Joe Manchin Preaching Fiscal Responsibility From His Yacht Feels a Bit on the Nose

Jack Holmes
Fri, October 1, 2021, 11:58 AM·3 min read

Photo credit: screenshot - Twitter

We've got a new offering from the Department of On-the-Nose Metaphors courtesy of Joe Manchin, his yacht, and some activists on kayaks. There's been a sense throughout the extended infrastructure saga that key players therein are beyond the reach of their constituents and the public, striding the marble halls of the Capitol fielding the occasional question about the reconciliation bill's price tag or intra-Democratic Party squabbling. Rarely is the West Virginia senator—or Arizona's Kyrsten Sinema, for that matter—asked why he is blocking the most significant investment in everyday American families in generations, or why he opposes a critical framework to begin decarbonizing our transportation and energy systems in earnest. There is seldom much discussion of what's actually in the $3.5 trillion bill, a list that includes changes to the tax code that would ensure the bill does not actually cost $3.5 trillion. There is almost never any mention of the fact that we spend vastly more on bombs and bullets and planes that don't work every year without even a moment's hesitation over inflation or The National Debt. Made-up nonsense like the filibuster or the reconciliation process itself are taken for granted.

Sometimes, it just takes some activists in kayaks, I guess. They floated up to Manchin's sprawling yacht in Washington, D.C. on Thursday and asked some questions that need to be asked, creating a visual in the process that speaks just as loudly. Here's one of 100 senators, imbued with superpowers thanks to the quirks of our constitutional system, leaning over the ramparts to speak to the common folk below as they ask, with no little desperation, why we can't fund dental coverage as part of Medicare.

Manchin still seems to be sticking to this idea that the bill is just too big and it makes him uncomfortable. This at least points towards the notion that there is some size of bill that he would support. His compatriot in this mission to torpedo the domestic agenda of a president in his own nominal party, Kyrsten Sinema, can scarcely assure us of even that much. Sinema has donors to feed, but her strategy to avoid passing a set of vital and popular proposals is increasingly chaotic and inscrutable.

The Arizona senator has reportedly left Washington on Friday as the machinations over the two bills—reconciliation and the parallel Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework—continue apace. There appeared a completely disorienting missive in Axios in which anonymous "allies" of "the wine-drinking triathlete" talked up her imperviousness to political pressure. (The article obsesses over the wine thing throughout.) Sinema is apparently opposed to raising taxes on corporations and the rich too much, but she's also concerned about The National Debt, but she also took a central role crafting the separate bipartisan bill which is "paid for" through accounting witchcraft. Also, nobody cares about The National Debt. They just don't want to pay taxes to fund social programs.

Sinema's poll numbers are taking a turn, but that doesn't seem to be affecting her calculus. And meanwhile, through these weeks and weeks of drag-on legislating, the West was on fire and seemingly everywhere else in this country was under threat of drowning. The boosted pandemic unemployment benefits are gone, and more and more people will be going to work sick. None of this seems to matter? Just a completely bewildering time to be alive.

HIS BASE 
Manchin winning cautious applause from GOP voters in West Virginia
David M. Drucker

WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Sat, October 2, 2021


Republicans in West Virginia are pleasantly surprised as they watch Sen. Joe Manchin almost single-handedly derail Democratic plans to pass $3.5 trillion in fresh domestic spending.

The Democratic former governor has made a Washington career out of threatening to block massive spending bills and other liberal legislation, only to fall in the line with party leadership and left-wing colleagues. West Virginia Republicans even have a nickname for Manchin based on this pattern of political maneuvering since his election to the Senate in 2010: “Yes-no Joe.” But something is different about Manchin’s opposition to the size and scope of the $3.5 trillion bill.

This time around, Manchin appears dug-in and unflappable in the face of pressure from President Joe Biden and liberal Democrats in the House and Senate. Republicans back home in West Virginia cannot help but notice, even if begrudgingly.

“Are we glad that he is opposed to the ultra-liberal, crazy Green New Deal? Yes," said John Findlay, the executive director of the West Virginia Republican Party. “We’re hopeful that it lasts.”

Manchin, 74, during his tenure on Capitol Hill, has cultivated the image of a centrist. Yet, his votes on the Senate floor tell a different story. Manchin’s lifetime score on legislation with the conservative Club for Growth is a paltry 21%. And under former President Barack Obama, the conservative group Heritage Action for America awarded the senator an average score on legislation of just 13% — meaning he was a reliable vote for the administration.

But under Biden and in the face of ambitious liberal proposals from Democrats in the House and Senate, Manchin has been a fly in the ointment of key elements of his party’s fiscal and social agenda. In a Senate that is evenly split between the parties and controlled by the Democrats only because of Vice President Kamala Harris’s tiebreaking vote, Manchin is singularly empowered to obstruct legislation such as the $3.5 trillion reconciliation package.

And Manchin is doing so, just as he signaled he would to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York months ago.

The senator said then, and reiterated this week, that he favors a reconciliation package that spends no more than $1.5 trillion. Manchin opposes a provision of the bill that would raise corporate taxes above his preferred threshold — and he is demanding that the legislation include the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funds from being used to finance abortions. Reconciliation packages are filibuster-proof and require a simple majority to pass. Without Manchin, Democrats are stuck.

“While I am hopeful that common ground can be found that would result in another historic investment in our nation, I cannot — and will not — support trillions in spending or an all or nothing approach that ignores the brutal fiscal reality our nation faces,” Manchin said in a statement. He also has ruffled Democratic feathers by refusing to vote to junk the 60-vote “filibuster” threshold for legislation.

Manchin has company. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona is opposing the reconciliation package in its current form, citing problems with the legislation similar to those voiced by her fellow Democrat from West Virginia (a few additional Senate Democrats are silently cheering Manchin and Sinema on). Both have sparked the ire of Democratic activists — in Washington and back home. However, their opposition makes for great general election politics, including in swing-state Arizona and deep-red West Virginia.

But between them, it is Manchin who is doing all of the talking. In West Virginia, some Republicans are cynical about the senator’s intentions. In a state former President Donald Trump in 2020 won with 68.6% of the vote, Manchin has no choice but to make a big deal about his apprehension to go along with his party’s liberal agenda, they say, especially if he wants to run for reelection in 2024.

In fact, some Republican insiders are convinced Manchin is simply preserving his political viability. Democrats, once dominant in the state, are now firmly ensconced in the minority. But Republican operatives also concede that Manchin is impressing his conservative constituents, even if they are girding for the possibility that he will cave in the end.

“Conservative voters in West Virginia, whether they are Democrats, independents, or Republicans, will view any effort to control government spending favorably,” said Mark Blankenship, a GOP strategist who is based in the state.

Joe Manchin said in January he'd be okay with $4 trillion in infrastructure, but now he wants a lot less. Here's a full timeline of his price tags.

Juliana Kaplan,Ben Winck
Sat, October 2, 2021

Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat, talks on the phone during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee hearing on June 9, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. The committee is hearing testimony about the Fiscal Year 2022 budget request for the Department of Health and Human Services. 

Photo by Al Drago-Pool/Getty 

Sen. Joe Manchin is once again pivotal to Democrats' legislative plans. And he's been far from consistent.

A recently published memo showed Manchin only backs a $1.5 trillion reconciliation package. He supported a $4 trillion plan in January.


Here's a timeline of Manchin's spending limits - and how they've both aided and obstructed Biden's agenda.

If you can't keep track of Democrats' massive spending push, you aren't alone. Even the party's most impactful senator has changed course multiple times in the past year.

West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin is a pivotal figure in the passage of any Democratic legislation right now. The party holds on to a razor-thin margin, and losing the moderate Democrat's support would doom much of President Joe Biden's legislative agenda.

The party entered the last week of September with several policy battles to win. Among the most important is Biden's $3.5 trillion spending plan, which would be the country's biggest expansion of social programs since the New Deal of the 1930s. It comes in addition to a $1 trillion bill for roads and bridges that passed the Senate in a bipartisan vote.

As negotiations have dragged on, Manchin has emerged as a clear opponent of the larger plan, and thanks to him and fellow moderate Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, of Arizona, the $3.5 trillion proposal is all but dead. Manchin is now pushing a package that's less than half the proposed size. In January, he sang a different tune.
In 9 months, Manchin shrunk his price tag by over $1 trillion

In July, Manchin presented his infrastructure proposals to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Politico revealed and Insider confirmed. His $1.5 trillion topline is far lower than the reconciliation package around which Democrats have coalesced.

Manchin reaffirmed his commitment to $1.5 trillion on Thursday, telling reporters that "I believe in my heart" that's the most that the country can afford right now.

In January, Manchin said he'd back up to $4 trillion in infrastructure spending, as then-president-elect Joe Biden laid out his plans for office.

"The most important thing? Do infrastructure. Spend $2, $3, $4 trillion over a 10-year period on infrastructure," Manchin told Inside West Virginia Politics in January.

He reaffirmed his support for a larger package in April, as Senate Republicans readied their own much smaller infrastructure package.

"We're going to do whatever it takes. If it takes $4 trillion, I'd do $4 trillion, but we have to pay for it," Manchin told reporters at the time, saying that he would go big if the situation warranted it.

The document obtained by Politico is dated July 28, meaning that it came about two weeks after Senate Democrats announced their $3.5 trillion reconciliation deal. Ahead of that deal, Manchin said any Democratic-only plan would need to be fully paid for, and not require borrowing money.

After Manchin presented his proposals to Schumer, all 50 Senate Democrats voted to advance the $3.5 trillion blueprint and send it to the House. That unanimous support is now on the ropes.

Now, it's progressives versus moderates

For months, progressives have warned they'll torpedo any attempt to bring the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package without the $3.5 trillion party-line reconciliation moving in tandem. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has attempted to do just that, a risky gamble as there is no guarantee the reconciliation bill would pass afterward.

After the progressive wing of the party pushed back, a Thursday vote on the bipartisan package was pulled as Democrats regrouped and confusion reigns about what comes next.

"We started off with the $10 trillion number. They wanted to bring that down to six, so we obliged, negotiating in good faith. Then several months ago, we had an agreement with Senator Manchin … saying we will move forward on this $3.5 trillion," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told NBC's Garrett Haake. "Since then, some folks in our party have reneged on that agreement, and that's where I think we have an issue of trust."

What is clear, though, is Manchin's opinion will continue to dictate where the package goes next. And a statement on Wednesday at least signaled where his head is at: "Spending trillions more on new and expanded government programs, when we can't even pay for the essential social programs, like Social Security and Medicare, is the definition of fiscal insanity."

WV EXPORTS NAT GAS NOT COAL

Joe Manchin Just Cooked the Planet

Jeff Goodell
Fri, October 1, 2021,

Joe Manchin - Credit: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin just cooked the planet. I don’t mean that in a metaphorical sense. I mean that literally. Unless Manchin changes his negotiating position dramatically in the near future, he will be remembered as the man who, when the moment of decision came, chose to condemn virtually every living creature on Earth to a hellish future of suffering, hardship, and death.

Quite a legacy. But he has earned it.

Last night, during the insane and at times comical negotiations over President Biden’s infrastructure bill and his $3.5 trillion Build Back Better agenda (aka the reconciliation bill), Manchin let it be known that he was not going to vote for any measure above $1.5 trillion. And because Democrats can’t afford to lose a single vote in the Senate, if Manchin won’t vote for it, the reconciliation bill won’t pass.

The $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill includes a long list of programs and tax reforms that will help reduce poverty and improve the social safety net, such as universal child tax credit, universal pre-K, free community college, and an expansion of Medicare. But it is also the primary vehicle for President Biden’s ambitious climate action agenda, including cuts in subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, and, most importantly, the Clean Energy Performance Package (CEPP), which is a clean energy standard that incentivizes power companies to shift away from fossil fuels.

From a climate point of view, the importance of these climate policy measures is impossible to overstate. In order to have a decent chance at maintaining a habitable planet, scientists agree that the world needs to zero out carbon pollution by 2050. And to have any shot at that, we have to start moving now. Every year, every month, every hour of delay makes that goal more difficult to achieve, and increases the risks of accelerated climate chaos that will make this past summer of hellish wildfires, storms, and droughts look like the good old days.

The zero carbon by 2050 goal is not a political slogan or environmentalist’s dream. It is what the best scientists in the world are telling us we need to do to avert climate catastrophe. It is also the basis for Biden’s goal of a 100 percent clean energy grid by 2035, and a 50 percent reduction in CO2 pollution by 2030. For Biden, taking strong action on climate is not just important in itself. It is also key to giving the U.S. climate negotiators something to bring to the table at the upcoming Glasgow climate talks, which begin on October 31st. After President Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Paris climate deal, the rest of the world has looked at the U.S. with distrust. Passage of strong climate measures in Congress before the Glasgow meeting would not only rehabilitate America’s standing as a nation that takes its contribution to solving the climate crisis seriously, but give U.S. negotiators leverage to push other nations to take action.

For Biden, and for the world, it all rests on the ability to get the reconciliation bill through Congress. With Republicans not willing to do anything, this was the only chance they had to get climate policy through. It was a gamble, but it was a gamble they had to take.

But Manchin is fucking it all up. To him, climate is a tomorrow problem. As he said recently on CNN’s State of the Union: “What’s the urgency?”

Manchin is one of a small group of centrist Democrats who pretend to be motivated by fiscal restraint. They have pitched themselves as the sober adults in the room full of crazy Socialist progressives who are spending like drunken sailors on government programs. Manchin says he can only support $1.5 trillion, that is the number that he believes is responsible, and he won’t go beyond that. “I’m at $1.5 trillion — I think $1.5 trillion does exactly the necessary things we need to do,” he said.

Yes, $1.5 trillion is a big number. And yeah, this is politics, you take the best deal you can get and move on. Half a loaf is better than no loaf.

But the problem is, it’s not close to what we need on climate. The policy specifics of the reconciliation bill are not yet clear, but what is clear is that Manchin won’t go along with anything that hurts the coal industry, including a reduction of the massive fossil fuel subsidies lavished on Big Oil and Big Coal. And if the clean energy standard is included (which is not at all clear at this point), Manchin will be sure it is weakened to the point of being ineffectual.

All in all, at a time when the world is looking to the U.S. to take bold action on climate and show some leadership, Manchin will be sure that what emerged from all this is, at best, some weak tea of climate policy that might not look like outright denial or dismissal but will do little to solve the problem. And, more importantly, that will do nothing to hasten the end of fossil fuels. As he put it in this memo outlining his negotiating position on the reconciliation bill, he made clear he wants assurances that nothing in the bill would get in the way of the production and burning of fossil fuels.

For anyone who cares about the future of life on this planet, Manchin’s moves are willfully destructive for a number of reasons.

First, his pretense toward fiscal sanity is absurd posturing. In a statement, he decried “the brutal fiscal reality” the nation faces as reason for his opposition. The $3.5 trillion, which is spread out over 10 years, is about 1.2 percent of GDP. How brutal is that? Especially when you consider that Manchin voted for every military budget in the last decade, which cost $9.1 trillion, without ever once whining about any brutal fiscal reality. 

As MSNBC’s Chis Hayes tweeted: “THERE IS NO BRUTAL FISCAL REALITY THE NATION FACES; IT IS ENTIRELY MADE UP.”

And the price of inaction on climate is a lot more than the price of action. It’s not just the tens of billions of dollars or so spent every year recovering from natural disasters. It’s also the price of the priceless: How do you put a dollar value on the extinction of monarch butterflies? How do you put a price tag on the 600 Americans who died during the heat wave that hit the Pacific Northwest last summer? How do you run the numbers for a vanishing Arctic? As climate journalist Amy Westervelt put it with characteristic aplomb: “The change these motherfuckers are signing us up for is so many times more radical than any climate policy ever proposed.”

You can argue that the real action on climate happens at the local level. Or that the astounding decline in clean energy prices will drive the revolution. But without a big push from government, it won’t happen fast enough, nor will the deep injustices of climate chaos be addressed in any meaningful way.

Second, Manchin is obviously a tool of the fossil fuel industry, which has poured millions of dollars into lobbying and ads to kill the reconciliation bill. The American Petroleum Institute, the industry’s biggest trade group, is running ads that celebrate Manchin for his opposition to the plan. Manchin has received more campaign donations from the oil, coal and gas industries than any other senator. “Help us thank Senator Joe Manchin,” reads one recent ad, “for being a champion of American made energy.” In fact, Manchin is, as journalist Mark Hertsgaard points out, “a modern day coal baron” himself, earning roughly half a million dollars a year in dividends from millions of dollars of coal stock he owns.

Third, the coal industry that Manchin is working so hard to protect is already a dead man walking. Coal is in freefall. In 2020, 543 million tons of coal were mined in the U.S., about half as much as a decade earlier. In 2012, 90,000 people were employed in coal mines; today, it’s only 40,000. There are more florists in America than coal miners today.

Coal mining put food on the table for generations of workers. But it mostly funneled money to the coal barons who owned and controlled the mines. In the past 150 years or so, billions of tons of coal have been mined and blasted out of West Virginia. If fossil fuels brought wealth and justice and prosperity, West Virginia would have streets paved with gold. Instead, it is a landscape of heartbreak and toil. According to data from the West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy, the state’s poverty rate of 16 percent is the sixth highest among the 50 states. It has the second lowest median household income in the nation. And nearly a third of all children in West Virginia live in a family that is either not getting enough to eat or is behind on housing payments. The state leads the nation in population decline, with young West Virginians fleeing to build lives elsewhere. You hear jokes about how people have overtaken coal as West Virginia’s top export.

The environmental legacy of Big Coal in West Virginia is equally toxic. Abandoned mines and thousands of uncapped oil and gas wells pollute local air and water. Mountaintop removal, a mining practice that involves deforesting mountain peaks and then blasting them apart to get at coal underneath, has turned large parts of the state into a moonscape.

Many West Virginians are done with coal and want a different future. A June poll by Data for Progress and the Chesapeake Climate Action Fund found that a clear majority of West Virginians, 56 percent, support a clean electricity transition by 2035, while only 36 percent oppose such a transition.

But Manchin himself is a man from the past. One of the tragedies here, not just for the people of West Virginia, but for the future of life on this planet, is that Manchin could have played this moment differently. With the leverage he has in the negotiations, he could have demanded massive investments in clean energy and social programs for West Virginia. He could have used it as a moment to ensure prosperity for his state and stability for our climate. He could have been a hero. Instead, he is a man out of time, selfish and sentimental and determined to take everyone down with him.

Philippine leader asks officials to ignore corruption probe


In this photo taken from video shown at United Nations headquarters, 

Rodrigo Roa Duterte, president of the Philippines, remotely addresses

 the 76th session of the U.N. General Assembly in a pre-recorded message, 

Tuesday Sept. 21, 2021. (UN Web TV via AP)


JIM GOMEZ
Fri, October 1, 2021, 7:49 AM·2 min read


MANILA, Philippines (AP) — The Philippine president says he will prohibit Cabinet officials from attending an ongoing Senate inquiry on suspected irregularities in massive government purchases of medical supplies in a brewing constitutional crisis.

President Rodrigo Duterte told Cabinet members in a televised meeting Thursday night that he'll issue a written order barring them and other officials, including three secretaries dealing with the coronavirus pandemic, from attending the inquiry.

The tough-talking president accused critical senators of using the televised hearings to gain political mileage ahead of next year’s national, local and congressional elections.


He said Sen. Richard Gordon, who leads the inquiry, has failed to produce any evidence of corruption in government purchases of protective masks and face shields after several hearings and had berated invited guests like a “despot.”

“That power to compel people to be there does not include abuse, does not include despotic ways, does not include making a very reckless but deliberate statement which is an affront to the constitution when you say, `I will conduct the investigation until kingdom come,’” Duterte said.

If Cabinet officials ignore Senate summons and are ordered arrested for contempt, Duterte said he would order the police and the military to refrain from helping the Senate sergeant-at-arms enforce the arrests.

“I’m the commander-in-chief anyway of all uniformed personnel of government. I am ordering the police and the military and everybody to stay out of this trouble. Do not get involved, don’t follow, because we have a crisis already,” Duterte said.

Gordon’s committee has been investigating what he and other senators said were the overpricing and other possible irregularities in purchases of masks and other medical supplies from a Philippine company, the Pharmally Pharmaceutical Corp.

Registered in 2019 with a capital of 625,000 pesos ($12,500), the company managed to secure multi-billion-peso (multi-million-dollar) government contracts to supply the gear as the Duterte administration scrambled to deal with coronavirus surges last year.

A Chinese businessman, who Duterte once appointed as an economic adviser, has been linked to Pharmally as a financier of the medical supplies the company purchased from China and eventually supplied to the Philippine government, Gordon and other senators said, citing testimony from a company official.

Duterte and Pharmally officials have denied allegations the supplies were overpriced. Duterte has also said he authorized health officials to skip the required bidding to deal with the pandemic.

Duterte has shot back by publicly accusing Gordon of misusing funds as chairman of the local Red Cross, an allegation the senator dismissed. Gordon criticized Duterte for defending government and company officials who have been linked to the irregularities and said the Senate investigation wound not be deterred by the president's threats.

Reproductive justice marches take place in aftermath of Texas abortion ban

Women's March rallies for reproductive freedoms kicked off Saturday. 

File Photo courtesy of Women's March/Twitter

Oct. 2 (UPI) -- Over 600 marches took place Saturday across the United States over fear of losing reproductive freedoms in the aftermath of Texas' abortion ban.

The Texas bill banning abortions once a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which doctors say can been as soon as six weeks after conception, took effect last month. Activists fear other states will implement their own version of one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country.

"We don't say this lightly: We're at grave risk of losing our reproductive freedoms," the Women's March account tweeted. "All of us need to fight back. That's why on October 2, we're marching in every state."

In Washington, D.C., the "Rally for Abortion Justice," kicked off at 1:30 p.m. from Freedom Plaza with demonstrators marching to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The New Orleans brass band the Soul Rebels and singer-songwriter Adeline performed at Freedom Plaza to energize the crowd ahead of the march.

Latina comedian and activist Cristela Alonzo hosted the rally at Freedom Plaza, along with other speakers across the coalition for abortion justice.

Some other speakers slated to give remarks at the D.C. rally included actress and activist Busy Philipps, known for her role in Dawson's Creek, and transgender swimmer and advocate for other trans athletes, Schuyler Bailar, according to the Women's March website.

The Women's March, which also protested the 2017 inauguration of President Donald Trump after his remarks on a 2005 Access Hollywood tape about "grabbing" women's genitals and other offensive remarks, is organizing the marches. More than 90 groups were also involved, including Planned Parenthood, which provides reproductive healthcare, and the Center for American Progress, a progressive public policy research and advocacy organization, CNN noted.

The National Parks Service confirmed to CNN that organizers applied for a permit for 10,000 in Washington, much smaller than the 2017 Women's March against Trump's inauguration, which drew more than 450,000 people to the capital.

The Women's March website said "everyone is required to wear a mask and practice social distancing" amid the COVID-19 pandemic, and urged anyone feeling ill to attend virtual events instead.

A sister rally in Houston announced that Padma Lakshmi and Gail Simmons of Top Chef, Shareenduh Tate, executive director of George Floyd Foundation, and Sabrina Greenlee, a community activist, author and domestic violence survivor, would participate, along with local leaders.

Counterprotests were also planned, including a D.C. group called "Take Feminism Back," which hosted an event to "counter pre-born violence" in Wisconsin's capital city Madison, CNN reported.

Battle for abortion rights hits America's streets

By AFP
Published October 2, 2021


Protesters attend a rally in Washington to defend access to abortion, part of a wave of marches planned for Oct 2, 2021 - Copyright AFP KARIM JAAFAR
Maria DANILOVA

Carrying signs with slogans like “my body, my choice, my right” thousands of women rallied Saturday in Washington at the start of a day of nationwide protests aimed at countering a conservative drive to restrict access to abortions.

The perennial fight over the procedure in America has become even more intense since Texas adopted a law on September 1 banning almost all abortions, unleashing a fierce counterattack in the courts and in Congress, but with few public demonstrations until now.

Two days before the US Supreme Court, which will have the final say on the contentious issue, is due to reconvene, nearly 200 organizations have called on abortion rights defenders to make their voices heard from coast to coast.

The flagship event was in the nation’s capital Washington, where a crowd of all ages — mostly women but men too — rallied under sunny skies at a square near the White House, many wearing purple masks with the words “bans off my body.”

Protesters danced to pop music blared from loudspeakers, as activists addressed the crowd in recorded interviews broadcast on large screens, and slogans like “abortion is healthcare” or “abort the Texas Taliban” were held aloft on signs, or daubed on protesters’ bodies.

A handful of counter protesters shouted “abortion is murder” but there was no violence.

Later the crowd was to march toward the Supreme Court, which nearly 50 years ago recognized the right of women to have an abortion in its landmark Roe v. Wade ruling.

Now the court, stacked by former president Donald Trump with conservative justices, seems ready to head in the opposite direction.

“Women are humans, we are full humans, and we need to be treated like full humans,” said Laura Bushwitz, a 66-year-old retired teacher from Florida, wearing a dress with portraits of women activists and politicians, like Michelle Obama.

“We should be able to have our own choice on what we want to do with our bodies. Period,” she said. “Hear that, SCOTUS,?” she asked, referring to the US Supreme Court.

The court has already refused to block the Texas law and has agreed to review a restrictive Mississippi law that could provide an opportunity to overturn the 1973 Roe v Wade precedent, that guaranteed the legal right to an abortion up until a fetus is viable outside the womb.

Rallies were planned in at least two conservative states’ capitals, Austin and Jackson, as well as in more than 600 cities in all 50 states. According to the organizers, nearly a quarter million people are expected to turn out across the United States.

“Together, we are joining hands to advocate for a country where abortion isn’t just legal — it’s accessible, affordable and destigmatized,” said the organizers of the Rally for Abortion Justice in a statement.

The group called on Congress to enshrine the right to abortion in federal law, to protect it from any possible reversal by the Supreme Court.

A bill to that effect was adopted a week ago in the House of Representatives, which is controlled by Democrats, but has no chance of passing the Senate where Republicans have enough votes to block it.

– ‘Patriarchal desire’ –

In 2017, a first “Women’s March” was held the day after Trump’s inauguration, rallying millions of opponents of the Republican billionaire who had been accused of sexism.

Since then, other demonstrations have failed to turn out such huge numbers, in part due to internal divisions over accusations of anti-Semitism leveled at one of the organizers.

But that page seems to have been turned.

Saturday’s participants are a broad coalition including small feminist groups, community and local organizations as well as the giant of family planning, Planned Parenthood.

“We’re taking to the streets once again, for the first time in the (Joe) Biden era,” the statement said. “Because a change in the Oval Office hasn’t stopped the politicized, perverse, and patriarchal desire to regulate our bodies. If anything, it’s only gotten even more intense.”

That escalation has been spurred on by Trump’s appointment of three conservative justices to the Supreme Court, emboldening local conservative elected officials across to the country to embark on an anti-abortion offensive.

So far this year, 19 states have adopted 63 laws restricting access to abortions.

If the high court were to overturn Roe v. Wade, every state would be free to ban or allow abortions.

That would mean 36 million women in 26 states — nearly half of American women of reproductive age — would likely lose the legal right to an abortion, according to a Planned Parenthood report released Friday.

Thousands march for abortion rights in US amid increased restrictions

ByAFP
Published October 2, 2021


Protesters march past the US Capitol as they take part in the Women's March and Rally for Abortion Justice in Washington on October 2, 2021 - Copyright AFP ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS
Maria DANILOVA

Wearing pink hats and T-shirts and shouting “Hands off my body,” tens of thousands of women took to the streets across the United States on Saturday in nationwide protests aimed at countering a conservative drive to restrict access to abortions.

In Washington, close to 10,000 protesters rallied in a square near the White House under sunny skies before marching to the US Supreme Court, which will have the final say on the contentious issue.

The protesters held signs that read “Mind your uterus” and “Make abortion legal,” with several women — and men — dressed like late Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, America’s iconic women’s rights crusader, who died last year.

The perennial fight over the procedure in America has become even more intense since Texas adopted a law on September 1 banning almost all abortions, unleashing a fierce counterattack in the courts and in Congress, but with few public demonstrations until now.

Two days before the Supreme Court is due to reconvene, rallies took place in several hundred American cities from coast to coast.

“Women are humans, we are full humans, and we need to be treated like full humans,” said Laura Bushwitz, a 66-year-old retired teacher from Florida, wearing a dress with portraits of women activists and politicians.

“We should be able to have our own choice on what we want to do with our bodies. Period,” she said. “Hear that, SCOTUS,?” she asked, referring to the US Supreme Court.

Michaellyn Martinez, a woman in her seventies with closely cropped hair, told AFP she got pregnant at the age of 19, several years before the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case, when the Supreme Court guaranteed the right to an abortion up until a fetus is viable outside the womb.

Martinez ended up having a daughter and getting married only to divorce two years later. “It changed my whole life — not having access to birth control and abortion,” she said. “I don’t want us to go back to the time when I was a young woman.”

At the Supreme Court, the marchers were met by counterprotests. A chain of riot police kept the two groups apart.

– ‘A long and ugly fight’ –

In New York, activists gathered in Manhattan’s Foley Square holding signs that read “We are not ovary-acting” and “I have a vagenda.”

Juliette O’Shea, 17, organized about 30 teens from her Manhattan high school to attend the rally to “show solidarity” with Texas.

“We’re trying to show that we are a strong and unified group of people who will not be silent when crazy abortion bans like the one in Texas are put into place,” O’Shea told AFP. “I think that this will be a long and ugly fight.”

The Supreme Court has already refused to block the Texas law and has agreed to review a restrictive Mississippi law that could provide an opportunity to overturn Roe v Wade.

So far this year, 19 states have adopted 63 laws restricting access to abortions.

Alexis McGill Johnson, president of Planned Parenthood, told protesters in Washington the story of a Texas woman who had to drive more than 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers), six hours one way, across three state lines, to get an abortion in Colorado — alone, because she was afraid that anybody helping her might get sued.

“No matter where you are, this fight is at your doorstep right now,” McGill Johnson said. “This moment is dark, but that is why we are here.”

The organizers of the Rally for Abortion Justice have called on Congress to enshrine the right to abortion in federal law, to protect it from any possible reversal by the Supreme Court.

A bill to that effect was adopted a week ago in the House of Representatives, which is controlled by Democrats, but has no chance of passing the Senate where Republicans have enough votes to block it.

Former president Donald Trump’s appointment of three conservative justices to the Supreme Court emboldened local conservative elected officials across the country to embark on an anti-abortion offensive.

If the high court were to overturn Roe v. Wade, every state would be free to ban or allow abortions.

That would mean 36 million women in 26 states — nearly half of American women of reproductive age — would likely lose the legal right to an abortion, according to a Planned Parenthood report released Friday.

Hundreds of marches begin nationwide as protesters decry 'unprecedented attack' on reproductive rights

Christine FernandoSavannah BehrmannJeanine Santucci
USA TODAY

WASHINGTON – Protesters are gathering in support of reproductive rights Saturday at hundreds of Women's March protests planned across all 50 states and Washington, D.C. The marches come a month since a Texas law banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy took effect.

In Washington's Rally for Abortion Justice, a crowd of protesters gathered Saturday morning around a banner proclaiming "Bans off our bodies!" as Cyndi Lauper's "Girls Just Want to Have Fun" blasted from speakers.

A baby in a stroller nibbled at a sign saying "I can't believe I'm a baby and I have to protest already," and volunteers passed out masks with “I march for abortion access” on them.

Teresa Hamlin from Chesapeake, Virginia, said she finds it “unbelievable that we have to be back out here."

“I did this in the '70s and '60s and now we're back out again," Hamlin said. "It breaks my heart, but they've kicked the hornet's nest, and we're not going back”

In Texas, Democrat Mike Collier, who is running for lieutenant governor, joined protesters, tweeting "men need to shut up, sit down, and listen."

In addition to the Texas law, the possibility of other states passing similar legislation and a Mississippi challenge to the landmark Roe v. Wade decision have created an "unprecedented attack" on reproductive freedoms, said Women's March executive director Rachel O'Leary Carmona.

"For a long time, groups of us were ringing the alarm bell around abortion access and many of us were told we were hysterical and Roe v. Wade will never be overturned," Carmona said. "But now it's clear that our fears were both rational and proportional."

The Supreme Court in September declined to block Texas' abortion law – a move the Women's March said "effectively took the next step towards overturning Roe v. Wade," according to its website. The marches were planned ahead of the Supreme Court reconvening Oct. 4.

More than 400 protesters gathered in Savannah, Georgia, for Saturday's Women's March. Melissa Nadia Viviana, co-organizer of the local march, said the message she wanted to communicate is that women need to have control of their bodies and their future.

“It's the only way we can spread equality throughout this country, so there's no going back to having other people make decisions for our uterus in the 21st century,” Viviana said. “We cannot progress at the same level as men if we don't have control of our reproductive freedom.”

'Women rising,' but numbers falling: 2020 March tries to reenergize amid flagging enthusiasm

'Shadow docket':Senate battles over Supreme Court 'shadow docket' in the wake of Texas abortion law

In Indianapolis, hundreds protested the Texas law and worried about a ripple effect felt closer to home. Some dressed as handmaids from "The Handmaid's Tale," and 27-year-old Van Wijk dressed as the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Indiana has passed laws restricting abortion access over the last few years. The laws have been both upheld and overturned by various courts, but the state Legislature has not definitively outlined any next steps.

Republicans in the state, including House Speaker Todd Huston, say they are "closely watching" the Texas ban and they will "continue to examine ways to further protect life at all stages."

“I think right now, compared to recent years, this is a very frightening moment,” Karen Celestino-Horseman, one of the Indianapolis rally organizers, told the Indianapolis Star, part of the USA TODAY Network.

The marches have drawn opposition for years from conservatives who say the Women's March doesn't represent the views of all women. Among the critics of this year's march was Jeanne Mancini, president of an anti-abortion group called March for Life.

Smaller groups of counterprotesters showed up at some of the demonstrations. In D.C., about 100 anti-abortion protesters met the marchers near the Supreme Court. Blasting Christian rock, they yelled “abortion is murder,” prompting the marchers to respond: “abortion is health care.”

In Ocala, Florida, anti-abortion protesters stood opposite an intersection from the pro-abortion rights group. Police were on scene to intervene between the opposing demonstrators, who sometimes crossed the road and engaged in disagreements.

Carmona called the abortion rights marches a "coalition effort" with the Women's March partnering with more than 90 other organizations, including Planned Parenthood, National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice and the Working Families Party.

The inaugural Women's March in 2017 started to protest against the election of then-President Donald Trump. Last fall, a march protested now-Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

"This is a moment to consolidate our movements and to demonstrate to policymakers and to the Supreme Court that we will not go quietly, that this is going to be a fight," Carmona said.

Contact News Now Reporter Christine Fernando at cfernando@usatoday.com or follow her on Twitter at @christinetfern.

Contributing: Austin Miller, The Ocala Star-Banner; Laura Nwogu, Savannah Morning News; Rashika Jaipuriar, Indianapolis Star

WOMENS MARCH

Watch Live: Women's March Returns to DC to Rally for Abortion Rights

The Women’s March Rally for Abortion Justice is set for Saturday in Washington, D.C. and an anti-abortion rights group has planed a counterdemonstration.

By Sophia Barnes, NBC Washington Staff and Associated Press

• Published 2 hours ago • Updated 32 mins ago

The Women’s March in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, is set to rally crowds of demonstrators in support of abortion rights and against a Texas law that bans most abortions.

Streams of protesters, many carrying signs reading "bans off our bodies," converged at Freedom Plaza for a rally before a planned march to the Supreme Court building. Up to 100,000 people are expected to attend rallies in the District and across the country, the Women’s March said

Numerous demonstrators paid homage to former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, highlighting the movement's current effort pressuring the courts to uphold abortion rights.

The march is part of “a fight to secure, safeguard, and strengthen our constitutional right to an abortion,” Rachel O'Leary Carmona, executive director of the Women's March, said in a statement. “And it’s a fight against the Supreme Court justices, state lawmakers, and senators who aren’t on our side — or aren’t acting with the urgency this moment demands.”

TEXAS ABORTION LAW12 HOURS AGO
Justice Department Urges Judge to Halt Texas Abortion Law

Guns, God and Abortion Are on the Supreme Court's Docket This Term: Here's a Preview of What to Expect

This year, the demonstration is dubbed the Rally for Abortion Justice. Organizers planned this march for early October because the Supreme Court of the United States is set to reconvene on Monday, and a key abortion case is on their docket.

The march comes a day after the Biden administration urged a federal judge to block the nation’s most restrictive abortion law, which has banned most abortions in Texas since early September.

It's one of a series of cases that will give the nation's divided high court occasion to uphold or overrule the landmark Roe v. Wade decision from 1973, which made abortion legal for generations of American women.

WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 02: Protesters attend the Rally For Abortion Justice on October 02, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Leigh Vogel/Getty Images for Women’s March)

An opponent of women's access to abortion called this year's march theme “macabre.”

“What about equal rights for unborn women?” tweeted Jeanne Mancini, president of an anti-abortion group called March for Life.

Anti-abortion rights group Students for Life of America has planned a counter-demonstration across the street from the Women's March in D.C.

The Women's March has become a regular event — although interrupted by the coronavirus pandemic — since millions of women turned out in the United States and around the world the day after the January 2017 inauguration of Trump. Trump endorsed punishing women for getting abortions and made the appointment of conservative judges a mission of his presidency.

Without Trump as a central figure for women of varied political beliefs to rally against, and with the pandemic still going strong, organizers talk of hundreds of thousands of participants nationally Saturday, not the millions of 2017.


In a medication abortion, a pregnant person can end their pregnancy by taking mifepristone and misoprostol pills after medical consultation. Danielle Campoamor explains how the drugs work and how to check if they are legal in your state.

Latina comedian and activist Cristela Alonzo will host the rally in the capital, which will feature speakers from Planned Parenthood and other advocates and providers of abortion access. Actress Busy Philipps and swimmer Schuyler Bailar are due to take part.

Groups that planned to attend include the National Organization of Women (NOW) and Texas pro-abortion rights coalition Trust Respect Access.

Attendees are asked to follow COVID-19 protocols, including wearing masks and social distancing.

In Photos: Women's March in DC Rallies for Abortion Rights

Thousands of women march in Southern California as abortion-rights showdowns loom

In Southern California, the largest protest is in Los Angeles, a gathering that has typically drawn thousands of people. But demonstrations are planned throughout the region, from Orange County to the Inland Empire, from Redondo Beach to the San Gabriel Valley.

Demonstrators gather at the Los Angeles Women’s March from Pershing Square to City Hall on Saturday, October 17, 2020. (Photo by Keith Birmingham, Pasadena Star-News/ SCNG)

By RYAN CARTER | rcarter@scng.com, BRENNON DIXSON | bdixson@scng.com, HUNTER LEE | hlee@scng.com and PIERCE SINGGIH | psinggih@scng.com | Daily News
PUBLISHED: October 2, 2021 at 7:59 a.m. | UPDATED: October 2, 2021 at 9:15 a.m.

Myriad “sister marches,” spinoffs of the fifth annual Women’s March in Washington D.C. today, were expected to fill the streets of Southern California. At least 600 marches are planned around the nation.

Local protesters joined activists across the nation, aiming to decry a restrictive Texas abortion law and draw attention to an upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision on Mississippi’s abortion laws — a case that pro choice advocates fear could overturn Roe v. Wade.

The marches trace their roots to protests that arose after President Donald Trump’s election, but these will be the first since he left office. During his tenure, key Supreme Court appointments shifted the court into a conservative direction and the table for abortion-rights showdowns in years to come.

In Southern California, the largest protest is planned in Los Angeles, a gathering that has typically drawn thousands of people. But demonstrations are planned throughout the region, from Orange County to the Inland Empire, from Redondo Beach to the San Gabriel Valley.

Demonstrations were expected in Riverside, Temecula, Redlands Pasadena, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, Malibu, North Hollywood, Redondo Beach, San Pedro, Simi Valley, Westchester and West Hollywood. And there are more: map.womensmarch.com/.

Some of these rallies were planned by larger women’s or political groups, but others are more grassroots, including those planned by individuals who say they feel a responsibility to protect the futures of young women and teach them about the importance of reproductive rights.

“Abortion care is a critical component of healthcare. It needs to be equitable and accessible for everyone regardless of their socioeconomic status,” said state Sen. Lena Gonzales, who was expected to participate in the Long Beach event. Her district encompasses parts of Long Beach and the South Bay. “California has been a leader in reproductive freedom and we will continue fighting these national attacks that threaten the quality of life for so many in our state and country.”

“This is not just for us. It’s for our children and our children’s children,” Emiliana Guereca, president of the Women’s March Foundation, said in an emailed statement. “It’s beyond time for the United States to recognize that access to abortion care is a key part of access to human rights.”

Opponents of legal abortions have won significant victories in court and in houses of government in recent months.

A recent Texas law banned abortions after six weeks, which is when healthcare providers can detect a fetal heartbeat but before most women know that they’re pregnant. It has been described as the strictest abortion law since the Supreme Court’s decision on Roe v. Wade in 1973, and it provides no exceptions for victims of rape or incest.

The law also allows state residents to sue medical clinics, doctors, nurses and people who drive women to get an abortion for damages of up to $10,000. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to keep the law in place, though the reasoning from the majority was one of standing.

And in December, the conservative-leaning Supreme Court will hear arguments from Mississippi lawmakers who want to ban abortions in that state after 15 weeks.

In Los Angeles, a collection of Downtown streets were scheduled to be closed for the march, which was set to wind from Pershing Square and concluding with a rally at City Hall.

Participants planned to gather at 9 a.m. at Pershing Square, 532 S. Olive St., with the march at 10 a.m. to City Hall, 200 N. Spring St. Organizers, including Women’s March Foundation, will hold a program with guest speakers, 11 a.m.-2 p.m.

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation announced these street closures in the area:

From 9 a.m. to 2 p.m.
Olive and Hill streets between First and Fifth streets
First Street between Hill and Spring streets

From 2 to 8 p.m.
Spring Street between First and Temple streets

The LADOT adds that if the crowd reaches into the thousands, there may be more impacted streets that will require closures. For updates, LADOT’s Facebook, www.facebook.com/ladotofficial. Website: bit.ly/3F6Fzu2.

PRIVATE FOR PROFIT PRISONS PAID FOR BY THE UNVACCINATED
Alabama Gov. Ivey approves COVID-19 relief funds for prison construction


Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signs legislation in 2019. Earlier this week, she signed a bill funding new prison construction. File Photo courtesy of Alabama governor's office
| License Photo


Oct. 2 (UPI) -- Alabama will build new prisons with federal COVID-19 pandemic relief dollars under a bill signed by the state's Republican governor.

The $1.3 billion plan to build two new men's prisons is intended to address overcrowding issues in its current facilities that have drawn scrutiny from the U.S. Department of Justice, reports AL.com.

Signed by Gov. Kay Ivey, the legislation directs $400 million from the American Rescue Plan Act, a coronavirus relief bill passed by Congress earlier this year. The rest will be funded with a $785 million bond and $154 million in state funds.

Ivey, speaking at a press event Friday, called the plan an "Alabama solution" to problems facing the state's prison system that has been subject to 15 federal mandates over conditions while draining state funds. She said the construction of the prisons was a major step forward in reforming the state's criminal justice system.

"Addressing these challenges through the construction of new prison facilities is the legal and fiscally sound thing for us to do," she said. "And it's also morally the right thing to do to ensure we have safe working conditions for our corrections staff and proper rehabilitation capabilities for the inmates."

One of the 4,000-bed men's prisons will be built in Elmore County and will focus on addiction treatment programs as well as mental health services and education. The second will be built in Escambia County.

The move had drawn criticism from Democrats. Earlier this week, U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell, D-Ala., said in a statement that he was "deeply disturbed" by the state's plan to use the money on prisons while COVID-19 was still spreading rapidly among its population.

RELATED States can use pandemic funds to extend unemployment benefits

"Alabama currently has the highest COVID-19 death rate in the country," he said. "To be clear, the current state of the Alabama prison system is abhorrent, but the use of COVID-19 relief funds to pay for decades of our state's neglect is simply unacceptable."

U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., who chairs the House judiciary committee, sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen asking her to block states from using relief money for prisons, The Hill reported.

He said that using the money to "fuel mass incarceration" runs against the purpose of the relief package, harming communities of color already disproportionately impacted by over-incarceration and the effects of the pandemic.

RELATED Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signs law banning COVID-19 'vaccine passports'

Ivey responded with a statement, telling Nadler to focus on the federal government's own fiscal challenges.

"The Democrat-controlled federal government has never had an issue with throwing trillions of dollars toward their ideological pet projects," she said in the statement. "These prisons need to be built, and we have crafted a fiscally conservative plan."

MONOPOLY CAPITALISM
CD&R wins $10bn auction for UK supermarket Morrisons

Oct 2, 2021 

|

Clayton, Dubilier & Rice (CD&R) has won the auction for Morrisons with a $9.5bn bid, paving the way for the U.S. private equity firm to take control of Britain’s fourth-biggest supermarket group.

The Takeover Panel, which governs M&A deals in the UK and arranged the auction, said on Saturday CD&R had offered 287 pence a share, while a consortium led by the Softbank owned Fortress Investment Group offered 286 pence.

CD&R’s victory marks a triumphant return to the UK grocery sector for Terry Leahy, the former chief executive of Britain’s biggest supermarket chain Tesco, who is a senior adviser to the firm.

The winning bid was only slightly higher than CD&R’s 285 pence a share offer that Morrisons’ board recommended in August.

The board, due to meet later on Saturday, is expected to recommend shareholders accept the new offer at a shareholder meeting slated for Oct. 19.

Morrisons and CD&R had no immediate comment on the outcome of the auction.

If shareholders approve the offer, CD&R could complete its takeover of Morrisons by the end of the month, the second UK supermarket chain in a year to be acquired by private equity after a buyout of no.3 player Asda completed in February.

Eggs and Butter

Bradford, northern England, based Morrisons started out as an egg and butter merchant in 1899. It listed its shares in 1967 and is Britain’s fourth-largest grocer after Tesco, Sainsbury’s and Asda.

The battle for Morrisons, which has been running since May, is the most high-profile of a raft of bids for British companies this year, reflecting private equity’s appetite for cash-generating UK assets.

CD&R has committed to retain Morrisons’ Bradford headquarters and its existing management team led by CEO David Potts, execute its existing strategy, not sell its freehold store estate and maintain staff pay rates. The commitments are not, however, legally binding.

Leahy was CEO of Tesco for 14 years to 2011 and will now be reunited with Morrisons CEO Potts and Chairman Andrew Higginson, two of his closest lieutenants at Tesco.

Potts, who joined Tesco as a 16-year-old shelf-stacker, will make more than 10 million pounds from selling his Morrisons shares to CD&R. Chief operating officer Trevor Strain will pocket about 4 million pounds.

Fortress is left to lick it wounds and mull the cost of the saga. Documents published in July showed that Fortress expected to incur banking and advisory fees and expenses of 263.5 million pounds.

In a statement the group said it wished those involved with Morrisons the best for the future, adding: “The UK remains a very attractive investment environment from many perspectives, and we will continue to explore opportunities to help strong management teams grow their businesses and create long-term value.”

Sainsbury’s has in recent months been mooted as another possible target for private equity and investment companies.

Source: Yahoo Finance

Donald Trump said AOC makes the old men in Congress 'shiver in fear' because she has a strong base like him, report says

Alia Shoaib
Sat, October 2, 2021

Former President Donald Trump (L), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (R) Getty Images (L), AP Photo (R)

Donald Trump said AOC elicited fear in Congress because she had a strong base like him, a new book extract says.


Trump said the AOC was a "failed geek", but praised her for her outsize influence in the Democrat Party.


He made the comments at a closed-door event with business leaders including Jeff Bezos in 2019.

Former President Donald Trump said that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made old men "shiver in fear" in the halls of Congress, reports say.

Trump reportedly made the comments at an event attended by a hundred business leaders in 2019, according to an excerpt from the book "In Trump's Shadow: The Battle for 2024 and the Future of the GOP" by journalist David Drucker, seen by The Daily Mail.

In the closed-door meeting, Trump called the New York congresswoman a "failed geek" but expressed admiration for her outsize influence within the Democratic Party.

"Let me tell you something about AOC. I've watched her walk down the halls of Congress, and I see these old men shiver in fear. They shiver in fear whenever they see her," Trump said.

"You want to know why? Because AOC has a base, just like me."

Trump's comments elicited "nervous laughter" from the crowd, according to the book extract quoted by The Daily Mail.

Trump also reportedly told the business leaders that reelecting him was the only way to continue their work and defeat AOC's Green New Deal.

"You definitely want to see me reelected if you want to keep being in business," Trump said.

"You've got this Green New Deal. It's completely crazy. It'll completely shut down American energy. And it's from this failed geek, Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez."

Trump's speech was an early reelection pitch, the book said, which came shortly after the Democrats regained control of the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterm elections.

High-profile business leaders in the audience included Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and CEOs of companies like JP Morgan, Boeing, and Blackrock.

Some members of Trump's entourage were also in attendance, including Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and his daughter Ivanka Trump.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Afghan girls' soccer squad find new home in Ronaldo's Portugal

Afghan girls' soccer squad find new home in Ronaldo's Portugal

Captain of Afghanistan's national women football team Muhtaj poses for a portrait with teammates at the Belem Tower in Lisbon

Catarina Demony
Thu, September 30, 2021

LISBON (Reuters) - Leaving her homeland Afghanistan was painful, says 15-year-old Sarah. But now safely in Portugal, she hopes to pursue her dream of playing soccer professionally - and perhaps meeting her idol, star striker Cristiano Ronaldo.

Sarah was one of several players from Afghanistan's national female youth soccer squad who fled their country in fear after the Taliban hardline Islamist movement seized power in August.

Portugal has granted asylum to the young footballers.

"I'm free," she said, smiling from ear-to-ear as she visited Lisbon's landmark Belem Tower on the River Tagus with her mother and teammates.

"My dream is to be a good player like Ronaldo - and I want to be a big business woman here in Portugal," she said.

She hoped to go back home one day but only if she can live freely.

Her mother, who requested that Reuters did not use their surname, had experienced first-hand a previous era of Taliban rule from 1996 to 2001. She is less optimistic they will ever be able to return.

Taliban leaders have promised to respect women's rights but under their first government, women could not work and girls were banned from school. Women had to cover their faces and be accompanied by a male relative when they left home.

A senior Taliban official said after the Aug. 15 takeover that women would probably not be allowed to play sport because it was "not necessary" and their bodies might be exposed.

"The reason we took on this mission (to evacuate the team) was to ensure they can aspire and play the sport they love," said Farkhunda Muhtaj, captain of the Afghanistan women's senior national team, who flew to Lisbon on Wednesday to surprise the youth team players.

From her home in Canada, where she works as assistant soccer coach at a local university, Muhtaj has been in touch with the girls throughout the evacuation process, codenamed Operation Soccer Balls. It managed to rescue a total of 80 people - the female youth team and family members, including babies.

They landed in Portugal on Sept. 19.

When Muhtaj showed up on Wednesday night, the girls were ecstatic. They hugged. Some could not hold back the tears.

"They been through so much, so many challenges," Muhtaj said. "They were just resilient and they were able to make it happen."

One relative, 25-year-old Zaki Rasa, recalled the chaos at the Kabul airport, where he spent three anguished days. He is now delighted to be in Portugal and wants to continue his studies.

"There is some uncertainty about the future," he said. "The important thing is that we are safe."

(Reporting by Catarina Demony; Editing by Andrei Khalip and Angus MacSwan)

Fleeing Afghan women footballers seek new home from Pakistan

Women's football is so frowned upon by the Taliban that they have allegedly burned down some players' homes. DW spoke to the former national team captain, Khalida Popal, who's trying to get her compatriots to safety.

Watch video03:52 Women banned from sports under Taliban: Khalida Popal speaks to DW

A group of 32 Afghan women football players and their families are seeking safe haven from the Taliban in third countries after fleeing to Pakistan, the former Afghanistan women's team captain said on Friday.

Women's team captain Khalida Popal told DW that some of the players "had their houses burned down and some family members were taken by the Taliban."

Some 135 people — 32 players and coaches as well as their families — "were displaced from their provinces" because of their involvement in women's football, Popal added.

"They are in Pakistan and we are trying our best to find a host country for them," she said.

'Stay strong,' Popal urges

Popal told women in the country not to give up: "I am feeling sorry and sad for my people, for especially women in Afghanistan. I want to tell you, stay strong. We are trying our best to help you in any way possible."

Khalida Popal, former Afghan national team captain, has fought hard for women soccer players

Popal, who now lives in Denmark, said she was happy that some of her fellow soccer players could get out of the country and have the opportunity to play the sport they have grown to love.

"As one of the founding members of the Afghanistan Women's first National Team I found my freedom through football," Popal told DW. "The foundation of women's football was based on standing up for our rights for the women of Afghanistan, but also challenging the culture that was taking the basic human rights from women."

Popal had even warned women and girls who played football to burn their kits and delete their social media accounts back in August when the Taliban seized power.

Watch video 04:36 From the archives: Popal on DW TV on September 9 this year

Escaping Afghanistan

Over 3,000 women and girls who played football in Afghanistan feared for their lives after the withdrawal of Western forces and the Taliban takeover of the country.

The Taliban had banned women and girls from education or playing sports between 1996 to 2001.

On September 8, a Taliban spokesman, Ahmadullah Wasiq, told Australian broadcaster SBS that "Islam and the Islamic Emirate do not allow women to play cricket or play the kind of sports where they get exposed."

The women's national senior and youth teams were the first to leave the country, securing asylum in Australia and Portugal respectively.

Watch video 01:46 Afghanistan girls' soccer team safe in Portugal

The Football for Peace international organization arranged the departure of Afghan provincial football players and their families to Pakistan throughout September.

The Pakistan football federation received the first group of them at its headquarters in Lahore with red flowers in mid-September.

jc/fb (Reuters, AFP)