Liberal critics question why architect of failed Biden foreign policy is advising ‘Project 2029'
But at a time when there's widespread agreement that Democrats need fresh ideas and new voices, the inclusion of longtime party insiders — especially former President Joe Biden's national security advisor Jake Sullivan — is raising eyebrows across the political spectrum.
"It's really disappointing to see the lack of self-awareness on Jake's part," said Brett Bruen, former director of global engagement in the Obama White House. "Having Jake involved, let alone leading this, will only lead to stupid, superficial changes."
"These Democratic leaders need to take a long look in the mirror and understand they played a big part in bringing this situation about — and exit stage left."
Modeled in name and structure after the Heritage Foundation's conservative Project 2025, Project 2029 brings together high-profile Democratic veterans to outline a policy road map. After a decade of standing more against President Donald Trump than for anything else, the group is dedicated to helping Democrats define the policies that can win the 2028 election.
The initiative, first reported by The New York Times, is led by longtime Democratic strategist Andrei Cherny and a cast of familiar faces — including Sullivan, Neera Tanden, Biden's domestic policy advisor; Anne-Marie Slaughter, CEO of New America; Justin Wolfers, University of Michigan economist; Jim Kessler, co-founder of Third Way; and Felicia Wong , former president of the Roosevelt Institute.
But Sullivan's role has drawn particular criticism from both Republicans and progressives.
Sullivan was Biden's top advisor during the chaotic 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan, which resulted in the deaths of 13 U.S. service members. He reportedly offered to resign at the time once the evacuation didn't go as planned.
He's also drawn fire for the Biden administration's failure to help Israel and Hamas reach a lasting ceasefire, and for its Ukraine policy — which, as one European diplomat told Fox News Digital, seemed aimed at letting Ukraine "lose slowly."
"Why isn't Jake Sullivan working at Chipotle?" quipped Steven Moore, founder of the Ukraine Freedom Project, on a podcast in 2024.
"Jake in his position both as national security advisor and in Biden world is one of the last people on earth that should be involved in a reset for the Democratic Party," said Bruen.
Sullivan did not reply to a request for comment by Fox News Digital.
Zohran Momdani's stunning upset in New York City's mayoral primary over former Gov. Andrew Cuomo has reignited a debate over whether Democrats on a national level need to start taking progressivism seriously.
"The people responsible for driving the Democratic Party into a ditch are now asking for the keys again," said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of progressive group Our Revolution. "Leaders like Zohran Mamdani are showing what's possible when you speak directly to working-class pain and stand up to entrenched power."
Despite the criticism, some Democrats defend Sullivan's role and believe he could help unify the party.
"He's a historic organizer of the diverse lanes of Democratic foreign policy, and he's done a great job with it," said Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state and Democratic strategist. However, Rubin questioned how much real influence Project 2029 will have, especially with no clear 2028 front runner.
"We're going to have a wide-open primary," Rubin said. "Unlike Project 2025, where Republicans had a candidate-in-waiting in Trump, we have no standard-bearer. So Project 2029 is going to be one of many blueprints for what a Democratic administration should do."
Some argue that figures like Sullivan are better suited to bridge the divide between establishment figures and progressives than any leftist leader.
"He's part of the old guard, but the old guard isn't that old. There's a lot of young people," one Democratic insider said. "You'd be hard-pressed to find people in the progressive lane pulling in establishment folks, whereas the establishment lane is working to pull in progressives."
Sullivan's GOP critics also point to his role in promoting now-debunked allegations during the 2016 election.
After a report from Slate claimed Trump Tower maintained a secret server communicating with Russia's Alfa Bank, Sullivan — then a senior advisor to Hillary Clinton — amplified the claim.
"This could be the most direct link yet between Donald Trump and Moscow," Sullivan said in a statement at the time. "This secret hotline may be the key to unlocking the mystery of Trump's ties to Russia."
Republicans later accused him of spreading unverified information and misleading the public.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Intel Slides After New CEO's Comeback Plan Worries Investors
(Bloomberg) -- Shares of Intel Corp. tumbled 8.5% on Friday after Chief Executive Officer Lip-Bu Tan sparked concerns that he was more focused on cost cutting than restoring the chipmaker's technological edge. Trump Awards $1.26 Billion Contract to Build Biggest Immigrant Detention Center in US The High Costs of Trump's 'Big Beautiful' New Car Loan Deduction Can This Bridge Ease the Troubled US-Canadian Relationship? Salt Lake City Turns Winter Olympic Bid Into Statewide Bond Boom Trump Administration Sues NYC Over Sanctuary City Policy As part of Intel's second-quarter report, Tan said the company will cancel some factory projects and take a more conservative approach to future spending. Tan called the investments begun under his predecessor, Pat Gelsinger, excessive and unwise. 'I do not subscribe to the belief that if you build it, they will come,' he said on a conference call with analysts. At the same time, Tan struggled to give a clear picture of how he'll make the company more competitive again. Gelsinger had embarked on an ambitious plan to turn Intel into a chip foundry, a business that makes products for outside clients. A key part of that was moving toward a more advanced production technique called 14A. But Tan signaled Thursday that Intel will only roll out that technology tentatively. The company will add large-scale capacity for 14A when Tan is convinced he has enough customers committed to using it, he said on the call. That didn't sit well with investors, who sent the shares down to $20.70 in New York on Friday, the stock's biggest single-day decline in more than three months. 'The idea you might step away from 14A if you can't get someone to invest in it is a problem,' said Wedbush Securities Inc. analyst Matt Bryson. The crux of the concern: If Intel stops introducing new manufacturing technology, it's bowing out of the race for leadership of the chip industry — and closing the book on what made it untouchable for decades. Intel's woes have previously spurred speculation that it might be acquired or broken up, though there's no clear path to a major deal. Possible suitors for Intel's factory division, such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., have backed away from the idea. Tan also has said he aims to keep Intel's manufacturing and product-design businesses together, though he does plan to offload smaller divisions. Intel confirmed on Friday that it aims to spin off its networking group into a standalone business. The company said it has begun identifying strategic investors, without naming them. CRN previously reported on the plan. In its earnings report, Intel gave an upbeat third-quarter sales forecast while missing estimates for some profit measures. Margins will be tighter than Wall Street anticipated in the period, and Intel only expects a break-even quarter. Analysts had projected a 4-cent gain on that basis. In the second quarter, revenue amounted to $12.9 billion, little changed from a year earlier. Analysts had projected $11.9 billion. The company posted a loss of 10 cents a share, compared with an estimated profit of 1 cent. Intel's stock had been up 13% this year through Thursday's close. Though that gain was in line with most chip stocks in 2025, rivals Nvidia Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. have performed better — lifted by their artificial intelligence prospects. Tan's focus is getting Intel's financial house in order, a task that has included thousands of layoffs and the slashing of capital spending. The company said Thursday that already-paused factories in Germany and Poland won't go ahead, and progress at another project in Ohio will be slowed. Intel will reduce capital expenditures on new plants and equipment this year and plans to make further cuts to that budget next year. The company will spend about $18 billion this year and less in 2026, executives said. Tan, who took the CEO job in March, acknowledged that he still has work to do to make the company more competitive in its main markets: processors for personal computers and servers. He's also still crafting Intel's plan to crack the AI chip industry — an area where Nvidia dominates. Tariff Effect? Third-quarter sales will be $12.6 billion to $13.6 billion, Intel said. Analysts on average had projected a number at the low end of that range. The company has benefited from a resurgence in the PC industry, driven in part by manufacturers' efforts to build up inventory before tariffs hit. But the Silicon Valley pioneer has lost market share to rivals and is struggling to attract foundry clients. Intel's layoff plans — first announced during the previous quarterly report — will reduce staff by 15%, Intel said. And the company expects further cuts through attrition and the splitting off of business units, Chief Financial Officer Dave Zinsner said in an interview. The chipmaker aims to end the year with 75,000 employees, down more than 20% from the end of the June quarter. Bloomberg News reported in April that Intel was looking to cut its workforce by roughly that amount. Analysts have expressed concern that PC demand will decelerate after a strong first half. The threat of tariffs imposed by the US — and other nations in retaliation — may have prompted PC makers to rush to stock up ahead of prospective cost spikes, the company warned last quarter. Economic Fears Demand was better than expected last quarter because an economic slowdown didn't materialize, Zinsner said. But the company is aware that some demand might have stemmed from consumers and businesses trying to avoid tariffs. 'We felt like tariffs might be a headwind in the second quarter and would further unsettle the economy,' he said. 'None of that transpired.' Intel's client computing division had revenue of $7.9 billion last quarter, topping the average prediction of $7.3 billion. Data center sales were $3.9 billion, compared with a $3.7 billion estimate. The foundry division generated revenue of $4.4 billion, in line with projections. Intel had previously said it planned to cut operating expenses to about $17 billion this year and $16 billion in 2026. The Santa Clara, California-based company remains on track for the 2025 cuts, Intel said Thursday. Tan's predecessor, Gelsinger, had concentrated on expanding Intel's factory network, once its key competitive advantage. He laid out plans to spend tens of billions of dollars on making its plants the best in the industry again, a status that would force rivals to use it as an outsourced provider of manufacturing. 'We will take a fundamentally different approach to building our foundry business,' Tan said in a memo to staff Thursday. 'Over the past several years, the company invested too much, too soon – without adequate demand. In the process, our factory footprint became needlessly fragmented and underutilized. We must correct our course.' For now, the biggest user of its factories is Intel's internal design teams. Some of Intel's best offerings now contain components made by TSMC, adding more pressure to its margins. Narrower Margins Adjusted gross margin — the percentage of sales remaining after excluding the cost of production — was about 30% in the second quarter and will be 36% in the current period. That's close to half of what it was when Intel's chips dominated the data center market. Nvidia has margins above 70%. Intel's Zinsner said the company isn't yet ready to unveil AI-related gear. The chipmaker is focusing on the development of products that will fit in unserved parts of the market. Ultimately, Intel needs to figure out how it can benefit from artificial intelligence, Emarketer analyst Jacob Bourne said in a note. 'A fundamental market truth isn't going away,' he said. 'Global demand for AI chips continues to soar, and Intel must find its footing in that value chain.' (Updates shares starting in first paragraph.) Burning Man Is Burning Through Cash Confessions of a Laptop Farmer: How an American Helped North Korea's Wild Remote Worker Scheme It's Not Just Tokyo and Kyoto: Tourists Descend on Rural Japan Elon Musk's Empire Is Creaking Under the Strain of Elon Musk A Rebel Army Is Building a Rare-Earth Empire on China's Border ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
House ethics panel tells Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to pay more for Met Gala attendance
Congress Ethics WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Ethics Committee on Friday told Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to make additional payments for her attendance at the 2021 Met Fashion Gala, where she drew attention for wearing a dress adorned with the message 'tax the rich." The ethics panel, which found the New York Democrat had underpaid for some of the services and clothing for the event, also issued reports Friday on unrelated ethics allegations against Reps. Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania, Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick or Florida and Henry Cuellar of Texas. In a 31-page report on the allegations against Ocasio-Cortez, the Ethics Committee said she had tried to comply with House rules on accepting gifts but failed by 'impermissibly accepting a gift of free admission to the 2021 Met Gala for her partner and by failing to pay full fair market value for some of the items worn to the event.' As a guest of Vogue, Ocasio-Cortez and her partner received tickets to the gala valued at $35,000, as well as customized clothing, hair and makeup styling and a hotel room to prepare for the high-society event. The congresswoman worked with an attorney to comply with House ethics rules and paid for most of the goods and services with personal funds, but the ethics panel found "the payments were significantly delayed and some payments fell short of fair market value.' In a statement, Ocasio-Cortez's chief of staff, Mike Casca, said: 'The Congresswoman appreciates the Committee finding that she made efforts to ensure her compliance with House Rules and sought to act consistently with her ethical requirements as a Member of the House. She accepts the ruling and will remedy the remaining amounts, as she's done at each step in this process.' Rep. Mike Kelly The House Ethics Committee issued a formal reproval Friday of Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., following a yearslong investigation into an insider-trading allegation over his wife's purchase of stock in a steel company in his Butler-area congressional district. The panel also said Kelly and his wife, Victoria Kelly, should divest of any stock in the company, Cleveland-Cliffs, before the congressman takes any further official actions related to it. While the committee said it 'did not find evidence' that Kelly 'knowingly or intentionally caused his spouse to trade based on insider information,' its report also said it 'did not receive full cooperation from Mrs. Kelly and was therefore unable to determine whether her stock purchase was improper.' However, the report said, 'Representative Kelly's failure to acknowledge the seriousness of the alleged misconduct' and of the investigation itself was a violation of the code of official conduct. The committee did 'not find a clear violation' of conflict of interest. The congressman said in a statement Friday, 'My family and I look forward to putting this distraction behind us." Kelly noted the investigation has 'unnecessarily' lasted for nearly five years, and in the time since the Cleveland Cliffs Butler Works plant faced an uncertain future. 'Throughout this process, I have fought for the 1,400 workers at the plant, I've spoken with these workers, and they appreciate the hard work we have done to fight for those jobs and for Butler,' Kelly said. The investigation was launched after a July 2021 referral regarding allegations the congressman's wife may have purchased stock based on confidential or nonpublic information he had learned during official duties. The Ethics Committee staff reviewed more than 25,000 pages of documents, the report said, and interviewed people including the congressman. It found Kelly had advocated for so-called Section 232 tariffs for the product the plant produced even after Mrs. Kelly held stock in Cleveland-Cliffs. 'He took several actions to specifically benefit Cleveland-Cliffs during the time his wife had a direct financial interest in the company,' it said. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick The House Ethics Committee announced Friday it had unanimously voted to reauthorize an investigative subcommittee to examine allegations involving Florida Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick. In May, the Office of Congressional Ethics referred several allegations to the House Ethics committee, including claims Cherfilus-McCormick, a Democrat, accepted campaign contributions tied to official actions and requested community project funding for a for-profit entity. The south Florida congresswoman has previously faced scrutiny over her campaign activities and the use of her congressional office. And earlier this year, a Florida state agency sued a company owned by her family, alleging it overcharged the state by nearly $5.8 million for pandemic-related work and has refused to return the funds. In a statement, Cherfilus-McCormick underscored that the ethics panel had not reached any final decision and that the further review does not mean she made any violations. 'I fully respect the process and remain committed to cooperating with the Committee as it works to bring this inquiry to a close,' she said. Rep. Henry Cuellar The House Ethics Committee also reauthorized its investigation into Rep. Henry Cuellar over whether he engaged in multiple illegal abuses of his office. The committee launched its investigation into the Texas Democrat last year after the Justice Department indicted Cuellar on numerous federal charges, including bribery, conspiracy and money laundering. The committee said in its reauthorization that lawmakers are 'aware of the risks associated with dual investigations' and cautioned that 'the mere fact of an investigation into these allegations does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred.' Cuellar's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. ___ Associated Press writers Joey Cappelletti and Matt Brown contributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
From Columbia University to Paramount, Trump keeps getting his way as America's 1st 'suer in chief'
Donald Trump is no stranger to lawsuits. In fact, he was involved in more than 4,000 of them before winning the White House in 2016. Since then, Trump has made headlines mostly as a defendant — that is, the individual getting sued (for sexual abuse and defamation; for business fraud; for hush-money payments; for trying to end birthright citizenship; and so on). But now, six months into his second presidential term, Trump is positioning himself as something new: America's first 'suer in chief.' And the strategy seems to be working. Late Wednesday, the Trump administration and Columbia University announced that they had settled a months-long dispute that started when the White House accused the Ivy League school of failing to protect Jewish students from discrimination during recent Gaza War protests — then froze the majority of its $1.3 billion a year in federal research grants and funding. To end the ordeal, Columbia agreed to pay the U.S. treasury more than $200 million over the next three years while scrutinizing international students more closely and releasing data to show that admissions and hiring are based on 'merit' rather than 'diversity.' (An independent monitor will oversee the deal and report to the government every six months.) In return, the administration agreed to restore Columbia's federal cash flow. Trump's spat with Columbia didn't technically take the form of a lawsuit; instead, the president has been using his executive powers — launching investigations, withholding money — to pressure elite campuses to conform to his ideological preferences. (The University of Michigan, Duke University and Cornell University are negotiating with the White House as well.) The logic, however, is the same: imposing your will through aggressive — and expensive — lawfare. As a real-estate mogul, Trump perfected this tactic long ago under the tutelage of his pugnacious lawyer Roy Cohn. But no one else has ever really used it as president. Here are a few of the suer in chief's recent wins. Paramount In October, then-candidate Trump sued Paramount, the parent company of CBS News, over the way that 60 Minutes edited an interview with his Democratic rival, Kamala Harris. Trump's allegation? That the program violated Texas's Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which generally targets false advertising, by only including part of her answer to a question about the Gaza War in its main broadcast. 'The work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by or a result of many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region,' Harris said in the interview. 'We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.' The second part of Harris's answer aired on 60 Minutes. The first part did not, appearing instead on CBS's social-media accounts and in a promo that aired on another CBS program, Face the Nation. 'To paper over Kamala's 'word salad' weakness, CBS used its national platform on 60 Minutes to cross the line from the exercise of judgment in reporting to deceitful, deceptive manipulation of news,' Trump's lawsuit claimed. In response, CBS insisted that Trump's 'repeated claims against 60 Minutes are false. The interview was not doctored and 60 Minutes did not hide any part of Vice President Harris's answer to the question at issue. 60 Minutes fairly presented the interview to inform the audience and not to mislead it. The lawsuit Trump brought against CBS is completely without merit and we will vigorously defend against it.' Editing for brevity is commonplace in television, and many legal experts agreed that the case was frivolous, arguing that Paramount would win in court on First Amendment grounds. Yet on July 2, the company decided to settle with Trump and pay $16 million to his future presidential library. Skeptics claimed that Paramount's decision — which involves no admission of wrongdoing — had less to do with journalism than with business, insisting that what the company really wanted was for Trump's Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to sign off on its proposed $8 billion mega-merger with the Hollywood studio Skydance. On July 18, Paramount announced that it would be cancelling its long-running Late Show with host Stephen Colbert, a frequent Trump critic. The company said the decision was 'purely financial.' And then on Thursday, the FCC approved the Paramount-Skydance merger. Trump has claimed that as part of the Paramount settlement, he 'also anticipate[s] receiving $20 Million Dollars more from the new Owners, in Advertising, PSAs, or similar Programming' on CBS in the future. If the Skydance deal goes through, Oracle billionaire Larry Ellison and his son, David, will control Paramount. The elder Ellison is a Trump friend and donor. Earlier this week, South Park kicked off its 27th season with an episode about religion in schools that skewered Paramount — just one day after signing its own $1.5 billion deal with the company. 'I didn't want to come back and be in the school, but I had to because it was part of a lawsuit and the agreement with Paramount,' Jesus tells some reluctant South Park parents. He then urges them to settle with Trump, who has threatened to sue for $5 billion if they don't let Jesus in. 'You guys saw what happened to CBS? Well, guess who owns CBS. Paramount,' Jesus says. 'You really want to end up like Colbert? You guys got to stop being stupid. … He also has the power to sue and take bribes and he can do anything to anyone.' At the end of the episode, the townspeople agree to pay Trump $3.5 million and create 'pro-Trump messaging.' ABC News In a similar (though much simpler) case, Trump sued ABC News and its This Week host George Stephanopoulos last March for defamation over a segment in which Stephanopoulos repeatedly said that Trump had been found liable for 'rape' in a sexual assault case brought by writer E. Jean Carroll. Stephanopoulos's statements were incorrect. Asked on its verdict sheet whether Carroll had proved by a preponderance of evidence that Trump had 'raped' her under New York's narrow legal definition — which requires vaginal penetration by a penis — the jury answered no. Instead, they found Trump liable for 'sexual abuse.' At the time, the judge said that Trump's behavior — which, according to Carroll, included yanking down her tights and shoving his hand inside her — would mean that 'Mr. Trump 'raped' her as many people commonly understand the word rape.' 'Indeed,' the judge added, 'the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.' But legal experts largely agreed that Stephanopoulos should have used the phrase 'sexual abuse' rather than the word rape, and in December 2024 ABC News agreed to settle the lawsuit by paying $15 million toward Trump's future presidential library and another $1 million in legal fees. Meta Way back in July 2021, Trump sued Meta and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, for suspending his Facebook and Instagram accounts following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Privately owned social media platforms are permitted under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act to moderate their services by removing posts that violate their standards — as long as they are acting in 'good faith.' Users agree to these terms of service when they sign up. Yet Trump claimed in his suit that Meta was engaging in 'illegal, shameful censorship of the American people.' Not much happened in the case for a few years — until Trump won the 2024 election. At that point, Zuckerberg visited Trump at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, where the incoming president 'brought up the litigation and suggested they try to resolve it,' according to the Associated Press. Two months later, in January of this year, Meta agreed to donate $22 million to Trump's presidential library and pay $3 million in legal fees. Around the same time, Meta announced that it was ending its diversity, equity and inclusion programs and eliminating fact-checking on Facebook — both longtime priorities of Trump and his allies. The company also made a $1 million donation to Trump's inaugural committee, and Zuckerberg sat front and center at his swearing-in. Law firms In the early weeks of his second term, Trump issued executive orders targeting three prominent law firms that had pursued what he viewed as politically motivated investigations and lawsuits against him and his allies. One was Perkins Coie, a firm that represented Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and repeatedly won election law cases in 2020 against Trump's campaign. Another was Covington & Burling, a firm that provided legal advice to Jack Smith, the special counsel who brought two federal indictments against Trump. And the third was Paul Weiss — a firm whose chairman, Brad Karp, 'has a long history of fund-raising for Democrats [and] sought to unite major law firms in 'a call to arms' to fight Mr. Trump in court on issues like his administration's policy of separating migrant children from their parents,' according to the New York Times. In his orders, Trump effectively sought to cripple these firms by revoking their lawyers' security clearances — which they need to represent key clients — and limiting their access to government buildings and officials. Again, it wasn't a lawsuit, per se — but it was a form of lawfare. And again, it worked. In March, Trump announced Karp had agreed to represent clients regardless of their political affiliation; to contribute $40 million in legal services to causes Trump has championed, including 'the President's Task Force to Combat Antisemitism'; and to end its internal DEI policies. In exchange, Trump rescinded his order against Paul Weiss. A few days later, however, the president issued a new order directing the heads of the Justice and Homeland Security departments to 'seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms who engage in frivolous, unreasonable and vexatious litigation against the United States' or in matters that come before federal agencies. Eventually, eight other firms followed Paul Weiss's lead, committing a combined total of nearly $1 billion in pro bono legal services to initiatives supported by the Trump administration in order to avoid becoming targets themselves. 'This is certainly the biggest affront to the legal profession in my lifetime,' Samuel Buell, a longtime professor of law at Duke University and a former federal prosecutor, told the New York Times.
