(BRIDGETOWN, Barbados) — Hurricane Beryl picked up power and speed on Sunday as it churned in the Caribbean and was upgraded to a major Category 4 storm, the first hurricane on record to reach major status east of the Lesser Antilles in the month of June.
The rapidly developing storm is now the earliest Category 4 hurricane in the Atlantic on record. Before Sunday, Hurricane Dennis, which became a Category 4 Atlantic storm on July 7, 2005, held the record.
On average, the first hurricane of the Atlantic season forms the second week of August. Beryl was the earliest Category 3 storm in the Atlantic since 1966.
A major hurricane is Category 3, 4 or 5, with winds of 111 mph or higher.
Beryl was a few hundred miles east of the Windward Islands on Sunday and was moving west over open waters.
By Monday morning, the hurricane’s eye is forecast to track just south of Barbados with 130 mph winds and produce 3 to 6 inches of rain across the region Sunday night and Monday. A storm surge of 6 to 9 feet is expected for Barbados.
From Barbados, the hurricane is expected to sweep across the Westward Islands with life-threatening conditions and head toward Jamaica, possibly reaching the island on Wednesday. The storm’s path on Sunday was shifting slightly south, and it’s too early to know if it will make direct landfall in Jamaica.
Right behind Beryl, there is another weather system that could become a tropical cyclone, as well, and may end up hitting Barbados on the same day Beryl is expected to bear down on Jamaica.
While it’s too soon to know with confidence, Beryl, or remnants of the storm, could reach southern Texas by next weekend, bringing heavy rain to the area. The alternative scenario is the storm remains wholly over Mexico.
In May, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued its highest-on-record hurricane forecast for this Atlantic hurricane season. All categories of storms are expected to exceed the typical number seen every year, National Weather Service forecasters said at the time.
NOAA scientists predicted between 17 and 25 named storms this season, compared to an average of 14; between eight and 13 hurricanes, compared to an average of seven; and between four and seven major hurricanes, compared to an average of three.
Multiple officials, including National Hurricane Center Director Michael Brennan and National Weather Service Director Ken Graham, described the 2024 Hurricane Outlook as the “highest” forecast ever issued in May.
Climate change is likely having a significant impact on the Atlantic hurricane season, according to researchers.
Warming of the surface ocean temperatures from human-induced climate change is likely fueling more powerful tropical cyclones with more extreme precipitation, scientists say.
(WASHINGTON) — Despite death threats and backlash from White House advisers over his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic during the Trump administration, Dr. Anthony Fauci said he never considered resigning.
“I just felt that we have to have somebody there who is actually getting the correct information to the American public,” Fauci told “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl on Sunday.
“I have felt, and still do, a very strong responsibility to the American public, not to any administration or any person, but to the American public.”
The former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) said he was “afraid that despite the pressures and all the somewhat unusual things that were going on, if I did walk away from it, there would be little opportunity to get the correct, potentially life-saving information to the American public.”
Fauci chronicled his decades-long public health career in a new memoir, “On Call: A Doctor’s Journey in Public Service.” His book comes after he retired in 2022 as director of NIAID, a position he had held since 1984.
During that time, Fauci advised seven presidents and guided the nation’s response to infectious disease outbreaks including AIDS, Zika, Ebola and COVID-19.
The last president he served under was Joe Biden. After a debate showing that has prompted calls from several Democratic pundits, opinion writers and The New York Times Editorial Board for Biden to step aside as the party’s nominee this cycle, Karl asked Fauci if he was “surprised” by the president’s performance Thursday night.
“I don’t want to comment on anything that would have any political implication. … The one thing I can say and feel comfortable about is I have dealt with President Biden, and in my dealings with him, it’s been really very positive,” Fauci said. “He asked probing questions, he’s right on point on things. So, my personal experience has been quite positive with him.”
When asked by Karl why someone in their 80s — Biden is 81 — would want to serve as president for another four years, Fauci said he thinks it is “an individual choice that you really can’t generalize.”
“You have to take each individual person,” he continued. “You know, how they feel, what they feel they can do. You know, what their passion is, what their energy is, those are the kinds of things.”
Despite retiring from his government position, Fauci has remained a lightning rod for mainly Republican critics of how the COVID-19 pandemic was handled. Testifying before a House subcommittee earlier this month, Fauci grew emotional describing the death threats that he and his family received during his time as NIAID director.
During that hearing, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., called for Fauci to be put in jail. “That man does not deserve to have a license. As a matter of fact, it should be revoked, and he belongs in jail,” she said.
When asked about Greene’s remarks on Sunday morning, Fauci spoke about the harm that he said can come from such comments.
“I mean, that’s bizarre, and that bizarreness leads to other crazies threatening and saying things that are also inappropriate,” he told Karl.
Karl also asked Fauci about comments former White House chief strategist and longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon made on his show “War Room” about Fauci and FBI Director Christopher Wray in late 2020 suggesting that they be beheaded and their heads be put “on pikes.” At the time, Twitter (now X) suspended Bannon’s podcast account, and YouTube took down the episode that seemed to imply Fauci and Wray be beheaded.
In an interview with Bannon that also aired on “This Week” Sunday, Karl pressed Bannon about those comments.
“You’re saying at a time when Anthony Fauci and his family are facing death threats, when Christopher Wray and FBI agents all the way down are facing death threats, and you’re going out and talking about putting their heads on pikes?” Karl pressed.
“A total metaphor. Anybody understands that,” Bannon responded. “That’s, that’s your overreach, by the way. They banned us, I think, on Twitter. They banned us on Facebook for that. And hey, guess what? The show got even bigger.”
On Sunday, Fauci criticized Bannon’s response, saying that his words went beyond metaphorical speech.
“These people that say they can say anything they want but it’s a figure of speech,” Fauci said. “Don’t buy that. That’s nonsense. Words matter.”
(MEXICO CITY) — Mexico City is one of the largest cities in the world, yet it is running out of water. It’s a slow-motion disaster decades in the making, caused by a litany of issues including human-induced climate change.
Residents are deeply concerned about the impending water crisis.
In Mexico City, many treat every drop of water with the utmost care because there is no running water, and rain hasn’t come amid drought. Water is purchased at a great cost for low-income families.
Bernardo Nonato Corona, a resident of the hills surrounding Mexico City, told ABC News he spends 25% of his income on water. And his story is repeated millions of times in Mexico City’s sprawling metropolis.
“Water is very necessary and is used for everything,” Corona said. “To drink it, for the maintenance of the house, for personal use, even for the plants themselves, since it doesn’t rain and you have to water them because it uses up a lot.”
Over the past months and possibly even years, Mexico City’s watershed has been experiencing a notable decrease in rainfall. The effects of this situation are now becoming increasingly visible, ABC News has found. For the first time, many people are openly questioning whether the city will face a water shortage soon.
A majority of Mexico City’s water supply — 60% to 70% — is sourced from aquifers and geological formations of rock and/or sediment that store groundwater, according to Mexico city’s water authority. A recent study found that as much as 5 million Olympic-sized pools of groundwater have been pumped out yearly for the past decade.
The city now relies on rain to fill a reservoir, and groundwater levels are dwindling. However, the ongoing historic drought, exacerbated by human-caused climate change, means a long rainy season is no longer guaranteed, experts told ABC News.
Enrique Lomnitz, founder of Isla Urbana, moved back to Mexico City after attending college in the United States to help his native country overcome its water crisis. He and his organization have been working to save Mexico City from completely losing water.
“So the reservoirs are basically empty,” Lomnitz said. “That’s 30, 40% of the city’s water that we’re no longer getting or we’re getting like a, like a trickle where we used to have a stream. So we’re not recharging our aquifers. We’re pumping an enormous, crazy amount of water out of the ground, because there’s 22 million people over here. And that is the basis of the problem.”
Decades of underinvestment in Mexico City’s water grid mean that about 40% of all water pumped through its pipes is lost due to leaks — the water simply seeps into the ground. When it rains, the city pumps out billions of gallons of water to avoid flooding — water that could theoretically be recycled.
Mexico City’s water system representatives did not respond to ABC News for comment.
On the political front, Mexico’s president-elect and former mayor of Mexico City, Claudia Sheinbaum, held an event on the esplanade of the Coyoacán mayor’s office in Mexico City on May 5, 2024, where she stated, “No scientist, because there is still no science that can do that, could predict this circumstance,” in referencing the current water crisis.
But scientists say droughts are inevitable and planning in advance is possible.
At the same event Sheinbaum said, “We already know where the water is going to come from, how to invest, it is going to be the great investment that we are going to make in the metropolitan area of the Valley of Mexico.”
ABC News reached out to the Sheinbaum campaign to ask what the layout looks like. They did not reply to a request for comment.
As climate change continues, heat waves become more extreme, and droughts grow longer. Everything is at stake for people like Corona and millions more in Mexico City.
“We don’t think about our children, that if tomorrow, the way we are going, water will be more expensive and there will be more water shortages, Corona said. “So if we don’t give a solution to the water issue, I don’t know what will happen tomorrow with our children, our grandchildren.”
The city will have to use its water much more efficiently and sustainably to better prepare for future droughts. Due to a historic drought made worse by climate change, record heat and faulty infrastructure, Mexico City needs to improve its overall water usage.
“I think it’s an existential crisis for the city, but I think that people are incredibly adaptive,” Lomnitz said. “I think people are very resilient. I think Mexico City’s resilient. Mexico City’s been through a whole lot of things. It’s not over.”
(NEW YORK) — Last June, the Supreme Court struck down the use of affirmative action in college admissions.
The court held, in a 6-3 decision, that Harvard and the University of North Carolina’s admissions programs, which had accounted for race at various stages in the process, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Now, students applying to post-secondary schools following the court’s decision are navigating a new landscape.
David Jiang’s high school graduating class is the first to apply to college since the Supreme Court decision. Jiang, 18, whose parents immigrated from China more than 20 years ago, said Harvard University had been his dream school.
“I was always aiming for the castle on the hill,” Jiang said. “I was always trying to go for Harvard.”
However, Harvard was part of last year’s historic Supreme Court decision that brought a policy change in college admissions, leaving uncertainty about the future of campus diversity.
Admissions officers can no longer consider race as part of a student’s application, but students still have the option to share that information in their essays.
Jiang, who applied early to Harvard last year, said he decided to lean into his Chinese American heritage in his application.
“It’s just a huge part of my identity,” Jiang told “Nightline.” “If a school does not want to admit me because I’m Asian American, then there’s not much I can do about that, because it’s the part of me that I just can’t get rid of.”
Jiang attended Stuyvesant High School in New York City, one of the top public schools in the country. He says he scored 1560 on the SAT, played the baritone saxophone in the NYC All-City Latin Jazz Ensemble and was a team captain of the New York City Math Team.
Among the over dozen schools Jiang applied to, many rejected or waitlisted him, including Harvard.
“I feel like by not getting into Harvard, I was sort of disappointing [my parents],” Jiang said. “But more importantly, I was disappointing myself.”
Adam Mortara, the lead counsel who helped strike down affirmative action on behalf of Students for Fair Admissions, claimed Harvard had previously unfairly held Asian American applicants to a higher standard.
“[Admissions penalty] was predominantly centered in the so-called ‘personal rating,’” said Mortara. “Where Asian applicants were given lower personal ratings than white applicants, African American applicants or Hispanic applicants.”
According to Harvard’s student newspaper, The Crimson, the so-called “personal rating” could “include traits like humor, kindness, sensitivity and leadership.”
“I think the stereotype is that Asian people are reserved, stick to themselves and just do math problems in their free time,” Jiang said.
While Jiang does not believe race played a role in his rejection from Harvard, he thinks that implicit bias is nearly impossible to erase.
“I think that there’s still this preconceived notion that Asians are so-and-so, and I feel like I did have to prove that I’m not the stereotypical Asian,” Jiang said.
Harvard has denied any bias or discrimination against Asian American applicants in their admissions process. In a statement to ABC News, Harvard claims in part they have “taken several steps to arrive in compliance with the ruling from the Supreme Court. These changes have been made across our recruitment, application and admissions practices.”
However, many students of color are still concerned about campus diversity in a post-affirmative action landscape.
“There is this real threat of the proportion of Black students at Harvard decreasing over the years,” said Clyve Lawrence, a rising senior at Harvard. “I feel concerned about a chilling effect that Black students who otherwise would have applied now are worried that they’ll be facing disadvantages because of this decision.”
Some students worry that without affirmative action, the odds would be stacked against them.
“There are already so many obstacles that disproportionately affect students of color,” said Joely Castillo, a Brown University transfer student.
Castillo said she had a difficult upbringing. After her father was arrested and imprisoned, her mother raised three girls on her own. After high school, she immediately started working multiple jobs to help support her family.
Almost a decade later, Castillo enrolled in a community college and set her sights on a four-year university. She workshopped her approach at the Kaplan Educational Foundation, a nonprofit that works with underprivileged community college students.
“I had to play catchup to the other applicants – students that have had the opportunity to have tutors and family supporting them throughout the college application,” said Castillo. “Whereas I was kind of going in blind.”
Castillo ultimately decided to write about her cultural background in her applications. With a 4.0 GPA, Castillo was accepted by Princeton University, Smith College, Brown University, and other schools.
Castillo ended up choosing Brown University, but says she still worries about diversity on campus.
“If we don’t continue to try and elevate students of color, our campuses are going to look the way that they did many years before, where there were less students of color,” Castillo said.
According to a 2017 New York Times analysis, Asian enrollment largely increased at top colleges over a 35-year period with affirmative action, while Hispanic and Black students mostly remained disproportionately underrepresented.
A survey by the Gallup Center on Black Voices shows nearly 70% of Americans supported the end of affirmative action. Some who fought for its end say the college admissions process won’t truly be fair until schools stop giving preference to children of alumni, called legacies.
“There’s no reason that one child should be afforded an admissions preference to an elite university because their parent went there,” said Mortara. “As opposed to the child of say, a second-generation immigrant family whose parents did not have the opportunity to attend that institution.”
The Department of Education launched a civil rights investigation into Harvard’s use of legacy admissions last year. A number of elite schools have already terminated legacy admissions, including Johns Hopkins University and Amherst College.
States like Virginia and Maryland have also joined Colorado to ban the practice at its public universities. More states, including California, New York and Massachusetts, are considering similar proposals. But some alumni of color and alumni who were the first ones in their families to attend college are opposing the ban.
“I think it’s a really big deal for us as American descendants of the enslaved to be legacy and legacy families,” said Amanda Calhoun, a second-generation Yale graduate, whose father also graduated from Yale.
Calhoun and her father said they feel affirmative action and its outreach programs were transformative.
“My concern would be we would see less outreach,” said Calhoun. “We’ll see less Black students, less minoritized students that are feeling empowered to apply to a place like Yale and other elite institutions.”
Yale is currently reviewing its preference for legacy applicants. But for now, the policy remains in place.
Harvard told ABC News that 23.4% of the Class of 2028 has no financial contribution from their parents, and just over half will receive need-based aid, with an average parent contribution of $15,500.
Additionally, Harvard says 20.5% of its incoming class will be students who are the first generation in their family to graduate from a four-year college or equivalent.
“I know that sometimes college is random, and the admissions decision does not always pan out the way you like it,” said Jiang, who is now a member of the Class of 2028 at Duke University. “I was glad I finally got into a school that I would love to go to.”
ABC News’ Rosa Kim and Jaclyn Skurie contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — Growing up in the 1990s and early 2000s just outside of Akron, Ohio, Shane Stahl felt it was taboo to talk about being part of the LGBTQ+ community or about LGBTQ+ experiences.
Stahl, 40, who identifies as a gay man, said that although he grew up in an accepting and supporting family, he didn’t feel like it was possible to openly express himself and feared he would be ostracized from his community if he did so.
As lawmakers in Ohio began to introduce — and sometimes pass — more anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, at both the local and the state level, Stahl said it took a toll on his mental health.
“It made me want to leave if I could,” he told ABC News. “It makes you feel very isolated, and I don’t know that this is everybody’s experience, but my experience always kind of was like, ‘Well, what does that person think about me? Do they have an inclination that maybe I’m gay? And if they do, are they going to treat me any differently? Are they going to say something to somebody that can have an effect on my job or my ability to rent an apartment or get a car, or any of those things that we all need to do to survive?’ So, yeah, it was definitely very isolating and scary.”
About a year-and-a-half ago, Stahl got a new job for Equality California — a nonprofit civil rights organization advocating for LGBTQ+ Californians — and moved to West Hollywood. He said being able to live in an accepting community made him feel welcome and improved his mental health.
Seeing the increase in anti-LGBTQ+ legislation “definitely was part of the motivation to leave Ohio and come to a place where I knew that there were strong laws on the books, that I knew I would be protected as a gay person,” he said. “Coming from a very suburban northeastern Ohio experience, it feels there’s a sense of peace I have now about my life that I didn’t necessarily have before.”
While anti-LGBTQ+ legislation can have a harmful effect on mental health, experts and LGBTQ+ rights advocates say legislation that strengthens protections for LGBTQ+ people can do just the opposite as well as bring a sense of acceptance and belonging.
LGBTQ+ people at higher risk of mental health struggles
Research has shown that LGBTQ+ people are more likely to experience mental health struggles than those who are heterosexual or cisgender.
LGBTQ+ individuals are 2.5 times more likely to have depression and anxiety or to misuse substances compared with heterosexual individuals, according to the American Psychiatric Association.
Additionally, LGBTQ+ youth are at increased risk of suicidal thoughts and ideations as well as attempted suicide.
However, experts say there is nothing that intrinsically puts LGBTQ+ people at higher risk of mental health challenges or suicide, and that it’s largely brought on by stigma, biases and discrimination.
“LGBTQ people are not at higher risk for suicide or other mental health challenges because of anything inherent in who we are. It’s about how we’re treated,” Casey Pick, director of law and policy for the Trevor Project, a nonprofit focusing on suicide prevention efforts among LGBTQ+ youth.
These biases and discrimination can take shape as anti-LGBTQ+ legislation including forced outing in schools, school sports bans, banning gender-affirming care for minors, criminalizing drag performances, book bans and limiting the ability of LGBTQ+ people to foster or adopt children.
In 2023, a FiveThirtyEight analysis found more than 100 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have passed in the last five years with more than half of them passing last year.
More than 500 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been introduced throughout the 2024 legislative session, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Such policies can have a negative impact on mental health.
Pick, who identifies as lesbian, said she remembers when the U.S. was debating marriage equality. In California, in 2008, lawmakers were debating Proposition 8, which was a ballot measure that would have added a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
“I remember being in my early 20s when California was actively debating Proposition 8, and so the constant onslaught of negative ads that would portray people like me, gay people, just trying to have a family as being a threat to children, a threat to family was just a constant negative grind on my mental health,” she said.
As anti-LGBTQ+ laws and policies have been enacted, many people — and some in cases their families — have left their home states to move to more protective states.
“Nobody should feel that they can’t live and call the place they want to call home because of who they are or who they love,” Stahl said. “The goal should not be to relocate these people; the goal should be let’s make their communities inclusive and welcoming.”
Pro-LGBTQ+ legislation positive for mental health
While more research is needed to better understand the full effects that protective legislation can have for LGBTQ+ people, studies have shown pro-LGBTQ+ legislation can have a positive impact on mental health.
One 2018 study found that sexual minority men were more likely to report poor/fair health in states with limited protections compared with heterosexual counterparts. But in this study protective state laws made no difference among sexual minority women who were more likely to report poor/fair self-rated health compared to their heterosexual counterparts in states with both comprehensive and limited protections.
A 2016 study of transgender veterans found those living in states with employment nondiscrimination protections were 26% less likely to have mood disorders and 43% less likely to practice self-harm.
“We know that living in a community that is safe, affirming and accepting of who you are, directly correlates to lower rates of suicide to better mental health outcomes,” Pick said. “That looks like safe schools; that looks like access to necessary health care; that looks like just basic equality in day-to-day life.”
Pick said she was heartened when the conversation around same-sex marriage in the U.S. started shifting in a positive direction.
She contrasted her feelings in 2008 “to just how good it felt, when we started seeing in 2012, those ballot measures going the other way. It was still exhausting to be part of a political campaign that I didn’t ask for, but on the days that we saw that we won those elections, that people were accepting us, that were welcoming LGBTQ people in the community, that made a difference.”
Stahl said he often jokes that moving to a state like California, with its wider slate of LGBTQ+ protections, felt “like a different planet.”
“I walk around my city, and I see businesses that have gay pride flags and pride flags in their windows,” he said. “I see people catering specifically to the LGBTQ+ community; I see a wealth of resources; I see a local and a state government that wants the best for me in my community and is actively working to improve the quality of our lives and let us know that we are welcome and we belong.”
Pick and Stahl recommend that people contact their state lawmakers to push back against anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and advocate for protective legislation.
They add that it is also important to create safe, accepting and supportive communities for LGBTQ+ people.
“Something as simple as be the house where not just your child, but maybe your child’s LGBTQ friends can come over feel safe, get cookies after school, be the place where they know that they can just let down and relax and where they won’t be confronted with the kind of hostility that is all too common out there today,” Pick said.
(WASHINGTON) — Democrats described President Joe Biden’s debate performance on Thursday as anywhere from “wobbly” to “disappointing” to a “disaster.” Now, they’re scrambling to figure out if he can bounce back.
Biden meandered through answers Thursday, seemingly losing his train of thought at points and sporting a slack-jawed, glazed-over expression during former President Donald Trump’s answers. The split-screen was described in brutal terms by Democrats who feared the debate compounded on what polls show are undeniable voter concerns over Biden’s age and fitness for office.
The president’s path to reelection could now hinge, in part, on the tall task of recovering from the debate and reassuring voters that despite his halting performance, he has what it takes to handle another four years in office.
Presidential historian Mark Updegrove singled out one Biden stumble when he appeared lost in an answer about tax reform, ultimately concluding with the confounding remark that “we beat Medicare,” as “the worst debate moment in U.S. presidential and vice-presidential history” and said the road to recovery would be difficult — but not impossible.
“I think this is going to be relatively difficult to turn around,” Updegrove said, “but miracles occasionally happen in politics.”
The Democratic frenzy in the hours after Thursday night’s debate has been fierce, with some operatives bringing up the prospect of replacing Biden on the 2024 ticket at this summer’s party convention.
Two aides to politicians spoken of as future presidential candidates told ABC News that outreach from worried party members has been significant, and Democratic offices on Capitol Hill received angry calls from constituents Friday over Biden’s performance, according to one senior congressional Democratic source.
For now, allies are publicly sticking with him.
“I’m with our nominee Joe Biden who wakes up every day thinking about America’s working families, not Donald Trump – a 34-time convicted felon, adjudicated rapist, and congenital liar who spent last night spewing nothing but lies,” said Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, spoken of as a possible future Democratic presidential contender.
“There’s no one who saw the debate last night and thinks that President Biden had a great night. I also know there’s no one who can look at the record of the Trump administration and think that Donald Trump had a good presidency,” Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, the subject of similar whispers, said to reporters Friday. “I think we’re going to have another four years of President Biden and Vice President [Kamala] Harris.”
Some Democrats pointed to the 2022 Pennsylvania Senate race, when now-Sen. John Fetterman, D, had what was universally decried as a terrible debate after suffering a stroke only to end up defeating Republican Mehmet Oz later that year.
“No one knows more than me that a rough debate is not the sum total of the person and their record,” Fetterman wrote on X. “Chill the f*** out.”
Privately, however, Democratic operatives said they’re clamoring for Biden to shake things up after Thursday’s debate.
One senior Democratic strategist expressed skepticism that Biden’s current team “will admit a mistake” and suggested, “perhaps it’s time for some staff changes and infusing the inner circle with fresh perspective.”
“Be prepared that there may not be another debate, which means finding another way to demonstrate he’s more than up to the job,” the person said. “Would do more to let Joe be Joe rather than trying to cram him with facts and figures.”
Other operatives specifically said Biden should blitz the airwaves with sit-down interviews, including in hostile territory — a tactic the president hasn’t adopted since taking office but that party members say is unavoidable now.
“He needs to get out in front of people every day for the next week, conduct live and unscripted interviews, and make the Sunday talk show rounds. This isn’t a time for complacency and the faith that a bad performance fades on its own. It fades when it is replaced by something else,” said Jim Kessler, the co-founder of center-left think tank Third Way.
“He’d have to do it across a lot of venues,” added another adviser to a politician discussed as a future presidential contender. “He might even have to do one on Fox.”
Experts also predicted that the debate’s timing could help Biden turn the page. Thursday’s event happened unprecedentedly early in an election cycle, and, with over four months to Election Day, countless news cycles could bury the debate if sensational enough.
“In some ways, the early debate could be beneficial for the comeback narrative,” said Aaron Kall, director of debate for the University of Michigan’s Debate Program. “I think because it’s so early, that could decrease the overall impact of a debate on the election and give opportunities other extraneous events, black swan events, to totally drown out the effect of a bad first performance.”
Biden is already working to alleviate concerns, addressing the debate at a rally in North Carolina Friday in which he offered a more vociferous defense of his record than he did on Thursday.
“I know I’m not a young man, to state the obvious,” he told a Raleigh crowd. “I don’t walk as easy as I used to. I don’t speak as smoothly as I used to. I don’t debate as well as I used to. But I know what I do know: I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. And I know how to do this job.”
The Biden campaign also touted a $14 million grassroots fundraising haul from debate day heading into Friday morning. It also said the hour after the debate was its best fundraising hour since the campaign’s launch in April 2023.
For some, though, Biden’s rally Friday underscored his Thursday performance.
“Where was this last night? Why wasn’t that energy there last night?” asked rallygoer Jenny Ackerman.
And some Democrats were outright pessimistic that the debate’s political damage wouldn’t be permanent.
“I don’t think it blows over,” a source familiar with the Biden campaign’s strategy said.
“Remember the Hindenburg!” added one Democratic donor of the debate.
Underscoring the damage dealt from the debate, Senate Republicans’ campaign arm swiftly released an ad splicing Democratic Senate candidates’ praise for Biden’s fitness for office with moments from the debate when the president stumbled. The made-for-television gaffes are likely to be featured in GOP attacks across the airwaves throughout the year, with Republicans virtually dancing over the debate’s impact on both Biden and down-ballot Democrats.
“Senate Democrats have spent years propping up Joe Biden despite his obvious mental deficiencies, now the world can see he isn’t he fit for the job. This disaster is on their hands,” said National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesman Philip Letsou.
The more pessimistic Democrats pointed to the potency of those attacks to sound the alarm that the damage may have been done.
“It’s hard to unsee what we all saw so starkly and vividly. Think of it this way. Biden may be the most experienced pilot in the world, but would you be comfortable flying in an airplane Captain Biden was at the controls of after what you saw last night?” asked on Democratic pollster.
When asked what Biden could do to calm the passengers, the person just replied, “Turn over the controls to a younger, experienced and competent pilot.”
(NEW YORK) — On Monday, Steve Bannon will be behind bars in federal prison, but the ex-Trump White House adviser said Friday he’s feeling great and has no regrets about defying Congress to avoid talking about his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by a pro-Trump mob.
In fact, Bannon told ABC “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl that he considers himself a “political prisoner” and that his four-month sentence will only make his influence grow.
“I’m a political prisoner … It won’t change me. It will not suppress my voice. My voice will not be suppressed when I’m there,” he told Karl.
Bannon is set to report to federal prison on Monday after the Supreme Court denied a request Friday to remain out of prison while he continues to appeal his contempt of Congress conviction.
Bannon was sentenced to four months in prison in October 2022 after being found guilty of defying a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
After Bannon was sentenced, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols agreed to postpone the jail term while Bannon appealed the conviction. Last month the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his conviction and Nichols ordered Bannon on June 6 to report to prison on July 1.
Watch more of Jonathan Karl’s interview with Steve Bannon on Sunday’s episode of “This Week.”
Bannon told Karl he still has no regrets about defying the House Jan. 6 committee’s subpoena and is looking to appeal the court decision.
“If it took me going to prison to finally get the House to start to move, to start to delegitimize the illegitimate J6 committee, then, hey, guess what, my going to prison is worth it,” he said.
The January 6th committee was established by a House resolution that passed along party lines in 2021 by a vote of 222-190. Two Republicans, Illinois’ Adam Kinzinger and Wyoming’s Liz Cheney, joined Democrats in supporting the measure and later served on the committee.
(NEW YORK) — Four people were killed and nine others injured after a vehicle crashed into a storefront in New York on Friday, authorities said.
The “mass casualty” incident occurred in Deer Park on Long Island Friday afternoon, Deer Park Fire Department Chief Dominic Albanese said during a press conference.
A minivan traveled nearly all the way through to the back of a nail salon, he said.
Four people were found dead upon arrival, all located inside a nail salon, Albanese said. It is unclear whether the victims were employees or customers, he said.
Nine people, were transported to area hospitals, including one by aviation, Albanese said. The driver was “partially conscious” following the crash and was apart of the nine transported to a hospital, he said.
The cause of the crash remains unknown. Authorities are investigating while the incident was intentional, Albanese said.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(SANTA FE, N.M.) — A New Mexico judge denied Alec Baldwin’s bid to drop his involuntary manslaughter charge over firearm evidence stemming from the 2021 fatal shooting on the set of “Rust” before his trial starts next month.
In their request to dismiss the indictment, Baldwin’s attorneys claimed the state “intentionally” destroyed key evidence — the firearm involved in the shooting — denying them the chance to review potentially exculpatory evidence.
Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer denied the request in an order issued on Friday, following arguments during a virtual hearing on Monday.
Baldwin’s trial is scheduled to begin with jury selection on July 9.
The actor was practicing a cross-draw in a church on the set of the Western film when the Colt .45 revolver fired a live round, fatally striking 42-year-old cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.
Baldwin, 66, who was also a producer on the film, was indicted by a grand jury on involuntary manslaughter in connection with Hutchins’ death earlier this year, after prosecutors previously dropped the charge. He pleaded not guilty.
Baldwin’s attorneys argued that the firearm is “central” to the state’s theory of guilt, but that they were denied the opportunity to examine it themselves and that FBI forensic testing that damaged the gun was unnecessary.
“They understood that this was potentially exculpatory evidence and they destroyed it anyway,” Baldwin’s attorney, John Bash, said during Monday’s hearing.
Baldwin has maintained that he did not pull the trigger of the firearm, though the FBI forensic report determined that the gun could not have been fired without pulling the trigger.
Bash argued that there’s reason to believe that further testing would show the firearm was capable of discharging without the pull of the trigger.
“The prosecution denied the criminal defendant the opportunity to see it, to test it,” Bash said. “It’s outrageous, and it requires dismissal.”
Prosecutors argued that there was no perceived exculpatory value of the firearm apparent to law enforcement following the shooting.
“The fact that this gun was unfortunately damaged during the accidental discharge testing does not deprive the defendant of the evidence that they can use effectively in cross-examining,” Erlinda Ocampo Johnson said during Monday’s hearing.
Johnson also argued there is “ample evidence” of the defendant’s guilt in this case in regards to his “reckless conduct.”
Marlowe Sommer’s ruling comes after she denied last week another defense request to dismiss the indictment. In that motion, Baldwin’s attorneys argued that the state failed to allege a criminal offense because Baldwin had no reason to believe the gun might contain live rounds and that the manipulation of the weapon could pose a “substantial risk” to Hutchins.
In her official order denying that motion, released on Friday, Marlow Sommer wrote that whether Baldwin had a criminally negligent state of mind “is a question of fact for the jury to decide.”
The judge also denied last month another request by the defense to dismiss the indictment in which Baldwin’s attorneys argued that the prosecution engaged in “bad faith” by failing to provide the grand jury with sufficient information.
Marlowe Sommer additionally denied last week a request from the state to use immunity to compel testimony from the film’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez, during Baldwin’s trial.
Gutierrez, 27, was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the shooting and sentenced in April to 18 months in prison, the maximum possible, in the shooting. She appealed her conviction in May.
Prosecutors sought immunity so that her testimony could not be used against her in her appeal. At a pretrial interview in May, Gutierrez asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, prosecutors said.
In issuing her ruling, Marlowe Sommer noted that the armorer has indicated she won’t testify and that she hasn’t heard “anything that [Gutierrez] might testify to that someone else could not testify to.”
Gutierrez could still be called to testify but would speak without immunity.
Marlowe Sommer last week also allowed for the testimony at Baldwin’s trial of a “Rust” crew member who prosecutors said witnessed the on-set shooting and said he saw Baldwin pull the trigger.
Following Monday’s hearing, Baldwin’s attorneys filed another motion seeking to dismiss the indictment, alleging that the state violated its discovery obligations by delaying the disclosure of “critical evidence that is favorable to Baldwin’s defense and that fundamentally reshapes the way Baldwin would have prepared for trial.”
In a response to the motion filed Thursday, the state pushed back against the defense’s claims, saying it has “worked tirelessly to ensure that the defendant has every possible page of discovery, no matter how minuscule or immaterial,” and asked the court to deny the motion.
(NEW YORK) — One day after President Joe Biden took the stage to debate former President Donald Trump, he arrived in New York City Friday to celebrate the opening ceremony of the Stonewall National Monument Visitor Center.
The opening ceremony also honors the 55th anniversary of the Stonewall Uprising, a six-day-long series of demonstrations against police raids on gay bars.
In his brief comments, Biden celebrated the LGBTQ+ community and praised its members for a courage that he said has inspired movements across the globe. The president said “the course of history was changed forever” by events that occurred at the Stonewall Inn, marking a pivotal moment in the fight for gay liberation.
“This beloved bar became the site of a call to cry for freedom, dignity, equality and respect — rebellion that galvanized the LGBTQ+ community all across the nation and, frankly, around the world,” Biden said.
The Stonewall National Monument Visitor Center is the first LGBTQ+ visitor center within the National Park System. Organized by LGBTQ advocacy groups PrideLive, the center hopes to serve as a living monument to those who have shaped the LGBTQ+ equality movement. President Obama designated the Stonewall National Monument a national monument eight years ago.
Biden attended the Stonewall event after delivering remarks at a rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, which was his first public appearance since his nationally televised debate Thursday evening with former President Donald Trump. Biden said he was inspired by the bravery of the LGBTQ+ community.
“Your courage and contributions enrich every part of American life. They set an example, I’m not exaggerating, for the entire world. That’s what this center this monument this month is all about,” Biden said.
The president was joined on stage by musician and gay rights activist Sir Elton John.
“As President Biden has reminded us today, we face one of those seminal moments: Do we stand up for our vision and our values, or let misinformation and senseless scapegoating turn back the clock?” John asked. “No f—— way. No. In this moment. too. we must take pride and fight on.”
