Connect with us

Economics

Donald Trump has again rewritten the history of January 6th

Published

on

“THIS IS A big one,” Donald Trump said as he signed a clemency order for nearly 1,600 January 6th rioters just hours after being sworn into office. By evening Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, a far-right group, who had been serving a 22-year sentence in federal prison for choreographing the attack on the Capitol, was in a holding cell in Louisiana awaiting release. In a phone call with The Economist that night his mother exulted that her boy would be home in Miami within days.

The amnesty proved to be even more sweeping than its beneficiaries had anticipated. “This is leaps and bounds better than I could have hoped,” says John Kinsman, a Proud Boy who served four years in prison. “Never in a million years” did he think that Mr Trump would set every January 6th “hostage” free. All but 14 leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, a militia, who breached the Capitol building, were granted full pardons. Their pardons lift penalties that typically arise from felony convictions, such as restrictions on buying guns, visiting certain foreign countries and, in some states, voting. Those who weren’t pardoned had their sentences commuted. In those cases, Mr Trump said, his team needed to do “further research”.

The outcome seemed surprising because just last week J.D. Vance, now the vice-president, told viewers on Fox News that “if you committed violence on that day obviously you shouldn’t be pardoned.” Yet many who had were. Pam Bondi, Mr Trump’s nominee to lead the Department of Justice (DoJ), echoed Mr Vance’s restraint, saying that she planned to look at the January 6th offenders on a “case-by-case” basis. The fact that Mr Trump overruled them suggests that the scope of his final decision was his own idea. Asked why he had ignored Mr Vance’s advice, Mr Trump said that those imprisoned had served enough time and had had their lives upended.

To some career DoJ lawyers who brought the cases, Mr Trump’s actions only reinforce their belief that he sought on January 6th to goad his supporters to sack the Capitol. “This is one of the most candid acknowledgements that what happened that day is what he intended,” says a senior DoJ lawyer. It is indeed reasonable to see the pardons as an endorsement of the mob violence that took place. In the summary of his now-dismissed case published on January 7th, Jack Smith, the special counsel investigating Mr Trump for his role in the Capitol attack, wrote that his office had sufficient evidence to “obtain and sustain a conviction”. But Mr Trump has now made sure that the meaning of the January 6th assault will be long contested. To them the pardons rectify an injustice arising from overreach by Mr Trump’s foes, including Mr Smith.

It is unarguable that soon hundreds of people who punched police, smashed windows and broke through barricades will be home. Though many of them are ordinary doctors and businessmen, at least 200 have pledged allegiance to a militia-like group. In interviews Proud Boys across America say that jail time has subdued their movement—and watch-dog groups like Miami Against Fascism agree that their power has been “severely diminished”.

Nonetheless political violence, both on the left and the right, has soared since 2021; there were two lone-wolf attempts on Mr Trump’s life during the campaign. According to an analysis by Robert Pape of the University of Chicago, the DoJ prosecuted 26 threats against members of Congress between 2022 and 2023. Yet Mr Trump’s administration may not pursue domestic radicals as forcefully as Joe Biden’s administration did.

There is some precedent for a president pardoning citizens who attacked America’s government with physical force, says Kimberly Wehle, a law professor who wrote a book on pardon power. The closest parallel is perhaps Andrew Johnson’s decision to grant amnesty to thousands of Confederate soldiers after the civil war. But he forced them to swear loyalty to the country and free their slaves as a condition of their release, thereby requiring them to admit defeat on the biggest issue they had fought for. Then as now, forgiveness exacerbated the nation’s divides.

Economics

British businesses pile on the pressure on U.K. Fin Min Reeves

Published

on

Rachel Reeves, UK chancellor of the exchequer, outside 11 Downing Street ahead of presenting her budget to parliament in London, UK, on Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2024. 

Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Home improvement retailer Kingfisher became the latest British company to report a negative impact from U.K. Finance Minister Rachel Reeves’ October budget — as she prepares her latest update on the state of the British economy.

In its annual earnings release on Tuesday, Kingfisher, which owns home improvement retailer B&Q, said the government’s policies had “raised costs for retailers and impacted consumer sentiment,” with sales of big-ticket items falling.

It is the latest in a line of British businesses that have criticized Reeves’ bumper tax-rising budget since autumn. The companies will now be keeping a close eye on Reeves’ Spring Statement, when she’s set to update lawmakers on her latest spending and taxation plans at 12:30 p.m. London time Wednesday.

Top on the businesses’ list of complaints is a higher employment cost after the government pledged in October to increase national insurance contributions from employers and raised the country’s “national living wage” by 6.7% from April 1.

On Sunday, Reeves defended the tax rises ahead of the Wednesday statement, telling Sky News the government “took the action that was necessary to ensure our public services and public finances were on a firm footing.”

However, a number of consumer-facing businesses have flagged concerns with the Labour government’s economic policies in their earnings reports this quarter. They include supermarket giant Tesco, which said its higher national insurance contributions could add up to £250 million ($324 million) to annual costs, while the chairman of pub chain JD Wetherspoon, Tim Martin, said the changes will cost every one of his pubs £1,500 per week. 

Regis Schultz, CEO of sportswear retailer JD Sports, said the policies mean it was tempting for businesses to reduce staff numbers and hours, “which will be bad news for the economy.” 

It comes as the U.K. battles economic sluggishness, rising prices and widespread uncertainty as a result of U.S. President Donald Trump’s global trade tariffs.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the country’s independent public finances watchdog, is reportedly expected to downgrade the U.K.’s growth forecasts for 2025 on Wednesday, halving its previous 2% estimate.

AB Foods, which owns budget fashion retailer Primark, blamed the Labour government’s budget as contributing to broader consumer weakness in the country. Finance Director Eoin Tonge told analysts that customers across its brands were cautious, citing “a shock and a fear, that’s driven people to pull in their horns.” That view was shared by clothing retailer Frasers Group, which said it saw weaker consumer confidence around the budget announcement. The company’s Chief Financial Officer Chris Wootton told Reuters the company “felt we’d been kicked in the face.”

The slew of negative corporate commentary is expected to pile pressure on Reeves ahead of her Spring Statement.

The British Retail Consortium has called on the government to “inject confidence into the economy,” warning that April’s rise in tax contributions and the minimum wage will generate £5 billion in additional costs for retailers, giving “many no option but to push prices up.”

The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said Reeves “must inject business with a serious confidence boost” on Wednesday.

“As an immediate priority the government should re-commit to not raising the business tax burden further over the course of this Parliament,” Louise Hellem, chief economist of the CBI, said in a statement. “Setting an ambitious goal for R&D spending, making it easier to invest in skills and taking measures to reduce the regulatory burden on business would be encouraging moves that would show the government understood what business needs to see from them.”

Goldman Sachs Chief Equity Strategist Peter Oppenheimer meanwhile told CNBC on Monday that concerns over consumer and business confidence will see Reeves focus on cutting costs rather than raising taxes this week, but said the government’s focus on boosting growth was “a laudable objective, a difficult thing to do.”

CNBC has reached out to the U.K. Treasury for comment.

CNBC’s Holly Ellyatt contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Economics

America’s Supreme Court tackles a thorny voting-rights case

Published

on

Louisiana v Callais, a case the Supreme Court heard on March 24th, contains a political puzzle. Why is the solidly Republican state defending a congressional map that cost the party a seat in 2024—and will likely keep that seat in Democratic hands after the 2026 midterms, when the fight to control the House of Representatives could be very close?

Continue Reading

Economics

Consumer confidence in where the economy is headed hits 12-year low

Published

on

Shoppers walk near a Nordstrom store at the Westfield UTC shopping center on Jan. 31, 2025 in San Diego, California.

Kevin Carter | Getty Images

Consumer confidence dimmed further in March as the view of future conditions fell to the lowest level in more than a decade, the Conference Board reported Tuesday.

The board’s monthly confidence index of current conditions slipped to 92.9, a 7.2-point decline and the fourth consecutive monthly contraction. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for a reading of 93.5.

However, the measure for future expectations told an even darker story, with the index tumbling 9.6 points to 65.2, the lowest reading in 12 years and well below the 80 level that is considered a signal for a recession ahead.

The index measures respondents’ outlook for income, business and job prospects.

“Consumers’ optimism about future income — which had held up quite strongly in the past few months — largely vanished, suggesting worries about the economy and labor market have started to spread into consumers’ assessments of their personal situations,” said Stephanie Guichard, senior economist, Global Indicators at The Conference Board.

The survey comes amid worries over President Donald Trump’s plans for tariffs against U.S. imports, which has coincided with a volatile stock market and other surveys showing waning sentiment.

The fall in confidence was driven by a decline in those 55 or older but was spread across income groups.

In addition to the general pessimism, the outlook for the stock market slid sharply, with just 37.4% of respondents expecting higher equity prices in the next year. That marked a 10 percentage point drop from February and was the first time the view turned negative since late-2023.

The view on the labor market also weakened, with those expecting more jobs to be available falling to 16.7%, while those expecting fewer jobs rose to 28.5%. The respective February readings were 18.8% and 26.6%.

Get Your Ticket to Pro LIVE
Join us at the New York Stock Exchange!
Uncertain markets? Gain an edge with CNBC Pro LIVE, an exclusive, inaugural event at the historic New York Stock Exchange.

In today’s dynamic financial landscape, access to expert insights is paramount. As a CNBC Pro subscriber, we invite you to join us for our first exclusive, in-person CNBC Pro LIVE event at the iconic NYSE on Thursday, June 12.

Join interactive Pro clinics led by our Pros Carter Worth, Dan Niles, and Dan Ives, with a special edition of Pro Talks with Tom Lee. You’ll also get the opportunity to network with CNBC experts, talent and other Pro subscribers during an exciting cocktail hour on the legendary trading floor. 

Tickets are limited!

Continue Reading

Trending