Connect with us

News

Conviction politics: Joe Biden sees opportunity in Trump’s guilty verdict

Published

on

Conviction politics: Joe Biden sees opportunity in Trump’s guilty verdict

Joe Biden’s re-election campaign escalated its attacks on Donald Trump over his criminal conviction in New York as Democrats urged the president to seize on the guilty verdict as an election weapon against his Republican rival.

In a memo released on Saturday, the Biden campaign dubbed Trump a “convicted felon” who would “destroy our justice system, shred our democracy, rig our economy for their billionaire donors, and attack the very idea of America”.

The statement signals that Democrats and the Biden re-election bid are preparing to be more aggressive in targeting Trump over his status as the first former president to be found guilty of a crime, rather than adopt a more passive approach.

On Friday, Biden briefly addressed the Trump verdict at the beginning of remarks on his Middle East peace plan, criticising his rival for blasting the US justice system during a remorseless tirade against the ruling a few hours earlier.

“It’s reckless, it’s dangerous, and it’s irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged just because they don’t like the verdict,” Biden said.

Advertisement

Some Democrats have been pushing the US president and the campaign to go further. Christy Setzer, a Democratic strategist, said Biden and his party needed to be more “forceful” in drawing a contrast with Trump when it comes to the conviction.

“Sometimes Democrats get so precious, so afraid to get their hands dirty or afraid to anger Trump’s supporters . . . our party misses the opportunity.” Setzer said on Saturday. “Let’s not do that here, on a story that has the power to fundamentally change the trajectory of the race, and history.”

The calls for Biden and the Democrats to be more pugnacious come as a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Saturday — and conducted after the conviction — showed that 10 per cent of Republican voters and 25 per cent of independent voters were less likely to vote for Trump due to the verdict. This would indicate a significant number of defections from the Trump camp.

Tony Fabrizio, a pollster for Trump, disputed the notion of any big effect on the former president’s ability to win a second term in the White House.

“We told our donors and supporters that our polling in these target states was indicating that most all of the trial impact was “baked in the cake” and that we expected marginal impact from an adverse ruling,” he said in a memo distributed by the Trump campaign on Saturday.

Advertisement

“So far, that seems to be the case.”

Democrats in swing districts heading into the November election are generally offering more guarded criticism of Trump over the ruling, while others say it is important not to focus excessively on the former president’s crimes at the expense of kitchen-table issues.

“Trump continues to be a sideshow, a circus, a caricature of a buffoon, the worst thing that happened to this country in a very long time. We need to focus on our people and the American people and getting them out to vote and focus a lot less on Trump,” Jamaal Bowman, a New York congressman, told MSNBC on Saturday.

Many Republicans believe that Democratic efforts to capitalise on Trump’s verdict are bound to backfire, since the trial itself has done little to move the needle in national or swing state polling, and most voters on the right and centre-right accept Trump’s claim that the prosecution had political motivations.

“Democrats think they can put out the Trump fire with oxygen. It’s political malpractice,” Mitt Romney, the Utah senator and Trump critic within the Republican party, told The Atlantic.

Advertisement

But Trump’s verdict is making him politically vulnerable on a number of fronts. As well as labelling him a “convicted felon”, Democrats will be able to target him for the underlying case, of falsifying business documents to pay for the silence of a porn actress so it would not damage his 2016 campaign for president.

They will start to poke holes in Trump’s claim that he is the candidate of law and order, since he failed to accept a criminal conviction. And if Trump lashes out and grows angrier at his legal predicament, as he did on Friday, they will have new opportunities to depict him as unhinged and distracted from the issues voters care most about.

“Trump’s campaign is about him, our campaign is about America,” the Biden campaign said in Saturday’s statement.

In an interview on Fox News’ Fox & Friends program on Sunday, Trump repeated his claims that the Biden administration had overseen the “weaponisation of the justice department”.

“It’s like their slogan: I’m ‘a threat to democracy.’ I’m the opposite. They’re the threat to democracy,” added Trump.

Advertisement

A sign of whether Trump’s verdict damages him politically will come from polling over the next few weeks. Biden still trails by 1.3 percentage points in national polling, according to the FiveThirtyEight.com average, and the former president also has a slight edge in key battleground states.

If Biden sees that attacks on Trump’s criminal record are having an impact, he may emphasise that during their first debate in late June in Atlanta. Biden may still have to remain above the fray to remain presidential, but his allies will be less constrained.

“We need a phalanx of campaign surrogates out in force, comparing Trump, America’s first felon on a major party ticket, to Biden,” said Setzer.

additional reporting by Alex Rogers in Washington

Advertisement

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending