Connect with us

News

Bill Clinton is hospitalized with a fever but in good spirits, spokesperson says

Published

on

Bill Clinton is hospitalized with a fever but in good spirits, spokesperson says

Former President Bill Clinton speaks during the Democratic National Convention on Aug. 21 in Chicago.

Paul Sancya/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Paul Sancya/AP

Former President Bill Clinton was admitted Monday to MedStar Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, D.C., after developing a fever.

The 78-year-old was hospitalized in the “afternoon for testing and observation,” Angel Urena, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, said in a statement.

“He remains in good spirits and deeply appreciates the excellent care he is receiving,” Urena said.

Advertisement

Clinton, a Democrat who served two terms as president from January 1993 until January 2001, addressed the Democratic National Convention in Chicago this summer, and campaigned ahead of November’s election for the unsuccessful White House bid of Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.

In the years since Clinton left the White House, he’s faced some health scares.

In 2004, he underwent quadruple bypass surgery after experiencing prolonged chest pains and shortness of breath. Clinton returned to the hospital for surgery for a partially collapsed lung in 2005, and in 2010 he had a pair of stents implanted in a coronary artery.

Clinton responded by embracing a largely vegan diet that saw him lose weight and report improved health.

In 2021, the former president was hospitalized for six days in California while being treated for an infection that was unrelated to COVID-19, when the pandemic was still near its height.

Advertisement

An aide to the former president said then that Clinton had a urological infection that spread to his bloodstream, but was on the mend and never went into septic shock, a potentially life-threatening condition. The aide said Clinton was in an intensive care section of the hospital that time, but wasn’t receiving ICU care.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Biden and Democrats seal judicial confirmation push to beat Trump’s tally

Published

on

Biden and Democrats seal judicial confirmation push to beat Trump’s tally

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Joe Biden has stamped his legacy on the federal bench after Senate Democrats raced to confirm more than 200 nominees to lifetime appointments in courts across the US, outpacing Donald Trump’s tally during his first presidency.

The number of Biden’s judicial nominees reached 235 as Congress ended its latest session last week, topping the 234 federal judges confirmed by Trump during his first term. It was the most judges appointed by a president during a single four-year term since the 1980s, Biden said in a statement.

As Biden’s presidency drew to a close, Democrats in the Senate — which is tasked with confirming federal judges — had pushed to secure as many confirmations as they could before control of Congress and the White House is ceded to Republicans next month.  

Advertisement

They hope that this final dash will counter the wave of judicial confirmations during Trump’s first term that fundamentally reshaped the US judiciary, swinging courts at all levels to the right. 

Trump’s appointment of three Supreme Court justices also skewed the ideological scale of the country’s most powerful bench, splitting it 6-3 between conservative and liberal justices. 

Justices of the US Supreme Court. Trump appointed three members of the current bench, as opposed to one from Joe Biden © Olivier Douliery/AFP/Getty Images

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority has since handed down rulings that have reverberated across American society, including striking down a decision enshrining the constitutional right to an abortion — moves that in turn emboldened right-leaning judges in lower courts, many appointed by Trump, to rule in favour of conservative causes.

The growing boldness of the American judiciary coupled with an increasingly polarised political landscape have turned judicial appointments into a critical frontier of presidential power. Judges at all levels have the opportunity to weigh in on challenges to administrations’ rules and laws, providing a powerful check on controversial policies.

Democrats’ last-minute push, which started in the wake of Biden’s election loss in November, infuriated Trump. He called on the Senate to block Biden’s judicial nominations: “The Democrats are trying to stack the Courts with Radical Left Judges on their way out the door.”

Advertisement

“There has been increasing polarisation around the appointment of federal judges,” said Paul Butler, professor at Georgetown Law. The Republican party has historically prioritised judicial picks — and Biden has taken a leaf out of that playbook, Butler added.

Biden’s appointments also stand out for their diversity, including what he described as “a record number of judges with backgrounds and experiences that have long been overlooked”.

Approximately two-thirds of confirmed judges are women and people of colour. Biden has appointed more Black women to US circuit courts than all previous presidents combined, and his sole Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, was the top court’s first Black woman.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

“Biden’s focus has been on remedying all of the decades where people other than straight white men weren’t considered for the bench,” said Butler.

Biden has also picked a record number of public defenders, more than 45, as well as labour and civil rights lawyers — at least 10 and more than 25, respectively — for the federal bench. 

Advertisement

“It’s absolutely crucial for a thriving, multiracial democracy that there are judges who not only look like all of us, but who have studied and spent their careers understanding how the laws impact people’s lives,” said Lena Zwarensteyn, senior director of the fair courts programme at The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a civil-rights group. 

The pendulum is set to swing back yet again. A new stream of conservative judicial appointments is expected once Trump returns to the White House next month and as Republicans take hold of the Senate.

“I’m incredibly proud of how the Senate Republican Conference worked as a team with former President Trump to shape the federal judiciary,” John Thune, the newly elected Republican Senate leader, said earlier this year. “I look forward to working with him to double down on our efforts during his next term in office.”

Continue Reading

News

Fox Star Is All For Trump Blowing $1.5 Trillion on Greenland: ‘Probably Will Pay Off’

Published

on

Fox Star Is All For Trump Blowing .5 Trillion on Greenland: ‘Probably Will Pay Off’
Media

MONEY WELL SPENT

Brian Kilmeade spoke to RNC Chair Michael Whatley about the president-elect’s plan—which Denmark says definitely won’t be happening.

Fox News host Brian Kilmeade and RNC Chair Michael Whatley on Fox News on December 23, 2024.
Fox News
Sean Craig

Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast here.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

News

Private equity investors trapped in China as top firms fail to find exit deals

Published

on

Private equity investors trapped in China as top firms fail to find exit deals

Stay informed with free updates

The world’s biggest private equity groups have been unable to sell or list their China-based portfolio companies this year, as Beijing’s crackdown on initial public offerings and a slowing economy leave foreign investors’ capital trapped in the country.

Among the 10 largest global private equity groups with operations in China, there is no record of any having listed a Chinese company this year or fully sold their stake through an M&A deal, figures from Dealogic show.

It is the first year for at least a decade where this has been the case, though the pace of exits has been slow since Beijing introduced restrictions on Chinese companies’ ability to list in 2021.

Advertisement

Buyout groups rely on being able to sell or list companies, typically within three to five years of buying them, in order to generate returns for the pension funds, insurance companies and others whose money they manage.

The difficulties in doing so have in effect left those investors’ funds locked away, with future returns uncertain.

“There’s a growing sense among PE investors that China may not be as systemically investable as once thought,” said Brock Silvers, chief executive of Hong Kong private equity group Kaiyuan Capital.

He said firms were facing “weakened exit strategies on multiple fronts” in China, including being affected by a slower economy and domestic regulatory pressure.

Many private equity groups expanded their presence in the world’s second-biggest economy as it grew rapidly over the past two decades. Global pension funds and others ploughed capital into the country, hoping to gain exposure to its economic boom.

Advertisement

The 10 firms invested $137bn over the past decade, but total exits amount to just $38bn, Dealogic data shows. New investment by those groups has collapsed to just $5bn since the start of 2022.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

The pace of buyout groups’ exits from deals globally has also been slowing. It was down 26 per cent in the first half of this year, according to a report by S&P Global.

But the halt in China exits is particularly stark. It has helped make some pension funds that allocate cash to private equity groups warier of exposure to the country.

“In theory, you could buy cheaply [in China] now but you need to ask what would happen if you can’t exit or if you have to hold it for longer,” said a private markets specialist at a large pension fund that is not currently investing in the country.

Advertisement

A senior executive at a major investment group that commits cash to private equity funds said they were “not expecting a lot of exits for the next couple of years at least” in China.

The data covers Blackstone, KKR, CVC, TPG, Warburg Pincus, Carlyle Group, Bain Capital, EQT, Advent International and Apollo, the 10 largest buyout groups by funds raised for private equity over the past decade, excluding those that have done no deals in China. The data does not include Blackstone real estate deals.

Private equity firms sometimes buy or sell companies without disclosing it, and any such exits may be missing from the data. The firms declined to comment.

The difficulty in cashing out has been one of the main factors deterring international buyout groups from making investments in the country, in addition to Sino-US tensions and the economic slowdown.

Jean Salata, founder of Barings Private Equity Asia, which Stockholm-based EQT bought in 2022, told the Financial Times in June that one reason the “bar is high” for China deals was that investors were asking: “How easy will it be to get liquidity on those investments five years from now?”

Advertisement

Foreign buyout groups used to rely on taking Chinese companies public in the US or other countries in order to exit their investments after a few years. But Beijing has introduced new restrictions on offshore listings since cracking down on the ride-hailing app DiDi, in the wake of its New York IPO in 2021. Listings have slowed significantly since.

In total this year, there have been just $7bn of domestic IPOs in China as of late November, compared with $46bn last year, which was already the lowest total since 2019.

The crackdown has left buyout groups searching for other options, such as selling their stakes to domestic and multinational companies and to other buyout groups. But overseas buyers are sometimes reluctant, in part because of closer US political scrutiny of the mainland.

One of the few recent exits among the 10 firms came when Carlyle sold its minority stake in the Chinese operations of McDonald’s back to the US fast-food retailer last year.

In China’s boom years before the Covid-19 pandemic, there were dozens of exits through both listings and mergers and acquisitions, and foreign private equity played a much bigger role in driving mainland activity.

Advertisement

Goldman Sachs chief executive David Solomon said at a Hong Kong conference in November that one of the reasons investors were “predominantly on the sidelines” over deploying funds in China was that “it’s been very difficult . . . to get capital out”.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending