theguardian--2020-11-23--'Wreckage everywhere': can Biden undo Trump’s harsh immigration policies?

In one beating , the woman from El Salvador told the immigration judge , her boyfriend ’ s punches disfigured her jaw and knocked out two front teeth .
After raping her , he forced her to have his name tattooed in jagged letters on her back , boasting that he was marking her with his brand .
The judge seemed moved by her testimony .
In the hearing in September in the Baltimore immigration court , he found that the woman ’ s terror of going back to her country , where she said the boyfriend was lying in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ swiftly denied her asylum claim , saying the danger she faced did not fit any definition of persecution under current interpretations of American law .
The outcome for the woman , identified in her confidential asylum case as L M , was the result of a decision in 2018 by President Trump ’ s first attorney general , Jeff Sessions .
Setting aside two decades of precedent , Sessions ruled that domestic violence and most gang violence could not be the basis for asylum .
As president-elect Joe Biden moves deliberately to transition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump refuses to accept defeat , he has laid out a fast-paced agenda to unwind Trump ’ s harsh immigration policies .
But even if Biden quickly orders a final end to family separations and re-opens the border for asylum-seekers , his plans could stall without action at the justice department , which holds extensive power over the immigration system .
To carry out Biden ’ s proposals , his attorney general will have to reverse decisions by Sessions and Attorney General William Barr that sharply limited asylum , particularly for people like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America .
Biden ’ s justice officials will have to contend with an immigration appeals court loaded by Barr with conservative judges known for denying asylum .
Incoming justice officials will also have to untangle a web of Trump administration policies that limited the independence of immigration judges .
Those policies , intended to speed judges ’ decisions , instead produced crippling inefficiencies and spiraling case backlogs in the courts , which are an agency within the justice department .
Justice officials will have to re-orient the work of federal prosecutors , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crossers long after that approach was widely rebuked during the family separation crisis of 2018 .
Some of Trump ’ s actions can be undone relatively easily , legal scholars and former judges and justice officials say .
Others require laborious rule-making or slow-moving litigation .
For Biden allies hoping to make a fast start , choosing priorities is daunting .
“ It ’ s like a tornado passed through , just wreckage everywhere , ” said T Alexander Aleinikoff , director of the Zolberg Institute on Migration and Mobility at the New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that took years to put in place are in ruins .
Where do you start ?
” Under Trump , a small but expert group of officials set out to shut down the asylum system , which the president scorned as a magnet for huge flows of migrants .
They largely succeeded .
Over four years , grants of asylum in immigration courts declined to 19 % of cases , while denials more than doubled to 73 % , official figures show .
In a busy court like Houston , one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 13 judges have denied more than 90 % of asylum cases , according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse , or Trac , at Syracuse University .
At the same time , Trump ’ s measures to push judges to move faster largely failed .
Under Trump 214 new judges were hired , expanding the corps to 520 judges .
Yet the case backlog , which was about 520,000 when Trump took office , has risen to a staggering 1.2m .
Biden ’ s plans will run squarely into these obstacles .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a program , known as the Migrant Protection Protocols , which forced more than 65,000 asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico – in squalid improvised refugee camps – while their cases are heard in US immigration courts .
During the coronavirus pandemic , that program has stalled .
But once those cases start moving in the courts , under the current asylum standards many are doomed to fail and end in deportation orders .
To change the standards , the new attorney general could use the same broad powers wielded by his predecessors , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from judges and issue their own precedent-setting opinions .
Sessions and Barr set a record for use of that authority , taking over at least 16 cases ; Sessions issued five major decisions in 2018 alone .
Biden ’ s attorney general could reverse decisions by Sessions that prevented victims of domestic and gang violence from winning asylum , and made it difficult to claim asylum based on threats to a close family member .
The new attorney general could also roll back decisions that constrained the authority of immigration judges .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do away with judicial independence , clearly stacking the deck to get as many deportations as they can , ” said Denise Slavin , who served as an immigration judge for 24 years before retiring in 2019 .
One of Sessions ’ decisions blocked judges from exercising discretion to close cases and remove them from the active caseload .
Gridlock ensued .
Judges were forced to press forward with deportations of immigrants , including children , who were well on their way to winning asylum or another legal visa from a different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chafed under an annual quota of 700 cases imposed by court administrators .
And in a final round in the face-off with the judges , who are justice department employees , the Trump administration asked the Federal Labor Relations Authority to decertify their union .
In a ruling on 2 November , the authority sided with the administration , silencing judges who had loudly resisted Trump ’ s restrictions .
The new administration could eliminate the judges ’ case quotas with a policy memo .
Supporting a challenge to the labor authority to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials choose to do it , would be an extended legal fight .
In the final months of Trump ’ s presidency , officials are working overtime trying to lock many of his changes into rules and regulations that would take much longer to undo .
Since March , unauthorized border crossers have been summarily expelled under public health orders .
As Biden re-opens the border , senior justice officials could move promptly to set new priorities for federal prosecutors , discouraging criminal prosecutions .
This would return enforcement to longstanding practice by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration violations , which are civil , not criminal , offenses .
Support for that change is emerging even among some Republican conservatives .
They argue that thousands of immigration cases have clogged federal courts along the border , diverting prosecutors from focusing on more serious narcotics , money-laundering and smuggling crimes , with little evidence of an impact on migrant flows .
“ They waste a lot of money and resources , and more important , they abuse human dignity and constitutional protections , when you round people up like cattle and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s happening , ” said Jonathan Haggerty , a research fellow at R Street , a group promoting free-market , conservative policies .
“ I don ’ t think you can make a strong case there is a deterrent effect , ” he said .
Some legal scholars worry that Biden , in reversing Trump ’ s policies , will be no less intrusive , in effect extending what they see as the president ’ s unabashed political use of the justice system .
“ I ’ m really concerned about the politicization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ramji-Nogales , a professor at Temple University Beasley School of Law .
She would like to see more authority given to judges so their decisions , and not shifting White House imperatives , would shape the law .
For L M , Biden ’ s arrival brings hope that she could still win asylum in the United States .
Her lawyer , Christina Wilkes , filed an appeal that will wind slowly through the courts .
“ By the time we get to our hearing , ” Wilkes said , “ hopefully we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new law ” .
This story is published in partnership with The Marshall Project , a nonprofit news organization covering the US criminal justice system .
Sign up for their newsletter , or follow The Marshall Project on Facebook or Twitter .

In one beating, the woman from El Salvador told the immigration judge, her boyfriend’s punches disfigured her jaw and knocked out two front teeth. After raping her, he forced her to have his name tattooed in jagged letters on her back, boasting that he was marking her with his brand.
The judge seemed moved by her testimony. In the hearing in September in the Baltimore immigration court, he found that the woman’s terror of going back to her country, where she said the boyfriend was lying in wait, was credible. But he swiftly denied her asylum claim, saying the danger she faced did not fit any definition of persecution under current interpretations of American law.
The outcome for the woman, identified in her confidential asylum case as L M, was the result of a decision in 2018 by President Trump’s first attorney general, Jeff Sessions. Setting aside two decades of precedent, Sessions ruled that domestic violence and most gang violence could not be the basis for asylum.
As president-elect Joe Biden moves deliberately to transition towards the White House, even while Trump refuses to accept defeat, he has laid out a fast-paced agenda to unwind Trump’s harsh immigration policies. But even if Biden quickly orders a final end to family separations and re-opens the border for asylum-seekers, his plans could stall without action at the justice department, which holds extensive power over the immigration system.
To carry out Biden’s proposals, his attorney general will have to reverse decisions by Sessions and Attorney General William Barr that sharply limited asylum, particularly for people like L M who are fleeing from Central America. Biden’s justice officials will have to contend with an immigration appeals court loaded by Barr with conservative judges known for denying asylum.
The US-Mexico border fence in Nogales, Arizona. To carry out Biden’s proposals, his attorney general will have to reverse decisions by Sessions and Attorney General William Barr that sharply limited asylum Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images
Incoming justice officials will also have to untangle a web of Trump administration policies that limited the independence of immigration judges. Those policies, intended to speed judges’ decisions, instead produced crippling inefficiencies and spiraling case backlogs in the courts, which are an agency within the justice department.
Justice officials will have to re-orient the work of federal prosecutors, who continued mass criminal prosecutions of unauthorized border crossers long after that approach was widely rebuked during the family separation crisis of 2018.
Some of Trump’s actions can be undone relatively easily, legal scholars and former judges and justice officials say. Others require laborious rule-making or slow-moving litigation. For Biden allies hoping to make a fast start, choosing priorities is daunting.
“It’s like a tornado passed through, just wreckage everywhere,” said T Alexander Aleinikoff, director of the Zolberg Institute on Migration and Mobility at the New School in New York. “Policies that took years to put in place are in ruins. Where do you start?”
Under Trump, a small but expert group of officials set out to shut down the asylum system, which the president scorned as a magnet for huge flows of migrants. They largely succeeded. Over four years, grants of asylum in immigration courts declined to 19% of cases, while denials more than doubled to 73%, official figures show. In a busy court like Houston, one of the country’s largest, ten of the 13 judges have denied more than 90% of asylum cases, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, or Trac, at Syracuse University.
Under Trump 214 new judges were hired, expanding the corps to 520 judges. Yet the case backlog, which was about 520,000 when Trump took office, has risen to a staggering 1.2m
At the same time, Trump’s measures to push judges to move faster largely failed. Under Trump 214 new judges were hired, expanding the corps to 520 judges. Yet the case backlog, which was about 520,000 when Trump took office, has risen to a staggering 1.2m.
Biden’s plans will run squarely into these obstacles. The president-elect said he would immediately end a program, known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, which forced more than 65,000 asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico – in squalid improvised refugee camps – while their cases are heard in US immigration courts. During the coronavirus pandemic, that program has stalled. But once those cases start moving in the courts, under the current asylum standards many are doomed to fail and end in deportation orders.
To change the standards, the new attorney general could use the same broad powers wielded by his predecessors, which allowed them to take over cases from judges and issue their own precedent-setting opinions. Sessions and Barr set a record for use of that authority, taking over at least 16 cases; Sessions issued five major decisions in 2018 alone.
Biden’s attorney general could reverse decisions by Sessions that prevented victims of domestic and gang violence from winning asylum, and made it difficult to claim asylum based on threats to a close family member.
The new attorney general could also roll back decisions that constrained the authority of immigration judges.
“They carried out a very systematic plan to do away with judicial independence, clearly stacking the deck to get as many deportations as they can,” said Denise Slavin, who served as an immigration judge for 24 years before retiring in 2019.
A group of Central American migrants surrender to US border patrol agents after jumping over the metal barrier separating Playas de Tijuana in Mexico from the US in 2018. Photograph: Guillermo Arias/AFP/Getty Images
One of Sessions’ decisions blocked judges from exercising discretion to close cases and remove them from the active caseload. Gridlock ensued. Judges were forced to press forward with deportations of immigrants, including children, who were well on their way to winning asylum or another legal visa from a different agency in the system.
Judges have chafed under an annual quota of 700 cases imposed by court administrators. And in a final round in the face-off with the judges, who are justice department employees, the Trump administration asked the Federal Labor Relations Authority to decertify their union. In a ruling on 2 November, the authority sided with the administration, silencing judges who had loudly resisted Trump’s restrictions.
The new administration could eliminate the judges’ case quotas with a policy memo. Supporting a challenge to the labor authority to help reinstate the union, should Biden officials choose to do it, would be an extended legal fight. In the final months of Trump’s presidency, officials are working overtime trying to lock many of his changes into rules and regulations that would take much longer to undo.
Since March, unauthorized border crossers have been summarily expelled under public health orders. As Biden re-opens the border, senior justice officials could move promptly to set new priorities for federal prosecutors, discouraging criminal prosecutions. This would return enforcement to longstanding practice by which most border crossers are charged with immigration violations, which are civil, not criminal, offenses.
Support for that change is emerging even among some Republican conservatives. They argue that thousands of immigration cases have clogged federal courts along the border, diverting prosecutors from focusing on more serious narcotics, money-laundering and smuggling crimes, with little evidence of an impact on migrant flows.
“They waste a lot of money and resources, and more important, they abuse human dignity and constitutional protections, when you round people up like cattle and they don’t understand what’s happening,” said Jonathan Haggerty, a research fellow at R Street, a group promoting free-market, conservative policies. “I don’t think you can make a strong case there is a deterrent effect,” he said.
Some legal scholars worry that Biden, in reversing Trump’s policies, will be no less intrusive, in effect extending what they see as the president’s unabashed political use of the justice system.
“I’m really concerned about the politicization of the courts,” said Jaya Ramji-Nogales, a professor at Temple University Beasley School of Law. She would like to see more authority given to judges so their decisions, and not shifting White House imperatives, would shape the law.
For L M, Biden’s arrival brings hope that she could still win asylum in the United States. Her lawyer, Christina Wilkes, filed an appeal that will wind slowly through the courts. “By the time we get to our hearing,” Wilkes said, “hopefully we’ll be able to rely on new law”.
This story is published in partnership with The Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization covering the US criminal justice system. Sign up for their newsletter, or follow The Marshall Project on Facebook or Twitter.


theguardian--2020-11-23--Can Trump actually stage a coup and stay in office for a second term?

Joe Biden won the presidential election , a fact that Donald Trump and other Republicans refuse to acknowledge .
There are worries the president and other Republicans will make every effort to stay in power .
“ There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration , ” Mike Pompeo , the secretary of state , said .
William Barr , the attorney general , has authorized federal prosecutors to begin to investigate election irregularities , a move that prompted the head of the justice department ’ s election crimes unit to step down from his position and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fired Christopher Krebs , the director of the federal agency that vouched for the reliability of the 2020 election and had pushed back on the president ’ s baseless claims of voter fraud .
Yet , despite all of Trump ’ s machinations , it is extremely unlikely he can find a way to stay in power or stage a coup .
Here ’ s an explanation of why : Trump refuses to accept that Joe Biden won the presidential election .
Is there a constitutional path for him to stage a coup @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Not really .
The electoral college meets on 14 December to cast its vote for president and nearly every state uses the statewide popular vote to allocate its electors .
Biden is projected to win far more than the 270 electoral votes he needs to become president .
His victory doesn ’ t hinge on one state and he has probably insurmountable leads in Michigan , Nevada , Wisconsin , Pennsylvania and Arizona .
There is a long-shot legal theory , floated by Republicans before the election , that Republican-friendly legislatures in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania could ignore the popular vote in their states and appoint their own electors .
Federal law allows legislatures to do this if states have “ failed to make a choice ” by the day the electoral college meets .
But there is no evidence of systemic fraud of wrongdoing in any state and Biden ’ s commanding margins in these places make it clear that the states have in fact made a choice .
“ If the country continues to follow the rule of law , I see no plausible constitutional path @ @ @ @ @ @ @ barring new evidence of some massive failure of the election system in multiple states , ” Richard Hasen , a law professor at the University of California , Irvine , who specializes in elections , wrote in an email .
“ It would be a naked , antidemocratic power grab to try to use state legislatures to get around the voters ’ choice and I don ’ t expect it to happen.
” For lawmakers in a single state to choose to override the clear will of its voters this way would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For Trump to win the electoral college , several states would have to take this extraordinary step , a move that would cause extreme backlash and a real crisis of democracy throughout the country .
“ There ’ s a strange fascination with various imagined dark scenarios , perhaps involving renegade state legislatures , but this is more dystopian fiction than anything likely to happen , ” said Richard Pildes , a law professor at New York University .
“ The irony , or tragedy , is that we managed to conduct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turnout , under exceptionally difficult circumstances – and yet , a significant portion of the president ’ s supporters are now convinced that the process was flawed.
” Is there any indication Republicans in these important states are going to go along with this ?
Shortly after election day , Jake Corman , the top Republican in the Pennsylvania state senate , indicated his party would “ follow the law ” in Pennsylvania , which requires awarding electors to the winner of the popular vote .
In an October op-ed , Corman said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and will not have a hand in choosing the state ’ s presidential electors or in deciding the outcome of the presidential election ” .
Republicans in the Pennsylvania legislature said they wanted to investigate allegations of voter fraud .
There ’ s no evidence of widespread malfeasance in the state , but the move is alarming because it could be the beginning of an effort to undermine the popular vote results in the state .
But in a major blow to the president ’ s legal efforts , the state ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not improperly block Trump ’ s campaign from observing the counting of mail-in ballots .
The Republican-led legislature in Michigan is also investigating the election , as are Republicans in Wisconsin .
There ’ s no evidence of widespread wrongdoing in either place .
Is this related in any way to the lawsuits Trump is filing ?
Trump ’ s campaign has filed a slew of legally dubious suits since election day .
The purpose of these suits appears not to be to actually overturn the election results , but to try @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counting process .
Each state has its own deadlines for certifying election results that are then used to allocate its electoral college votes .
In at least two states , Pennsylvania and Michigan , Trump ’ s campaign is seeking to block officials from certifying results .
That certification timeline is important because federal law says that as long as election results are finalized by 8 December this year , the result is “ conclusive ” .
That provides a safeguard against Congress , which is responsible for counting the electoral college votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dragging out the process , the Trump campaign may be seeking to blow past that deadline and create more wiggle room to second-guess the results .
Even if that is the Trump campaign ’ s hope , courts are unlikely to step in , Pildes said .
“ States are going to start certifying their vote totals beginning in less than 10 days , and there is no basis in the claims made thus far for the courts to stop that process , ” he said .
Say the worst-case scenario comes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the people in several states .
Is there any safeguard to stop Trump ?
Yes .
Michigan , Wisconsin , Pennsylvania and Nevada all have Democratic governors who would refuse to approve a set of Trump electors with the popular vote clearly showing Biden winning their state .
Instead , they would submit the electors Biden is entitled to as the winner of the popular vote .
It would then fall to Congress , which is charged with counting the votes from the electoral college , to decide what to do .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ how Congress should handle a dispute in electors from a state is extremely confusing , but experts believe the slate backed by a state ’ s governor is the legally sound one .
There is a rival theory that the president of the Senate , Mike Pence , could have control over the process .
A dispute over electors between the US House and Senate is a worst-case scenario and the US supreme court would probably be asked to step in .
Regardless of however long a dispute is , the constitution does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counting is ongoing , the president and vice-president ’ s terms both end at noon on 20 January .
At that point if there isn ’ t a final result in the race , the speaker of the House – probably Nancy Pelosi – would become the acting president .

Joe Biden won the presidential election, a fact that Donald Trump and other Republicans refuse to acknowledge.
There are worries the president and other Republicans will make every effort to stay in power. “There will be a smooth transition to a second Trump administration,” Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, said. William Barr, the attorney general, has authorized federal prosecutors to begin to investigate election irregularities, a move that prompted the head of the justice department’s election crimes unit to step down from his position and move to another role. Trump also fired Christopher Krebs, the director of the federal agency that vouched for the reliability of the 2020 election and had pushed back on the president’s baseless claims of voter fraud.
Yet, despite all of Trump’s machinations, it is extremely unlikely he can find a way to stay in power or stage a coup. Here’s an explanation of why:
Trump refuses to accept that Joe Biden won the presidential election. Is there a constitutional path for him to stage a coup and stay in office for another term?
Not really. The electoral college meets on 14 December to cast its vote for president and nearly every state uses the statewide popular vote to allocate its electors. Biden is projected to win far more than the 270 electoral votes he needs to become president. His victory doesn’t hinge on one state and he has probably insurmountable leads in Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Arizona.
There is a long-shot legal theory, floated by Republicans before the election, that Republican-friendly legislatures in places such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania could ignore the popular vote in their states and appoint their own electors. Federal law allows legislatures to do this if states have “failed to make a choice” by the day the electoral college meets. But there is no evidence of systemic fraud or wrongdoing in any state and Biden’s commanding margins in these places make it clear that the states have in fact made a choice.
“If the country continues to follow the rule of law, I see no plausible constitutional path forward for Trump to remain as president barring new evidence of some massive failure of the election system in multiple states,” Richard Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine, who specializes in elections, wrote in an email. “It would be a naked, antidemocratic power grab to try to use state legislatures to get around the voters’ choice and I don’t expect it to happen.”
For lawmakers in a single state to choose to override the clear will of its voters this way would be extraordinary and probably cause a huge outcry. For Trump to win the electoral college, several states would have to take this extraordinary step, a move that would cause extreme backlash and a real crisis of democracy throughout the country.
“There’s a strange fascination with various imagined dark scenarios, perhaps involving renegade state legislatures, but this is more dystopian fiction than anything likely to happen,” said Richard Pildes, a law professor at New York University. “The irony, or tragedy, is that we managed to conduct an extremely smooth election, with record turnout, under exceptionally difficult circumstances – and yet, a significant portion of the president’s supporters are now convinced that the process was flawed.”
A live broadcast of Donald Trump speaking from the White House is shown on screens at an election night party in Las Vegas on 3 November. Photograph: John Locher/AP
Is there any indication Republicans in these important states are going to go along with this?
Shortly after election day, Jake Corman, the top Republican in the Pennsylvania state senate, indicated his party would “follow the law” in Pennsylvania, which requires awarding electors to the winner of the popular vote. In an October op-ed, Corman said the state legislature “does not have and will not have a hand in choosing the state’s presidential electors or in deciding the outcome of the presidential election”.
Republicans in the Pennsylvania legislature said they wanted to investigate allegations of voter fraud. There’s no evidence of widespread malfeasance in the state, but the move is alarming because it could be the beginning of an effort to undermine the popular vote results in the state. But in a major blow to the president’s legal efforts, the state’s supreme court ruled that Philadelphia election officials did not improperly block Trump’s campaign from observing the counting of mail-in ballots.
The Republican-led legislature in Michigan is also investigating the election, as are Republicans in Wisconsin. There’s no evidence of widespread wrongdoing in either place.
Is this related in any way to the lawsuits Trump is filing?
Trump’s campaign has filed a slew of legally dubious suits since election day. The purpose of these suits appears not to be to actually overturn the election results, but to try to create uncertainty and draw out the counting process.
Each state has its own deadlines for certifying election results that are then used to allocate its electoral college votes. In at least two states, Pennsylvania and Michigan, Trump’s campaign is seeking to block officials from certifying results.
That certification timeline is important because federal law says that as long as election results are finalized by 8 December this year, the result is “conclusive”. That provides a safeguard against Congress, which is responsible for counting the electoral college votes, from second-guessing election results. By dragging out the process, the Trump campaign may be seeking to blow past that deadline and create more wiggle room to second-guess the results.
Even if that is the Trump campaign’s hope, courts are unlikely to step in, Pildes said.
“States are going to start certifying their vote totals beginning in less than 10 days, and there is no basis in the claims made thus far for the courts to stop that process,” he said.
05:51 Can Joe Biden and Kamala Harris unite America after Trump? – video explainer
Say the worst-case scenario comes to fruition and Republican-led legislatures override the will of the people in several states. Is there any safeguard to stop Trump?
Yes. Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Nevada all have Democratic governors who would refuse to approve a set of Trump electors with the popular vote clearly showing Biden winning their state. Instead, they would submit the electors Biden is entitled to as the winner of the popular vote.
It would then fall to Congress, which is charged with counting the votes from the electoral college, to decide what to do. The law that outlines the process for how Congress should handle a dispute in electors from a state is extremely confusing, but experts believe the slate backed by a state’s governor is the legally sound one. There is a rival theory that the president of the Senate, Mike Pence, could have control over the process. A dispute over electors between the US House and Senate is a worst-case scenario and the US supreme court would probably be asked to step in.
Regardless of however long a dispute is, the constitution does set one final deadline. Even if counting is ongoing, the president and vice-president’s terms both end at noon on 20 January. At that point if there isn’t a final result in the race, the speaker of the House – probably Nancy Pelosi – would become the acting president.


theguardian--2020-11-23--Why is Joe Biden considering this man to help fight the climate crisis?

It was a deceptively low-key occasion on Capitol Hill : an older man in a dark suit , talking into a TV camera about an energy report .
According to his firm ’ s 362-page analysis , the fastest path to California ’ s climate goals included continuing to rely on fossil fuels .
The analysis was funded by gas companies and groups related to them , but he wasn ’ t a lobbyist or industry consultant .
Quite the opposite , he was the Obama administration ’ s well-respected energy secretary , Ernest Moniz .
“ We certainly have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he said in the April 2019 interview with C-SPAN .
“ But we also have to get beyond what we think are often completely unrealistic proposals for the pace at which we can decarbonize.
” Fighting climate change at the pace needed would require a “ broad coalition , ” he said – one that included the oil and gas industry .
Moniz was wading into a dispute that will define how the new Biden administration tackles the crisis : can oil and gas companies be part of the solution ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of disinformation campaigns and efforts to slow climate action , that they will always stand in the way ?
As the Biden transition team wrestles with this question , it is already facing pressure from activists not to hire more people with fossil fuel ties , like Louisiana congressman Cedric Richmond , who will join Biden ’ s White House as a top adviser .
• None Moniz is on the board of one of the most polluting power companies in America , the Georgia-based Southern Company .
• None His firm Energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paid for by Southern California Gas ( SoCalGas ) , which a state consumer advocate has since argued should be fined for using customer money to oppose climate progress .
• None Moniz presented the results at an event sponsored by Stanford University ’ s Natural Gas Initiative , which SoCalGas and other fossil fuel companies help fund as affiliate members .
The initiative offers corporate members access to research “ from inception to outcome ” .
• None EFI also partnered with Stanford researchers on a report that explored opportunities to capture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One of the funders was the industry group the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative .
• None EFI ’ s advisory board is chaired by the former chief executive of British oil company BP , although it also includes distinguished climate experts and environmentalists .
EFI ’ s California analysis neatly aligned with what SoCalGas had been arguing as the state tightened its climate goals .
It found that gas power plants with technologies to capture their emissions would reduce climate pollution more than any other option , including renewable power .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has helped the US cut its planet-heating emissions by replacing dirtier coal , it remains a major climate polluter that is linked with significant health problems .
Collin Rees , a senior campaigner for Oil Change International said Moniz ’ s links to fossil fuels aren ’ t “ a blip on his resume ” .
“ It is his entire professional career for the last couple decades , which is deeply concerning , ” Rees said .
The gas industry sponsors of Moniz ’ s analysis were never a secret .
Financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ page of the EFI report , and Moniz said when he released the findings in 2019 that even though gas companies had requested the research , it was still independent .
A Moniz spokesperson declined to comment for this story .
Moniz released the California report at an event sponsored by Stanford University ’ s Natural Gas Initiative , which offers companies access to research “ from inception to outcome ” , meetings with professors and opportunities to recruit students .
The price per year ranges between $ 35,000 and $ 250,000 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ shared with the Guardian , shows the initiative ’ s comfortable relationship with SoCalGas , an affiliate member .
In April 2019 , the Sierra Club was criticizing a separate analysis SoCalGas had paid for from the consulting firm Navigant .
That report backed up the company ’ s argument for “ renewable gas ” – a biogas collected from rotting landfills and sewage treatment plants .
SoCalGas has touted biogas as cities across the state have taken steps to reduce the climate emissions from buildings , by transitioning away from gas appliances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ initiative ’ s managing director Naomi Boness stepped in to help .
She sent an email to her colleagues with the subject line : “ SoCalGas seeking consultant on decarbonization in California.
” The company sought a “ highly regarded energy resource scientist or economist ” to respond to the Sierra Club ’ s complaints .
“ This could be in the form of a letter or op-ed piece , possibly followed by further research , if needed , and a peer reviewed paper on this topic in the not too distant future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let me know if any of you would be interested in taking on this challenge , and feel free to forward within the Stanford community.
” Stanford spokesperson E J Miranda said : “ Stanford energy researchers engage with a broad range of stakeholders in open forums .
Our individual faculty and researchers fulfill their academic responsibilities with independence , professional ethics and personal integrity.
” A spokesperson for SoCalGas did not respond to the Guardian ’ s questions by deadline .
During the Obama administration , SoCalGas advocated against agency climate efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electric appliances over gas ones , according to notes from an American Gas Association meeting obtained by the Guardian .
SoCalGas ’ s owner , Sempra Energy , is also making big bets on the future of gas – investing in export infrastructure in the US and Mexico .
Despite that record , SoCalGas has used Moniz ’ s research to try to bolster its climate reputation .
It posted his report on Facebook without noting it funded the work , and it cited the analysis in an August 2020 letter to California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natural gas and renewable gas … are clean , reliable , affordable , and resilient sources of energy that play a critical part of the solution to California ’ s energy concerns.
” The company has drawn attention from California ’ s senator Diane Feinstein and representative Nanette Barragán , who last month wrote to it about reports that it has “ worked to undermine California ’ s transition away from fossil fuels ” .
The internal watchdog at the California Public Utilities Commission , which regulates the company , has asked the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abusing customer funds to subvert climate action .
“ A lot of people might think , ‘ oh , it ’ s a gas company , it ’ s lobbying for gas , that makes it like every other gas company , ” said Sara Gersen , a clean energy staff attorney with Earthjustice , an environment group that joined the consumer advocate ’ s complaint .
“ But its lobbying machine is actually quite unique among gas companies nationwide because most gas companies just leave it to the trade association.
” Charlie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Investigations Center , said Moniz has strengthened that lobbying machine .
“ The report is not necessarily super proscriptive , but by putting his name on there , SoCalGas has been able to do press releases and social media and letters to various commissions and other regulatory bodies , ” Spatz said .
EFI has also partnered with the labor group the AFL-CIO to back an “ all-of-the above ” energy strategy that preserves jobs .
Moniz has not-so-subtly jabbed a progressive Green New Deal that would fight climate change and inequity simultaneously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Deal , ” that would work “ within the constraints of technical , cost , and social realities ” .
Moniz believes fossil gas will be part of the solution , used to back up solar panels and wind turbines that don ’ t generate power constantly .
Already , Biden has chosen someone from the Stanford orbit to run his energy department transition .
The team lead , Arun Majumdar , was the first head of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy , ARPA-E , which incubates energy technologies .
He later set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Strategic Energy Alliance , which was funded by oil companies Shell , Exxon , and Total , as well as Bank of America .
Shell contributed $ 20m over five years , and Majumdar praised the company for supporting Stanford for 40 years .
“ This support comes at a critical time for our energy future , ” he said .
Jesse Jenkins , an assistant professor at Princeton University who formerly worked under Moniz , said some of the criticism of him is “ misplaced ” .
“ There are very different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re going to make progress on clean energy in this country .
Certain progressives believe that the goal is to defeat the oil and gas sector , ” Jenkins said .
“ There are other people who are equally committed to tackling climate change who believe that one of the most effective ways to do that is to convince incumbent industries that there is money to be made and a role to be played in supporting a clean energy transition as opposed to fighting it to the death .
”

It was a deceptively low-key occasion on Capitol Hill: an older man in a dark suit, talking into a TV camera about an energy report.
According to his firm’s 362-page analysis, the fastest path to California’s climate goals included continuing to rely on fossil fuels. The analysis was funded by gas companies and groups related to them, but he wasn’t a lobbyist or industry consultant. Quite the opposite, he was the Obama administration’s well-respected energy secretary, Ernest Moniz.
“We certainly have to get beyond … the climate deniers,” he said in the April 2019 interview with C-SPAN. “But we also have to get beyond what we think are often completely unrealistic proposals for the pace at which we can decarbonize.” Fighting climate change at the pace needed would require a “broad coalition,” he said – one that included the oil and gas industry.
Moniz was wading into a dispute that will define how the new Biden administration tackles the crisis: can oil and gas companies be part of the solution? Or have they proven, with years of disinformation campaigns and efforts to slow climate action, that they will always stand in the way?
As the Biden transition team wrestles with this question, it is already facing pressure from activists not to hire more people with fossil fuel ties, like Louisiana congressman Cedric Richmond, who will join Biden’s White House as a top adviser.
In Moniz’s case:
Moniz is on the board of one of the most polluting power companies in America, the Georgia-based Southern Company.
His firm Energy Futures Initiative (EFI) conducted research paid for by Southern California Gas (SoCalGas), which a state consumer advocate has since argued should be fined for using customer money to oppose climate progress.
Moniz presented the results at an event sponsored by Stanford University’s Natural Gas Initiative, which SoCalGas and other fossil fuel companies help fund as affiliate members. The initiative offers corporate members access to research “from inception to outcome”.
EFI also partnered with Stanford researchers on a report that explored opportunities to capture climate emissions from fossil fuel operations. One of the funders was the industry group the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative.
EFI’s advisory board is chaired by the former chief executive of British oil company BP, although it also includes distinguished climate experts and environmentalists.
EFI’s California analysis neatly aligned with what SoCalGas had been arguing as the state tightened its climate goals. It found that gas power plants with technologies to capture their emissions would reduce climate pollution more than any other option, including renewable power. It suggested an all-of-the-above approach.
While gas has helped the US cut its planet-heating emissions by replacing dirtier coal, it remains a major climate polluter that is linked with significant health problems.
Collin Rees, a senior campaigner for Oil Change International said Moniz’s links to fossil fuels aren’t “a blip on his resume”.
“It is his entire professional career for the last couple decades, which is deeply concerning,” Rees said.
Writer and producer Norman Lear speaks during the Fonda Fire Drill Friday’s fossil fuel protest outside City Hall in downtown Los Angeles on 7 February 2020. Photograph: Frederic J Brown/AFP via Getty Images
The gas industry sponsors of Moniz’s analysis were never a secret. Financial contributors were prominently displayed on the third page of the EFI report, and Moniz said when he released the findings in 2019 that even though gas companies had requested the research, it was still independent. A Moniz spokesperson declined to comment for this story.
Moniz released the California report at an event sponsored by Stanford University’s Natural Gas Initiative, which offers companies access to research “from inception to outcome”, meetings with professors and opportunities to recruit students. The price per year ranges between $35,000 and $250,000.
An internal email from the initiative, shared with the Guardian, shows the initiative’s comfortable relationship with SoCalGas, an affiliate member.
In April 2019, the Sierra Club was criticizing a separate analysis SoCalGas had paid for from the consulting firm Navigant. That report backed up the company’s argument for “renewable gas” – a biogas collected from rotting landfills and sewage treatment plants. SoCalGas has touted biogas as cities across the state have taken steps to reduce the climate emissions from buildings, by transitioning away from gas appliances.
Contacted by SoCalGas, the Stanford initiative’s managing director Naomi Boness stepped in to help. She sent an email to her colleagues with the subject line: “SoCalGas seeking consultant on decarbonization in California.”
The company sought a “highly regarded energy resource scientist or economist” to respond to the Sierra Club’s complaints.
“This could be in the form of a letter or op-ed piece, possibly followed by further research, if needed, and a peer reviewed paper on this topic in the not too distant future,” Boness said. “Please let me know if any of you would be interested in taking on this challenge, and feel free to forward within the Stanford community.”
Stanford spokesperson E J Miranda said: “Stanford energy researchers engage with a broad range of stakeholders in open forums. Our individual faculty and researchers fulfill their academic responsibilities with independence, professional ethics and personal integrity.”
A spokesperson for SoCalGas did not respond to the Guardian’s questions by deadline.
During the Obama administration, SoCalGas advocated against agency climate efforts, including a rule that would incentivize electric appliances over gas ones, according to notes from an American Gas Association meeting obtained by the Guardian. SoCalGas’s owner, Sempra Energy, is also making big bets on the future of gas – investing in export infrastructure in the US and Mexico.
Despite that record, SoCalGas has used Moniz’s research to try to bolster its climate reputation. It posted his report on Facebook without noting it funded the work, and it cited the analysis in an August 2020 letter to California regulators in which it argued that “natural gas and renewable gas … are clean, reliable, affordable, and resilient sources of energy that play a critical part of the solution to California’s energy concerns.”
The company has drawn attention from California’s senator Diane Feinstein and representative Nanette Barragán, who last month wrote to it about reports that it has “worked to undermine California’s transition away from fossil fuels”.
The internal watchdog at the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates the company, has asked the commission to fine SoCalGas $255m for abusing customer funds to subvert climate action.
“A lot of people might think, ‘oh, it’s a gas company, it’s lobbying for gas, that makes it like every other gas company,” said Sara Gersen, a clean energy staff attorney with Earthjustice, an environment group that joined the consumer advocate’s complaint. “But its lobbying machine is actually quite unique among gas companies nationwide because most gas companies just leave it to the trade association.”
Charlie Spatz, a researcher with the Climate Investigations Center, said Moniz has strengthened that lobbying machine.
“The report is not necessarily super proscriptive, but by putting his name on there, SoCalGas has been able to do press releases and social media and letters to various commissions and other regulatory bodies,” Spatz said.
A coal-fired power station operated by FirstEnergy on the Ohio River near Shippingport, Pennsylvania. Photograph: Alamy
EFI has also partnered with the labor group the AFL-CIO to back an “all-of-the above” energy strategy that preserves jobs.
Moniz has not-so-subtly jabbed a progressive Green New Deal that would fight climate change and inequity simultaneously, touting instead a “Green Real Deal,” that would work “within the constraints of technical, cost, and social realities”. Moniz believes fossil gas will be part of the solution, used to back up solar panels and wind turbines that don’t generate power constantly.
Already, Biden has chosen someone from the Stanford orbit to run his energy department transition. The team lead, Arun Majumdar, was the first head of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, ARPA-E, which incubates energy technologies. He later set up a program at Stanford called the Strategic Energy Alliance, which was funded by oil companies Shell, Exxon, and Total, as well as Bank of America. Shell contributed $20m over five years, and Majumdar praised the company for supporting Stanford for 40 years.
“This support comes at a critical time for our energy future,” he said.
Jesse Jenkins, an assistant professor at Princeton University who formerly worked under Moniz, said some of the criticism of him is “misplaced”.
“There are very different theories of change about how we’re going to make progress on clean energy in this country. Certain progressives believe that the goal is to defeat the oil and gas sector,” Jenkins said. “There are other people who are equally committed to tackling climate change who believe that one of the most effective ways to do that is to convince incumbent industries that there is money to be made and a role to be played in supporting a clean energy transition as opposed to fighting it to the death.”


theguardian--2020-11-23--Antony Blinken: Biden's secretary of state nominee is sharp break with Trump era

After reports first emerged on Sunday night that Antony Blinken would be US secretary of state in the Biden administration , one particular interview from his past began circulating on social media .
It was a September 2016 conversation with Grover , a character from Sesame Street , on the subject of refugees , directed at American children who might have new classmates from faraway countries .
“ We all have something to learn and gain from one another even when it doesn ’ t seem at first like we have much in common , ” Blinken told the fuzzy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an administration that has separated migrant children from their parents and kept them in cages , Blinken ’ s arrival at the state department will mark a dramatic change , to say the least .
While Mike Pompeo has remained a domestic politician throughout his tenure as secretary of state , giving the lion ’ s share of his interviews to conservative radio stations in the midwest , for example , Blinken is very much a born internationalist .
He went to school in Paris , where he learned to play the guitar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and harboured dreams of becoming a film-maker .
Before entering the White House under Barack Obama , he used to play in a weekly soccer game with US officials , foreign diplomats and journalists , and he has two singles , love songs titled Lip Service and Patience , uploaded on Spotify .
All those contacts and the urbane bilingual charm will be targeted at soothing the frayed nerves of western allies , reassuring them that the US is back as a conventional team player .
The foreign policy priorities in the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejoining treaties and agreements that Donald Trump left .
There is little doubt that Blinken will be on the same page as Joe Biden .
He has been at the president-elect ’ s side for nearly two decades .
After working in Bill Clinton ’ s national security council , he became Biden ’ s chief foreign policy adviser in the Senate in 2002 , as staff director on the foreign relations committee , and worked on Biden ’ s failed presidential bid in 2008 .
After Obama picked Biden as vice-president , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his national security adviser .
His face can be seen at the back of the room in the famous photograph of Obama officials monitoring the raid that killed Bin Laden .
In the last two years of the Obama administration , Blinken served as deputy secretary of state .
His return in the top job then is the embodiment of continuity .
But in recent interviews , he has acknowledged the mistakes and regrets of the Obama era .
On the decision not to intervene in any significant way in Syria ( a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CBS News : “ We failed to prevent a horrific loss of life .
We failed to prevent massive displacement … something I will take with me for the rest of my days.
” He also signed an open letter with other former Obama officials in 2018 , acknowledging that the initial support they gave to the Saudi war in Yemen had not succeeded in limiting or ending the war and had mutated into a blank check under the Trump administration , resulting in devastating civilian casualties .
A Biden administration is expected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflict .
Those who know Blinken well insist that his commitment to human rights is genuine and rooted in experience .
He is the stepson of a Holocaust survivor and worked in the Clinton White House on the interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo .
Since Biden won the Democratic nomination , Blinken has led an outreach effort to the left of the party , narrowing at least some differences , on Saudi Arabia and climate goals for example .
News of his expected nomination was quickly welcomed by Matt Duss , Bernie Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is a good choice .
Tony has the strong confidence of the president-elect and the knowledge and experience for the important work of rebuilding US diplomacy , ” Duss wrote on Twitter .
“ It will also be a new and great thing to have a top diplomat who has regularly engaged with progressive grassroots.
” But there were also rumblings on Sunday night of future tensions along old faultlines in US foreign policy .
Blinken has been adamant about the Biden administration ’ s commitment to Israel ’ s security and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dependent on Israel ’ s policy decisions .
In her comment on Duss ’ s tweet , Michigan congresswoman Rashida Tlaib , an advocate of Palestinian rights , said : “ Just make sure he doesn ’ t try to silence me and suppress my first amendment right to speak out against Netanyahu ’ s racist and inhumane policies.
” The policy struggles will eventually rise to the fore but Blinken – who at 58 arrives at the state department as the father of two young children – is likely to begin with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pompeo and having the stated desire to lead the US back towards leadership on the world stage on global issues like Covid , climate and non-proliferation .
He told the Intelligence Matters podcast in September : “ We ’ d actually show up again , day in , day out .
But to engage the world , not as it was in 2009 or even in 2017 when we left it , but as it is and as we anticipate it will become : rising powers , new actors super-empowered by technology and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ along if we ’ re going to make progress .
”

After reports first emerged on Sunday night that Antony Blinken would be secretary of state in the Biden administration, one interview from his past began circulating on social media.
It was a September 2016 conversation with Grover, a character from Sesame Street, on the subject of refugees, directed at American children who might have new classmates from faraway countries. “We all have something to learn and gain from one another even when it doesn’t seem at first like we have much in common,” Blinken told the fuzzy blue puppet.
After four years of an administration that has separated migrant children from their parents and kept them in cages, Blinken’s arrival at the state department will mark a dramatic change, to say the least.
While Mike Pompeo has remained a domestic politician throughout his tenure as secretary of state, giving the lion’s share of his interviews to conservative radio stations in the midwest, for example, Blinken is very much a born internationalist.
He went to school in Paris, where he learned to play the guitar (he played Pink Floyd’s Another Brick in the Wall at graduation) and football, and harboured dreams of becoming a film-maker. Before entering the White House under Barack Obama, he used to play in a weekly soccer game with US officials, foreign diplomats and journalists, and he has two singles – love songs titled Lip Service and Patience – uploaded on Spotify.
Rob Malley, the president of the International Crisis Group, who was at school with Blinken in France, said: “He was an American in Paris, with a sense of what it meant to be an American with US culture and values at a time when there was a lot of anti-Americanism around. But he also saw what it was to be a French person looking at America.”
All those contacts and the urbane bilingual charm will be targeted at soothing the frayed nerves of western allies, reassuring them that the US is back as a conventional team player. Where Pompeo has been abrasive, Blinken is soft-spoken with a reputation for self-deprecatory humour. Those traits will be handy in the initial effort to rebuild relationships. The foreign policy priorities in the first days of a Biden administration will be rejoining treaties and agreements that Donald Trump left.
Blinken’s background is a very much a European one and he has described Brexit as “a total mess”.
“This is not just the dog that caught the car, this is the dog that caught the car and the car goes into reverse and runs over the dog,” he said on a podcast in late October.
There is little doubt that Blinken will be on the same page as Joe Biden. He has been at the president-elect’s side for nearly two decades. After working in Bill Clinton’s national security council, he became Biden’s chief foreign policy adviser in the Senate in 2002, as staff director on the foreign relations committee, and he worked on Biden’s failed presidential bid in 2008.
After Obama picked Biden for vice-president, Blinken returned to the White House as his national security adviser. His face can be seen at the back of the room in the famous photograph of Obama officials monitoring the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden, along with members of the national security team, receive an update on the mission against Osama bin Laden in the situation room of the White House on 1 May 2011. Antony Blinken can be seen fourth from left at the back. Photograph: Pete Souza/AP
In the last two years of the Obama administration, Blinken served as deputy secretary of state. His return in the top job then is the embodiment of continuity. But in recent interviews he has acknowledged the mistakes and regrets of the Obama era.
On the decision not to intervene in any significant way in Syria (a decision Blinken opposed), he told CBS News: “We failed to prevent a horrific loss of life. We failed to prevent massive displacement … something I will take with me for the rest of my days.”
He signed an open letter with other former Obama officials in 2018 acknowledging that the initial support they gave to the Saudi war in Yemen had not succeeded in limiting or ending the war and had mutated into a blank cheque under the Trump administration, resulting in devastating civilian casualties. A Biden administration is expected to cut off military involvement in the conflict.
Those who know Blinken well insist that his commitment to human rights is genuine and rooted in experience. He is the stepson of a Holocaust survivor, Samuel Pisar, who lived through Auschwitz and Dachau and other camps and who went on to become a lawyer, writer and adviser to John F Kennedy. Blinken also worked in the Clinton White House on the interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo.
“He is somebody within the Obama administration and the Biden team who really understands the role that promoting and protecting human rights can play as advantageous to US policy,” said Rob Berschinski, who worked alongside Blinken as deputy assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labour.
Since Biden won the Democratic nomination, Blinken has led an outreach effort to the left of the party, narrowing at least some differences, for example on Saudi Arabia and climate goals. News of his expected nomination was quickly welcomed by Matt Duss, Bernie Sanders’ chief foreign policy adviser.
“This is a good choice. Tony has the strong confidence of the president-elect and the knowledge and experience for the important work of rebuilding US diplomacy,” Duss wrote on Twitter. “It will also be a new and great thing to have a top diplomat who has regularly engaged with progressive grassroots.”
Antony Blinken (left) talks with South Korea’s foreign minister Yun Byung-se at the defence ministry in Seoul in January 2016. Photograph: Ed Jones/AFP/Getty Images
But there were also rumblings on Sunday night of future tensions along old faultlines in US foreign policy. Blinken has been adamant about the Biden administration’s commitment to Israel’s security and said military support would not be made dependent on Israel’s policy decisions.
In a comment on Duss’s tweet, the Michigan congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, an advocate of Palestinian rights, said: “Just make sure he doesn’t try to silence me and suppress my first amendment right to speak out against Netanyahu’s racist and inhumane policies.”
The policy struggles will eventually rise to the fore but Blinken – who at 58 arrives at the state department as the father of two young children – is likely to begin with an extended honeymoon simply by not being Pompeo and having the stated desire to lead the US back towards leadership on the world stage on global issues such as Covid, the climate and non-proliferation.
He told the Intelligence Matters podcast in September: “We’d actually show up again, day in, day out. But to engage the world, not as it was in 2009 or even in 2017 when we left it, but as it is and as we anticipate it will become: rising powers, new actors super-empowered by technology and information, who we have to bring along if we’re going to make progress.”


theguardian--2020-11-23--It was hard not to laugh at Rudy Giuliani's hair malfunction – but it's time to stop equating looks

It was hard not to laugh at Rudy Giuliani's hair malfunction – but it's time to stop equating looks with character | Emma Beddington

Weren ’ t the pictures of Rudy Giuliani ’ s hair malfunction last week wonderful ?
I was transfixed by footage of him bug-eyed and ranting at a press conference , as dark rivulets of hair dye ( or mascara , expert opinion was divided ) ran down his sweaty cheeks .
The incident spawned a delighted outpouring of comment and mocking tweets .
He was a Scooby-Doo villain unmasked ; a gargoyle , a comic-book grotesque , and it felt so apt .
For critics , it was as if corruption , lies and moral turpitude were finally oozing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is the same satisfaction we feel as we dissect the brittle spun-sugar edifice of Trump ’ s hair , the harshly theatrical lines of his makeup ( “ una naranja espantosa ” , a scary orange , as a White House housekeeper described it to the Washington Post ) or his cack-handed panda-eye concealer habit .
It is delicious when the facade cracks , especially in one so obsessed with surface .
It feels like poetic justice when a man who built a gold tower , regularly comments on his daughter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporter is caught looking diminished and ridiculous .
No amount of expensive vanity , it seems , can cover what is essentially rotten about these men : the ugliness keeps showing through .
“ If a person has ugly thoughts it begins to show on the face , ” Roald Dahl wrote in The Twits .
Except , of course , that is nonsense .
I don ’ t believe for a moment that any of us actually thinks there is any correlation between looks and character .
So why do we still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Years of cultural conditioning doesn ’ t help , I suppose .
Hollywood has been conflating ugliness and moral failing since cinema began , and Shakespeare was doing it 500 years ago .
The messaging is at its most intense in childhood : villains , from Disney to Harry Potter , are fat , disfigured or ugly .
David Walliams has been called out for it ; Dahl is infamous for it .
Reading The Witches to my sons when they were small was an odd experience : they adored the story and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but the diagram and explanation of an unmasked witch confused them – because it looked like me .
I have alopecia and , like the witches , am bald beneath my wig .
Was I planning to turn them into mice ?
Even in 2020 , Anne Hathaway ’ s Grand High Witch in the new screen version is revealed , beneath her disguise , to be a bald monster with disfigured , claw-like hands .
Weary disability campaigners were provoked into action once more on the film ’ s release , condemning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
People with limb differences , from Paralympians to Bake Off ’ s Briony Williams tweeted pictures of themselves tagged # notawitch and Warner Bros was flustered into one of those weaselly not-quite apologies .
The studio declared it was “ deeply saddened … our depiction of the fictional characters in The Witches could upset people with disabilities ” .
Things are slowly changing : the British Film Institute has said it will not support films with facially scarred villains , and the campaigning group RespectAbility is dedicated to analysing shortcomings in Hollywood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to shift its portrayals .
From a fictional perspective , it is surely more interesting to subvert the “ ugliness as evil ” trope anyway .
One of the best things about the Amazon ’ s ultra-gory , superheroes-gone-bad series The Boys is how absurdly good-looking the truly repellent baddies are , all chiselled cheekbones and dewy beauty .
But this reframing needs to go further than fiction , and that is up to us .
Corruption and amorality can also be high-definition glossy and ready for its closeup : think of Ivanka @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard-right demagogues probably won ’ t look like Trump or Steve Bannon ( another whose general aura of dissolution and decay it is terribly hard not to conflate with his repellent politics ) .
Isn ’ t that actually far scarier ?
There are many reasons to loathe Trump and Giuliani , but a heavy hand with the retouching wand , a pale expanse of paunch spilling out of a golf shirt , or a turbo-charged bad hair day are not among them .
They are rotten to the core ; let ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the surface .

Weren’t the pictures of Rudy Giuliani’s hair malfunction last week wonderful? I was transfixed by footage of him bug-eyed and ranting at a press conference, as dark rivulets of hair dye (or mascara, expert opinion was divided) ran down his sweaty cheeks. The incident spawned a delighted outpouring of comment and mocking tweets. He was a Scooby-Doo villain unmasked; a gargoyle, a comic-book grotesque, and it felt so apt. For critics, it was as if corruption, lies and moral turpitude were finally oozing out of him as a tarry discharge.
It is the same satisfaction we feel as we dissect the brittle spun-sugar edifice of Trump’s hair, the harshly theatrical lines of his makeup (“una naranja espantosa”, a scary orange, as a White House housekeeper described it to the Washington Post) or his cack-handed panda-eye concealer habit. It is delicious when the facade cracks, especially in one so obsessed with surface. It feels like poetic justice when a man who built a gold tower, regularly comments on his daughter’s looks and mocked a disabled reporter is caught looking diminished and ridiculous.
No amount of expensive vanity, it seems, can cover what is essentially rotten about these men: the ugliness keeps showing through. “If a person has ugly thoughts it begins to show on the face,” Roald Dahl wrote in The Twits. Except, of course, that is nonsense. I don’t believe for a moment that any of us actually thinks there is any correlation between looks and character. So why do we still allow and amplify this lazy trope?
Years of cultural conditioning doesn’t help, I suppose. Hollywood has been conflating ugliness and moral failing since cinema began, and Shakespeare was doing it 500 years ago. The messaging is at its most intense in childhood: villains, from Disney to Harry Potter, are fat, disfigured or ugly. David Walliams has been called out for it; Dahl is infamous for it. Reading The Witches to my sons when they were small was an odd experience: they adored the story and Quentin Blake’s enchanting illustrations, but the diagram and explanation of an unmasked witch confused them – because it looked like me. I have alopecia and, like the witches, am bald beneath my wig. Was I planning to turn them into mice?
Even in 2020, Anne Hathaway’s Grand High Witch in the new screen version is revealed, beneath her disguise, to be a bald monster with disfigured, claw-like hands. Weary disability campaigners were provoked into action once more on the film’s release, condemning yet another depiction of disability as evil. People with limb differences, from Paralympians to Bake Off’s Briony Williams tweeted pictures of themselves tagged #notawitch and Warner Bros was flustered into one of those weaselly not-quite apologies. The studio declared it was “deeply saddened … our depiction of the fictional characters in The Witches could upset people with disabilities”.
Things are slowly changing: the British Film Institute has said it will not support films with facially scarred villains, and the campaigning group RespectAbility is dedicated to analysing shortcomings in Hollywood’s portrayal of disability and trying to shift its portrayals.
From a fictional perspective, it is surely more interesting to subvert the “ugliness as evil” trope anyway. One of the best things about the Amazon’s ultra-gory, superheroes-gone-bad series The Boys is how absurdly good-looking the truly repellent baddies are, all chiselled cheekbones and dewy beauty.
But this reframing needs to go further than fiction, and that is up to us. Corruption and amorality can also be high-definition glossy and ready for its closeup: think of Ivanka and Jared. The next generation of hard-right demagogues probably won’t look like Trump or Steve Bannon (another whose general aura of dissolution and decay it is terribly hard not to conflate with his repellent politics). Isn’t that actually far scarier?
There are many reasons to loathe Trump and Giuliani, but a heavy hand with the retouching wand, a pale expanse of paunch spilling out of a golf shirt, or a turbo-charged bad hair day are not among them. They are rotten to the core; let’s resist the temptation to fixate on the surface.


theguardian--2020-11-23--The left is accused of authoritarianism – but it's the right that gets away with it | Andy Beckett

For a wearyingly long time now , one of the right ’ s favourite tactics against the left has been to accuse it of planning a police state .
From Winston Churchill ’ s 1945 claim that a Labour government would need “ some form of Gestapo ” to last year ’ s warnings in the Tory press that Jeremy Corbyn would turn Britain into a version of Venezuela , rightwing journalists and politicians have used the spectre of authoritarianism to make the left seem sinister and foreign .
The tactic is sometimes still effective .
In this month ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the key state of Florida in part by persuading Hispanic immigrants that Joe Biden , a famously pragmatic Democrat , would instead form an intolerant leftwing government .
“ I voted for Trump to prevent the United States from resembling countries like Cuba , ” Jose Edgardo Gomez told the Miami Herald .
“ We want the United States to continue being free and to continue having a true democracy … Many Americans don ’ t understand the threats that socialism poses.
” The fact that no western democracy has ever been turned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hasn ’ t completely neutralised this argument .
Because there have been so few elected socialist governments in the west , and even fewer that have enacted much of their programmes , the left hasn ’ t had many opportunities to prove that it ’ s not interested in ruling by authoritarian methods .
Instead , the allegation has lingered .
On rightwing websites such as Spiked and Guido Fawkes , which often provide anti-Labour attack lines to the Tory press and politicians , Keir Starmer is already being described as an authoritarian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights lawyer .
No doubt tabloid picture researchers are scouring the archives for any photos of him wearing a Russian hat .
Corbyn had to waste some of his leadership denying that his favourite cap was a tribute to Lenin ’ s ; the Times told readers he rode a “ Chairman Mao-style bicycle ” .
Besides smearing the left and putting it on the defensive , these red scares have another important but less noticed effect .
They serve as a political distraction .
Over the past 40 years , while the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leftwing dictatorships in the west , actual authoritarianism has become a growing feature of rightwing government in Britain and the US .
The change has been incomplete and gradual .
Authoritarianism is often a tendency , an official inclination , rather than an absolute political state .
And this autocratic turn has gone largely undeclared : countries that won the second world war and the cold war like to think they have no time for despots .
But the outcome has been a great strengthening of government against the governed .
In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as strike-breakers , and demonised her opponents as “ the enemy within ” .
In the 2000s , the George W Bush administration argued that the president ’ s powers should be almost unlimited , and established the brutal detention camp at Guantánamo .
Both premiers were criticised for their draconian tendencies , but both were comfortably re-elected , unrepentant .
Yet even Bush has been shocked by the Trump presidency .
Donald Trump ’ s intolerance of press criticism and peaceful protest , threats to jail political opponents , and contempt for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States more of an autocracy than a democracy .
Meanwhile , similar impulses have been at work in Boris Johnson ’ s premiership , with its illegal suspension of parliament , illegal Brexit legislation and fury at the few remaining checks on its authority , such as “ activist lawyers ” .
As with Bush and Thatcher , the breaking of democratic norms by Trump and Johnson has been accepted and sometimes welcomed by many voters .
Over 10m more people chose Trump this month than at the 2016 election .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tory majority since 1987 .
In increasingly impatient , divided societies , frustration with the compromises and deadlocks produced by previous , more consensual governments has left voters open to more aggressive alternatives .
Shortly before the 2019 election , a prophetic survey by the Hansard Society found that 54 % of Britons felt the country “ needs a strong ruler willing to break the rules ” , and 42 % believed that Britain ’ s problems could be dealt with better “ if the government didn ’ t have to worry so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Even people appalled by the transgressions of Trump and Johnson can be reluctant to consider their implications .
For the first few days after this month ’ s US election , Trump ’ s refusal to concede defeat was widely seen as just a tantrum – rather than a rejection of democracy and , in effect , a demand to head a one-party state .
If you ’ ve grown up with the idea that the US is a strong democracy , or that British prime ministers respect the law , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibility that neither may be the case .
It may also be frightening to realise that the Anglo-American right has a double standard on authoritarian governments .
That double standard used to be applied mainly to other countries .
During the 1980s , Jeane Kirkpatrick , an influential adviser to the Republican president Ronald Reagan , argued that rightwing police states were “ less repressive ” than leftwing , “ totalitarian ” ones , and should be supported by the US when there were , from a conservative perspective , no better alternatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her thinking were felt by people living under rightwing foreign dictatorships , from the Philippines to Argentina , that the US helped sustain in power .
But with the Trump presidency you could say that a version of her doctrine has been applied at home .
The US and Britain ’ s authoritarian experiments may now be coming to an end .
The sacked Dominic Cummings was the source of much of the Johnson government ’ s autocratic thinking .
Trump , for all his manoeuvring , will almost certainly have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in January .
The democratic and constitutional pressures against him staying on are probably too great .
Yet the conditions remain that made the experiments possible .
In the US , after Trump ’ s attacks on the election , many voters are disillusioned with democracy .
And the ground has been prepared for his party to refuse to accept future electoral outcomes it doesn ’ t like – possibly starting with January ’ s crucial Senate races in Georgia .
In Britain , the government still contains deeply illiberal figures , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And Johnson himself , like Trump , has a dislike of being held accountable that ’ s so strong , he ’ s arguably not a democratic politician in any sense beyond the winning of elections .
As with Trump , the fact that he lacks the focus and diligence to be a dictator is not that reassuring .
A more functional rightwing strongman could come along .
And the scale of what has already happened during Trump and Johnson ’ s premierships shouldn ’ t be played down , as just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In two of the world ’ s supposedly most stable political systems , the right have bent democracy out of shape .
In future , it would be good to have a bit less self-righteous talk from them about dictatorships of the left .

For a wearyingly long time now, one of the right’s favourite tactics against the left has been to accuse it of planning a police state. From Winston Churchill’s 1945 claim that a Labour government would need “some form of Gestapo” to last year’s warnings in the Tory press that Jeremy Corbyn would turn Britain into a version of Venezuela, rightwing journalists and politicians have used the spectre of authoritarianism to make the left seem sinister and foreign.
The tactic is sometimes still effective. In this month’s US election, Donald Trump won the key state of Florida in part by persuading Hispanic immigrants that Joe Biden, a famously pragmatic Democrat, would instead form an intolerant leftwing government. “I voted for Trump to prevent the United States from resembling countries like Cuba,” Jose Edgardo Gomez told the Miami Herald. “We want the United States to continue being free and to continue having a true democracy … Many Americans don’t understand the threats that socialism poses.”
The fact that no western democracy has ever been turned into a police state by the left hasn’t completely neutralised this argument. Because there have been so few elected socialist governments in the west, and even fewer that have enacted much of their programmes, the left hasn’t had many opportunities to prove that it’s not interested in ruling by authoritarian methods. Instead, the allegation has lingered.
On rightwing websites such as Spiked and Guido Fawkes, which often provide anti-Labour attack lines to the Tory press and politicians, Keir Starmer is already being described as an authoritarian, despite his history as a human rights lawyer. No doubt tabloid picture researchers are scouring the archives for any photos of him wearing a Russian hat. Corbyn had to waste some of his leadership denying that his favourite cap was a tribute to Lenin’s; the Times told readers he rode a “Chairman Mao-style bicycle”. Besides smearing the left and putting it on the defensive, these red scares have another important but less noticed effect. They serve as a political distraction.
Over the past 40 years, while the right has continued to warn about hypothetical leftwing dictatorships in the west, actual authoritarianism has become a growing feature of rightwing government in Britain and the US. The change has been incomplete and gradual. Authoritarianism is often a tendency, an official inclination, rather than an absolute political state. And this autocratic turn has gone largely undeclared: countries that won the second world war and the cold war like to think they have no time for despots. But the outcome has been a great strengthening of government against the governed.
In the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher politicised the police as strike-breakers, and demonised her opponents as “the enemy within”. In the 2000s, the George W Bush administration argued that the president’s powers should be almost unlimited, and established the brutal detention camp at Guantánamo. Both premiers were criticised for their draconian tendencies, but both were comfortably re-elected, unrepentant.
Yet even Bush has been shocked by the Trump presidency. Donald Trump’s intolerance of press criticism and peaceful protest, threats to jail political opponents, and contempt for the electoral process have arguably made the United States more of an autocracy than a democracy. Meanwhile, similar impulses have been at work in Boris Johnson’s premiership, with its illegal suspension of parliament, illegal Brexit legislation and fury at the few remaining checks on its authority, such as “activist lawyers”.
As with Bush and Thatcher, the breaking of democratic norms by Trump and Johnson has been accepted and sometimes welcomed by many voters. Over 10m more people chose Trump this month than at the 2016 election. Last year, Johnson won the first big Tory majority since 1987.
In increasingly impatient, divided societies, frustration with the compromises and deadlocks produced by previous, more consensual governments has left voters open to more aggressive alternatives. Shortly before the 2019 election, a prophetic survey by the Hansard Society found that 54% of Britons felt the country “needs a strong ruler willing to break the rules”, and 42% believed that Britain’s problems could be dealt with better “if the government didn’t have to worry so much about votes in parliament”.
Even people appalled by the transgressions of Trump and Johnson can be reluctant to consider their implications. For the first few days after this month’s US election, Trump’s refusal to concede defeat was widely seen as just a tantrum – rather than a rejection of democracy and, in effect, a demand to head a one-party state. If you’ve grown up with the idea that the US is a strong democracy, or that British prime ministers respect the law, it’s frightening to face up to the possibility that neither may be the case.
It may also be frightening to realise that the Anglo-American right has a double standard on authoritarian governments. That double standard used to be applied mainly to other countries. During the 1980s, Jeane Kirkpatrick, an influential adviser to the Republican president Ronald Reagan, argued that rightwing police states were “less repressive” than leftwing, “totalitarian” ones, and should be supported by the US when there were, from a conservative perspective, no better alternatives. At the time, the consequences of her thinking were felt by people living under rightwing foreign dictatorships, from the Philippines to Argentina, that the US helped sustain in power. But with the Trump presidency you could say that a version of her doctrine has been applied at home.
The US and Britain’s authoritarian experiments may now be coming to an end. The sacked Dominic Cummings was the source of much of the Johnson government’s autocratic thinking. Trump, for all his manoeuvring, will almost certainly have to step down when Joe Biden is inaugurated in January. The democratic and constitutional pressures against him staying on are probably too great.
Yet the conditions remain that made the experiments possible. In the US, after Trump’s attacks on the election, many voters are disillusioned with democracy. And the ground has been prepared for his party to refuse to accept future electoral outcomes it doesn’t like – possibly starting with January’s crucial Senate races in Georgia. In Britain, the government still contains deeply illiberal figures, such as the home secretary, Priti Patel. And Johnson himself, like Trump, has a dislike of being held accountable that’s so strong, he’s arguably not a democratic politician in any sense beyond the winning of elections. As with Trump, the fact that he lacks the focus and diligence to be a dictator is not that reassuring. A more functional rightwing strongman could come along.
And the scale of what has already happened during Trump and Johnson’s premierships shouldn’t be played down, as just another stage in conservatism’s evolution. In two of the world’s supposedly most stable political systems, the right have bent democracy out of shape. In future, it would be good to have a bit less self-righteous talk from them about dictatorships of the left.