NATO leaders are descending on Washington. Here’s what to know

posted in: Politics | 0

By MATTHEW LEE AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — NATO leaders meet this week for a summit commemorating the 75th anniversary of the military alliance, which has never been larger and more focused but is also facing potentially existential threats from outside and within.

If Russia’s war in Ukraine, challenges posed by an increasingly aggressive China, and the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza weren’t enough, some key members’ commitment to defend their allies is coming under question.

There is deep uncertainty over President Joe Biden’s ability to beat his predecessor, NATO skeptic Donald Trump, in November to lead the most powerful member of the alliance.

While Biden’s political troubles are stirring concerns at home and abroad, countries in Europe are facing their own issues with a rise of far-right populism, particularly in France and Hungary, threatening what had been a bedrock pillar of post-World War II security and stability.

Here’s what to watch for at the three-day summit:

All eyes on Biden

Reeling from his disastrous June 27 debate performance and struggling to hold his reelection campaign together, Biden says people should look to his interactions at the NATO summit for proof that he is still strong and vigorous enough to lead.

Diplomats and analysts say they will be watching closely — although NATO leaders accept they have no control over American elections and are unlikely to weigh in publicly.

“The outcome of the November election matters enormously for NATO and pretty much all heads of state and government in the alliance feel the same way, even if they refuse to discuss it,” said Jeff Rathke, president of the American-German Institute at Johns Hopkins University.

The prospect of Trump returning to the White House has alarmed many in Europe who fear he may reduce U.S. commitments to NATO or Ukraine — or pull them completely.

“There is nothing that Biden’s NATO counterparts can do to affect that outcome, so they are in the uncomfortable position of being observers to a process that is critical to the alliance but over which they have no control,” Rathke said.

Biden, who has taken credit for strengthening NATO and resisting Russian President Vladimir Putin, said his confidence and competence would be on display.

But he will be under tremendous pressure to quell growing concern that he is not up to the job, as either de facto head of NATO or commander in chief of the alliance’s most important member.

“The unpredictability of what (Trump) might do and how quickly in office he might do it, leaves people on edge,” Rathke said. “It would be a significant jolt to NATO if he were to win.”

But it’s also not all about Joe

As much as the spotlight will be on Biden, 31 other leaders have a voice in NATO decision-making. The summit will be British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s first appearance on the world stage just days after winning a resounding victory in elections.

Although Starmer has signaled continued strong support for both NATO and Ukraine, gains made by far-right parties, as well as left-wing groups opposed to Western support for Israel’s war in Gaza, may dilute London’s influence.

Of more concern is turmoil in France, where President Emmanuel Macron’s government is facing political uncertainty after left-wing parties united to beat a surging far right in legislative elections but still didn’t win a majority in parliament. The far-right party, which is skeptical of NATO, greatly increased the number of seats it holds.

And there are Hungary and Turkey, the last two NATO members to hold out on allowing the newest members, Finland and Sweden, to join the alliance. Viktor Orban of Hungary raised alarm bells by visiting Russia last week for talks with Putin, and Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan remains on good terms with the Kremlin.

NATO’s future

In many respects, the alliance has never looked stronger. Since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, NATO gained those two members, bringing the total to 32. At the same time, Eastern and Central European members closer to Russia’s borders — the Baltic states, Poland and the Czech Republic — have stepped up support for Ukraine and NATO as an institution.

But NATO is fragile. Its policies must be made by unanimous consensus, and political upheaval in capitals hinders future decision-making. NATO leaders are expected once again to reaffirm their “open door” policy — that membership is open to any country meeting the requirements. But Ukraine won’t see its hoped-for invitation this week.

“In some ways, this NATO summit is coming as sort of the best of times and the worst of times. The best of times, in the sense that the alliance knows what it’s about,” said Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“But it’s also sort of the worst of times — obviously because of the war in Ukraine, challenges of ramping up European defense spending, concerns about the reliability of the United States,” he said.

Defense spending has been one of Trump’s biggest complaints about NATO, and he has repeatedly suggested that the U.S. wouldn’t defend countries that don’t meet the agreed-upon goal of spending 2% of gross domestic product on defense.

NATO officials have championed a significant increase — to 23 — in the number of allies meeting that commitment. Several more are expected to say they’re meeting that standard during the summit.

Keeping up support for Ukraine

Many NATO allies in the past year have signed their own security agreements with Ukraine to provide long-term guarantees of assistance for Kyiv to defend itself from Russia and prevent possible future attacks.

Russia made significant battlefield gains over the past several months during congressional delays in approving U.S. military aid. Those have been overcome, and a new multibillion-dollar package is expected to be announced this week.

But Ukraine’s goal is joining NATO, placing it under the alliance’s Article 5 collective security umbrella that obligates other members to come to its defense if attacked.

Membership is highly unlikely while the conflict rages. However, the allies plan to present Ukraine with a “bridge” to membership that would further lay out next steps.

In the meantime, countries are expected to pledge new military and economic support. Billions of dollars have already been sent to Ukraine, and officials say more is coming. Outgoing NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Friday that contributions of roughly $43 billion per year should be the baseline moving ahead.

Don’t forget about China

NATO allies also are focused on threats posed by China, including persistent disinformation campaigns aimed at sowing doubts in democratic systems. And they have repeatedly complained that Chinese sales of some tools and technology have allowed Moscow to rebuild Russia’s defense industrial base to wage war in Ukraine.

The U.S., in particular, has called out China for pursuing policies that threaten European security as Beijing seeks broader commercial relations with the countries of Europe.

For the third year in a row, leaders or top officials from Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea will attend the NATO summit for discussions on how to deal with Chinese threats in the South China Sea and beyond.

Americans are split over whether Trump should face prison in the hush money case, poll finds

posted in: Politics | 0

By BILL BARROW and LINLEY SANDERS | Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans are about evenly split on whether former President Donald Trump should face prison time for his recent felony conviction on hush money charges, according to a new poll from the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Among U.S. adults, 48% say the former president and presumptive Republican nominee should serve time behind bars, and 50% say he should not. About 8 in 10 Democrats think Trump should face prison time, while independents are divided. About half, 49%, of independents say he should, and 46% say he should not.

Most Republicans believe that Trump was mistreated by the legal system and say he should not face jail time. Democrats, conversely, are generally confident that the prosecutors, the judge and members of the jury treated Trump fairly as a defendant.

The results underscore the partisan divide in opinions about the case, which was the first brought against a current or former U.S. president. Both Trump and Democratic President Joe Biden have made the trial central to how they campaign to their respective bases: Biden frequently pointing out that Trump became the first former president to be convicted of a felony; Trump arguing that Democrats orchestrated the case against him for political purposes.

Trump’s sentencing was delayed from Thursday, three days before the Republican National Convention opens, to September at the earliest — when early voting in multiple states will already be underway.

“I thought it was all a sham to begin with,” said Dolores Mejia, a 74-year-old Republican in Peoria, Arizona, who has been closely following the trial. “I wasn’t surprised he got convicted because the court was in New York, a very blue state. … It seemed like it was thoroughly stacked against him.”

A small but notable slice of Republicans have a different view from the rest of their party. The poll found that 14% of Republicans approve of Trump’s conviction, while 12% believe he should spend time behind bars.

“I knew he had a big ego and questionable values when I voted for him the first time in 2016, but I thought the mantle of the presidency would be a humbling experience for him, and I was wrong,” said Leigh Gerstenberger, a Pennsylvania Republican who said he agreed with jurors’ finding in the New York case and believes Trump should spend at least some time behind bars.

“I could not be more disappointed in his conduct both in office and out of office,” the 71-year-old retiree said. “There are plenty of Americans who have spent time behind bars for lesser offenses. President Trump should not be treated any differently.”

Related Articles

National Politics |


To a defiant Biden, the 2024 race is up to the voters, not to Democrats on Capitol Hill

National Politics |


Angie Craig of MN is fifth Democratic lawmaker to urge Biden not to run again

National Politics |


With false promises, Florida sent migrants to Sacramento a year ago. Where are they now?

National Politics |


Barrett sought middle ground in Trump immunity case. This time Roberts said no.

National Politics |


Lost in the presidential race? These are the issues that matter to voters

About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are extremely or very confident that Trump has been treated fairly by either the jurors, the judge or the prosecutors. Slightly less than half, 46%, approve of the conviction in the case, in line with an AP-NORC poll conducted in June, while about 3 in 10 disapprove, and one-quarter are neutral.

Some Americans do not believe Trump should be imprisoned but reject his arguments that he’s been treated unfairly by the justice system.

“I don’t think the particular crime deserves time,” said Christopher Smith, a 43-year-old independent in Tennessee. “I see what he did, lying on business records because of an affair, as more of a moral crime,” Smith said, explaining that he believes prison should be a punishment for crimes that involve a convicted person actively harming another person.

The poll found that Americans are less divided about another recent high-profile case. Last month, Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was convicted of three felonies in federal court for lying about drug use when purchasing a gun. Six in 10 U.S. adults approve of Hunter Biden’s conviction, with much smaller political differences: About 6 in 10 Democrats approve, as do around 7 in 10 Republicans.

About 6 in 10 U.S. adults believe Hunter Biden should be sentenced to serve time in prison because of his conviction in this case, with Republicans slightly more likely than Democrats to agree that prison time is warranted.

The poll of 1,088 adults was conducted June 20-24, 2024, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

Barrow reported from Atlanta.

Taking Prison to Court: Fighting for the Right to Sleep

posted in: News | 0

Michael Garrett had been incarcerated since 1994 and had suffered nightly, unable to get any real rest for nearly 20 years before he decided to sue the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). He told his mother he was going to change the system. He would stand against policies that forced people to choose between necessities like sleep, breakfast, or clean clothes. He had a high school diploma, and he had wanted to be a lawyer when he was younger. He felt he had the skills and experience to advocate for himself and others. 

He remembers telling his mom that by the end of his efforts, the prison system might actually thank him. Today, he laughs as he recalls her response: “No way in hell.” 

In March 2013, Garrett filed a federal lawsuit against TDCJ while he was housed at the McConnell Unit in South Texas. The suit said the prison’s 24-hour schedule was so packed and security checks so frequent that people inside were only being allowed about four hours of sleep per night, and even those were interrupted. The result is prolonged sleep deprivation that he says is damaging his health and violates his Eighth Amendment rights, which protect against cruel and unusual punishment. 

Each night, Garrett struggles to fall and stay asleep. He lies in his bed and tries to block out the light and ignore the sounds—chatter among other prisoners, guards coming and going. But he can’t ignore the head count that happens just a couple of hours after he closes his eyes. 

His case describes his migraine headaches, high blood pressure, and seizures, though in an interview Garrett seems far from frail. He’s tall and strongly built. His hair is shorn close to his scalp, and he sports a mustache and a mid-length beard that’s streaked with white on one side. He speaks softly but confidently about his case.

Now 54 years old, Garrett has been fighting the behemoth prison system in court for more than a decade.

Initially, he represented himself, later winning the support of a civil attorney, and he recently managed to get the conservative Fifth Circuit to side with him for a third time, something one of his lawyers said must be “some sort of record.” Three times, federal district court judges ruled against Garrett, saying there was no constitutional right to sleep in prison and that he couldn’t prove his medical conditions were caused by sleep deprivation or that TDCJ was “intentionally” or “wantonly” withholding sleep from people inside. And three times, the Fifth Circuit reversed these decisions. The courts, circuit judges repeatedly declared, couldn’t unfairly dismiss Garrett’s concerns. 

Those victories are more remarkable given that during his first civil trial and appeal, Garrett did his own legal research, writing, and filings from his cell and the prison’s law library. Before the second civil trial, Garrett was appointed a criminal defense attorney, Naomi Howard, pro bono. Garrett’s would be her first civil case.  

“He’s patient, and he is in it for the long term.”

But she said Garrett’s intelligence and his understanding of administrative and legal processes made her work easier. “I mean, the man survived the Fifth Circuit without any help from me,” she said, emphasizing his pro se legal victory. 

The issue is compelling, but the case has endured because of his “will and determination,” Howard said. “He knows the rules. He knows the hurdles that lawyers face. He’s patient, and he is in it for the long term.”

Garrett was sentenced to life after being convicted of multiple felonies in Dallas and Collin counties—he talks about Dallas as where he “fell out.” He was born in Taos, New Mexico, and moved around often in his early years due to his dad’s job in the Air Force. To his father—a captain—education was paramount. Garrett graduated from Duncanville High School, in a suburb southwest of Dallas, then took a few college classes. “I wanted to be a lawyer, but I screwed up,” he said. 

So he’s cobbled together his own legal education. As a teen and young adult, he studied to become a paralegal in Virginia and Colorado. While in prison, he took law classes online. He put his studies to use in his own case and, eventually, in others. Today, he’s housed in the Estelle Unit in Huntsville, where he’s been designated a legal liaison for veterans, helping incarcerated vets with any legal issues they have. 

Garrett is part of a longstanding tradition of “writ writers” in Texas prisons. These are prisoners who engage with the legal system from inside and largely without lawyers’ help, filing petitions and motions related to their own or peers’ criminal cases, sometimes launching lawsuits based on alleged civil rights or constitutional violations. 

In addition to helping other prisoners file briefs or appeals in attempts to reduce or overturn their sentences, Garrett, who is Jewish, has helped advance lawsuits against TDCJ related to its restrictions on religious facial hair and special diets. 

(Michelle Pitcher)

“I’m supposed to do what it says in the Bible, help out, do the best I can,” he told the Texas Observer. “I’m not perfect … but I try my best. I try to do more right than I do wrong.” 

When he first entered prison in the 1990s, the writ-writing culture was strong, Garrett said. At any time, if there were 50 chairs in the law library, all would be occupied by people furiously working on typewriters to meet filing deadlines. Now, writ writers seem to have a more complicated reputation among staff and other prisoners, he said. Despite this, Garrett can still be found in one of the prison library chairs. He’s worked hard to keep the sleep deprivation lawsuit going. 

“I knew [the suit] was going to be a long road,” he told the Observer. “But I didn’t think it was going to be this long.” He said TDCJ has spent years in litigation to fight what he believes is a simple issue of broken policy. 

Other incarcerated people learned of Garrett’s lawsuit while doing research for their own complaints about the prison’s sleep schedule. He said he’s helped some initiate their own grievances related to sleep deprivation. 

As of mid-June, Garrett’s case against the prison system remains in limbo. The Fifth Circuit sided with Garrett in March, and the state has not indicated whether it plans to continue to appeal.

In the meantime, Garrett still faces the consequences.

Each night, as he gets into his bottom bunk bed, he forces himself to find some sense of calm. He’ll think back on a good conversation or recall a memory from before being locked up. Anything to distract himself from the ambient light, the sounds of the heavy mechanical gates opening and closing, the mosquitos coming in through cracked windows and making a meal of him. In his 9-by-5-foot cell—which he shares with a bunkmate—any comfort comes from his imagination. 

NYC Housing Calendar, July 8-15

posted in: News | 0

City Limits rounds up the latest housing and land use-related events, public hearings and affordable housing lotteries that are ending soon.

Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office

Mayor Eric Adams at a rally in April to kick off public review for his City of Yes for Housing Opportunity plan. The City Planning Commission will hold a hearing on the proposal Wednesday.

Welcome to City Limits’ NYC Housing Calendar, a weekly feature where we round up the latest housing and land use-related events and hearings, as well as upcoming affordable housing lotteries that are ending soon.

Know of an event we should include in next week’s calendar? Email us.

Upcoming Housing and Land Use-Related Events:

Monday, July 8 at 1 p.m.: The NYC Planning Commission will host a public review session. More here.

Tuesday, July 9 at 11 a.m.: NYC Council’s Subcommittee on Zoning and Franchises will host a hearing on the proposed Bronx Metro North Station Area study. More here.

Tuesday, July 9 at 9:30 a.m.: NYC’s Landmarks Preservation Commission will meet. More here.

Wednesday, July 10 at 10 a.m.: The NYC Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Mayor Eric Adams’ proposed “City of Yes for Housing Opportunity” plan, which would ease zoning restrictions to spur more housing development. More here.

Thursday, July 11 at 2 p.m.: The Department of City Planning will host a public scoping meeting on a proposal to rezone downtown Jamaica. More here.

Thursday, July 11 at 6 p.m.: Neighbors Together will host “Community Voices: A Convo Around East New York’s Affordable Housing Crisis,” at Brooklyn’s New Hope Family Worship Center. More here.

Saturday, July 13 at 10 a.m.: Bronx Neighborhood Housing Services will host an affordable housing fair featuring programs and resources for affordable home-ownership. More here.

NYC Affordable Housing Lotteries Ending Soon: The New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) are closing lotteries on the following subsidized buildings over the next week.

Andrews Avenue South Senior Residence, Bronx, for households earning between $0 – $74,580.

138 Brucker Boulevard Apartments, Bronx, for households earning between $105,875 – $218,010.

Williamsburg Apex, Brooklyn, for households earning between $106,458 – $218,010.

3991 Saxon Avenue Apartments, Bronx, for households earning between $105,840 – $250,380.