(LEESBURG, Va.) — On Election Day eve, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin made his final pitch to voters at a rally, telling the crowd, “We have to stand up for our kids.”
The Monday night event, hosted by Youngkin’s Spirit of Virginia political action committee in a stadium in Leesburg, Virginia, put education and “parents’ rights” front and center as the top issue for Republican voters ahead of Tuesday’s election.
“We’re gonna put [parents] at the head of the table in charge of our children’s lives,” said Youngkin.
At the last GOP rally in the state, before voters head to the polls Tuesday, Youngkin took aim at social media companies, linking them to issues of bullying and youth mental health struggles. He also said Democrats and social media giants are not prioritizing children’s safety.
“[Democrats] really believe that children belong to the state and not to families,” Youngkin said.
The rally, which was part of Youngkin’s “Secure Your Vote” campaign, aimed at encouraging Republicans to vote early, featured several top state Republicans, including Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares and Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears.
“When you are talking about my child, all bets are off,” Earls-Sears said.
“The stakes couldn’t be higher,” Mitarres echoed. “Parents matter.”
Loudoun County, where the event was held, became the epicenter of the “parents’ rights” conservative moment in 2021 over school pandemic learning policies and Republicans’ criticisms of the schools’ focus on racial equity.
Voters in the fast-growing suburb will select a new school board on Tuesday with all nine seats on the ballot.
“We gotta get this done,” Youngkin told the crowd. “The parents matter movement we started right here in Loudoun County and spread across the entire county … we’ve got to reinforce it again tomorrow.”
In 2021, Youngkin ran on education — advocating for parents to have more control over their children’s schooling after pandemic-era restrictions that required remote classes.
If Republicans hold their state House majority and win back the state Senate, Youngkin could advance more education legislation.
On education, Virginia Democrats say that they want to boost public school funding to address learning loss during the pandemic and other issues.
The rally also comes a few days after Youngkin issued an executive order directing the Department of Education to issue guidance ensuring school divisions notify parents of school-connected overdoses within 24 hours.
(DES MOINES, Iowa) — Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds endorsed Ron DeSantis Monday night at a rally in downtown Des Moines, injecting the Florida governor’s presidential campaign with a boost he hopes will narrow a poll deficit in a state on which he has banked his campaign.
“I am so proud to stand here tonight and give him my full support and endorsement for president of the United States of America,” Reynolds said on stage before introducing DeSantis, whom she praised for his kindness and his leadership, especially during the coronavirus pandemic.
The endorsement — rare for an Iowa governor — had been suspected, as DeSantis and Reynolds are friends and have spoken glowingly of each other in public, but even Reynolds acknowledged Monday the decision was difficult.
“I thought long and hard about making this decision, about telling Iowans and telling you where I stand,” she said, saying she enjoyed welcoming and speaking with all the presidential candidates who have visited Iowa.
“We owe each of them a debt of gratitude,” she said.
“But I also believe that as a mom and as a grandma and as an American, I could not and cannot sit on the sidelines any longer,” she added. “We are living in unprecedented times. There is just too much at stake. Our country is in trouble. The world is a powder keg. And I’m here to tell you, without a doubt, that Ron DeSantis is the person that we need leading this country.”
DeSantis, who greeted Reynolds with a hug when he took the stage, praised the Iowa governor as “one of the greatest governors in the United States” with “a great head on her shoulders.”
“When I was going through a lot, when we were going through it with COVID, I think Kim and I are the only governors in America that forced all our schools to be open for classroom instruction,” he said.
The timing of the endorsement — news of which broke Sunday morning with reports that it would happen the next night — is opportune for DeSantis, who endured a week of rough news: An NBC/Des Moines Register Iowa poll showed him slipping to a tie for second with Nikki Haley, and he endured a flurry of defections to former President Donald Trump by lawmakers in his home state.
The endorsement also gives DeSantis something new to tout on the Republican debate stage Wednesday night in Miami.
In Iowa, there are indications that Reynolds’ backing could boost DeSantis.
Norman Uchida, 73, a retired utility worker who attended Monday’s rally, said it could “have a big impact” and added the governor is “very popular” among Republicans in Iowa.
Meanwhile, Phil Cronin, a 68-year-old realtor from Johnston who attended a recent DeSantis event but told ABC News there that he was undecided, said in a text message Monday, “I think a lot of [Reynolds] and the endorsement.”
“It does maybe help me narrow the field a bit,” Cronin said.
Cody Hoefert, a former co-chair of the Iowa Republican Party who has endorsed DeSantis, called Reynolds’ endorsement “a big deal” and called their alignment “a natural fit.”
Yet if polls are any indication, winning Iowa will be a massive undertaking for DeSantis, who trails Trump in the state by nearly 30 points, according to FiveThirtyEight’s polling average.
DeSantis has dismissed the polls as he methodically hop-scotches across Iowa, hoping the frequent stops at small-town diners build a bevy of support that won’t reveal itself until the results trickle in on caucus night.
Reynolds’ endorsement has caught the attention of Trump, whose relationship with the Iowa governor severed earlier this year as he accused her of being disloyal.
“Why would anybody endorse Ron DeSanctimonious, who is like a wounded bird falling from the sky?” Trump wrote on his Truth Social, using a nickname he coined for the Florida governor, adding, “What’s that all about?”
On stage Monday night, Reynolds said a personal touch from Casey DeSantis helped her decide to endorse: Florida’s first lady, who battled breast cancer two years ago, visited Reynolds and her husband, Kevin, after he was diagnosed with cancer himself this fall.
“Casey, I want you to know how much that meant to both of us,” she said.
(WASHINGTON) — Special counsel Jack Smith’s team filed a lengthy response Monday to former President Donald Trump’s motions to dismiss his federal election interference case on statutory and constitutional grounds, saying the former president “stands alone in American history for his alleged crimes.”
Trump’s lawyers have filed multiple motions to dismiss the Jan. 6 case, including mounting arguments that the charges brought against him were unconstitutionally applied and ran afoul of the charging statutes.
Trump in August pleaded not guilty to charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called “fake electors,” using the Justice Department to conduct “sham election crime investigations,” trying to enlist the vice president to “alter the election results,” and promoting false claims of a stolen election as the Jan. 6 riot raged — all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.
The former president has denied all wrongdoing and denounced the charges as “a persecution of a political opponent.”
In its response Monday, the special counsel argues his indictment rightfully charges Trump with “perpetrating an unprecedented campaign of deceit to attack the very functioning of the federal government” and accuses Trump of “attempts to rewrite the indictment” by claiming it “charges him with wholly innocuous, perhaps even admirable conduct.”
Trump “stands alone in American history for his alleged crimes,” the special counsel writes.
“No other president has engaged in conspiracy and obstruction to overturn valid election results and illegitimately retain power,” the filing states.
The special counsel’s team disputes head-on a key argument put forward by Trump’s legal team — that he should not be able to be charged criminally given he was acquitted by the Senate following his impeachment after the Capitol attack.
In its filing, the special counsel describes such an argument as “frivolous” and “meritless,” and goes on to cite in its filing then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s speech explaining his decision to vote for Trump’s acquittal. McConnell said he believed the Senate lacked jurisdiction to convict Trump of inciting a mob and added Trump “is still liable for everything he did while he was in office “as an ordinary citizen,” according to the filing, which adds: “We have a criminal justice system in this country.”
“The defendant’s criminal prosecution thus does not ‘second guess’ the Senate on a question of criminal liability,” Smith’s office said in its filing.
Smith also disputed the argument from Trump’s legal team that his efforts to convince his supporters the election was stolen were not “deceptive” because he himself genuinely believes the 2020 election was fraudulent.
According to Smith, even if Trump “could supply admissible evidence of his own personal belief that the election was ‘rigged’ or ‘stolen,’ it would not license him to deploy fraud and deceit to remedy what he perceived to be a wrong, and it would not provide a defense to the charge.”
In its filing, they also urge U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to reject Trump’s claim that his actions to overturn the election detailed in the indictment amount to “First Amendment-protected” speech, noting that in the indictment itself, they make clear there’s nothing illegal about claiming the election was stolen.
“The First Amendment does not protect fraudulent speech or speech otherwise integral to criminal conduct, particularly crimes that attack the integrity and proper function of government processes,” Smith’s team writes in the filing. “The defendant’s arguments are based on an inaccurate and self-serving characterization of the charges, and his motion should be denied.”
In a separate filing Monday, Smith also indicated that Trump’s statements celebrating the actions of rioters in the years since the Jan. 6 attack will be used against him at trial.
Arguing against an effort by Trump’s legal team to have language struck from his indictment that ties him to the Capitol attack, Smith notes in his filing how Trump has repeatedly “promoted and extolled the events of that day” and “championed” the rioters as “great patriots.”
“The defendant’s decision to repeatedly stand behind Jan. 6 rioters and their cause is relevant to the jury’s determination of whether he intended the actions at the Capitol that day,” Smith’s office said.
(WASHINGTON) — South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott is the only Black candidate vying for the GOP’s presidential nomination and while he has talked openly about race in America — sometimes seizing the moment to challenge his competitors — his messaging on the issue hasn’t often separated him from the other candidates in the field.
Since he’s launched his bid for the White House, Scott, like his Republican rivals, has leaned into his belief that America is “not a racist country” and his opposition to so-called “critical race theory” and other views that emphasize identity.
“Joe Biden and the radical left are attacking every rung of the ladder that helped me climb,” he said in his campaign launch speech, in May.
“When I cut your taxes, they called me a prop. When I re-funded the police, they called me a token. When I pushed back on President Biden, they even called me the N-word,” he said. “I disrupt their narrative. I threaten their control. The truth of my life disrupts their lies!”
In October, Scott deviated from usual stops in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina to visit a Black church on the South Side of Chicago.
“There is a radical movement on the far left, and the more progress that America makes on race, the more some leaders want to deny it,” Scott told the congregants of New Beginnings Church. “Our country has made, however, tremendous strides since then on the issue of race — but lawlessness and fatherlessness and joblessness have gotten worse in the last 60 years and not better.”
His speech in Chicago was intended, in part, to clarify controversial remarks he made at the second Republican Primary debate in September. Scott drew criticism then after he appeared to suggest that President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” federal welfare program in the ’60s had been more difficult for Black Americans than slavery.
Former Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele, who is Black, called Scott’s debate comments a “load of crock.”
His more than an hourlong speech at New Beginnings Church also called out Democratic leadership in Chicago for, in his view, failing the Black community. Many of those elected officials are Black.
“If everything can be based and blamed on systemic racism, the problems can’t be the liberals’ fault,” Scott told the audience. “They want us to sit down, shut up and don’t forget to vote as long as we’re voting blue. Instead of solutions, we are offered distractions and division.”
Afterward, attendees were eager to pepper Scott, who rarely addresses Black audiences on the campaign trail, with tough questions. Many of the exchanges were tense.
MORE: How Tim Scott’s run for president is affecting his role as senator
PHOTO: Sen. Tim Scott and Attorney Rodrick Wimberly at New Beginnings Church in Chicago, Illinois
Sen. Tim Scott and Attorney Rodrick Wimberly at New Beginnings Church in Chicago, Illinois
ABC News
Attorney Rodrick Wimberly said he came to the church with his wife, Evelyn, “out of respect” for what Scott has accomplished. When it was his turn to speak with the South Carolina senator, Wimberly challenged Scott.
“I’ve seen both in the debate and also in statements you’ve made where you indicated that you don’t feel that there’s systematic racism,” he said. “There is statistical data to show, or suggest at the very least, that there is some issue where it’s systemic.”
Scott told him, “I’m saying that there is racism, but it’s not the system.”
The pair went back and forth on education, redlining — referring to discrimination in financial loans — and inequities in wealth before Scott was ushered away by his staff.
After the conversation, Wimberly told ABC News he came that day open to voting for Scott, but after their interaction he and his wife wouldn’t cast a ballot for him “at this time.”
MORE: Tim Scott’s bachelorhood puts spotlight on how few US presidents have been single
The disconnect illustrates a challenge Scott, and more broadly the Republican Party, has in making significant inroads with Black voters. In the last presidential election, 87% of Black voters backed Democrat Joe Biden, according to ABC News’ exit polling.
Nadia Brown, a political scientist and professor at Georgetown University argued that Scott’s messaging on race is most likely not directed at Black voters at all.
Instead, the senator, who has struggled so far to gain traction in the polls, is pitching himself as a non-white candidate who agrees with the issues that motivates the GOP base, Brown said.
The vast majority of Republican primary voters (92%) were white in 2020, the last presidential election year, according to a 538 analysis.
“What Tim Scott and those of his ilk are doing, they’re trying to play on these emotional push pins that most African Americans don’t see. It’s not landing for them,” Brown said. “I think that is a call out to other conservatives, particularly white conservatives, who want to say, ‘I have a Black senator,’ or, ‘I feel comfortable voting for a Black candidate.'”
In rare moments, Scott has cited his race to break from others in the Republican primary field.
In July, he criticized Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for supporting a change to the state’s standards that directed educators to teach middle school students enslaved people “developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.”
Scott suggested to reporters that DeSantis should rethink his position. “What slavery was really about was separating families, about mutilating humans and even raping their wives. It was just devastating,” he said.
(DeSantis has defended the standards, telling ABC News’ Linsey Davis in September: “It was not saying that slavery benefited. It was saying that these folks were resourceful.”)
Though the audience for his Chicago speech was predominantly Black, the crowds at Scott’s typical campaign stops are overwhelmingly white. At those events, Scott often declares that he will “speak like a pastor,” in the famous tradition of Black clergy.
Leah Wright Rigueur, a history professor at Johns Hopkins University and author of “The Loneliness of the Black Republican,” analyzed how Scott presents himself in the primary field.
“Because Tim Scott doesn’t have certain markers of what the Republican base wants in a candidate, he’s not white and he’s not married, he plays up on other things: He plays up certain tropes about Black people and he leans into this kind of religious identity that I think really brings out a comfort for white audiences,” Wright Rigueur said.
“[Scott] has to talk about race, but he has to do it in a way that doesn’t alienate the main players in the party, and that’s extremely hard to do given that the standard line on race in the party right now is that ‘we don’t have a problem and in fact it’s other people who are the real racists,'” Wright Rigueur told ABC News.
In response to Scott’s speech at the Chicago church, Rep. Jonathan Jackson, D-Ill., who is Black and represents part of the city in Congress, told ABC News, “He’s trying to capitulate and kowtow to an extremist right wing group, and he ought to be ashamed of himself.”
When criticized for his stance on race, Scott responds with an oft-repeated refrain placing the blame on the political left for, he argues, trying to silence another view.
“I’ve been called a prop, a token, the N-word, and more ugly names than I can share,” Scott said in a recent fundraising appeal.
Other Black conservatives agree with Scott’s sentiments.
“It’s quite obvious what America’s past has been, but there’s nobody alive today that could sit up and say, ‘Well, I didn’t develop into my full potential because I wasn’t given an opportunity,'” said Raynard Jackson, a Republican political consultant, who is Black. “I think [Scott] hit all the right notes in the right key.”
William Oden, chairman of the Sumter, South Carolina, Republican Party, who is also Black, voted for Scott in his Senate bid and loves Scott’s “optimistic message.”
“His message dispels the rumor that people talk about our country being racist,” Oden said.
Although Scott had told ABC News that his team discussed giving his Chicago church speech “for a very long time,” he delivered it amid signs that his campaign is faltering.
A super PAC supporting Scott announced it would pull fall ads from TV and he’s still polling in the single digits nationally as well as in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, according to 538’s average. He only just managed to qualify for the third Republican primary debate, set for Wednesday.
Before Scott’s Chicago speech, his team held a call to announce a plan to shift resources from New Hampshire and increase staffing in Iowa so that they were equipped to go “all in.” Campaign manager Jennifer DeCasper also joined him in the city, in a rare appearance to signal what the campaign saw as a major moment.
DeCasper is the only Black woman at the helm of a Republican presidential campaign this cycle and some point to the diversity within Scott’s staff as an illustration of his commitment to communities of color.
“Tim doesn’t just believe in diversity. He is diverse,” said Jackson, the consultant. “If you go to his office, it’s nothing but the definition of diversity, and it’s not forced or contrived diversity. That’s just who he is.”
Wright Riguer, the history professor, said that DeCasper is an important reflection of how Scott is approaching the issue.
“Given that there was a Black woman who is essentially guiding his larger political future, that is really important for how he is thinking and talking about race right now,” she said.
Scott’s campaign declined to comment for this article.
His recent remarks at the University of Mississippi are perhaps most emblematic of how he will continue to address the topic of race in a party that de-emphasizes identity.
“I don’t want to be the Black conservative. I don’t want to be the Black southerner,” he said in late October. “I want to be Tim Scott, who happens to be Black.”
(WASHINGTON) — While a major Republican event down in Florida saw boos and cheers, former President Donald Trump faced mounting legal challenges to his candidacy because of the 14th Amendment — an argument he totally rejects — and Trump’s rival Joe Biden sought to play down some notably poor new poll numbers.
Here’s a recap of major 2024 campaign updates over the last week:
‘Boos’ and cheers at the Florida Freedom Summit
On Saturday, Republican presidential hopefuls took the stage at the annual Florida Freedom Summit in Kissimmee. Hosted by the state GOP, the event featured a lineup of officials and conservative voices as well as some of the biggest names in the 2024 race.
The GOP primary’s most anti-Trump candidates didn’t shy away from condemning the former president in his home state. Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie were both met with raucous “boos” from the audience as they called for new leadership in the Republican Party.
Hutchinson — who was also shouted at to “go home” by one attendee — predicted that Trump is likely to be convicted of a felony in one of four criminal cases, citing his own experience as a federal prosecutor.
Trump has denied all wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty. He has dismissed criticism from the likes of Christie and Hutchinson, as when he’s called Christie a “failed” candidate.
Christie, who has seemingly relished building his campaign in part around an anti-Trump message, invited the “boos” as they poured over him in Florida, noting that “it feels like home.” He continued through shouts of “loser” and “traitor,” sternly telling the audience that such behavior “will not solve one problem we face in this country and will not make this country better.”
“You can yell and boo about it as much as you’d like,” he said. “But it doesn’t change the truth, and the truth is coming.”
Another candidate, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, made his case to be the next standard-bearer of the GOP, touting how conservatives in the state have won a slew of elections and overseen major policy shifts since he’s been in office. This time, cheers came from the crowd.
“You think of what’s happened, and I don’t think that there’s a parallel anywhere in the modern history of the Republican Party than what’s happened in the state of Florida over these last five years,” DeSantis said.
Former President Trump, in his own remarks, sought to attack DeSantis but faced a less receptive audience. After praising multiple Republican governors, except DeSantis, the crowd began to chant, “Florida, Florida,” leaving Trump to stand there and smirk.
Still, though, fervent support for Trump was not missing. MAGA flags, purses and stickers were on full display.
Both Biden and Trump have major favorability issues, new poll shows
A year out from the 2024 presidential election and the race’s leading candidates — President Biden and Trump — are nonetheless not viewed favorably by Americans, a new ABC News/Ipsos poll shows.
Only 33% of Americans view Biden favorably, and even less, 29%, view Trump favorably. Biden’s favorability among Black (49%) and Hispanic (33%) Americans is also low, which likely comes as a considerable concern for Democrats since these groups overwhelmingly supported him in 2020, according to exit polling.
Similarly, a large majority of Americans (76%) believe that the country is headed in the wrong direction. And Americans are more likely to trust Republicans to do a better job on the top issues they identified: the economy and inflation.
Those numbers underline what has been an unusual dynamic throughout the 2024 race so far: While Biden and Trump continue to lead in primary polls, other surveys show the general public is seemingly unhappy with them both — and the potential for a rematch.
Separately, and similarly likely to provoke alarm for Democrats, a new New York Tmes/Siena College poll that surveyed registered voters in key battleground states found that in hypothetical matchups between Biden and Trump, the former president comes out on top in most of them.
Trump edges out Biden in the poll’s theoretical contest in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania, with Biden taking Wisconsin by a slim margin. Biden won all five states in 2020.
Registered voters in the swing states were also asked how they would vote in the case of another Democratic nominee, such as an unnamed generic alternative or someone like Vice President Kamala Harris — and both options polled better than Biden.
Biden’s campaign said in a statement that they wouldn’t be “fretting” about the new polls, pointing both to Democrats’ unexpected success in the 2022 midterms, when Biden was also unpopular, and unfavorable polls in 2011 for former President Obama before he was reelected in 2012.
“Predictions more than a year out tend to look a little different a year later,” Biden campaign spokesperson Kevin Munoz said in a statement.
14th Amendment challenges to keep Trump off the ballot are moving ahead
Last week, hearings in Colorado and Minnesota were held as groups of voters attempt to keep Trump off the ballot in their states, arguing that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution prohibits him from holding office because of Jan. 6
Supporters of this theory argue it applies to Trump because of his conduct after he lost the 2020 election but sought to reverse the results, including on the morning of Jan. 6, 2021. Previous such efforts focused on other Republicans have failed, except in New Mexico, where a local commissioner convicted of trespassing at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was booted from his office.
Trump has rejected the 14th Amendment outright and his attorneys have labeled it “anti-democratic.”
A district judge in Denver heard five days of testimony about the matter while in Minnesota, the state Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday.
A ruling in Colorado is expected this month. One of the main lawyers behind the challenge to Trump recently told ABC News that he expects the U.S. Supreme Court will have to weigh in.
Dean Phillips heads out on the trail
After launching his long shot Democratic presidential campaign in late October, Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips has been out on the trail in full force.
His primary bid against Biden has been criticized by some other Democrats who see it as an unnecessary — and possibly harmful — obstacle to preparing to run against Trump.
He’s also brushed off attacks that his early focus on New Hampshire disregards how Democrats are trying to pivot in their primary to focus on states like South Carolina and Michigan that they feel are more representative of their voters.
Phillips, a third-term lawmaker, former member of Democratic leadership in the House and a wealthy businessman in his own right, has said that he is concerned about the president’s age and the future of the Democratic Party. He’s said he had been urging Democrats to challenge Biden for months and is now doing it himself.
But that doesn’t mean he’ll stick around forever. “I’ll be clear – if my campaign is not viable after March 5th, I’ll wrap it up and endorse the likely nominee – Biden or otherwise,” he wrote on X on Saturday, in part. “I will then campaign for them as vigorously as I’m campaigning now. I’m not here for games.”
“I’m saying the quiet part out loud. Biden/Harris isn’t viable against Trump,” Phillips posted on X later in the weekend. “I will defeat Trump.”
ABC News’ Libby Cathey, Abby Cruz, Hannah Demissie, Devin Dwyer, Lalee Ibssa, Fritz Farrow, Isabella Murray, Oren Oppenheim and MaryAlice Parks contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. believes the Middle East cannot return to the status quo and must agree on a new future for the Palestinians in the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7 terror attack, which led Israel to launch a war in the region, a top White House official said on Sunday.
“What I think we believe in strongly is that Gaza cannot and should not be allowed to be a platform from which horrific terrorist attacks can be conducted against Israel,” Biden deputy national security adviser Jon Finer said in an interview with ABC “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos, referring to the Palestinian territory Hamas controls.
“And so to the extent that they are seeking to make that no longer possible, that is both a very legitimate and, we believe, an achievable goal,” Finer added.
“Beyond that, what comes on the day after [fighting ends], I think we’ve also started to speak to: We cannot go back to a pre-Oct. 7 environment in Gaza where [terrorists] can threaten Israel in that way,” Finer said.
That applies both to supporting Israel in its current military operations and supporting a political future for the Palestinians living in Gaza and the West Bank next to Israel, Finer said.
“That means resuming the urgent work of giving a political horizon to the Palestinian people, which to President [Joe] Biden means a two-state solution,” Finer told Stephanopoulos.
That message was also delivered by Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas during an early Sunday morning surprise visit to the West Bank territory.
Blinken “made clear that Palestinians must not be forcibly displaced” and “expressed the commitment of the United States to working toward the realization of the Palestinians’ legitimate aspirations for the establishment of a Palestinian state,” his spokesperson Matthew Miller said.
The October attack on Israel by Hamas, designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S., killed more than 1,400, according to Israeli officials.
More than 9,400 people have also been killed in Gaza since the conflict began, the Palestinian Health Ministry said. Israel insists it takes steps to curb civilian casualties, though it has faced mounting criticism over the death and injury toll in Gaza.
Many pro-Palestinian activists and some Democratic members of Congress have called for a cease-fire in light of the Gaza casualties, but it’s a move the Biden administrations does not support. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in front of the White House on Saturday.
On Sunday, Stephanopoulos asked Finer about Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who is perhaps the most vocal Democrat in criticizing the administration’s support of Israel in the war. “The majority of the American people are not with you on this one,” she wrote Friday in a social media post. She also denounced Palestinian “genocide.”
Tlaib has herself come under fire for using controversial language around the conflict, including the phrase “from the river to the sea” — seen by many as a call for the end of Israel’s existence, though Tlaib has said it’s “an aspirational call for [Palestinian] freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence.”
Finer, when pressed by Stephanopoulos on Tlaib’s criticism, said that the Biden administration “strongly” disagreed with some of the words and phrases used amid the conflict — in what seemed to be a subtle rebuke of Tlaib — but he acknowledged there are “strong views on all sides,” including within the administration.
“We have seen strong comments made by members of Congress, we respect the fact that there are people who have deep personal ties to this conflict in way that may be unusual in terms of recent world events,” Finer said.
He continued: “All that said, some of the characterizations and the terms used, we believe, have technical definitions, have certain historical resonance and weight, and we do not accept their application to this particular war, even as we continue to raise our serious concerns about the toll that this is taking on civilian life and the need to do even more to protect it.”
Stephanopoulos asked Finer if Blinken made progress in the U.S. effort to secure Palestinian sovereignty alongside the Israelis — a long-stated goal of the U.S. that has repeatedly failed amid ongoing tensions in the Middle East.
“There is actually a lot of alignment among the United States and our Arab partners on the fact that we cannot go back to a pre-Oct. 7 mindset,” Finer argued.
“None of them are particular supporters of Hamas. That is quite clear. And all of them, I think, are strong supporters of the need for a two-state solution, which is what Secretary Blinken and President Biden have also been calling for, and the need to resume that work.” Finer added.
Despite the calls for cease-fire also coming from some American allies in the region, such as Egypt, Finer said: “Secretary Blinken spoke quite clearly to why we believe now is not the time for an overall ceasefire, although we have made clear that we would support and are advocating for humanitarian pauses to allow humanitarian aid to be distributed, to potentially facilitate the release of more hostages and to give some relief and to allow the Palestinian residents of Gaza to take a breath amid this heavy, heavy bombardment.”
In the meantime, Finer said, the U.S. continues to engage in “quiet, intensive negotiations” to secure the release of the more than 200 people, including Americans, believed to have been taken captive by Hamas after its terror attack.
“It is a huge priority for the president and for all of us to get as many of those hostages home. … And we believe that it’s still possible,” Finer said, “but that work is continuing and there is no agreement yet.”
(RICHMOND) — With three days until Election Day in Virginia’s pivotal legislative races, Gov. Glenn Youngkin believes the state can “lead” on rather than “fight” about abortion if enough of his fellow Republicans take office to enact a 15-week ban with exceptions, he said on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday.
Virginia is a battleground on the issue this year as the southern-most state that hasn’t widely banned or restricted abortion access since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.
Control of the state Legislature, currently divided between Democrats and Republicans, could decide the fate of abortion access.
“It’s one of the most divisive topics across Virginia,” Youngkin told “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos.
But, he argued, his stance — a “limit” on the procedure after 15 weeks with exceptions for rape, incest and saving the life of the mother — could be a compromise. Current law bans abortions after 26 weeks.
“I think this is one where Virginians come together around reasonableness. And it then allows us to move onto really important topics,” Youngkin said, going on to cite concerns about inflation, education and crime — while touting how the state has added workers and increased education and public safety funding while he’s been in office.
Abortion rights advocates and Democrats in Virginia have also heavily campaigned on the possibility of Republican-led restrictions, should the party take control of the Legislature as Youngkin predicts.
In September, Virginia Democratic Party Chairwoman Susan Swecker contended that Youngkin and “the MAGA extremists who are running to control the General Assembly” would seek to “overturn our rights and then keep taking more.”
When pressed on Sunday by Stephanopoulos about why Virginia shouldn’t preserve its current 26-week law, Youngkin said more restrictions were needed but he stressed that he viewed that as the consensus move.
“I think this is a choice between no limits and reasonable limits, and I think this is one where Virginians come together around reasonableness,” he said.
“This is a place we can come together and settle on a very difficult topic,” he said, “and I think we can lead here as opposed to fight.”
Youngkin won the governorship in what was seen as something of an upset in 2021 and he has since built an increasingly national profile. Asked by Stephanopoulos if he has ruled out joining the 2024 presidential race — especially in light of GOP front-runner Donald Trump’s unpopularity in general election polls — Youngkin said he “continues to be very focused on Virginia.”
The governor has been eyed by some prominent donors like billionaire Thomas Petterfly as a potential late entrant in the Republican primary race.
“To even have my name tossed around in this is incredibly humbling,” Youngkin said.
(WASHINGTON) — House Majority Leader Steve Scalise on Sunday defended Republicans seeking to send aid to Israel in its war with Hamas by cutting funding for the IRS to go after tax crimes, including by the wealthy.
“We passed a bill that addressed two problems that our Defense Department talks about: One, we need to get aid to Israel, and we do; but when our generals come and testify before committees like armed services, they say our debt is our biggest national threat. Not other countries like China, Russia — they say it’s our debt. We addressed both in this bill in a bipartisan vote,” Scalise told ABC “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos.
Stephanopoulos had noted that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the GOP-led funding package for Israel in the House would add $12.5 billion to the government’s deficit mostly because it would reduce the ability of the IRS to enforce tax collections.
Scalise was also separately pressed about the issue of the 2020 presidential election after Rep. Ken Buck, a Republican from Colorado, said last week that he would be retiring — and blamed conservatives’ focus on election denialism.
“Can you say unequivocally the 2020 [presidential] election was not stolen?” Stephanopoulos asked Scalise.
The majority leader repeatedly declined to answer directly, instead raising concerns with how some states changed their voting rules in 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
“So you just refuse to say unequivocally that the 2020 election was not stolen?” Stephanopoulos said.
“You want to keep rehashing 2020. We’re talking about the future,” Scalise responded.
(HAMBURG) — One of Germany’s largest airports was shut down for more than 18 hours after a man believed to be armed and holding his 4-year-old child hostage drove a vehicle through a security barrier and parked under a Turkish Airlines jet, authorities said.
The incident — described by police as “tense” — began Saturday night at the Hamburg Airport, and hostage negotiators worked for hours to get the suspect to release the child and surrender, officials said.
The incident was resolved peacefully around 2:30 p.m. local time when the suspect got out of his vehicle with his daughter and surrendered, the Hamburg police department said in an online statement.
“The hostage situation is over. The suspect has left the car with his daughter. The child appears to be unharmed,” according to the police statement.
The suspect, whose name was not immediately released, was taken into custody without incident, police said.
The incident unfolded around 8 p.m. local time Saturday when a vehicle crashed through a security barrier surrounding the airport, according to police. The suspect allegedly fired a gun twice in the air as he drove onto the airport’s tarmac and apparently hurled a burning bottle from the vehicle, police said.
The suspect drove to an area where airplanes usually park and stopped underneath a Turkish Airlines plane, according to local media reports.
All flights in and out of Hamburg Airport were suspended as police hostage negotiators and psychologists communicated with the suspect, according to Sandra Levgruen, a spokesperson for the Hamburg Police.
Levgruen said authorities suspect the incident stemmed from a child custody dispute. Levgruen said the child’s mother contacted police and reported that her daughter was taken.
Levgruen said that during the hourslong standoff, the suspect told negotiators that his life was a “heap of shards.”
(NEW YORK) — The attorney leading a bipartisan campaign to disqualify former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot in every state says there’s a “very good chance” a top court in Minnesota, Colorado or Michigan will rule on the issue before the end of the year — teeing up urgent review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“This question needs to be decided ideally before any ballots are printed, and I hope and expect it will be decided in our favor,” said Ben Clements, chairman and senior legal advisor of Free Speech for People, a legal advocacy group behind some of the constitutional challenges to Trump’s candidacy.
Judges in Colorado and Minnesota last week heard arguments in cases brought by groups of voters alleging an often-overlooked part of the Constitution — Section 3 of the 14th Amendment — bars Trump from their state ballots.
The district court in Colorado is expected to deliver an initial ruling this month.
A court in Michigan this week will take up a similar case against Trump as his attorneys counter-sue officials in that state to forcibly include him on the ballot.
“We the people have an obligation, the secretaries of state have an obligation, the courts have an obligation to enforce and give meaning to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Even if it might be politically hard,” Clements said on ABC’s “This Week.”
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was ratified after the Civil War to keep former Confederate rebels from being elected to government roles. It says anyone who took an oath “as an officer of the United States to support the Constitution” and who then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or gave “aid or comfort to the enemy” cannot hold office.
Trump’s critics allege he clearly violated Section 3 given his connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol and efforts to block certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory.
“It’s very clear cut,” said Harvard Law professor and constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe. “The odds are that at least one state court is going to decide that the language of the 14th Amendment means what it says and says what it means, applying in this obvious case.”
Trump has called the lawsuits an “absurd conspiracy theory” and “election interference.” His legal team argues in court documents that the First Amendment right to free speech protects the former president from allegations he engaged in insurrection.
Trump attorney Scott Gessler, defending him in court in Colorado last week, called the 14th Amendment challenge there “anti-democratic” and contended that “it looks to extinguish the opportunity … for millions of Coloradans, Colorado Republicans and unaffiliated voters to be able to choose and vote for the presidential candidate they want.”
The constitutional argument for disqualifying Trump gained steam after two prominent conservative legal scholars wrote an analysis in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review concluding that Section 3 is “valid, enforceable, and self-executing” — and applies to Trump.
“The fact that they are associated with the Federalist Society, that, unlike me, they are not liberals, I think adds credibility,” Tribe said.
The claim, under this theory, that each secretary of state has the power to unilaterally remove Trump from ballots is backed up, at least in part, by a 2012 appeals court ruling from now-Supreme Court justice — and Trump nominee — Neil Gorsuch.
In a dispute over a naturalized citizen seeking to run for president in Colorado, Gorsuch concluded “a state’s legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office.”
“This is a provision that’s supposed to operate whether or not you are prosecuted and convicted,” Tribe said of Section 3.
But so far, no secretary of state has enforced Section 3 on their own.
“Eligibility challenges of any kind, whether it’s residency or age or anything else, go through one channel and one channel alone, and that’s the court,” insisted Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat.
“We’re not an investigatory office. We’re not a law enforcement office. The ones who are going to make the legal calls about who engaged in what conduct and whether it rises to the level of constitutional disqualification — that’s what a court will do,” he said.
The case “is tough,” said Sarah Isgur, an ABC News legal analyst and former Trump Justice Department official.
“Was Jan. 6 an ‘insurrection’ or ‘rebellion’ in that legal sense of the term? Did Donald Trump ‘engage’ in that insurrection?” Isgur said of questions the courts will have to weigh. “The other problem, and I think this one’s more difficult, is that the language of Section 3 actually only applies to people who took the oath of office as officers of the U.S. When Donald Trump took the oath for president, he did not take the oath for an officer of the U.S.”
Clements believes his cases are compelling and will be difficult for the Supreme Court to ignore.
“The purpose of Section 3 was to say certain people engage in conduct that’s so egregious that is such a threat to our democracy,” he said, “that even if they have the support of the majority of Americans — they should not serve.”
