Politics

By Helen Coster

(Reuters) -A judge in Delaware on Sunday delayed by one day the start of the trial in a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox Corp over the network’s coverage of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, a courthouse spokesperson said.

“The Court has decided to continue the start of the trial, including jury selection, until Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. (1300 GMT),” said Judge Eric Davis, according to the statement, which did not provide a reason for the delay.

“I will make such an announcement tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7E,” he added.

Davis had said on Thursday he expected to conclude jury selection on Monday and to proceed to opening statements.

Dominion and Fox did not immediately reply to requests for comment about the delay.

The trial is one of the most closely watched U.S. defamation cases in years, involving a leading cable news outlet with numerous conservative commentators.

Dominion has accused Fox of ruining its reputation by airing baseless claims that its machines secretly changed votes in favor of Democrat Joe Biden, who defeated then-President Donald Trump, a Republican, in the 2020 presidential election.

Dominion is asking for $1.6 billion in damages, a figure Fox has said is unrealistic and based on flawed economic modeling.

An expert report commissioned by Dominion attributed scores of lost contracts to Fox’s coverage, though much of the report remains under seal.

Fox Corp reported nearly $14 billion in annual revenue last year.

Dominion has said Fox’s conduct was damaging to American democracy and that the network must be held accountable, while Fox said on Friday that Dominion’s lawsuit was a threat to press freedom.

“While Dominion has pushed irrelevant and misleading information to generate headlines, Fox News remains steadfast in protecting the rights of a free press,” Fox said in a statement.

The primary question for jurors is whether Fox knowingly spread false information or recklessly disregarded the truth, the standard of “actual malice” that Dominion must show to prevail in a defamation case.

Dominion says defamatory statements were aired on Fox shows including “Sunday Morning Futures,” “Lou Dobbs Tonight” and “Justice with Judge Jeanine.”

Dominion alleges that Fox staff, ranging from members of the newsroom to the board of directors, knew the statements were false but continued to air them to avoid losing viewers to far-right outlets.

Fox had argued that coverage of the vote-rigging claims was inherently newsworthy and protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee of press freedom.

Davis rejected that argument in a ruling last month on both parties’ competing motions for summary judgment.

Fox has also said that Dominion cannot pin actual malice on the individuals whom Dominion says were responsible for the defamatory statements.

(Reporting by Helen Coster and Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Sandra Maler and Jamie Freed)

source

By Helen Coster

(Reuters) – The start of Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion defamation trial against Fox has been pushed back by a day, the judge said on Sunday, with a source familiar with the matter saying the media giant was pursuing settlement talks.

The source, who was not authorized to speak publicly, told Reuters that Fox was seeking a possible settlement. The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal also reported that Fox was pursuing settlement talks, citing sources.

Dominion is suing Fox Corp and Fox News in a defamation lawsuit over the network’s coverage of the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

“The Court has decided to continue the start of the trial, including jury selection, until Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. (1300 GMT),” Judge Eric Davis said in a statement, without providing a reason for the delay.

“I will make such an announcement tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7E,” he added.

Davis had said on Thursday he expected to conclude jury selection on Monday and to proceed to opening statements.

A Dominion spokesperson declined to comment, while Fox did not immediately reply to requests for comment on the delay.

Davis on Wednesday sanctioned Fox News, handing Dominion a fresh chance to gather evidence after Fox withheld records until the eve of the trial.

The evidence includes recordings of Rudy Giuliani, former U.S. President Donald Trump’s lawyer, saying in pre-taped Fox appearances that he did not have any evidence to back up the false allegations of election rigging by Dominion in the 2020 race that are at the heart of the lawsuit.

The recordings were made by a former Fox employee who is currently suing the network.

Davis said he would also very likely tap an outside investigator to probe Fox’s late disclosure of the evidence and take whatever steps necessary to remedy the situation, which he described as troubling.

Fox said in a statement on Wednesday that it “produced the supplemental information” to Dominion “when we first learned it.”

CLOSELY WATCHED

The trial is one of the most closely-watched U.S. defamation cases in years, involving a leading cable news outlet with numerous conservative commentators.

Murdoch is set to testify, along with a parade of Fox executives and on-air hosts, including Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro.

The trial is considered a test of whether Fox’s coverage crossed the line between ethical journalism and the pursuit of ratings, as Dominion alleges and Fox denies.

Dominion has accused Fox of ruining its reputation by airing baseless claims that its machines secretly changed votes in favor of Democrat Joe Biden, who defeated then-President Trump, a Republican, in the 2020 presidential election.

Dominion is asking for $1.6 billion in damages, a figure Fox has said is unrealistic and based on flawed economic modeling.

An expert report commissioned by Dominion attributed scores of lost contracts to Fox’s coverage, though much of the report remains under seal.

Fox Corp reported nearly $14 billion in annual revenue last year.

Dominion has said Fox’s conduct was damaging to American democracy and that the network must be held accountable, while Fox said on Friday that Dominion’s lawsuit was a threat to press freedom.

“While Dominion has pushed irrelevant and misleading information to generate headlines, Fox News remains steadfast in protecting the rights of a free press,” Fox said in a statement.

The primary question for jurors is whether Fox knowingly spread false information or recklessly disregarded the truth, the standard of “actual malice” that Dominion must show to prevail in a defamation case.

Dominion says defamatory statements were aired on Fox shows including “Sunday Morning Futures,” “Lou Dobbs Tonight” and “Justice with Judge Jeanine.”

Dominion alleges that Fox staff, ranging from members of the newsroom to the board of directors, knew the statements were false but continued to air them to avoid losing viewers to far-right outlets.

Dominion also cites evidence that some hosts and producers thought the guests spreading the false statements, including former Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, could not back up their allegations.

Fox had argued that coverage of the vote-rigging claims was inherently newsworthy and protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee of press freedom.

Davis rejected that argument in a ruling last month on both parties’ competing motions for summary judgment.

Fox has also said that Dominion cannot pin actual malice on the individuals whom Dominion says were responsible for the defamatory statements.

Fox has said Dominion must prove that a “superior officer” at the network or its parent company “ordered, participated in, or ratified” wrongdoing. The network has argued that doubts about the claims among certain individuals cannot be attributed to the organization as a whole.

(Reporting by Helen Coster and Dan Whitcomb; additional reporting by Leela de Kretser and Jack Queen; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Jamie Freed)

source

By Helen Coster

WILMINGTON, Delaware (Reuters) -The start of Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion defamation trial against Fox has been pushed back by a day, the judge said on Sunday, with a source familiar with the matter saying the media giant was pursuing settlement talks.

The source, who was not authorized to speak publicly, told Reuters that Fox was seeking a possible settlement. The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal also reported that Fox was pursuing settlement talks, citing sources.

Dominion is suing Fox Corp and Fox News in a defamation lawsuit over the network’s coverage of the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

“The Court has decided to continue the start of the trial, including jury selection, until Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. (1300 GMT),” Judge Eric Davis said in a statement, without providing a reason for the delay.

“I will make such an announcement tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7E,” he added.

Davis had said on Thursday he expected to conclude jury selection on Monday and to proceed to opening statements.

Dominion and Fox declined to comment on the delay.

Davis on Wednesday sanctioned Fox News, handing Dominion a fresh chance to gather evidence after Fox withheld records until the eve of the trial.

The evidence includes recordings of Rudy Giuliani, former U.S. President Donald Trump’s lawyer, saying in pre-taped Fox appearances that he did not have any evidence to back up the false allegations of election rigging by Dominion in the 2020 race that are at the heart of the lawsuit.

The recordings were made by a former Fox employee who is currently suing the network.

Davis said he would also very likely tap an outside investigator to probe Fox’s late disclosure of the evidence and take whatever steps necessary to remedy the situation, which he described as troubling.

Fox said in a statement on Wednesday that it “produced the supplemental information” to Dominion “when we first learned it.”

CLOSELY WATCHED

The trial is one of the most closely-watched U.S. defamation cases in years, involving a leading cable news outlet with numerous conservative commentators.

Murdoch is set to testify, along with a parade of Fox executives and on-air hosts, including Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro.

The trial is considered a test of whether Fox’s coverage crossed the line between ethical journalism and the pursuit of ratings, as Dominion alleges and Fox denies.

Dominion has accused Fox of ruining its reputation by airing baseless claims that its machines secretly changed votes in favor of Democrat Joe Biden, who defeated then-President Trump, a Republican, in the 2020 presidential election.

Dominion is asking for $1.6 billion in damages, a figure Fox has said is unrealistic and based on flawed economic modeling.

An expert report commissioned by Dominion attributed scores of lost contracts to Fox’s coverage, though much of the report remains under seal.

Fox Corp reported nearly $14 billion in annual revenue last year.

Dominion has said Fox’s conduct was damaging to American democracy and that the network must be held accountable, while Fox said on Friday that Dominion’s lawsuit was a threat to press freedom.

“While Dominion has pushed irrelevant and misleading information to generate headlines, Fox News remains steadfast in protecting the rights of a free press,” Fox said in a statement.

The primary question for jurors is whether Fox knowingly spread false information or recklessly disregarded the truth, the standard of “actual malice” that Dominion must show to prevail in a defamation case.

Dominion says defamatory statements were aired on Fox shows including “Sunday Morning Futures,” “Lou Dobbs Tonight” and “Justice with Judge Jeanine.”

Dominion alleges that Fox staff, ranging from members of the newsroom to the board of directors, knew the statements were false but continued to air them to avoid losing viewers to far-right outlets.

Dominion also cites evidence that some hosts and producers thought the guests spreading the false statements, including former Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, could not back up their allegations.

Fox had argued that coverage of the vote-rigging claims was inherently newsworthy and protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee of press freedom.

Davis rejected that argument in a ruling last month on both parties’ competing motions for summary judgment.

Fox has also said that Dominion cannot pin actual malice on the individuals whom Dominion says were responsible for the defamatory statements.

Fox has said Dominion must prove that a “superior officer” at the network or its parent company “ordered, participated in, or ratified” wrongdoing. The network has argued that doubts about the claims among certain individuals cannot be attributed to the organization as a whole.

(Reporting by Helen Coster and Dan Whitcomb; additional reporting by Leela de Kretser and Jack Queen; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Jamie Freed)

source

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. House Republicans will try to agree on a plan to lift the federal $31.4 trillion debt ceiling and cut government spending when Congress returns this week, after being stymied for months by Democratic President Joe Biden’s demands they do so without conditions.

House of Representatives Speaker Kevin McCarthy in a Monday speech at the New York Stock Exchange will lay out the conditions Republicans want Democrats to agree to in exchange for movement on the debt ceiling.

He has offered few specific details ahead of the talk, but Republicans have proposed holding annual spending growth to 1% for a decade, reducing regulation and boosting energy production.

Members of McCarthy’s sometimes-fractious caucus, who hold a narrow 222-213 majority, have yet to agree on actual legislation. Any proposal Republicans introduce would need to be negotiated with Biden’s Democrats, who control the Senate, before it could become law.

The White House, which is leading the Democrats’ approach to the debt ceiling, has dismissed the Republican proposals as unrealistic.

Nonpartisan forecasters have warned the federal government could face a historic default this summer if Congress fails to act. A default could cripple the U.S. and world economies and force a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating, as occurred in a 2011 standoff over the debt.

But McCarthy’s speech, which Republicans say is intended to draw Wall Street’s support for negotiations on spending, could spark movement after months of inaction. Biden has insisted that Congress pass a “clean” debt hike without conditions, noting that it did so three times under his predecessor, Republican Donald Trump.

“At this point, I think there’s no choice for Republicans and the speaker but to bring forward some type of proposal,” Representative Tom Emmer, the No. 3 House Republican, told Reuters.

The prospective legislation, which conservatives hope to pass by the end of April, could lift the borrowing limit until May 2024, according to a source familiar with the matter. That would set the stage for another debt ceiling debate in the closing months of the 2024 presidential campaign.

But first, Republicans must agree on a proposal that can win the support of at least 218 of their 222 members.

“Getting us all on the same page is a challenge. But it’s not impossible and I’m optimistic that we’ll get there. This is an issue we’ve been talking about for some time,” said Republican Representative Ben Cline.

Cline, a member of the hardline House Freedom Caucus, sits on both the House Budget and Appropriations Committees and is helping to craft a budget plan for the conservative Republican Study Committee, the biggest caucus in Congress.

RISKS

The White House has dismissed the proposals so far.

“Speaker McCarthy is adopting the extreme MAGA House Republican position: threatening our economic recovery, hardworking Americans’ retirement, and catastrophic default in order to force devastating cuts,” said White House spokesperson Andrew Bates.

House Republicans maintain that their proposals would win enough public support to force Biden and the Democrats into negotiations, just as the party’s bill to overturn changes in the Washington, D.C., criminal code passed Congress last month, despite initial Democratic opposition.

Biden and McCarthy met at the White House in February to discuss the standoff, but they have not held further talks as the administration has called on House Republicans to release a budget proposal.

The White House in March unveiled its own budget proposal that it said would cut U.S. deficits by $3 trillion over the next 10 years. But with the House Budget Committee not expected to produce a spending plan anytime soon, the Republican focus has shifted to the debt ceiling plan.

Republican Representative Garret Graves, a top McCarthy adviser who has led debt ceiling talks within the Republican conference, said legislation could follow the outline set in a March 28 McCarthy letter to Biden.

“We’re continuing to discuss both strategy and putting a little more meat on the bones or translating the speaker’s letter into legislation,” Graves said in an interview.

While McCarthy’s letter contained few details, Republicans are considering proposal that could reset nondefense discretionary spending to fiscal 2022 levels, hold annual spending at 1% for a decade, reduce regulation, boost energy production and reset the debt ceiling to a ratio of debt to gross domestic product.

‘FIVE FAMILIES’

The Republican conference is divided by ideological caucuses known internally as “the five families,” a reference to the warring mafia clans of “The Godfather” movies.

The five families, who are expected to take up the plan early next week, run the gamut from members of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, who have floated the idea of reaching a deal with Democrats to avoid default, to the hardline conservative House Freedom Caucus, whose members insist on deep spending cuts and say Biden will be responsible for any default.

Some Republicans also favor the clean debt ceiling increase that Biden has demanded.

(Reporting by David Morgan; Additional reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt; Editing by Scott Malone and Alistair Bell)

source

(Corrects typographical error in first paragraph)

By Katharine Jackson

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A fundraising group supporting Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s potential run for U.S. president on Sunday launched its first attacks on leading rival Donald Trump, questioning the former president’s allegiance to his fellow Republicans.

“Trump should fight Democrats, not lie about Governor DeSantis,” the ad stated. “What happened to Donald Trump?”

Former president Trump launched a bid for the 2024 Republican nomination in November and polls show he is leading the field of declared and as-yet undeclared candidates. DeSantis, who is expected to launch a run, is in second position in polls.

Never Back Down, the Super PAC backing DeSantis, released the ad titled “Fight Democrats, not Republicans” online and on “Fox News Sunday.”

The ad begins with a reference to Trump’s legal troubles in New York.

“Donald Trump has been attacked by a Democrat prosecutor in New York. So why is he spending millions attacking the Republican governor of Florida?”

Trump pleaded not guilty in Manhattan on April 4 to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to a hush-money payment made to porn star Stormy Daniels. He was questioned on Thursday in a separate $250 million business fraud lawsuit brought by the state’s attorney general.

Make American Great Again, the major Super PAC aligned with Trump, has already attacked DeSantis in ads.

Its latest release on Friday referenced a Daily Beast report that DeSantis ate chocolate pudding with his fingers while on a flight from Tallahassee to Washington in 2019.

“DeSantis has his dirty fingers all over senior entitlements, like cutting Medicare, slashing Social Security, even raising our retirement age,” the ad said. “Tell Ron DeSantis to keep his pudding fingers off our money.”

A Reuters/Ipsos poll in early April showed 48% of Republicans saying they want Trump to be their party’s presidential nominee in 2024, with 19% supporting DeSantis.

(Reporting by Katharine Jackson; Editing by Scott Malone and Chizu Nomiyama)

source

By Jason Lange

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Donald Trump’s presidential campaign on Saturday reported raising $14.5 million during the first three months of this year, with contributions accelerating sharply after he announced he was about to be criminally indicted.

The disclosure to the Federal Election Commission does not cover all of the former president’s political fundraising or disclose full details for online donors.

But the filing shows at least $2.7 million raised from individual donors in the two weeks after March 18, when he announced that a Manhattan grand jury was about to charge him after an investigation into hush money Trump allegedly paid to a mistress ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

During the prior two weeks, the disclosure shows the campaign bringing in just over $1 million from individual donors.

Trump, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, has denied having a sexual encounter with the woman at the center of the investigation and calls the probe a witch hunt by his political enemies. His indictment on March 30 made him the first former U.S. president to face criminal charges.

That has energized his supporters and his campaign finances.

The campaign reported spending $3.5 million through March, with close to half going to his campaign payroll and travel expenses. At least $7,000 was spent at golf clubs and resorts that are owned by Trump in south Florida.

Eight in 10 Republicans see the case against Trump as politically motivated, and his lead over other Republican presidential hopefuls has grown since his indictment, according a Reuters/Ipsos public opinion poll found this month.

Still, Trump has not sewn up the money race for the Republican nomination, and some experts say his legal woes, which include other potentially more serious investigations, could push Republicans tired of the drama around him to look for another presidential candidate.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who is expected to announce a presidential bid soon, reported having about $85 million in a political fundraising account at the end of March.

To counter the perceived threat from DeSantis, the Make America Great Again Inc Super PAC, which has received at least $60 million in funding from one of Trump’s political committees, on Saturday reported to regulators it plans to spend $1.5 million on TV ads opposing DeSantis.

(Reporting by Jason Lange; Editing by William Mallard)

source

By Gram Slattery

MANCHESTER, N.H. (Reuters) – On issues of policy, Tim Scott, the latest Republican to declare he is interested in a 2024 presidential bid, runs largely with the current, following the party line on hot button matters from abortion to immigration.

On issues of style, however, the only Black Republican in the U.S. Senate is swimming against the tide, betting that a relentless focus on unity and optimism can appeal in a party where many voters appear hungry for a bare-knuckled brawl.

That sunny disposition was on display on Thursday at the Red Arrow Diner in Manchester, New Hampshire, a tiny greasy spoon serving French toast and pancakes, where Scott made small talk with patrons, some of whom appeared startled by the sudden arrival of a U.S. senator during breakfast.

“What I found on the campaign trail is that people are starving for an optimistic message,” said Scott, after chatting to voters here, one day after announcing the launch of a presidential exploratory committee.

Voters need to “focus on the progress we’ve made, and why we made that progress,” he added.

In past elections, such rhetoric was unremarkable. President Ronald Reagan, a hero to many conservatives, famously cruised to re-election in 1984 saying, it was “morning in America,” a slogan borrowed by multiple Republicans since.

Yet they are words unlikely to be uttered by leading 2024 Republican contenders now, at least by former President Donald Trump and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who have leaned on light-versus-dark imagery in the opening stages of the campaign.

During one of his first campaign events in January, Trump pledged to “stop left-wing radical racists and perverts,” telling his supporters he was “angry.”

DeSantis has gone aggressively after political opponents and others who oppose his policies in recent months. He is currently trying to strip Disney World of local government powers due to its opposition to legislation which restricts teaching on sexual orientation and gender identity in Florida public schools. He has also pushed for changes to the way Black history is taught. 

By contrast, ten prominent Scott supporters, including donors and party officials, said his sunny, inclusive demeanor is a major selling point in them being open to voting for him.

But they acknowledged they were unsure if the South Carolina native’s positivity still sold among voters who feel besieged by what they see as a corrupt, leftist elite. Those feelings are particularly acute after Trump’s indictment earlier this month for his alleged role in hush-money payments to two women before the 2016 election.

If Scott runs, his campaign will be an experiment that optimism still sells among Republican voters, they said.

“In a primary setting, where you have mostly Republicans voting, many feel that America is under attack from within and what is required to turn things around are personalities like Donald Trump,” said Maurice Washington, the head of the Charleston County, South Carolina, Republican Party, and a confidante of Scott.

“I know of Republicans on the other hand who feel that it is time to pause, take a deep breath and work more towards healing among all people, and that’s where Senator Scott is. The question is which side – or bubble – within the Republican Party is holding the most votes.”

While Scott is within the conservative mainstream, he has attempted to portray himself as unusually compassionate, drawing on his personal experience as the impoverished child of a single mother.

Among the policies he has supported, which he often highlights, are the creation of “opportunity zones” to boost blighted communities and a tax credit program which helps low-income families with children.

Scott struggled to answer questions in New Hampshire on Thursday when pressed by reporters on his stance on abortion pills. He has backed a ban on abortion after 20 weeks of gestation, a position that divides Americans, opinion polls show.

LONG ROAD AHEAD

At the campaign stop in Manchester, Scott – who is well-known for his skill with face-to-face, “retail politics” – made small talk with patrons on topics as innocuous as baseball.

“You know, the vision he’s putting forward is a positive vision for the future. I hope we see more of that from more candidates,” said Chris Maidment, a New Hampshire Republican county chair, while exiting the cramped diner where Scott spoke.

Maidment jokingly knocked the senator for ordering grits, a dish more common in Scott’s South Carolina than in northern New England.

If Scott formally enters the race, one major challenge will be boosting his name recognition, his supporters acknowledge. As of now, he has no more than 2% support in all major polls. Some potential donors find his positivity appealing but worry that he would struggle against Trump, who dominates headlines.

He will also have to best another South Carolina native, former Governor Nikki Haley, who threw her hat into the ring in February and who shares a similar base of donors, allies and voters.

“The people that are most stressed out about it are the donors,” said Chip Felkel, a South Carolina Republican operative. “Do they cut their contributions in half and split it, do they pick one, or do they keep their powder dry?”

Chris Ager, the chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party and an attendee at the Scott event, said the state’s Republicans “welcome him to the debate.”

But will they buy the sunny vision he is selling?

“Time will tell,” Ager said. “I’ve heard both sides. As party chairman, I want to see unity. I want to see us together. But I also want to see somebody fighting the policies that we disagree with that are coming from the Democrats.”

(Reporting by Gram Slattery, editing by Ross Colvin and Alistair Bell)

source

KNOCK, Ireland (Reuters) – President Joe Biden said on Friday he has decided to run for a second term and would formally announce his re-election campaign “relatively soon.”

“We’ll announce it relatively soon. But the trip here just reinforced my sense of optimism about what can be done,” Biden told reporters at the tail-end of an emotional trip to Ireland. “I told you my plan is to run again.”

Biden has long said he intended to run for re-election but the lack of a formal announcement has sometimes given jitters to supporters unsure if the 80-year-old Democrat, one of the oldest world leaders, would really commit to another four-year term.

Yet behind the scenes, close aides and allies have already begun putting the steps in place to stand up a campaign infrastructure and fundraising apparatus ahead of a 2024 bid that could be a re-run of the 2020 match-up with Republican ex-president Donald Trump, who has already launched his campaign.

Biden’s expected pitch is to “finish the job” after a first term that included several legislative wins, including billions of dollars in federal funds to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic and for new infrastructure.

But Biden’s age makes his re-election bid a historic and risky gamble for the Democratic Party, which faces a tough election map to hold the Senate in 2024 and is the minority in the House of Representatives now. Biden’s approval ratings are stuck in the low 40s; he would be 86 by the end of a prospective second term, nine years older than the average U.S. male life expectancy.

Doctors declared Biden, who does not drink alcohol and exercises five times a week, “fit for duty” after an examination in February. The White House says his record shows that he is mentally sharp enough for the rigors of the job.

(Reporting by Steve Holland in Knock, Ireland, and Trevor Hunnicutt in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, Editing by Rosalba O’Brien)

source

(Reuters) – Montana lawmakers on Friday passed a bill to ban popular short-form video app TikTok from operating in the state, the latest threat to the Chinese-owned app’s existence in the U.S.

The bill, known as SB 419, would prohibit mobile app stores from offering TikTok for download to users in Montana. The Montana House voted 54-43 to approve the ban.

(Reporting by Sheila Dang in Dallas)

source

By Steve Holland and Trevor Hunnicutt

KNOCK, Ireland (Reuters) -U.S. President Joe Biden said on Friday he has decided to run for a second term and would formally announce his re-election campaign “relatively soon.”

“We’ll announce it relatively soon. But the trip here just reinforced my sense of optimism about what can be done,” Biden told reporters at the tail-end of an emotional trip to Ireland. “I told you my plan is to run again.”

Biden has long said he intended to run for re-election but the lack of a formal announcement has sometimes given jitters to supporters unsure if the 80-year-old Democrat, one of the oldest world leaders, would really commit to another four-year term.

Yet behind the scenes, close aides and allies have already begun putting the steps in place to stand up a campaign infrastructure and fundraising apparatus ahead of a 2024 bid that could be a re-run of the 2020 match-up with Republican ex-president Donald Trump, who has already launched his campaign.

Biden’s expected pitch is to “finish the job” after a first term that included several legislative wins, including billions of dollars in federal funds to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic and for new infrastructure.

But Biden’s age makes his re-election bid a historic and risky gamble for the Democratic Party, which faces a tough election map to hold the Senate in 2024 and is the minority in the House of Representatives now. Biden’s approval ratings are stuck in the low 40s; he would be 86 by the end of a prospective second term, nine years older than the average U.S. male life expectancy.

Doctors declared Biden, who does not drink alcohol and exercises five times a week, “fit for duty” after an examination in February. The White House says his record shows that he is mentally sharp enough for the rigors of the job.

(Reporting by Steve Holland in Knock, Ireland, and Trevor Hunnicutt in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, Editing by Rosalba O’Brien)

source