Connect with us

Published

on

Representative Jim Jordan may or may not break down the last few Republican holdouts who blocked his election as House speaker yesterday. But the fact that about 90 percent of the House GOP conference voted to place him in the chambers top job marks an ominous milestone in the Republican Partys reconfiguration since Donald Trumps emergence as its central figure.

The preponderant majority of House Republicans backing Jordan is attempting to elevate someone who not only defended former President Trumps efforts to subvert the 2020 presidential election but participated in them more extensively than any other member of Congress, according to the bipartisan committee that investigated the January 6 insurrection. As former Republican Representative Liz Cheney, who was the vice chair of that committee, said earlier this month: Jim Jordan knew more about what Donald Trump had planned for January 6 than any other member of the House of Representatives.

Read: Jim Jordan could have a long fight ahead

Jordans rise, like Trumps own commanding lead in the 2024 GOP presidential race, provides more evidence that for the first time since the Civil War, the dominant faction in one of Americas two major parties is no longer committed to the principles of democracy as the U.S. has known them. That means the nation now faces the possibility of sustained threats to the tradition of free and fair elections, with Trumps own antidemocratic tendencies not only tolerated but amplified by his allies across the party.

Ian Bassin, the executive director of the bipartisan group Protect Democracy, told me that the American constitutional system is not built to withstand a demagogue capturing an entire political party and installing his loyalists in key positions in the other branches of government. That dynamic, he told me, would likely mean our 247-year-old republic wont live to celebrate 250. And yet, he continued, those developments are precisely what were witnessing play out before our eyes.

Sarah Longwell, the founder of the anti-Trump Republican Accountability Project, told me that whether or not Jordan steamrolls the last holdouts, his strength in the race reflects the position inside the party of the forces allied with Trump. Even if he doesnt make it, because the majorities are so slim, you cant argue that Jim Jordan doesnt represent the median Republican today, she told me.

Longwell said House Republicans have sent an especially clear signal by predominantly rallying around Jordan, who actively enlisted in Trumps efforts to overturn the 2020 election, so soon after they exiled Cheney, who denounced them and then was soundly defeated in a GOP primary last year. Nominating Jim Jordan to be speaker is not them acquiescing to antidemocratic forces; it is them fully embracing antidemocratic forces, she said. The contrast between Jim Jordan potentially ascending to speaker and Liz Cheney, who is out of the Republican Party and excommunicated, could not be a starker statement of what the party stands for.

In one sense, Jordans advance to the brink of the speakership only extends the pattern that has played out within the GOP since Trump became a national candidate in 2015. Each time the party has had an opportunity to distance itself from Trump, it has roared past the exit ramp and reaffirmed its commitment. At each moment of crisis for him, the handful of Republicans who condemned his behavior were swamped by his fervid supporters until resistance in the party crumbled.

Even against that backdrop, the breadth of Republican support for Jordan as speaker is still a striking statement. As the January 6 committees final report showed, Jordan participated in virtually every element of Trumps campaign to subvert the 2020 result. Jordan spoke at Stop the Steal rallies, spread baseless conspiracy theories through television appearances and social media, urged Trump not to concede, demanded congressional investigations into nonexistent election fraud, and participated in multiple White House strategy sessions on how to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to reject the results.

Given that record, undermining the election is too soft a language to describe Jordans activities in 2020, Jena Griswold, Colorados Democratic secretary of state, told me. He was involved in every step to try to destroy American democracy and the peaceful transfer of the presidency. If Jordan wins the position, she said, you could no longer count on the speaker of the House to defend the United States Constitution.

Jordan didnt stop his service to Trump once he left office. Since the GOP won control of the House last year, Jordan has used his role as chair of the House Judiciary Committee to launch investigations into each of the prosecutors who have indicted Trump on criminal charges (local district attorneys in Manhattan and Fulton County, Georgia, as well as federal Special Counsel Jack Smith). Fani Willis, the Fulton County district attorney, has described Jordans demand for information as an effort to obstruct a Georgia criminal proceeding that is flagrantly at odds with the Constitution.

The willingness of most GOP House members to embrace Jordan as speaker, even as he offers such unconditional support to Trump, sends the same message about the partys balance of power as the former presidents own dominant position in the 2024 Republican race. Though some Republican voters clearly remain resistant to nominating Trump again, his support in national surveys usually exceeds the total vote for all of his rivals combined.

Equally telling is that rather than criticizing Trumps attempts to overturn the 2020 election, almost all of his rivals have echoed his claim that the indictments hes facing over his actions are unfair and politically motivated. In the same vein, hardly any of the Republican members resisting Jordan have even remotely suggested that his role in Trumps attempts to subvert the election is a legitimate reason to oppose him. That silence from Jordans critics speaks loudly to the reluctance in all corners of the GOP to cross Trump.

If Jordan becomes speaker, it would really mean the complete and total takeover of the party by Trump, former Republican Representative Charlie Dent, now the executive director of the Aspen Institutes congressional program, told me. Because he is the closest thing Trump has to a wingman in Congress.

All of this crystallizes the growing tendency at every level of the GOP, encompassing voters and activists as well as donors and elected officials, to normalize and whitewash Trumps effort to overturn the 2020 election. In an Economist/YouGov national poll earlier this year, fully three-fifths of Trump 2020 voters said those who stormed the Capitol on January 6 were participating in legitimate political discourse, and only about one-fifth said they were part of a violent insurrection. Only about one-fifth of Trump 2020 voters thought he bore a significant share of responsibility for the January 6 attack; more than seven in 10 thought he carried little or no responsibility.

That sentiment has solidified in the GOP partly because of a self-reinforcing cycle, Longwell believes. Because most Republican voters do not believe that Trump acted inappropriately after 2020, she said, candidates cant win a primary by denouncing him, but because so few elected officials criticize his actions, the more normal elements of the party become convinced its not an issue or its not worth objecting to.

The flip side is that for the minority of House Republicans in highly competitive districts18 in seats that voted for President Joe Biden in 2020 and another 15 or so in districts that only narrowly preferred TrumpJordan could be a heavy burden to carry as speaker. Everyone is worried about their primary opponents, but in this case ameliorating the primary pressures by endorsing Jordan could spell political death in the general election in a competitive district, Dent told me. Even so, 12 of the 18 House Republicans in districts that Biden carried voted for Jordan onhis first ballot as a measure of their reluctance to challenge the partys MAGA forces.

The instinct for self-preservation among a handful of Republican members combined with ongoing resentment at the role of the far right in ousting Kevin McCarthy might be enough to keep Jordan just below the majority he needs for election as speaker; many Republicans expect him to fail again in a second vote scheduled for this morning. Yet even if Jordan falls short, its his ascent that captures the shift in the partys balance of power toward Trumps MAGA movement.

Bassin, of Protect Democracy, points to a disturbing analogy for what is happening in the GOP as Trump surges and Jordan climbs. When you look at the historical case studies to determine which countries survive autocratic challenges and which succumb to them, Bassin told me, a key determinant is whether the countrys mainstream parties unite with their traditional opponents to block the extremists from power.

Philip Wallach: Newt Gingrichs degraded legacy

Over the years, he said, that kind of alliance has mobilized against autocratic movements in countries including the Czech Republic, France, Finland, and, most recently, Poland, where the center-right joined with its opponents on the left to topple the antidemocratic Law and Justice party. The chilling counterexample, Bassin noted, is that during the period between World War I and World War II, center-right parties in Germany and Italy chose a different course. Rather than directly opposing the emerging fascist movements in each country, they opted instead to try to ride the energy of [the] far-right extremists to power, thinking that once there, they could easily sideline [their] leaders.

That was, of course, a historic miscalculation that led to the destruction of democracy in each country. But, Bassin said, right now, terrifyingly, the American Republican Party is following the German and Italian path. The belligerent Jordan may face just enough personal and ideological opposition to stop him, but whether or not he becomes speaker, his rise captures the currents carrying the Trump-era GOP ever further from Americas democratic traditions.

Continue Reading

UK

Budget 2025 income tax U-turn: What the hell just happened?

Published

on

By

Budget 2025 income tax U-turn: What the hell just happened?

What the hell’s just happened? 

On Thursday night I was told that Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer were now not going to raise income tax, having had anonymous briefings for weeks that a manifesto-breaking tax rise was coming, culminating in the speech in Downing Street by the chancellor last week alluding to that.

Politics live: U-turn on budget income tax rise triggers ‘not normal’ market volatility

I had also heard the prime minister was going to make a speech next week to the same effect.

The U-turn – first broken in the Financial Times – was not something the government wanted to leak, and there is anger in Downing Street.

I was told late last night by a source that the decision had been taken to back off income tax rises.

There is obviously some consternation, to say the least, that ministers, the party, the public have been marched up the hill, only to be marched back down again. It all adds to a sense of chaos and a government out of control. So what on earth is going on?

Read more: How No 10 plunged itself into crisis

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Bombshell’ over income tax

Let’s first do the economics of it. I was told this morning by Treasury sources that the fiscal forecasts from the Office of Budget Responsibility are stronger than expected.

There had been expectations of a £30bn-£40bn black hole in the public finances.

But I’m told today that black hole is actually closer to £20bn: the chancellor also wants headroom of perhaps up to £15bn, but I’m told the change in forecasts has changed the calculation. I’m told wage growth has been stronger which has helped tax receipts and improved forecasts.

So, where does that leave the government? Treasury figures tell me that the change in forecasts mean the manifesto-busting income tax hike is now not necessary.

I don’t need to spell out the jeopardy for such a move: Rachel Reeves was poised to be the first chancellor in 50 years to raise the basic rate of income tax and break the core manifesto pledge that Labour made to voters last year.

It doesn’t mean taxes are not going up. The government is set to freeze tax thresholds for another two years from 2028. That will raise around £8bn as millions of workers are dragged into higher tax bands and end up paying more tax.

There will also be tax raising around pensions and salary sacrifice schemes and on electric vehicles, as well as other measures, as the chancellor casts around for £20bn.

But what about the politics? Well, one government figure today insists that the decision to drop the income tax plan is nothing to do with the self-inflicted leadership crisis at No 10 after anonymous briefings designed to see off any potential post-budget coup against the prime minister spectacularly backfired. The changed forecasts, I’m told, came in last week.

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

But of course there’s tonnes of politics in this. The talk of higher wage growth perhaps offsetting some of the productivity downgrades was being flagged a couple of weeks back, before the chancellor made her speech.

It’s extremely unusual for a chancellor to pitch-roll their budget. But Reeves did it for a reason.

That was laying the ground for a massive budget that would bring manifesto-breaking tax rises.

She told us of the difficult environment, ruled out more borrowing or spending cuts before telling us “everyone must play their part”. She repeatedly refused to stick to manifesto promises on tax. It doesn’t get much more stark than that.

That the government has U-turned on that decision is about far more than just the fiscal framework.

Read more: What taxes could go up now?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Wes Streeting: Faithful or traitor? Beth Rigby’s take

With trust so low in the government, there were serious worries – and warnings – from the party that such a big manifesto break might be something from which the PM and the chancellor wouldn’t recover.

One senior party figure that thinks there could be a leadership challenge after the May elections told me this week that manifesto-breaking tax rises would only make that more likely because Labour would “need a clean skin” to try and rebuild with the public if Starmer broke his promises in that way.

Read more: Is Starmer ‘in office but not in power’?

Lucy Powell, the deputy Labour leader, fired a warning shot last week when she said the party should stick to the manifesto and not raise tax: “We should be following through on our manifesto, of course. There’s no question about that,” she told Matt Chorley on BBC Radio 5 Live.

“Trust in politics is a key part of that because if we’re to take the country with us then they’ve got to trust us and that’s really important too.”

The party will no doubt feel relief today that the chancellor is not going to break the manifesto.

It would have only made things a whole lot worse for a government that is in real trouble.

But the shambles of this week is staggering. From the self-inflicted leadership crisis to leaks over a massive budget U-turn, it all lends to the sense that this is a No 10 out of control, lurching from one mess to another. Strap in.

Continue Reading

UK

Banksy painting theft lands burglar with 13-month prison sentence

Published

on

By

Banksy painting theft lands burglar with 13-month prison sentence

A man has been given a 13-month prison sentence for stealing Banksy’s famous Girl With Balloon painting from a London gallery.

Larry Fraser, 49, of Beckton, east London, was sentenced on Friday after pleading guilty to one count of non-residential burglary at Kingston Crown Court on 9 October.

The painting, one of the street artist‘s most famous, was stolen from a gallery in New Cavendish Street in London at around 11pm on 8 September last year.

The recovered painting back in the gallery. Pic: Metropolitan Police
Image:
The recovered painting back in the gallery. Pic: Metropolitan Police

Fraser used a hammer to smash his way through a glass entrance door at the Grove Gallery before stealing the artwork, which was valued at £270,000.

He concealed his identity with a mask, hooded jacket and gloves, but the Metropolitan Police’s Flying Squad was able to identify him and track him to a location streets away.

He was also caught on CCTV loading the artwork into a van before fleeing the scene.

A second man, 54-year-old James Love, was accused of being the getaway driver in the burglary, but cleared of stealing the print.

Larry Fraser. Pic: Metropolitan Police
Image:
Larry Fraser. Pic: Metropolitan Police

Damage to the Grove Gallery after the theft. Pic: Metropolitan Police
Image:
Damage to the Grove Gallery after the theft. Pic: Metropolitan Police

Fraser was arrested at his home address on 10 September, within 48 hours of the burglary, and charged the next day.

Officers were able to recover the artwork after executing a warrant on the Isle of Dogs. It has now been returned to the gallery.

Fraser pleaded to the court that he was struggling with a historic drug debt and agreed to steal the work “under a degree of pressure and fear”.

He said he did not know what he would be stealing, nor its value, until the day of the offence.

Fraser was caught on CCTV taking the painting away from the gallery. Pic: Metropolitan Police
Image:
Fraser was caught on CCTV taking the painting away from the gallery. Pic: Metropolitan Police

Jeffrey Israel, defending, said Fraser lived with his mother as her principal carer, and had only managed to “break his cycle of drug addiction” after his last prison sentence.

He added that it “would take a bold advocate” to suggest that the value of the print had increased by the burglary, but insisted “that is probably the reality”.

Read more:
Banksy artwork ‘worth millions’ scrubbed off wall outside court
Blink-182 star to auction rare Banksy worth millions

Judge Anne Brown was unmoved, however, and said the offence was “simply too serious” for a suspended sentence.

“This is a brazen and serious non-domestic burglary,” she said.

“Whilst you did not know the precise value of the print, you obviously understood it to be very valuable.”

She added: “Whilst I am sure there was a high degree of planning, this was not your plan.”

However, Fraser may be eligible for immediate release due to time spent on electronic curfew.

Detective Chief Inspector Scott Mather, who led the Met’s investigation, said: “Banksy’s Girl With Balloon is known across the world – and we reacted immediately to not just bring Fraser to justice but also reunite the artwork with the gallery.

“The speed at which this took place is a testament to the tireless work of the flying squad officers – in total it took just four days for normality to be restored.”

The 2004 artwork was part of a £1.5m collection of 13 Banksy pieces at the gallery.

Gallery manager, Lindor Mehmetaj, said it was “remarkable” for the piece to have been recovered after the theft.

The 29-year-old said: “I was completely, completely shocked, but in a very, very positive way when the Flying Squad showed me the actual artwork.

“It’s very hard to put into words, the weight that comes off your shoulders.”

Continue Reading

UK

Summer camp leader pleads guilty to drugging and sexually assaulting two boys

Published

on

By

Summer camp leader pleads guilty to drugging and sexually assaulting two boys

A former vet has admitted drugging and sexually assaulting two boys at a summer camp and child cruelty towards six other victims.

Jon Ruben, 76, of Nottinghamshire, admitted sexual assault of a child under 13, assault of a child under 13 by penetration, eight counts of child cruelty, three counts of making indecent images of children and four drugs charges.

Leicester Crown Court was told Ruben, who prosecutors said had run a holiday camp for at least 27 years, laced sweets with tranquilising drugs and attacked two children after asking youngsters to play “a sweet game”.

Ruben denied a charge of assault by penetration which prosecutors have been given two weeks to consider if they will proceed with.

Prosecutor Mary Prior KC said the charges related to a summer camp held at rented premises near a village in Leicestershire last summer.

The prosecutor told the court: “The defendant, for at least 27 years, has run a holiday camp.

“There is a long history of children feeling sick at the camp over many years.”

The rented premises, Stathern Lodge, were not connected to the camp itself, the court heard, and Ruben was in charge of youngsters there, Ms Prior said.

“He made the rules,” she added. “For many years he has played what he calls a sweet game with the children in which he goes into the bedrooms.

“The game is that each has to eat really sticky sweets as quickly as they can but they must chew them.

“Children have always felt ill the next day but he explained it as they were overwrought.”

Ruben was remanded in custody until a further hearing at the same court on 28 November.

Temporary Detective Chief Inspector Neil Holden said: “This has been a horrific, complex and emotional investigation involving multiple young, innocent, vulnerable victims and a man who committed the vilest crimes.

“Our focus today must of course remain on the young victims and with the support of partners and dedicated family liaison officers, we have and continue to support their welfare and to ensure their safeguarding going forward.”

Continue Reading

Trending