Truss: UK should have ‘done more earlier’ to counter Vladimir Putin

    [ad_1]

    politico

    LONDON — Former British Prime Minister Liz Truss argued the U.K. should have “done more earlier” to counter Vladimir Putin’s rhetoric before he invaded Ukraine, and said the West depended on Russian oil for too long.

    Truss — the U.K.’s shortest-serving prime minister who resigned amid market turmoil last year — was speaking in a House of Commons debate about Ukraine, her first contribution in the chamber as a backbencher since 2012. She has been increasingly vocal on foreign policy since leaving office.

    The former prime minister, who as served foreign secretary for Boris Johnson before succeeding him in the top job, recalled receiving a phone call at 3.30 a.m. on the morning of the invasion, and told MPs: “This was devastating news. But as well as being devastating, it was not unexpected.”

    Truss praised the “sheer bravery” of Ukrainians defending their country, as well as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his Cabinet for not fleeing the country in the aftermath. “I remember being on a video conference that evening with the defense secretary and our counterparts, who weren’t in Poland, who weren’t in the United States,” she said of Ukraine’s top team. “They were in Kyiv and they were defending their country,” she added.

    But while Truss argued Western sanctions had imposed an economic toll on Putin’s Russia, said urged reflection. “The reason that Putin took the action he took is because he didn’t believe we would follow through,” she argued, and said the West should “hold ourselves to high standards.”

    Ukraine, she said, should have been allowed to join NATO.

    “We were complacent about freedom and democracy after the Cold War,” she said. “We were told it was the end of history and that freedom and democracy were guaranteed and that we could carry on living our lives not worrying about what else could happen.”

    Truss urged the U.K. to do all it could to help Ukraine win the war as soon as possible, including sending fighter jets, an ongoing matter of debate in Western capitals despite Ukrainian pleas.

    And the former U.K. prime minister said the West should “never again” be “complacent in the face of Russian money, Russian oil and gas,” tying any future lifting of sanctions “to reform in Russia.”



    [ad_2]
    #Liz #Truss #earlier #counter #Vladimir #Putin
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Liz Truss Crashes the (Republican) Party

    Liz Truss Crashes the (Republican) Party

    [ad_1]

    If Truss had reconsidered the soundness of a program that sent the pound plunging, triggered emergency actions by the Bank of England and drew open scorn from the Biden administration, she did not say so. To the contrary, she seemed to believe her defective strategy of borrowing Republican ideas could be improved by borrowing more Republican ideas.

    And in Washington, Truss found a new one she admired: the Republican Study Committee, an influential body within the House of Representatives that serves as an ideological anchor for the GOP and a clearinghouse for government-shrinking policies. In a meeting with Representative Kevin Hern of Oklahoma, the group’s chair, Truss said she wanted to create a similar caucus in Westminster to “house all of their ideas into a collective group, in order to hold the current prime minister accountable,” according to Hern.

    Truss floated a few names for that entity. One, Hern told me, was the “Conservative Growth Group.”

    Weeks later, my colleague Eleni Courea reported that a handful of MPs, including Truss and several former ministers, had gathered to toast the creation of a group with precisely that name.

    Truss’ Washington tour came at a moment of trial for conservative movements on both sides of the Atlantic. In Britain and the United States, small-government ideology is facing a renewed test of relevance in an age of populism and interventionist economic policy. The austerity-minded conservatism of the Great Recession gave way years ago in both countries to the spirit of culture war and nostalgic nationalism, leaving lawmakers who truly want to roll back government marginalized even within right-leaning parties.

    If Truss has lately taken inspiration from the Republican Party in a narrow, tactical way, American conservatives might draw some bigger lessons from her tribulations.

    Here, Republicans are contemplating their own adventure in economic reengineering. Having abandoned fiscal restraint during the Trump presidency, they are now demanding spending reductions from President Biden in a fight over raising the statutory limit on government borrowing. If Democrats do not agree to some form of cuts, then Republicans have threatened to risk a calamitous national default by refusing to raise the debt ceiling.

    There is not much evidence that Republicans have a strategy for prevailing in that confrontation, or for avoiding the kind of market panic that broke Truss’ government. Republicans did not campaign in the midterm elections on a defined blueprint for downsizing government. Like Truss, they are pursuing structural changes to their country’s finances without an electoral mandate.

    Unlike Truss, Republicans still have time to adjust course.

    The conservatives Truss met in Washington did not seem inclined to see her as a Ghost of Christmas Future — a grim embodiment of what happens when you try to revise the relationship between taxpayers and their government without first persuading voters to go along with you. They welcomed her, instead, like a pal who has fallen on hard times.

    Accompanied by two colleagues — Jake Berry, the former Conservative Party chairman, and Brandon Lewis, a former minister — Truss visited Capitol Hill and advocacy groups like Americans for Tax Reform. The voluble activist Grover Norquist, a self-described Truss fan, told me he urged her to focus relentlessly on lowering tax rates and avoid other factional disputes within her party. That, he said, is how you build a diverse bloc of support for cutting taxes.

    “You do one issue. You do Jack Kemp. You do, ‘We’re the lower-rate people,’” said Norquist, who displays a 1990s-vintage Tory poster in his office (“New Labour, New Taxes”).

    In Britain’s immediate political environment, this is not obviously good advice. Sunak has dismissed a fresh push for tax cuts as impracticable; his government is beset by labor strife, crises in health care and the cost of living, mounting ethics scandals and apocalyptic polling brought on in part by Truss herself. A read-my-lips anti-tax message does not look like much of a route to relevance for a former prime minister now returned to the back benches.

    But it was a door-opener for Truss in Washington. Hern told me his session with Truss was scheduled to last 15 minutes and then unspooled over more than an hour as he, a 61-year-old Tulsa entrepreneur who amassed a fortune as an owner of McDonald’s franchises before joining Congress in 2018, outlined his legislative playbook for Truss, a lifelong activist who at 47 has served in Parliament for more than a decade, including as foreign secretary.

    Hern told me they bonded over a shared view that their countries were on a dangerous path. Referring to Truss as having been “prime minister of what once was a great nation,” Hern credited her with trying to “save Great Britain” even though her attempt misfired.

    “I think she felt like she tried to do too much, too soon, and didn’t have a following,” he said.

    When I asked Hern if Truss’ fate could inform the debt ceiling fight, it did not sound like he had considered the idea before. But he did not wholly dismiss it.

    Truss, he said, tried to impose her plans in a “top-down” fashion that would never work here. Hern said Republicans had to have a “hard conversation” with Americans about how the government spends money.

    A congressional aide who met with Truss said she expressed fear that Britain’s conservative movement could “disappear entirely.” Truss did not quite say she expected Conservatives to get wiped out in the next election, according to this aide, but she warned that Britain’s volatile electorate has a way of obliterating political parties in a manner that seldom happens in the United States.

    I imagine much of Truss’ party would find it galling to think of their toppled premier plotting in America to revive her unpopular agenda and squeeze her struggling successor. So, it was not too surprising that a spokesman for Truss declined to make her available, sniffing that her office would not provide “running commentary” on her activities.

    But one of her traveling companions was more forthright about their mission in America.

    Berry, a veteran MP from the band of Northern England known as the “red wall” for its historic tilt toward Labour, told me in late January that it was painfully apparent his party had “failed over a significant period of time” in the task of explaining “why we are conservatives in a compelling way.” His baleful outlook reflected a widespread sense in Britain that the Tories’ imagination and credibility is depleted after a dozen years in power.

    Berry, who is 44, said his country now needed “sort of a Marshall Plan for conservatism,” invoking the American aid program that rebuilt Europe after World War II. Republicans, he said, had been admirably successful at forging mass support for cutting taxes and trusting the private sector to govern itself. The British right could use a kind of intellectual rescue mission on that front.

    What the Republican Party has not done any better than its British counterpart, however, is persuading voters to give up cherished federal spending in order to balance the public ledger, while holding down taxes. The one neat trick to modern American conservatism has been campaigning on tax cuts while embracing deficits and debt that would be intolerable for nearly any other country — certainly for the United Kingdom. This most powerful weapon in the Republican arsenal cannot simply be leased to besieged British conservatives.

    It may not be easy to discard for Americans like Hern either, no matter how sincerely they want to jolt their country from its fiscal laxity. Voters here are accustomed to living in a land of low taxes, loose expenditures and staggering public debts. If Republicans want to engage Americans in a demanding reassessment of that formula, there is not much time to do that before the debt-ceiling fight reaches a climax.

    They, too, could find that they have tried to do too much, too soon, without a sufficient following.

    [ad_2]
    #Liz #Truss #Crashes #Republican #Party
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )