usa
US eases oil, gas and gold sanctions on Venezuela after electoral roadmap signed
In response to Venezuela’s government and a faction of its opposition formally agreeing to work together to reach a series of basic conditions for the next presidential election, the U.S. agreed Wednesday to temporarily suspend some sanctions on the country's oil, gas and gold sectors.
Tuesday's agreement between President Nicolás Maduro’s administration and the Unitary Platform came just days before the opposition holds a primary to pick its candidate for the 2024 presidential election.
The U.S. Treasury issued a six-month general license that would temporarily authorize transactions involving Venezuela's oil and gas sector, another that authorizes dealings with Minerven — the state-owned gold mining company — and it removed the secondary trading ban on certain Venezuelan sovereign bonds.
Read: Gazans find nowhere is safe during Israel’s relentless bombing
The ban on trading in the primary Venezuelan bond market remains in place, Treasury says.
Brian E. Nelson, Treasury's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said the U.S. welcomes the signing of the electoral roadmap agreement but “Treasury is prepared to amend or revoke authorizations at any time, should representatives of Maduro fail to follow through on their commitments.”
“All other restrictions imposed by the United States on Venezuela remain in place, and we will continue to hold bad actors accountable. We stand with the Venezuelan people and support Venezuelan democracy,” he said.
Read: Egypt, Jordan fear Israel could force permanent expulsion of Palestinians into their countries
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. and the international community “will closely follow implementation of the electoral roadmap, and the U.S. government will take action if commitments under the electoral roadmap and with respect to political prisoners are not met.”
US vetoes Security Council resolution calling for ‘humanitarian pauses’ in Gaza
The United States on Wednesday vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that would have called for “humanitarian pauses” to deliver lifesaving aid to millions in Gaza.
The failure by the Security Council to make its first public intervention on the Israel-Gaza crisis followed the rejection of a Russian-backed draft on Monday evening.
Also read: Gaza's doctors struggle to save hospital blast survivors as Middle East rage grows
The US Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield explained her country’s veto in the Council chamber saying, “This resolution did not mention Israel’s right of self-defence.”
“Israel has the inherent sight of self-defence as reflected in Article 51 of the UN Charter,” she added, noting that the right was reaffirmed by the Council in previous resolutions on terrorist attacks, “this resolution should have done the same.”
While 12 of the Council’s 15 members voted in favour of the resolution, sponsored by Brazil, one (United States) voted against, and two (Russia, and the United Kingdom) abstained.
Also read: After blast kills hundreds at Gaza hospital, Hamas and Israel trade blame as rage spreads in region
Prior to the vote, Russia proposed two amendments for an immediate, durable and full ceasefire, and to stop attacks against civilians. Both proposals were rejected by the Security Council.
Russian Ambassador to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia said, “the time for diplomatic metaphors is long gone.”
Anyone who did not support Russia’s draft resolution on this issue bears responsibility for what happens, he said.
The current draft “has no clear call for a ceasefire” and “will not help to stop the bloodshed”.
The ambassador said Russia’s amendments proposed a call to end indiscriminate attacks on civilians and infrastructure in Gaza and the condemnation of the imposition of the blockade on the enclave; and adding a new point for a call for a humanitarian ceasefire.
“If these are not included in the current draft, it would not help to address the human situation in Gaza and polarize positions of the international community,” he said.
Also read: Giving birth in a war zone: Around 50,000 women in Gaza are pregnant
The United Kingdom also abstained from voting in the resolution saying that the text needed to be clearer on Israel’s inherent right to self-defence, and because it ignored the fact that “extremist group” Hamas, which controls Gaza, is using Palestinian civilians as human shields.
“They [Hamas] have embedded themselves in civilian communities and made the Palestinian people their victims too,” said UK Ambassador to the UN, Barbara Woodward.
Despite vetoing the resolution, The US ambassador said Washington will continue to work closely with all Council members on the crisis.
“Yes, resolutions are important, and yes, this Council must speak out. But the actions we take must be informed by the facts on the ground and support direct diplomacy that can save lives,” Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield said.
Also read: Israel bombs Gaza region where civilians were told to seek refuge
Failure of single component caused Washington seaplane crash that killed 10, NTSB says
U.S. investigators have confirmed that a mechanical issue caused the seaplane crash that killed 10 people off an island in Washington state last year.
The National Transportation Safety Board, which investigated the Sept. 4, 2022, crash, said Thursday that a single component of a critical flight control system failed, causing an unrecoverable, near-vertical descent into Puget Sound's Mutiny Bay near Whidbey Island.
About 85% of the aircraft was recovered from the ocean floor several weeks after the crash.
NTSB investigators examining the wreckage found that a component called an actuator, which moves the plane's horizontal tail and controls the airplane's pitch, had become disconnected. That failure would have made it impossible for the pilot to control the airplane.
Evidence showed the failure happened before the crash, not as a result of it, investigators concluded.
The plane was a de Havilland Canada DHC-3 Otter turboprop operated by Renton-based Friday Harbor Seaplanes. It was headed to the Seattle suburb of Renton from Friday Harbor, a popular tourist destination in the San Juan Islands, when it abruptly fell into Mutiny Bay and sank. The pilot and all nine passengers died.
Read: Airplane crash in Gulf of Mexico leaves 2 dead, 1 missing
Witnesses said, and video showed, that the plane had been level before climbing slightly and then falling, the NTSB said.
“The Mutiny Bay accident is an incredibly painful reminder that a single point of failure can lead to catastrophe in our skies,” NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said in a news release.
Weeks after the crash, the NTSB said the cause appeared to be the disconnected actuator and issued a recommendation that all operators of the DHC-3 planes immediately inspect that part of the flight control system. In early November, the FAA issued an emergency directive to operators mandating the inspections, The Seattle Times reported.
The NTSB in its final report recommends that the Federal Aviation Administration and Transport Canada require operators of those planes to install a secondary locking feature, so “this kind of tragedy never happens again,” Homendy said.
Read: Ukrainian airplane crashes near Iran's capital, killing 176
Friday Harbor Seaplanes didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment on Thursday.
Those who died in the crash include pilot Jason Winters, Sandy Williams of Spokane, Washington; Ross Mickel, his pregnant wife Lauren Hilty and their child Remy Mickel, of Medina, Washington; Joanne Mera of San Diego; Patricia Hicks of Spokane, Washington; Rebecca and Luke Ludwig, of Excelsior, Minnesota; and Gabrielle Hanna of Seattle.
Lawsuits have been filed in King County Superior Court by the family members of the victims against the aircraft’s charter operator, Friday Harbor Seaplanes; as well as the DHC-3 Otter manufacturer, de Havilland Aircraft of Canada; and the plane’s certificate holder, Viking Air — saying they are responsible for the deaths.
Nate Bingham, who is representing the Ludwigs’ families, said the plane crashed because of “an antiquated design with a single point of failure.”
Read more: Domestic airplane skids off runway at Nepal's int'l airport, no casualties
The companies have not responded to requests for comment about the lawsuits. Northwest Seaplanes said last year it was “heartbroken” over the crash and was working with the FAA, NTSB and Coast Guard.
What to do with 1.1 million bullets seized from Iran? US ships them to Ukraine
Russia has long turned to Iranian-made drones to attack Ukraine. Now Ukrainian forces will be using bullets seized from Iran against Russia troops.
A U.S. Navy ship seized the 1.1 million rounds off of a vessel that was being used by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to arm Houthi rebels in Yemen’s civil war in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution.
Those 7.62 mm rounds have now been transferred to Ukraine, U.S. Central Command said Wednesday. The much-needed ammunition has been sent at a time when continued U.S. financial support for Kyiv’s fight to defend itself remains in question.
The 7.62 mm ammunition is the standard round for Soviet-era Kalashnikov assault rifles and their many derivatives. Ukraine, as a former Soviet republic, still relies on the Kalashnikov for many of its units.
“With this weapons transfer, the Justice Department’s forfeiture actions against one authoritarian regime are now directly supporting the Ukrainian people’s fight against another authoritarian regime. We will continue to use every legal authority at our disposal to support Ukraine in their fight for freedom, democracy, and the rule of law,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.
Read: Biden says there’s ‘not much time’ to keep aid flowing to Ukraine and Congress must ‘stop the games’
The U.S. Navy’s Mideast-based 5th Fleet and its allies have intercepted numerous ships believed to be transporting weapons and ammunition from Iran to Yemen in support of the Iranian-backed Houthis. This is the first time that the seized weaponry has been handed over to Ukraine, Central Command spokeswoman Capt. Abigail Hammock said.
This shipment was seized by Central Command naval forces in December off of a vessel the command described as a “stateless dhow," a traditional wooden sailing ship, that was being used by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to arm the Houthis.
A fragile cease-fire is in place in Yemen after the almost decadelong war, but Iran has continued to supply the Houthis with lethal aid, Lt. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich, head of U.S. Air Forces Central, told reporters on Wednesday. He said this was a major threat to Yemen finding a durable peace.
U.S. Central Command said the U.S. “obtained ownership of these munitions on July 20, 2023, through the Department of Justice’s civil forfeiture claims against Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.”
A United Nations arms embargo has prohibited weapons transfers to the Houthis since 2014. Iran insists it adheres to the ban, even as it has long been transferring rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, missiles and other weaponry to the Houthis via the sea.
Read: Ukraine aid is dropped from government funding bill raising questions about future US support
Independent experts, Western nations and U.N. experts have traced components seized aboard detained vessels back to Iran.
Iran's mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.
Even though the shipment of more than 1 million rounds of small arms ammunition is substantial, it pales in comparison with the amount that the U.S. has already sent to Ukraine since Russia invaded in February 2022, much of which has already been used in the intense ground battle.
The U.S. has provided more than 300 million rounds of small arms ammunition and grenades as part of the almost $44 billion in military aid it has sent to help Ukraine.
Further U.S. funding for Ukraine's war was not included in a stopgap measure that prevented a government shutdown last weekend. With the ouster of Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, it was unclear whether the future leader will be able to generate enough support from the party’s hard-liners, who have opposed sending more money to Ukraine.
Read more: Mexico's president slams US aid for Ukraine and sanctions on Venezuela and Cuba
Speaker McCarthy ousted in historic House vote, as scramble begins for a Republican leader
Speaker Kevin McCarthy was voted out of the job Tuesday in an extraordinary showdown — a first in U.S. history, forced by a contingent of hard-right conservatives and throwing the House and its Republican leadership into chaos.
It’s the end of the political line for McCarthy, who has said repeatedly that he never gives up, but found himself with almost no options remaining. Neither the right-flank Republicans who engineered his ouster nor the Democrats who piled on seem open to negotiating.
McCarthy told lawmakers in the evening he would not run again for speaker, putting the gavel up for grabs. Next steps are highly uncertain with no obvious successor to lead the House Republican majority. Action is halted in the House until next week, when Republicans try to elect a new speaker.
“I may have lost this vote today, but as I walk out of this chamber I feel fortunate to have served," McCarthy said at a press conference at the Capitol, alternating between upbeat assessment of his speakership and angry score-settling of those who ousted him.
Still, he said, “I wouldn't change a thing.”
McCarthy’s chief rival, Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, orchestrated the rare vote on the obscure “motion to vacate,” and pushed ahead swiftly into a dramatic afternoon roll call.
While McCarthy enjoyed support from most Republicans in his slim majority, eight Republican detractors — many of the same hard-right holdouts who tried to stop him from becoming speaker in January — essentially forced him out.
Stillness fell as the presiding officer gaveled the vote closed, 216-210, saying the office of the speaker “is hereby declared vacant.”
Moments later, a top McCarthy ally, Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., took the gavel and, according to House rules, was named speaker pro tempore, to serve in the office until a new speaker is chosen.
The House then briskly recessed as lawmakers met privately to discuss the path forward.
It was a stunning moment for McCarthy, a punishment fueled by growing grievances but sparked by his weekend decision to work with Democrats to keep the federal government open rather than risk a shutdown.
But in many ways, McCarthy's ouster was set in motion when, in deal-making with hard-right holdouts at the start of the year, he agreed to a series of demands — including a rules change that allowed any single lawmaker to file the motion to vacate.
As the House fell silent, Gaetz, a top ally of Donald Trump, rose to offer his motion.
Leaders tried to turn it back, but the vote was 218-208, with 11 Republicans against tabling the motion, a sign of trouble to come.
The House then opened a floor debate unseen in modern times, and Republicans argued publicly among themselves for more than an hour.
“It's a sad day,” Republican Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma said as debate got underway, urging his colleagues not to plunge the House Republican majority "into chaos."
But Gaetz shot back during the debate, "Chaos is Speaker McCarthy."
Read: US Speaker Pelosi's husband attacked, beaten by intruder
As the fiery debate dragged on, many of the complaints against the speaker revolved around his truthfulness and his ability to keep the promises he has made.
Almost alone, Gaetz led his side of the floor debate, criticizing the debt deal McCarthy made with President Joe Biden and the vote to prevent a government shutdown, which conservatives opposed as they demanded steeper spending cuts.
But a long line of McCarthy supporters stood up for him, including Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a leader of the conservative Freedom Caucus, who said, “He has kept his word.” Rep. Garret Graves, R-La., waved his cellphone, saying it was “disgusting” that hard-right colleagues were fundraising off the move in text messages seeking donations.
McCarthy, of California, insisted he would not cut a deal with Democrats to remain in power — not that he could have relied on their help even if he had asked.
Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a letter to colleagues that he wants to work with Republicans, but he was unwilling to provide the votes needed to save McCarthy.
“It is now the responsibility of the GOP members to end the House Republican Civil War,” Jeffries said, announcing the Democratic leadership would vote for the motion to oust the speaker.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Biden “hopes the House will quickly elect a Speaker.” Once that happens, she said, "he looks forward to working together with them."
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell issued a statement thanking McCarthy for "what is often a thankless role.
Read: Biden says there’s ‘not much time’ to keep aid flowing to Ukraine and Congress must ‘stop the games’
At the Capitol, both Republicans and Democrats met privately ahead of the historic afternoon vote.
Behind closed doors, McCarthy told fellow Republicans: Let’s get on with it.
McCarthy invoked Republican Speaker Joseph Cannon, who more than 100 years ago confronted his critics head-on by calling their bluff and setting the vote himself on his ouster. Cannon survived that takedown attempt, which was the first time the House had actually voted to consider removing its speaker. A more recent threat against John Boehner in 2015 didn't make it to a vote but led him to early retirement.
Gaetz was in attendance, but he did not address the room.
Across the way in the Capitol, Democrats lined up for a long discussion and unified around one common point: McCarthy cannot be trusted, several lawmakers in the room said.
“I think it’s safe to say there’s not a lot of good will in that room for Kevin McCarthy,” said Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass.
“At the end of the day, the country needs a speaker that can be relied upon,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. "We don’t trust him. Their members don’t trust him. And you need a certain degree of trust to be the speaker.”
Removing the speaker launches the House Republicans into chaos heading into a busy fall when Congress will need to fund the government again or risk a mid-November shutdown.
Typically, top leaders would be next in line for the job, but Majority Leader Steve Scalise is battling cancer and Majority Whip Tom Emmer, like any potential candidate, may have trouble securing the vote. Another leading Republican, Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York, is also a Trump ally.
One of McHenry's first acts in the temporary position was to oust Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi from her honorary office at the Capitol while she was away in California to pay tribute to Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
“No matter who is going to be the speaker, the challenges still remain," Scalise said. “But I think the opportunity is there to continue moving forward.”
Asked if he was physically up to the job, Scalise said, “I feel great.”
It took McCarthy himself 15 rounds in January over multiple days of voting before he secured the support from his colleagues to gain the gavel.
Read more: Attorney General Garland says in interview he'd resign if Biden asked him to take action on Trump
Trump, the former president who is the Republican front-runner in the 2024 race to challenge Biden, complained about the chaos. “Why is it that Republicans are always fighting among themselves," he asked on social media.
Asked about McCarthy's ouster as he exited court in New York, where he is on trial for business fraud, Trump did not respond.
One key McCarthy ally, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., who is also close with Trump, took to social media urging support for “our speaker.”
Republicans left the chamber in a daze, totally uncertain about next steps. “I honestly don’t know,” said Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz. “This is a total disaster.”
Many had lined up to hug McCarthy, some to shake his hand.
Democrats, who have bristled at McCarthy's leadership — cajoling them one minute, walking away from deals the next — said they were just holding back, waiting for Republicans to figure out how to run the House.
Rep, Don Bacon, R-Neb., the leader of a centrist group, said the only option was to leave the eight hardliners behind and try to work across the aisle. “We’re going to stay with Kevin,” he said. “He told us earlier he’ll never quit.”
But McCarthy made it clear Tuesday night that he would not try to win back the job.
Generations of students remember 1968 massacre in march through Mexico City
Chanting in unison, students marched through downtown Mexico City on Monday evening, marking 55 years since the military massacred hundreds of students in Tlatelolco plaza.
Enrique Treviño Taudres survived the massacre and now marches every year with the Pro Democratic Freedoms 68 Committee. “People know a lot and forget easily,” he said, adding that the memory of Tlatelolco holds important lessons for modern Mexico.
As many as 300 people were massacred at a student protest in Tlatelolco plaza on Oct. 2, 1968, in what the Mexican government initially reported as the lawful suppression of a violent riot just 10 days before the Summer Olympics’ Opening Ceremony in Mexico City.
Since then military reports have revealed at least 360 government snipers were stationed on rooftops around the square. They opened fire and, in the ensuing chaos, the military members posted round the square began shooting peaceful protesters and students.
“Look, it’s a commemoration of that day but it is also a call to the current students, the current young people to be aware of the reality,” said Treviño. “The best example that we grandparents can give young people is that we were conscientious and committed young people. We took to the streets.”
Adolfo Cruz, a tourism student in the city, marched on Monday for the first time. “Part of this is remembering all our deceased companions because it’s thanks to them we have the right to march today,” Cruz said. “We also want to change things."
Mexican students today still find themselves the victims of violence and organized crime. In 2018 three university students in the western city of Guadalajara were killed by a gang and their bodies dissolved in acid. Infamously, 43 students were abducted and murdered in southern Mexico in 2014, the victims of an attack which implicated municipal, state and national authorities.
October 2nd, said Cruz, “is a commemoration, but it’s also for the rights of all students,” in a country where there are still “many difficulties” across the education system.
After the massacre in 1968, 25 people were officially reported dead, but later investigations identified 44 remains. Successive government inquiries have never shown exactly how many died, but eyewitnesses claimed bodies were carted away from the square and estimates range that over 300 were killed.
The Mexican government acknowledged the massacre was a “state crime”on its 50th anniversary in 2018.
Earlier on Monday, interim head of Mexico City’s government Martí Bartes spoke about the historical ramifications of the tragedy.
“'68 is so strong because it transformed political culture from below,” he said from the Plaza of the Three Cultures, where the protest began in 1968. “'68 transformed universities, massively expanded higher education, incorporated new critical thinking into the social sciences, generated activists, opened the doors to new ideas such as feminism or sexual diversity.”
A rainy Monday night marked the end of a run of protests in Mexico’s capital: from the anniversary of the 43 abducted students in southern Mexico last Tuesday, to a march for abortion rights Thursday. Since last week, monuments have been hiding behind blue barricades across the city and the Marabunta Brigade, a group trained to keep protestors safe, has been busy.
Monday evening was Mario Romero’s 20th protest as a member of the brigade but, he said, he was not tired, or afraid.
“I like to come out because things need to change, but nothing changes," he said.
Donald Trump arrives in court for a New York trial scrutinizing his business practices
Former President Donald Trump showed up on Monday for a trial in a lawsuit that could cost him control of Trump Tower and other prized properties, after vowing to defend his reputation in a case he calls "a sham."
Trump, who built his political career on his fame as a billionaire real estate ace and master of "The Art of the Deal," appeared voluntarily for a trial that has high stakes for him.
New York Attorney General Letitia James' suit accuses Trump and his company of deceiving banks, insurers and others by habitually lying about his wealth in financial statements.
Judge Arthur Engoron already has ruled that Trump committed fraud in his business dealings. It is a non-jury trial, so Engoron will decide on six other claims in the lawsuit.
Also read: Biden warns US democracy in peril from 'extremist' Trump
James, a Democrat, is seeking $250 million in penalties and a ban on Trump doing business in New York. The judge's ruling last week, if upheld on appeal, could force Trump to give up New York properties including Trump Tower, a Wall Street office building, golf courses and a suburban estate.
Trump, the Republican front-runner in the 2024 presidential race, has denied wrongdoing. He says that James and the judge are undervaluing such assets as Mar-a-Lago, and that it didn't matter what he put on his financial statements because they have a disclaimer that says they shouldn't be trusted.
In posts overnight on his Truth Social site, he said he was going to court "to fight for my name and reputation," denounced the case as "A SHAM," and called on the attorney general and judge to resign.
Also read: Trump campaign reports raising more than $7 million after Georgia booking
Before the trial Monday, James reiterated her position that Trump for years engaged in "persistent and repeated fraud."
"No matter how powerful you are, and no matter how much money you think you have, no one is above the law," she said on her way into the courthouse.
The Republican former president and a who's who of people in his orbit — his two eldest sons, Trump Organization executives and former lawyer-turned-foe Michael Cohen are all listed among dozens of potential witnesses.
Trump isn't expected to testify for several weeks. His trip to court Monday will mark a remarkable departure from his past practice.
Trump didn't go to court as either a witness or a spectator when his company and one of its top executives was convicted of tax fraud last year. He didn't show, either, for a trial earlier this year in which a jury found him liable for sexually assaulting the writer E. Jean Carroll in a department store dressing room.
Also read: One image, one face, one American moment: The Donald Trump mug shot
In some ways, though, this new trial comes with higher stakes.
James, a Democrat, is seeking $250 million in penalties and a ban on doing business in New York.
Engoron's ruling of last week, if upheld on appeal, would also shift control of some of his companies to a court-appointed receiver and could force him to give up prized New York properties such as Trump Tower, a Wall Street office building, golf courses and a suburban estate.
Trump called it a "a corporate death penalty."
"I have a Deranged, Trump Hating Judge, who RAILROADED this FAKE CASE through a NYS Court at a speed never before seen," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
In his post Sunday night, Trump wrote that Engoron is "unfair, unhinged, and vicious in his PURSUIT of me."
Engoron will decide on six remaining claims in James' lawsuit, including allegations of conspiracy, falsifying business records and insurance fraud.
James' lawsuit accused Trump and his company of a long list of falsehoods in the financial statements he gave to banks. In a recent court filing, James' office alleged Trump exaggerated his wealth by as much as $3.6 billion.
Among the allegations were that Trump claimed his Trump Tower apartment in Manhattan — a three-story penthouse replete with gold-plated fixtures — was nearly three times its actual size and worth an astounding $327 million. No apartment in New York City has ever sold for close to that amount, James said.
Trump valued Mar-a-Lago as high as $739 million — more than 10 times a more reasonable estimate of its worth, James claimed. Trump's figure for the Palm Beach, Florida, private club was based on the idea that the property could be developed for residential use. While Trump lives there, deed terms prohibit further residential development on the property, James said.
Trump has denied wrongdoing, arguing in sworn testimony for the case that it didn't matter what he put on his financial statements because they have a disclaimer that says they shouldn't be trusted.
He and his lawyers have also argued that no one was harmed by anything in the financial statements. Banks he borrowed money from were fully repaid. Business partners made money. And Trump's own company flourished.
James' lawsuit is one of several legal headaches for Trump as he campaigns for a return to the White House in next year's election. He has been indicted four times since March, accused of plotting to overturn his 2020 election loss, hoarding classified documents and falsifying business records related to hush money paid on his behalf.
The trial could last into December, Engoron said.
Attorney General Garland says in interview he'd resign if Biden asked him to take action on Trump
Attorney General Merrick Garland said in an interview that aired Sunday that he would resign if asked by President Joe Biden to take action against Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. But he doesn't think he'll be put in that position.
“I am sure that that will not happen, but I would not do anything in that regard,” he said on CBS “60 Minutes.” “And if necessary, I would resign. But there is no sense that anything like that will happen.”
READ: Jailed Maldives' ex-president transferred to house arrest after his party candidate wins presidency
The Justice Department is at the center of not only indictments against Trump that include an effort to overturn the 2020 election and wrongly keeping classified documents, but also cases involving Biden's son Hunter, the aftermath of the riot at the U.S. Capitol and investigations into classified documents found in the president's home and office. Garland has appointed three separate special counsels.
Garland has spoken only sparingly about the cases and reiterated Sunday he would not get into specifics, but dismissed claims by Trump and his supporters that the cases were timed to ruin his chances to be president in 2024.
“Well, that’s absolutely not true. Justice Department prosecutors are nonpartisan. They don’t allow partisan considerations to play any role in their determinations,” Garland said.
Garland said the president has never tried to meddle in the investigations, and he dismissed criticism from Republicans that he was going easy on the president's son, Hunter, who was recently indicted on a gun charge after a plea deal in his tax case fell apart. Hunter Biden is due in a Delaware court this week.
READ: US government shutdown is averted for now with a temporary funding bill. What happens in a shutdown?
“We do not have one rule for Republicans and another rule for Democrats. We don’t have one rule for foes and another for friends," he said. ”We have only one rule; and that one rule is that we follow the facts and the law, and we reach the decisions required by the Constitution, and we protect civil liberties."
Garland choked up when talking about his concerns over violence, particularly as judges and prosecutors assigned to the Trump cases got death threats.
READ: Despite dispute, Canada remains committed to its relationship with India: Trudeau
“People can argue with each other as much as they want and as vociferously as they want. But the one thing they may not do is use violence and threats of violence to alter the outcome,” he said. “American people must protect each other. They must ensure that they treat each other with civility and kindness, listen to opposing views, argue as vociferously as they want, but refrain from violence and threats of violence. That’s the only way this democracy will survive.”
Ukraine aid is dropped from government funding bill raising questions about future US support
Congressional supporters of Ukraine say they won't give up after a bill to keep the federal government open excluded President Joe Biden's request to provide more security assistance to the war-torn nation.
Still, many lawmakers acknowledge that winning approval for Ukraine assistance in Congress is growing more difficult as the war between Russia and Ukraine grinds on. Republican resistance to the aid has been gaining momentum in the halls of Congress.
Voting in the House this past week pointed to the potential trouble ahead. Nearly half of House Republicans voted to strip $300 million from a defense spending bill to train Ukrainian soldiers and purchase weapons. The money later was approved separately, but opponents of Ukraine support celebrated their growing numbers.
Also read: US government shutdown is averted for now with a temporary funding bill. What happens in a shutdown?
Then, on Saturday, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., omitted additional Ukraine aid from a measure to keep the government running until Nov. 17. In doing so, he closed the door on a Senate package that would have funneled $6 billion to Ukraine, roughly a third of what has been requested by the White House. Both the House and Senate overwhelmingly approved the stopgap measure, with members of both parties abandoning the increased aid for Ukraine in favor of avoiding a costly government shutdown.
The latest actions in Congress signal a gradual shift in the unwavering support that the United States has so far pledged Ukraine in its fight against Russia, and it is one of the clearest examples yet of the Republican Party's movement toward a more isolationist stance. The exclusion of Ukraine funding came little more than a week after lawmakers met in the Capitol with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who sought to assure lawmakers that his military was winning the war, but stressed that additional aid would be crucial for continuing the fight.
Also read: US government shutdown is nearing this weekend. What does it mean, who’s hit and what’s next?
After that visit, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that one sentence summed up Zelenskyy's message in his meeting with the Senate: "'If we don't get the aid, we will lose the war," Schumer said.
Yet, McCarthy, pressured by his right flank, has gone from saying "no blank checks" for Ukraine, with the focus being on accountability, to describing the Senate's approach as putting "Ukraine in front of America." He declined to say after the vote on government funding whether he would bring aid for Ukraine up for a House vote in the coming weeks.
"If there is a moment in time we need to have a discussion about that, we will have a discussion completely about that, but I think the administration has to make the case for what is victory," McCarthy said.
Biden said in a statement after Congress averted a shutdown that "we cannot under any circumstances allow American support for Ukraine to be interrupted." He called on McCarthy to "keep his commitment to the people of Ukraine" and push through "the support needed to help Ukraine at this critical moment."
Also read: Mexico's president slams US aid for Ukraine and sanctions on Venezuela and Cuba
In the Senate, both Schumer and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky pledged to move quickly to try and pass the full White House request. But it was clear that goal will be increasingly difficult as more rank-and-file GOP senators have questioned the aid or demanded that it be attached to immigration policy that would help secure the southern border — echoing similar demands in the House.
Florida Sen. Rick Scott, a Republican who voted for the spending bill after the Ukraine aid was stripped out, said that Congress needs to have "a conversation with the American public." He said he was optimistic after seeing the money taken out of the bill.
"In my state, people want to be helpful to Ukraine, but they also want to be helpful to Americans," Scott said. "And so they want to really understand how this money has been spent."
Democrats said they were disappointed by the lack of Ukraine funding, but expressed determination that they would get the aid to the war-torn country.
"We will not stop fighting for more economic and security assistance for Ukraine," Schumer said after the bill passed. "Majorities in both parties support Ukraine aid, and doing more is vital for America's security and for democracy around the world."
Leading up to Saturday's vote, Pentagon officials expressed alarm at the prospect of no extra funding for Ukraine. In a letter to congressional leaders dated Friday, Michael McCord, under secretary of defense, wrote that the department has exhausted nearly all the available security assistance.
"Without additional funding now, we would have to delay or curtail assistance to meet Ukraine's urgent requirements, including for air defense and ammunition that are critical and urgent now as Russia prepares to conduct a winter offensive and continues its bombardment of Ukrainian cities," McCord said.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said after the vote that U.S. assistance was vital as Ukrainians "fight to defend their own country against the forces of tyranny. America must live up to its word."
Rep. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he would like to send a clear message to the world about U.S. support for Ukraine by passing legislation, but believes the Pentagon has "enough draw-down money" to last through December. He said he believes McCarthy still supports funding for Ukraine.
"I think the speaker has always had a good position on Ukraine. I think he's dealing with a caucus that's got fractures that he has to deal with and none of them can be ignored when you've got a four-seat majority and 15 nuts in the conference," Rogers said, referring to far-right lawmakers who have staunchly opposed funding for Ukraine.
Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he heard McCarthy tell Zelenskyy during his visit that "we will give them what they need."
"Unfortunately, the message that speaker and the former president is sending is that they can't be relied upon," Meeks said, adding a reference to former President Donald Trump, who has called on Congress to withhold additional Ukraine funding until the FBI, IRS and Justice Department "hand over every scrap of evidence" on the Biden family's business dealings.
The U.S. has approved four rounds of aid to Ukraine in response to Russia's invasion, totaling about $113 billion, with some of that money going toward replenishment of U.S. military equipment that was sent to the frontlines. In August, Biden called on Congress to provide for an additional $24 billion.
Saturday's move by the House to act first on government funding left the Senate with a stark choice: either go along with a bill that fails to help Ukraine, or allow what could have been an extended government shutdown to occur.
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., expressed frustration at the outcome.
"Every day that goes by that we don't get the additional money is a day Russia gets closer to being capable of winning this war," Murphy said.
Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Ukraine should not be deterred, and that aid can be approved by other means.
"Neither our friends nor our enemies should look at this as being some change in the United States' commitment to Ukraine," Risch said.
US government shutdown is averted for now with a temporary funding bill. What happens in a shutdown?
Congress has averted for now a threatened government shutdown that would have disrupted many services, squeezed federal employees and roiled politics.
The threat was set aside late Saturday after Congress voted to keep agencies open until Nov. 17. Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., dropped demands for steep spending cuts and relied on Democratic votes for House passage, before the Senate easily approved the measure Saturday night.
House Republicans, fueled by hard-right demands for lower spending, had been forcing a confrontation over federal spending.
In a shutdown, some government entities would be exempt — Social Security checks, for example, would still go out — and other functions would be severely curtailed. Federal agencies would cease all actions deemed nonessential, and many of the federal government’s roughly 2 million employees, as well as 2 million active-duty military troops and reservists, would not receive paychecks.
A look at what could happen in the event of a shutdown.
WHAT IS A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN?
A shutdown happens when Congress fails to pass some type of funding legislation that is signed into law by the president. Lawmakers are supposed to pass 12 different spending bills to fund agencies across the government, but the process is time-consuming. They often resort to passing a temporary extension, called a continuing resolution or CR, to allow the government to keep operating.
When no funding legislation is enacted, federal agencies must stop all nonessential work and would not send paychecks as long as the shutdown would last.
Although employees deemed essential to public safety such as air traffic controllers and law enforcement officers still have to report to work, other federal employees are furloughed. Under a 2019 law, those workers are slated to receive backpay once the funding impasse is resolved.
WHEN WOULD A SHUTDOWN BEGIN AND HOW LONG COULD IT LAST?
Government funding expires Oct. 1, the start of the federal budget year. A shutdown would have begun at 12:01 a.m. Sunday if Congress didn't pass a funding plan that the president could sign into law. The House and Senate averted this by approving a temporary funding bill keeping federal agencies open until Nov. 17, setting up another potential crisis if they fail to more fully fund government by then.
Read: Recession or not? Points to ponder to understand US economy
There were fears that a potential stoppage could last weeks.
WHO DOES A SHUTDOWN AFFECT?
Millions of federal workers would face delayed paychecks, including many of the roughly 2 million military personnel and more than 2 million civilian workers across the nation.
Nearly 60% of federal workers are stationed in the Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security.
While the military's active-duty troops and reservists would continue to work, more than half of the Department of Defense's civilian workforce — roughly 440,000 people — would be furloughed.
Across federal agencies, workers are stationed in all 50 states and have direct interaction with taxpayers — from Transportation Security Administration agents who operate security at airports to Postal Service workers who deliver mail.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has said new training for air traffic controllers would have to be halted and an additional 1,000 controllers in the midst of training would have to be furloughed.
People applying for government services like clinical medical trials, firearm permits and passports could see delays if there was a shutdown.
Head Start programs serving more than 10,000 disadvantaged children would immediately lose federal funding. National parks would close.
Some federal offices would have to close or face shortened hours during a shutdown.
Businesses closely connected to the federal government, such as federal contractors or tourist services around national parks, could see disruptions and downturns.
Lawmakers warned that a shutdown could rattle financial markets. Goldman Sachs estimated that a shutdown would reduce economic growth by 0.2% every week it lasted, but growth would then bounce back after the government reopens.
Read: US economy likely returned to growth after shrinking in first 2 quarters of 2022
Others say any disruption in government services would have far-reaching impacts because it would shake confidence in the government to fulfill its basic duties.
WHAT ABOUT COURT CASES, THE WORK OF CONGRESS AND PRESIDENTIAL PAY?
The president and members of Congress would continue to work and get paid. Any members of their staff who were not deemed essential would be furloughed.
The Supreme Court would be unaffected by a short shutdown because it can draw on a pot of money provided by court fees, including charges for filing lawsuits and other documents, court spokeswoman Patricia McCabe said.
Even in a longer shutdown, the entire judiciary would not shut down, and decisions about what activities would continue would be made by each court around the country. The justices and all federal judges would continue to be paid because of the constitutional prohibition on reducing judges’ pay during their tenure, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Funding for the three special counsels appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland would not be affected by a government shutdown because they are paid for through a permanent, indefinite appropriation, an area that has been exempted from shutdowns in the past.
That would mean that the two federal cases against Donald Trump, the former president, as well as the case against Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, would not be interrupted. Trump has demanded that Republicans defund the prosecutions against him as a condition of funding the government, declaring it their “last chance” to act.
Read more: US economy shrinks for a 2nd quarter, raising recession fear
HAS THIS HAPPENED BEFORE?
Before the 1980s, lapses in government funding did not result in government operations significantly shuttering. But then-Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti, in a series of legal opinions in 1980 and 1981, argued that government agencies cannot legally operate during a funding gap.
Federal officials have since operated under an understanding they can make exemptions for functions that are “essential” for public safety and constitutional duties.
Since 1976, there have been 22 funding gaps, with 10 of them leading to workers being furloughed. But most of the significant shutdowns have taken place since Bill Clinton's presidency, when then-Speaker Newt Gingrich. R-Ga., and his conservative House majority demanded budget cuts.
The longest government shutdown happened between 2018 and 2019 when then-President Trump and congressional Democrats entered a standoff over his demand for funding for a border wall. The disruption lasted 35 days, through the holiday season, but was also only a partial government shutdown because Congress had passed some appropriations bills to fund parts of the government.
WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO END A SHUTDOWN?
It's the responsibility of Congress to fund the government. The House and Senate have to agree to fund the government, and the president has to sign the legislation into law.
Congress often has relied on a continuing resolution to provide stopgap money to open government offices at current levels as budget talks are underway. Money for pressing national priorities, such as emergency assistance for victims of natural disasters, is often attached to a short-term bill.