Politics

By Patricia Zengerle and Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Donald Trump sat for hours watching the attack on the U.S. Capitol unfold on live TV on Jan. 6, 2021, ignoring pleas by his children and other close advisers to urge his supporters to stop the violence, witnesses told a congressional hearing on Thursday.

The House of Representatives Select Committee used its eighth hearing this summer to detail what members said was Trump’s failure to act for the 187 minutes between the end of his inflammatory speech at a rally urging supporters to march on the Capitol, and the release of a video telling them to go home.

“President Trump sat at his dining table and watched the attack on television while his senior-most staff, closest advisors and family members begged him to do what is expected of any American president,” said Representative Elaine Luria, a Democratic committee member.

The panel played videotaped testimony from White House aides and security staff discussing the events of the day.

Former White House counsel Pat Cipollone was asked question after question in the recorded testimony about whether Trump took this action or that action – did he call the secretary of defense? Did he call the U.S. attorney general? Did he call the head of Homeland Security? Cipollone answered “no” to each query.

Panel members said Trump’s daughter Ivanka and son Don Jr. were among those who pleaded with him to act.

The hearing, expected to be the last until September, detailed both the violence that played out as Trump supporters fought their way into the Capitol and Trump’s actions in the hours after his speech in which he urged the crowd to “fight like hell” and the release of the video telling the rioters to go home.

The onslaught on the Capitol, as Vice President Mike Pence met with lawmakers, injured more than 140 police officers and delayed certification of Democratic President Joe Biden’s victory in the November 2020 election.

“Over the last month and a half, the select committee has told a story of a president who did everything in his power to overturn an election. He lied, he bullied, he betrayed his oath,” the committee’s Democratic chairperson, Representative Bennie Thompson, said via a remote video feed after being diagnosed with COVID. “He tried to destroy our democratic institutions. He summoned a mob to Washington.”

Representative Adam Kinzinger, a Republican committee member, said Trump had no interest in calling off the rioters.

“The mob was accomplishing President Trump’s purpose, so of course he didn’t intervene,” Kinzinger said.

Trump remains highly popular among Republican voters and continues to flirt with the possibility of running for president again in 2024. But a Reuters/Ipsos poll concluded on Thursday found his standing among Republicans has weakened slightly since the hearings began early last month. Some 40% of Republicans now say he is at least partially to blame for the riot, up from 33% in a poll conducted six weeks ago, just as the congressional hearings were getting underway.

Trump denies wrongdoing and continues to claim falsely that he lost because of widespread fraud. “These hearings are as fake and illegitimate as Joe Biden — they can’t do anything without a teleprompter,” Trump spokesperson Liz Harrington said in a post on his Truth Social social media site as the hearing began.

MORE HEARINGS IN SEPTEMBER

Scheduled during the evening to reach a broad television audience, the public hearing was the eighth in six weeks by the House of Representatives Select Committee. Another round of hearings will begin in September, said the panel’s Republican vice chairperson, Representative Liz Cheney.

The witnesses in the room were Matthew Pottinger, a deputy national security adviser under Trump, and Sarah Matthews, a deputy press secretary in his White House. Both resigned in the hours following the riot.

“If the president had wanted to make a statement and address the American people, he could have been on camera almost immediately,” Matthews testified. “If he had wanted to make an address from the Oval Office, we could have assembled the White House press corps within minutes.”

The panel of seven Democratic and two Republican House members has been investigating the attack for the past year, interviewing more than 1,000 witnesses and amassing tens of thousands of documents.

It has used the hearings to build a case that Trump’s efforts to overturn his defeat by Biden in 2020 constitute illegal conduct, far beyond normal politics.

Previous hearings have focused on the run-up to the riot, Trump’s pressure on Pence to deny Biden’s victory, militant groups whose members participated in the Capitol attack, and Trump’s interactions with close advisers questioning his false allegations of massive voter fraud.

Committee members said Trump incited the riot by refusing to admit he lost the election and through comments including a Twitter post in December calling supporters to Washington for a “big protest” on Jan. 6, saying, “Be there, will be wild.”

The attack on the Capitol led to several deaths. More than 850 people have been charged with taking part in the riot, with more than 325 guilty pleas so far.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle and Richard Cowan; Additional reporting by Jason Lange, Doina Chiacu, Moira Warburton and Rose Horowitch; Editing by Scott Malone, Andy Sullivan, Alistair Bell and Daniel Wallis)

source

(Reuters) – A U.S. venue cancelled Dave Chappelle’s stand-up show just hours before he was due on stage on Wednesday, after critics lamented the scheduled gig following controversy over the comedian’s jokes about transgender people.

In a statement on its website, First Avenue in Minneapolis, Minnesota said Chappelle’s show would moved to the city’s Varsity Theater, where the U.S. comedian is also due to perform on Thursday and Friday.

First Avenue had announced the Chappelle show earlier this week, drawing criticism on social media.

Chappelle drew a backlash last year for material in his Netflix comedy special “The Closer” that some in the LGBTQ+ community said ridiculed transgender people. His supporters viewed it as a cry against cancel culture.

“To staff, artists, and our community, we hear you and we are sorry. We know we must hold ourselves to the highest standards, and we know we let you down. We are not just a black box with people in it, and we understand that First Avenue is not just a room, but meaningful beyond our walls,” First Avenue said.

“The First Avenue team and you have worked hard to make our venues the safest spaces in the country, and we will continue with that mission. We believe in diverse voices and the freedom of artistic expression, but in honoring that, we lost sight of the impact this would have. We know there are some who will not agree with this decision; you are welcome to send feedback.”

A representative for Chappelle could not immediately be reached for comment.

In May, the Emmy Award winning entertainer was tackled on stage during his show at the Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles. A 23-year-old man was charged with four misdemeanor counts.

(Reporting by Marie-Louise Gumuchian; Editing by Raissa Kasolowsky)

source

By Matt Spetalnick

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Biden administration is willing to discuss the existing U.S.-Colombia trade agreement with the Andean country’s next president, a senior U.S. official said, as Washington dispatched a high-level delegation on Thursday to begin forging a relationship with him.

Gustavo Petro, a 62-year-old economist who will become Colombia’s first leftist leader next month, talked during his campaign about proposals to renegotiate trade pacts, including a 2012 deal with the United States, but moderated some of his stances by the time he was elected last month.

Asked whether Washington is willing to renegotiate the accord or open it up for discussion, the senior administration official said: “Any conversations relating to the U.S.-Colombia trade promotion agreement will be led by the U.S. Trade Representative.”

“We look forward to engaging in those discussions with the Petro administration after he is inaugurated on Aug. 7,” the official added.

The official previewed a visit to Bogota beginning on Thursday by a group of U.S. officials that could be a test for what has long been one of the closest U.S. partnerships in Latin America. They will meet outgoing President Ivan Duque as well as President-elect Petro and his transition team.

Petro has called the U.S.-led drug war a “complete failure,” saying the government should instead support small farmers with substitute crops and increase their incomes.

Asked how the delegation would address the issue, a second official said it wants to “to listen and to understand the contours and the nuances” of Petro’s ideas.

President Joe Biden’s administration believes a “holistic approach” focused on economic livelihoods and security is needed and they can find common ground, the official added.

Petro has also raised concerns in Washington over his outreach to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who is under U.S. sanctions. The two leaders said last month they discussed reestablishing normal relations at their countries’ border.

Asked whether Petro’s efforts could undermine efforts to isolate Venezuela’s Socialist leader, the second official said Colombia could help encourage Maduro and the Venezuelan opposition to resume negotiations.

The visit is also intended to provide reassurances against “speculation” about the U.S.-Colombia relationship, one official said, referring to questions about how well the countries would work together once Petro takes office.

The agenda will include discussion of implementation of a 2016 peace deal between the Colombian government and FARC rebels, the officials said.

The delegation includes the White House’s top Latin America adviser Juan Gonzalez, Assistant Secretary of State Brian Nichols, deputy national security adviser Jon Finer and Philip Gordon, Vice President Kamala Harris’ national security adviser.

(Reporting By Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

source

By Brendan O’Brien

(Reuters) – A former Minneapolis police officer was scheduled to be sentenced on Thursday on federal charges stemming from his role in the death of George Floyd, an incident that sparked protests around the globe against police brutality and racism.

United States District Judge Paul Magnuson was to sentence Thomas Lane at 10 a.m. local time in a federal courtroom in St. Paul on charges that he deprived Floyd of his civil rights and his conduct caused his death.

Lane was facing as much as 5 1/4 to 6 1/2 years in prison, according to court records.

Lane was one of four officers who responded to a Minneapolis grocery store on May 25, 2020 and took the Black man into custody on suspicion he used a fake $20 bill to buy cigarettes.

During the encounter, former police officer Derek Chauvin pinned the handcuffed Floyd beneath his knee for more than nine minutes, leading to his death.

The incident, which was captured on cellphone video, led to protests in many cities in the United States and around the world against police brutality and racism.

Lane, along with fellow former Minneapolis police officers Tou Thao and Alexander Kueng, were found guilty by a federal jury in February for their involvement Floyd’s death. A date has not been set for the sentencing of Thao and Kueng.

During the trial, federal prosecutors argued that the three other men knew from their training and from “basic human decency” that they had a duty to help Floyd as he begged for his life before falling limp beneath Chauvin’s knee.

Earlier in July, Chauvin was sentenced to 21 years in prison on federal charges of violating Floyd’s civil rights.

Chauvin also was convicted of intentional second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in a state trial in 2021. He is serving a sentence of 22-1/2 year in a Minnesota prison on that conviction.

In May, Lane pleaded guilty to state aiding and abetting manslaughter charges and agreed to a sentence of three years in prison. A state trial is scheduled to be begin in January for the other two officers.

(Reporting by Brendan O’Brien in Chicago; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

source

By Moira Warburton

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Top U.S. Senate Democrats and Republicans said on Wednesday they may have the votes to pass a bill protecting same-sex marriage rights nationwide, the day after the measure passed the House of Representatives with a bipartisan majority.

The measure, intended to head off any Supreme Court effort to roll back gay marriage rights, passed the House on Tuesday with all Democrats and 47 Republican representatives – just over a fifth of their caucus – voting in favor.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on Wednesday said he was “really impressed by how much bipartisan support it got in the House.”

When the Supreme Court last month struck down its landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling protecting the right to abortion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court should also reconsider its past rulings that guaranteed access to contraception and the right to gay marriage because they relied on the same legal arguments as Roe.

Under Senate rules, Schumer would need at least 10 Republicans in favor to pass the bill in the 50-50 Senate.

Senator John Thune, the chamber’s No. 2 Republican, said he believed a bill codifying gay marriage could receive enough Republican support to pass.

“I wouldn’t be surprised. We haven’t assessed that at all, yet,” he told reporters when asked if 10 Republicans could back such legislation. “But as a general matter, I think that is something people in the country have come to accept.”

Several other Republicans said they could support the bill. Senator Susan Collins co-sponsored a Senate version of the House bill. Senator Thom Tillis told CNN on Wednesday that he would “probably” vote in favor.

Senator Rob Portman, another co-sponsor, said the bill sends “an important message.”

Republican Senator Ted Cruz said on Saturday that the Supreme Court was “clearly wrong” in establishing a federal right to gay marriage. Senator Lindsey Graham said he would not support a bill codifying same-sex marriage.

Other Republicans said they would wait to read the text of the bill before deciding how they would vote.

Republican Senator Mitt Romney called the House legislation “unnecessary.”

“I haven’t given consideration to that legislation in part because the law isn’t changing and there’s no indication that it will,” he said, adding that Justice Thomas had “opened a lot of doors that no other justices walk through.”

(Reporting by Moira Warburton, additional reporting by David Morgan; Editing by Scott Malone and Howard Goller)

source

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A bipartisan group of U.S. senators introduced two bills on Wednesday to reform election laws, seeking to block a repeat of then-President Donald Trump’s failed attempt to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democratic President Joe Biden.

The legislation, among other things, would make clear that the vice president has only a ceremonial role in certifying election results, after a mob of Trump supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, stormed the U.S. Capitol in a bid to force then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the election result.

The action came amid growing evidence from the House of Representatives committee investigating the Jan. 6 melee that Trump sought to overturn his loss by spreading falsehoods about a rigged election.

Introduced by the group led by Democratic Senator Joe Manchin and Republican Senator Susan Collins, the two bills address a range of issues, from the handling of election results and presidential transitions to mail-in ballots, election record security and threats against election workers.

“We urge our colleagues in both parties to support these simple, commonsense reforms,” said a statement released by the group of seven Democrats and nine Republicans.

Similar legislation is also being pursued by two Democrats, Senator Richard Durbin and Senate Rules Committee Chair Amy Klobuchar, along with independent Senator Angus King. Democrats in the House are also pursuing legislation.

Lawmakers hope to enact a package of election law reforms this year, while the House and Senate are under Democratic control.

“The January 6th commission has added urgency,” King said in a statement welcoming the bipartisan group’s legislation. “This will help build consensus around approaches that will reinforce the seams in the fabric of democracy we’ve seen stretched too thin.”

One bill introduced on Wednesday would reform the 1887 Electoral Count Act by clarifying the appropriate state and federal roles in choosing the president and vice president, and provide clear guidelines on when federal resources can be allocated to eligible presidential candidates.

A second piece of legislation would double federal penalties for those who threaten or intimidate election workers, poll watchers, voters or candidates. It would also seek to improve the handling of mail-in ballots by the U.S. Postal System and states, authorize the federal agency that administers elections and safeguard election records.

(Reporting by David Morgan; Additional reporting by Richard Cowan; Editing by Richard Chang and Jonathan Oatis)

source

By Jeff Mason and Trevor Hunnicutt

JOINT BASE ANDREWS, Md. (Reuters) -U.S. President Joe Biden plans to speak with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, by the end of the month at a moment of simmering tensions between the countries over Taiwan and trade.

“I think I’ll be talking to President Xi within the next 10 days,” Biden told reporters as he returned from a climate-related trip to Massachusetts.

The long-discussed call between the two leaders, their first in four months, would come at a crucial moment given tensions over the status of Taiwan, and as the Biden administration weighs cutting import duties on goods from China to help reduce inflation pressures on American consumers.

The United States calls China its main strategic rival and says high-level engagement is important to keeping the difficult relationship stable and preventing it from veering inadvertently into conflict. Last month, Washington pushed NATO to adopt a strategic document calling China a security challenge.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Biden appeared to cast doubt on a trip reportedly planned by House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi to visit Taiwan next month.

“I think that the military thinks it’s not a good idea right now, but I don’t know what the status of it is,” Biden said.

Beijing said on Tuesday that it would respond with “forceful measures” should Pelosi visit the Chinese-claimed island, and that such a visit would “seriously undermine China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Pelosi’s office declined to comment on whether the visit is moving forward, citing security concerns. The State Department has called the trip “hypothetical.” Plans for the trip were reported https://on.ft.com/3B0jKgc by the Financial Times, which also said the White House had expressed concerns.

China considers the democratically-governed island its own territory, and the issue is a constant irritant in ties between Beijing and Washington.

Biden’s administration has repeatedly spoken of its “rock-solid” commitment to the island’s security.

U.S. military vessels were conducting transits through the Taiwan Strait as recently as Tuesday, angering Beijing, which sent fighters across the strait’s median line this month following a visit to Taipei by U.S. Senator Rick Scott.

On trade, the Biden administration has been at odds with China over fulfilling its commitments to existing agreements.

But rising inflation has prompted a look at possible tariff relief, including on the ‘Section 301’ tariffs imposed by former President Donald Trump, covering some $370 billion in Chinese imports.

People familiar with the tariff deliberations have told Reuters that Biden also is weighing whether to pair a removal of some tariffs with a new investigation into China’s industrial subsidies and efforts to dominate key sectors, such as semiconductors. Such a probe could lead to more tariffs.

(Reporting by Jeff Mason and Trevor Hunnicutt; Additional reporting by Costas Pitas and Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Marguerita Choy and Rosalba O’Brien)

source

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Joe Biden will announce a set of executive actions aimed at addressing climate change on Wednesday in a visit to the site of a former coal-fired plant in Massachusetts that is playing a role in supporting the state’s offshore wind industry.

Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups have been calling for the White House to take aggressive measures on climate change after Democratic Senator Joe Manchin said last week he was not ready to support key climate provisions in Congress, a critical loss in the evenly divided Senate.

In a visit to Somerset, Massachusetts, Biden will stress that climate change is “an existential threat to our nation and to the world” and will make clear that “if Congress is not going to act on this emergency, then he will,” said a White House official.

The former coal-fired power plant that Biden will visit is becoming a manufacturing hub for undersea cables that will support Massachusetts’s offshore wind industry, illustrating the switch from fossil fuels to renewable fuels that Biden has been promoting as critical to reducing climate emissions.

While there, he will unveil a set of executive actions that include steps to protect communities facing extreme heat with money from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Health and Human Services Department’s Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).

The official said Biden also will announce additional actions to boost the domestic offshore wind industry.

Biden has been under pressure to declare a climate emergency, which would enable the use of the Defense Production Act to ramp up production of a wide range of renewable energy products and systems. But the president is not expected to take that step on Wednesday.

Biden promised tough action on climate change in his presidential campaign and pledged in international climate negotiations to cut climate pollution by 50% by 2030 and reach 100% clean electricity by 2035.

But his climate agenda has been derailed by several major setbacks, including clinching enough congressional support to pass crucial climate and clean energy measures in a federal budget bill, record-setting gasoline prices, and global energy market disruption caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

A Supreme Court ruling last month limiting the federal government’s authority to issue sweeping regulations to reduce carbon emissions from power plants also is undermining Biden’s climate plans.

(Reporting by Steve Holland; Editing by Leslie Adler)

source

By Rose Horowitch and Moira Warburton

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday passed a bill protecting gay marriage rights, after the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade imperiled similar precedents that protected rights to same-sex relations and contraception.

The bill, which passed the Democratic-controlled chamber by a vote of 267-157 with support from 47 Republicans, establishes federal protections for gay marriage and prohibits anyone from denying the validity of a marriage based on the race or sex of the couple.

It will now go to the Senate for a vote, where it faces unclear odds in the evenly divided chamber. House Republicans were told to vote with their conscience by party leadership, who did not whip against the bill.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler sponsored the bill after the federal right to an abortion was overturned when the Supreme Court struck down its landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said the court should also reconsider its past rulings that guaranteed access to contraception and the 2015 right to gay marriage, because they relied on the same legal arguments as Roe.

Some congressional Republicans have echoed Thomas’ arguments. Republican Senator Ted Cruz said on Saturday that the high court was “clearly wrong” in establishing a federal right to gay marriage.

Democrats have argued that Congress must enshrine the right to gay marriage into federal law in case the court revisits its past rulings.

“The rights and freedoms that we have come to cherish will vanish into a cloud of radical ideology and dubious legal reasoning,” Nadler said in a statement on Monday.

Under the House bill, states could still restrict gay marriage if the Supreme Court overturns its prior ruling. But such states would be required to recognize marriages that occurred in states where they remain legal.

The House will vote Thursday on a bill to guarantee nationwide access to contraception, another right that Thomas suggested the court revisit.

Democrats are hoping the bills will draw a contrast to Republicans ahead of Nov. 8 midterm elections, in which soaring inflation challenges Democrats’ majority hold on the House and the Senate.

(Reporting by Rose Horowitch and Moira Warburton; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Leslie Adler)

source

By Sarah N. Lynch

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A federal prosecutor told jurors on Tuesday at Steve Bannon’s criminal trial that the prominent former presidential adviser to Donald Trump decided he was “above the law” in defying a subpoena from the congressional committee investigating last year’s attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The prosecution and defense delivered opening statements after jurors were selected in the trial, with the government’s first witness then testifying. Evan Corcoran, a lawyer for Bannon, said in his opening statement that Bannon did not ignore the subpoena and in fact engaged with the committee in the belief that it would negotiate with his attorney and that its deadlines “were not fixed – they were flexible.”

Bannon, 68, has pleaded not guilty to two misdemeanor counts of contempt of Congress brought after he declined last year to provide testimony or documents to the Democratic-led House of Representatives select committee.

The subpoena issued last September, prosecutor Amanda Vaughn told jurors, “wasn’t optional. It wasn’t a request. And it wasn’t an invitation. It was mandatory.”

“The defendant decided he was above the law,” Vaughn added. “That’s why we’re here today.”

Vaughn said the committee had reason to believe Bannon might have information about the events leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot. Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol and attacked police in a failed effort to block formal congressional certification of his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

Bannon “didn’t get stuck on a broken down Metro car,” Vaughn said of the defendant’s refusal to comply with the subpoena, referring to the Washington area’s subway system. Instead, the case is about “the defendant thumbing his nose” at the normal process of government, Vaughn added.

Corcoran said that committee staff and lawyers for proposed witnesses almost always negotiate – and witnesses often appear at a date later than the one specified in a subpoena.

“That’s the process,” Corcoran said.

‘A VIOLENT ASSAULT’

Kristin Amerling, the committee’s general counsel, was the first prosecution witness.

“When the committee issues subpoenas with deadlines, is it important to the committee for people to comply with the deadlines?” Vaughn asked Amerling.

“Absolutely,” Amerling replied. “The select committee is looking at a violent assault on the United States Capitol, on law enforcement, on our democratic institutions. We have a limited amount of time.”

Amerling said the committee’s authority expires at the end of 2022.

In explaining the panel’s interest in hearing from Bannon, Amerling noted that he had told a podcast the day before the riot that “all hell is going to break loose tomorrow” and that the committee wanted to learn whether he had advance knowledge of the attack.

Twelve jurors and two alternates – nine men and five women – were selected, with U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols presiding over the trial.

Nichols previously ruled that Bannon could not claim he failed to comply with the subpoena because he believed his documents and testimony were protected by a legal doctrine called executive privilege that can keep certain presidential communications confidential.

The judge also has barred Bannon from telling jurors that he relied upon advice from his lawyer, who told him there were valid legal reasons he could fail to respond to the subpoena.

Corcoran told jurors that Bannon after being subpoenaed sought advice from an attorney, Robert Costello, who then raised objections with the committee including whether the requested information was protected by executive privilege. Corcoran said that these objections are “not an excuse” for failing to comply, but the fact that Bannon’s lawyer directly engaged the committee showed that the defendant did not willfully ignore the subpoena.

Bannon reversed course this month and said he wanted to testify before a public committee hearing, nearly 10 months after defying the subpoena. There has been no indication of any plan to have him do so, as the committee likely would want him to first testify in closed sessions in order to cover a wide range of matters. Trump told Bannon he was waiving any executive privilege claim.

“You will also see the excuse the defendant gave for not complying. You will see he claimed something called a privilege,” Vaughn told the jury.

As a top adviser to the Republican Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign who later served as White House chief strategist, Bannon helped articulate the “America First” right-wing populism and fierce opposition to immigration that helped define Trump’s presidency.

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Editing by Will Dunham and Scott Malone)

source