Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 163 Shares159 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump’s ‘unified Reich’ video was a message not a mistake | Margaret Sulivan

    We’ve been here before. Donald Trump says or does something outrageous, and then walks it back slightly. But his message as a would-be authoritarian – or far worse – gets through.The latest iteration was a video shared this week on his Truth Social account that (by featuring would-be headlines) promised a “unified reich” if Trump wins a second term as president.The word “reich”, of course, is closely tied to Adolf Hitler, who called his Nazi empire the “Third Reich”. You don’t have to be a student of world history to understand that instantly.Despite the outcry in some quarters – including the Biden White House – about the video, the Trump campaign took no immediate action to remove it. It stayed up for 15 hours, amid mild excuses.That approach was all too familiar. Send the message and then downplay it as unimportant.After Trump hosted the prominent antisemites Nick Fuentes and Kanye West at Mar-a-Lago, he characterized the dinner as “quick and uneventful”.The 2017 white-supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia? Trump saw “very fine people on both sides”.A few years later, during the fall of the 2020 presidential campaign – following the social justice protests that roiled American cities – Trump issued some instructions to the white supremacist Proud Boys group. His words should have been disqualifying: “Stand back and stand by.”Unsurprisingly, the extremist group took it as intended; this was clear encouragement from the then president. They celebrated on social media – and stood by.Because with Trump, there’s always more of this horror to come.His campaign speeches these days ring with Nazi rhetoric as he claims that immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country” and that his political opponents are “vermin”.And, yet, he slams any Jewish American who supports Biden. Last month, he opined that any Jewish person who would vote for his rival “doesn’t love Israel” and “should be spoken to”.He always gives himself just enough of an out, as when he claimed he didn’t know who the Proud Boys were, or that a junior campaign staffer didn’t notice the “unified reich” reference when posting the video.But these halfhearted walk-backs don’t deny the message.They are signals – dog whistles – that indicate Trump is more than willing to associate himself with some of history’s most despicable characters and movements.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“How many times will we have to debate if the Nazi imagery is intentional or accidental?” wrote Amy Spitalnick, CEO of the non-profit Jewish Council for Public Affairs. “It is never accidental,” responded Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar of authoritarian “strongmen” throughout history.For the most part, exhausted Americans yawn. They shrug off the latest outrage as regrettable but harmless, just another case of Trump being Trump. The Wall Street bigwig and Republican mega-donor Ken Griffin even told Bloomberg News recently that he might change his mind and support Trump because the former president would “exude a level of strength” that would help to stabilize the world in trying times.The “strongman” pose, in other words, is working: an authority figure is the one to deal with a chaotic world. Just don’t look too carefully at where the chaos originates. As Trump claimed during the 2016 campaign, the world is in crisis and “I alone can fix it.”Much of the mainstream media covered this week’s “unified reich” posting as if this were just part of a typical campaign. “Trump’s latest flirtation with Nazi symbolism draws criticism,” one headline in the Hill put it. Yes, and so did President Obama’s decision to wear a tan suit.Despite all of Trump’s misdeeds – the criminal indictments, the abhorrent words, the sordid relationships, the clear plans to dismantle democratic guardrails – he rolls on undaunted.With the “unified reich” video, as with all the earlier outrages, you’ll hear no apology, no disavowal, no expression of regret. And certainly no promise that this will never happen again.It will happen again. After all, it’s working.
    Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

  • 213 Shares139 Views

    in US Politics

    Corporations are forcing Americans to pay more for less – in their own words | Matt Stoller

    In 2022, the Biden administration and the oil industry were in a brutal fight over oil prices. The president was demanding that domestic oil producers invest and drill more to address spiking costs, but Texas frackers were recalcitrant. “Whether it’s $150 oil, $200 oil, or $100 oil, we’re not going to change our growth plans,” the Pioneer CEO, Scott Sheffield, said, echoing comments from other leaders at different domestic firms. Profits would go to investors, not to more rigs to address pain at the pump.The oil barons won the fight. Profits in the oil industry jumped from virtually nothing in 2020 to the hundreds of billions in 2021, and then doubled again in 2022. And yet, economists did not see any sort of plot at work. “Don’t blame the oil companies for their high profits,” said the economist Olivier Blanchard. “It is not price gouging, just how markets work.”Three weeks ago, the Federal Trade Commission released information showing how naive such statements really were. Sheffield, it turns out, allegedly helped engineer a price-fixing scheme to reduce oil production and increase prices for Americans at the pump. His goal was to end fierce competition in the industry, which had, as he put it, “lowered the price by $20 to $30 per barrel over the past 10 years”. The FTC banned Sheffield from his corporation’s board and has reportedly referred allegations against Sheffield to the Department of Justice for possible criminal investigation.The magnitude of this alleged plot is stunning. Oil prices are controlled by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec), a cartel composed of nations with known oil reserves. Because Opec is made up of governments, price-fixing law doesn’t apply. But these laws do apply to domestic US firms engaged in shale oil production, who competed fiercely with Opec from 2014 to 2016 for market share, bringing down prices in the interim.In 2017, tired of this price war, Texas oilmen and Opec officials began sitting down to dinners, and by 2021, Texas had de facto joined Opec. Companies like Pioneer, Devon Energy and Continental Resources publicly pledged to hold back production. As the FTC found, Sheffield was also privately sending hundreds of text and WhatsApp messages to Opec officials, seeking to align US producers with the global cartel.Class-action lawyers are on top of the scandal, but there’s also increasing political interest. At a hearing last week, the US representatives Rosa DeLauro and Matt Cartwright began criticizing “big oil” for this scheme, and Representative Mark Pocan even called for jail time for the oil executives allegedly involved. The top Democrat on the powerful energy and commerce committee, Frank Pallone, just launched a wide-ranging investigation across the industry.The US consumes 7bn barrels of oil a year, meaning that if the dollar amount went up by $20-30, as Sheffield calculated, that’s roughly $400-700 a person in America, a transfer from consumers to oil men and their private equity backers. That’s a not small amount of what inflation wrought in 2021, which was about $4,700 per capita in increased prices. (I suspect the amount is actually more than $20-30 a barrel, since price spikes tend to be larger than the average over long periods of time. But we’ll leave it at what Sheffield calculated.)What is perhaps most shocking about this scandal is not that it happened, but that it happened in plain sight. Oil CEOs weren’t hiding. In 2021, as prices rose on the end of Covid lockdowns, Sheffield publicly threatened rivals who might increase production, saying “all the shareholders that I’ve talked to said that if anybody goes back to growth, they will punish those companies”.For years, there has been a debate between macro-economists like Blanchard about the source of post-Covid inflation. Many economists chalked up price hikes to workers demanding more money and saw the way to address it as scaring workers into accepting less money by throwing a bunch of them out of work. “We need five years of unemployment above 5% to contain inflation,” said Larry Summers. That’s what their models told them.By contrast, 85% of Americans, along with a few iconoclastic scholars and writers, said “corporations being greedy and raising prices to make record profits” was the cause of inflation. Why? Well it might have been because they noticed that CEOs were routinely telling investors that they were raising prices to increase margins, not to meet wage demands. Or it might have been because they experienced large and unexplained price increases in meat, rent, hotels, groceries and restaurants. Indeed, when the CEO of Wendy’s recently said Wendy’s was considering using AI to engage in dynamic pricing, the public outrage was palpable.It’s time to declare the debate over. In 2021, the total corporate profit increase was $730bn, or a little over $2,100 a person. That’s a large chunk of the inflationary increase in costs. Moreover, the price-fixing in the oil industry, which contributed roughly $200bn of that, isn’t an anomaly.Take post-Covid rent hikes. One software and consulting pricing firm for landlords, RealPage, specialized in telling its clients to hike rents more than they otherwise might. As of December of 2020, RealPage had nearly 32,000 clients, including “10 largest multifamily property management companies in the United States”. There are multiple antitrust suits accusing the private equity-owned firm of organizing a massive price-fixing conspiracy to inflate rents across the board.Beyond rent, the Biden administration or private plaintiffs now have credible antitrust claims against firms engaged in price-fixing in meat, hotels and large online sellers like Amazon. Corporations in a range of industries have made comments similar to those of Sheffield.Alex Cisneros, an executive for Red Roof Inn, told a trade outlet that Red Roof Inn was using a software package called STR from CoStar to systematically hike prices across the hotel industry. “Red Roof’s franchisees for the most part are making more money with less occupancy,” Hotel News Now explained. “Red Roof is now providing more data to franchisees to educate and get them comfortable commanding higher rates.”According to a lawsuit, an unnamed executive at Smithfield, a pork processor, summarized the advice he got from Agri Stats, a consulting firm that coordinates production in the industry, as: “Just raise your price.”Rent, meat, oil and hotels are big sectors, so criminal activity in the form of price-fixing to boost profits should bust through the illusions economists have about how our markets really work. There are also a number of concrete steps policymakers can take to respond to this price-fixing.The first is to arrest or sue the offending executives for criminal activity.The second is to strengthen price-fixing and merger laws, allow more private class-action suits, force judges to speed up cases and increase the budget of antitrust enforcers to make collusion more difficult.The third is to reform the Federal Reserve so policymakers there stop using macro-economic models that avoid considerations of profits and price-fixing.And the fourth is, frankly, political. One key reason there is action on these schemes is because Biden has prioritized antitrust enforcement. He hasn’t put enough into antitrust, and he doesn’t talk about it very often. But he should, or else Americans are likely to fall into the trap of thinking that what is good for big business is good for their pocketbooks, when the opposite is so often the case.
    Matt Stoller is a writer and former policymaker who focuses on the politics of market power and antitrust More

  • 150 Shares149 Views

    in US Politics

    Nikki Haley says she will vote for Donald Trump in 2024 election

    Nikki Haley, who emerged as Donald Trump’s most enduring rival and trenchant critic during the Republican primary elections, has said she intends to vote for the former US president in November.Haley was speaking at the Hudson Institute thinktank in Washington on Wednesday, her first public appearance since dropping out of the race in March. She was asked whether Joe Biden or Trump would do a better job on national security issues.The former ambassador to the UN and South Carolina governor ran through a list of priorities when choosing a president, ranging from the need to back allies and hold enemies to account, to supporting capitalism and freedom while reducing the national debt.“Trump has not been perfect on these policies,” Haley said. “I have made that clear many, many times. But Biden has been a catastrophe. So I will be voting for Trump.”The 52-year-old added by way of caveat: “Having said that, I stand by what I said in my suspension speech. Trump would be smart to reach out to the millions of people who voted for me and continue to support me and not assume that they’re just going to be with him. And I genuinely hope he does that.”Haley joins the US Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, the former attorney general William Barr and Chris Sununu, the New Hampshire governor, in the ranks of one-time Trump foes who will nevertheless support him as the party nominee.During a bruising primary campaign, she said Trump had “lost any sort of political viability”, showed “moral weakness” and is “thin-skinned and easily distracted”. She argued that America needs to move on from his “chaos”. Trump fired back and recently dismissed reports that he might consider Haley as his running mate.Haley’s U-turn provoked a swift backlash. Sarah Longwell, a political strategist and publisher of the conservative Bulwark website, tweeted: “So when Nikki Haley said, ‘It is now up to Donald Trump to earn the votes of those in our party and beyond it who did not support him.’ She really meant, he can treat me and my voters like garbage and I’ll still fall in line and support him.”Joe Walsh, an ex-Republican congressman, added: “This isn’t complicated: Nikki Haley believes Trump is unfit. And she believes he should never be back in the White House. But if she said that publicly, her career as a Republican would be over. So, as expected, she decided to not be truthful. To keep her career as a Republican.”Although she dropped out of the primaries in early March, Haley has continued to draw up to 20% in the contests, a clear warning sign for Trump’s campaign. The former president has dismissed the idea of trying to appeal to Haley’s voters, where Biden said in Atlanta this weekend: “Let me say, there’s always going to be a place for Haley voters in my campaign.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump has also been endorsed by former Republican primary opponents including Doug Burgum, the North Dakota governor, Vivek Ramaswamy, an entrepreneur, and the South Carolina senator Tim Scott.Earlier in the event at the Hudson Institute, attended by several foreign ambassadors, Haley was fiercely critical of far right Republicans who favour “America first” isolationism, though she did not mention Trump by name. She praised the House speaker Mike Johnson for pushing aid for Israel and Ukraine through Congress.“A growing number of Democrats and Republicans have forgotten what makes America safe,” she said. “A loud part of each party wants us to abandon our allies, appease our enemies and focus only on the problems we have at home.“They believe if we leave the world alone, the world will leave us alone. They even say ignoring global chaos will somehow make our country more secure. It will not. This worldview has already put America in great danger and the threat is mounting by the day.” More

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in US Politics

    Another provocative flag flown at Samuel Alito residence, report says

    Another type of provocative flag that was flown during the breach of the US Capitol by extremist supporters of Donald Trump on 6 January 2021 was reportedly flown outside a summer residence of US supreme court justice Samuel Alito – following a similar, prior incident outside his main residence.Last summer, the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, which originates from the Revolutionary war and has in recent years become a symbol of far-right Christian extremism, was flown outside Alito’s summer home in Long Beach Island, New Jersey, the New York Times reported on Wednesday.According to photographs obtained by the outlet and interviews with multiple neighbors and passersby, the flag was flown last July and September. The newspaper reported that the flag was visible in a Google Street View image from late August. It remains unclear whether the flag was flown consistently throughout last summer.The New York Times report comes just days after it reported that an upside-down American flag was flown outside Alito’s Virginia home just days after the January 6 Capitol riots.The Appeal to Heaven flag, also commonly known as the Pine Tree flag, was spotted among other controversial flags waved in Washington on 6 January 2021 when rioters and insurrectionists stormed the US Capitol, encouraged by Trump, then the president, over the false belief that the 2020 election had been won by him and not the actual victor, Joe Biden.The Capitol attack was aimed at stopping the official certification by Congress of Biden’s victory, which was delayed by the violence but finally happened in the early hours of the following morning.The Pine Tree flag was originally used on warships commanded by George Washington during the Revolutionary war. It has since been adopted by Christian nationalists who advocate for an American government based on Christian teachings.The first report of the Stars and Stripes being flown upside-down outside an Alito residence provoked outrage about the further politicization of the supreme court, but Alito simply said his wife had done it and it was displayed only briefly.The Guardian contacted the supreme court for comment on the latest report but did not receive an immediate response. More

  • 150 Shares199 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump attends Houston lunch to ask oil bosses for more campaign cash

    Donald Trump was continuing to ask fossil-fuel executives to fund his presidential campaign on Wednesday, despite scrutiny of his relationship with the industry.The former president attended a fundraising luncheon at Houston’s Post Oak hotel hosted by three big oil executives.The invitation-only meeting comes a day after the defense rested its case in Trump’s criminal hush-money trial, and a week after Houston was battered by deadly storms. The climate crisis, caused primarily by the burning of fossil fuels, has created the conditions for more frequent and severe rainfall and flooding, including in Texas.“Houstonians are staring at Trump in disbelief as he flies in to beg big oil for funds just days after the city’s climate disaster,” said Alex Glass, communications director at the climate advocacy organization Climate Power, and a former Houston resident.It also follows a fundraising dinner at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club last month, where the former president reportedly asked more than 20 oil executives for $1bn in campaign donations from their industry and promising, if elected, to remove barriers to drilling, scrap a pause on gas exports, and reverse new rules aimed at cutting car pollution.“Donald Trump is telling us who he is, again,” said Pete Maysmith, a senior vice-president at the environmental nonprofit the League of Conservation Voters. “He has already asked oil executives for a billion dollars for his campaign, [and] we can only assume this week’s meeting is to haggle over exactly what they will get in return.”Executives from two of the companies reportedly represented at the Mar-a-Lago meeting were among the hosts of Trump’s Wednesday’s fundraiser.Harold Hamm, the executive chairman and founder of Continental Resources and one of the Wednesday luncheon organizers, is a longtime Trump supporter and was reportedly also at the April dinner.Hamm, a multibillionaire, was a major player in the rush to extract oil from the Bakken shale formation, which stretches across the US midwest and Canada.During Trump’s first presidential campaign, Hamm was also reportedly one of the seven top donors to receive special seats at Trump’s inauguration. The oil magnate was briefly under consideration to be energy secretary during the former president’s first term but reportedly turned down the position. He turned away from Trump after his 2020 loss, choosing to donate to his opponents, but then donated to Trump’s primary campaign in August.One of Hamm’s Wednesday co-hosts was Vicki Hollub, chief executive of Occidental Petroleum, which was also represented at the Mar-a-Lago fundraiser. Hollub has been criticized by climate activists for investing in carbon-capture technology in an effort to continue extracting oil and gas, despite warnings that fossil fuels must be phased out to avoid the worst effects of climate change.Congressional Democrats launched an investigation into Occidental Petroleum on Wednesday after the Federal Trade Commission last month accused the company and six others of illegal collusion with the oil production cartel Opec+ to keep fuel prices high.The third co-host of Wednesday’s meeting, Kelcy Warren, is the executive chairman of Energy Transfer Partners – a company with whom Trump has close financial ties.Throughout the 2024 campaign cycle, Warren has donated more than $800,000 to Trump’s campaign. In the 2020 election cycle, he held at least one fundraiser for the former president in 2020 and donated $10m to a pro-Trump Super Pac.During his first presidential run in 2016, Trump invested in the company while also receiving more than $100,000 in campaign contributions from Warren, the Guardian found.Warren appears to have benefited from Trump’s first term: within days of taking office in 2017, Trump approved construction of his company’s highly controversial Dakota Access pipeline, triggering outrage from climate advocates, conservationists and nearby Indigenous tribal organizations.Last year, the Texas Tribune found that Energy Transfer Partners profited to the tune of $2.4bn as gas demand soared during Texas’s deadly winter freeze and the ensuing collapse of the state’s energy grid.The fossil-fuel industry has funneled $7.3mto Trump’s 2024 campaign and associated groups, making it his fifth-largest industry donor this election cycle.The $1bn “deal” that Trump allegedly offered to oil executives last month could save the industry $110bn in tax breaks if he returns to the White House, an analysis last week found.Last week, Raskin launched a House oversight investigation into nine oil companies after Trump reportedly offered to dismantle Biden’s environmental rules for their benefit, and requested $1bn in contributions to his presidential campaign.Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has also expressed interest in formally investigating the Mar-a-Lago meeting. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, the powerful Washington watchdog, also told the Guardian it is investigating. More

  • 138 Shares149 Views

    in US Politics

    Trump falsely claims US justice department was ready to kill him

    On social media and in a Tuesday fundraising email, Donald Trump raised an alarming concern. The Department of Justice, he said, was ready to kill him.The wild distortion came against the backdrop of Trump’s hush-money trial in New York and amid fears of rising political violence around the coming presidential election, predominantly from the far right. The comments cement an inverted picture Trump and his allies have painted, in which a patriotic Trump is pitted against anti-democratic deep-state foes.The outlandish claims could ratchet up anger among his supporters and stoke conspiracy theories. “You know they’re just itching to do the unthinkable,” read the Trump campaign fundraising email, signed with the former president’s name. “Joe Biden was locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.”On his social media website, Truth Social, Trump echoed the claim. “Crooked Joe Biden’s DoJ, in their Illegal and UnConstitutional Raid of Mar-a-Lago, AUTHORIZED THE FBI TO USE DEADLY (LETHAL) FORCE,” he alleged.Trump was apparently referencing the order for a search warrant executed in August 2022, when plainclothes agents of the FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in search of classified documents Trump had allegedly refused to turn over to the government.A May court filing by Trump’s legal team, under a section titled “The Illegal Raid”, quotes from a line in the search warrant.“The Order contained a ‘Policy Statement’ regarding ‘Use Of Deadly Force,’ which stated, for example, ‘Law enforcement officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force when necessary,’” attorneys representing Trump wrote.The language cited in the filing was apparently taken from DoJ policy outlining the use of force in executing search warrants. The unabridged text of the policy reads: “Law enforcement officers and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.”The agency executed the warrant to search Trump’s Florida home while Trump was in New York and reportedly communicated with the Secret Service agents present to ensure a smooth operation.In a statement, the FBI described the language as “a standard policy statement limiting the use of deadly force. No one ordered additional steps to be taken and there was no departure from the norm in this matter.”The Washington Post has previously reported that FBI agents picked a day for the raid when Trump would not be at Mar-a-Lago and told the Secret Service ahead of time.But Trump’s statements about the filing have unleashed a frenzy. Christina Bobb, an attorney for the former president who signed documents before the search claiming Trump had complied with the subpoena for documents, reacted with similar hyperbole.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“WTF?!! They were prepared to kill me?! A few dozen FBI agents v. me and they were ready to kill me?!!! What in the world happened to the United States of America?!” wrote Bobb, on X.“These people are sick,” wrote Paul Gosar, an Arizona congressman and staunch Trump ally, also on X. “Biden ordered the hit on Trump at Mar-A-Lago,” he added in a subsequent post.The rhetorical redirection – from the content of Trump’s legal battles, which range from alleged financial improprieties to the mishandling of classified documents to his brazen attempt to overturn the 2020 election – form part of a strategy Trump and his allies are embracing before the 2024 presidential election.The public relations strategy turns Trump’s anti-democratic tendencies back at his critics – “enemies”, in the former president’s parlance – as allegations. In communications shared widely with his followers, it is the Department of Justice, the media, the Democrats and Rinos – Republican in name only – who dare to criticize him who threaten democracy.Trump, who has warned of “death and destruction” if charged with crimes and who defended supporters calling for the assassination of former vice-president Mike Pence for refusing to join the plot to overturn the election, urges his supporters to see him as the victim.“NOW WE KNOW, FOR SURE,” Trump added in his post accusing the D0J of preparing to use lethal force, “THAT JOE BIDEN IS A SERIOUS THREAT TO DEMOCRACY.” More

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in US Politics

    Newsmax accused of deleting evidence that it was spreading 2020 election lies

    The chief executive of Newsmax deleted text messages and the company allowed key employees to delete emails as part of an effort to conceal evidence the outlet knew it was broadcasting falsehoods about the 2020 election, lawyers for the voting machine company Smartmatic said in an acerbic court filing last week obtained by the Guardian.The allegations were made as part of a motion for sanctions in an ongoing defamation case Smartmatic filed against Newsmax for making false and outlandish claims about the company after the last presidential election. The case is planned to go to trial in September in Delaware superior court.The motion, which contains significant redactions, says Newsmax’s chief executive, Christopher Ruddy, deleted text messages after the company was asked to preserve documents and communications as part of a lawsuit. Smartmatic also alleges that Newsmax allowed emails from Gary Kanofsky, its news director, who tried to warn other Newsmax staffers against broadcasting false claims about Smartmatic, to be deleted.Smartmatic attorneys also claim that Newsmax allowed messages from the editorial director, David Perel, to be deleted even though he warned Ruddy about the credibility of a source and was responsible for drafting Newsmax’s journalistic practices.Newsmax, which denies publishing libelous claims, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. NBC News first reported the court filing.The messages are relevant to the case because Smartmatic needs to prove that Newsmax had “actual malice” and knew the statements were false or acted with reckless disregard to the truth and published them anyway.“Newsmax destroyed the text messages and emails of key executives responsible for its defamatory campaign against Smartmatic. This was not a mistake,” Smartmatic lawyers wrote in the court papers. “Newsmax’s cover-up worked. Critical documents, including text messages and emails going directly to Newsmax’s actual malice and motive, were permanently deleted.”Among the text messages allegedly deleted was one in which Ruddy refers to Sidney Powell, Trump’s lawyer who was one of the most prominent purveyors of false allegations of voter fraud after the 2020 election. While the content is redacted in the filing, Smartmatic described the message as Ruddy’s “unvarnished view of Ms Powell’s credibility” and “direct evidence of actual malice”.Ruddy claimed that the messages on his phone were set to automatically delete every 30 days, a setting lawyers said he did not change after Smartmatic instructed him to preserve communications. Despite that claim, Ruddy turned over an additional 1,106 text messages on 2 May, which Smartmatic lawyers say is evidence that his text messages did not really auto-delete during the period he claimed.The filing also describes Kanofsky, the news director, as “the closest thing Newsmax had to a whistleblower”. Starting in November 2020, Kanofsky allegedly sent emails to other Newsmax employees with a fact-check about Smartmatic and warning them about broadcasting false claims. Newsmax allegedly did not tell Kanofsky to preserve his emails and they were deleted. Smartmatic lawyers said when they pressed Newsmax on why they weren’t turning over Kanofsky’s emails, Newsmax attorneys revealed that Kanofsky had a practice of regularly deleting all of his work emails and saving them in his personal email.David Perel, the editorial director, also was not instructed to preserve emails, even though he sent relevant messages warning against publishing false claims. Smartmatic claimed. Perel was terminated in 2021 and Smartmatic said Newsmax wiped the messages on his company laptop.Lastly, Smartmatic claims that Newsmax tried to conceal the existence of a document outlining its journalistic and ethical practices. While the content of the guidelines is redacted in the filing, Smartmatic says Newsmax violated them by broadcasting false information.“Newsmax’s misconduct goes beyond falsely accusing Smartmatic of rigging the US election; it also attempted to conceal evidence of its actions and failed to follow its own journalistic standards,” J Erik Connolly, a lawyer for Smartmatic said in a statement.Smartmatic asked the superior court judge Eric Davis, who is overseeing the case, to order the company to pay legal fees it spent obtaining the concealed messages. It also asked Davis to alert the future jury to the concealment and instruct them to make an “adverse inference” about Newsmax’s motives.The lawsuit is one of several defamation actions that have been filed against conservative media as part of an effort to hold them accountable for spreading lies. Smartmatic and the voting machine company Dominion also have ongoing defamation lawsuits against Powell, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Lindell.Smarmatic settled a libel suit against the far-right network OAN last month for undisclosed terms. Last year, Fox News agreed to pay Dominion $787.5m to settle a defamation suit the company filed against it for false election claims. More

  • 88 Shares149 Views

    in US Politics

    Another week, another Trump flirtation with fascism

    Welcome back to the Stakes, our weekly US politics newsletter. I cover democracy issues, and I’m filling in for Adam Gabbatt this week as Donald Trump flirted with a third term in office (yes, that’s illegal) and posted a video promising a “unified reich” (yes, that’s Nazi-adjacent language). Weird how these anti-democratic “gaffes” keep happening! We’ll get into why that might be, after a look at what else is happening in US politics.Here’s what you need to know
    Trump rests, but doesn’t get any restOn the 20th day of the hush-money trial in New York, Trump declined to take the stand and the defense rested. Trump had falsely claimed he wasn’t allowed to take the stand: he was, and he chose not to. Outside the courtroom, he said although the defense would rest quickly, he himself would not be resting. “I don’t rest. I’d like to rest sometimes, but I don’t get to rest.”
    Biden’s Israel problemThe international criminal court’s prosecutor applied for arrest warrants for leaders of Israel and Hamas, and Joe Biden is not pleased. He called the warrant application “outrageous” and said: “We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.” His strong backing of Israel comes as the progressive left continues to pressure him to end US support for the Israel-Gaza war.
    That’s not the way the flag goesAn upside-down US flag – a symbol of those who believed the 2020 election was stolen – flew outside the home of the supreme court justice Samuel Alito’s home shortly after the January 6 insurrection in 2021. Alito blamed his wife, saying she did it as part of a dispute with a neighbor, but many observers saw it as the latest example of the politicization of the high court.
    Too many coincidencesView image in fullscreenAnother week, another few instances of Trump flirting with fascism.On Monday, Trump’s Truth Social account reposted a video about a second Trump term which included a fake newspaper with reference to a “unified reich”. The term means “empire” in German and is indelibly associated with Hitler’s rule, which the Nazis called the Third Reich.Biden’s campaign seized on it, saying Trump was telegraphing how he’d lead “as a dictator over a ‘unified reich’”. Trump’s campaign defended themselves by arguing it was all a mistake, saying a staffer reposted the video but didn’t see the words.But the video remained on Trump’s page for 15 hours, long after media outlets had reported on it, and stayed up even after the Trump campaign had acknowledged it in its statement.This pattern isn’t new for Trump: he will often use fascist language or nods to extremist groups, then claim it was a mistake or that the left and the media are twisting a narrative.Like claiming he would be a “dictator on day one”, but only for a day. Or promising a “bloodbath” if he lost the election, which his campaign later declared was a reference to the auto industry. Or calling his political opponents “vermin” – something Hitler also did – and saying immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of the US.Most recently, just days before the Truth Social video, speaking at the National Rifle Association’s convention, Trump floated the idea of a third term. US presidents are limited to two terms by the 22nd amendment to the constitution, which was passed in 1951 a few years after Franklin D Roosevelt won his fourth term.“You know, FDR 16 years – almost 16 years – he was four terms. I don’t know, are we going to be considered three-term? Or two-term?” Trump asked the NRA crowd, some of whom responded “three!”He has previously said he wouldn’t try for a third term – which is good, because it’s not clear how he could unless he figures out how to suspend or override the constitution – and if that were to happen, who knows what comes next.Regardless, the prospect of “Trump forever” is clearly on voters’ minds when they’re deciding who to elect this year, a sign that his ongoing authoritarian bent is spooking at least part of the undecided electorate.“I wouldn’t put it past him, now that he owns the RNC, to say: ‘Don Jr is going to do the next term, and he’ll get two,” said one focus group attendee who was quoted by Bloomberg.“‘And then Barron will get two.’ And we’ll just have some fake monarchy.”Worst weekView image in fullscreenArizona’s fake electors. Eleven of them were arraigned on Tuesday in the state’s case against the people who falsely signed documents saying Trump won the state, and the Trump allies who drummed up the idea.Among the 11 were Christina Bobb, an attorney who is now the Republican National Committee’s senior counsel for election integrity; Rudy Giuliani (last week’s “worst week” winner); former Arizona Republican party chair Kelli Ward and her husband, Michael; and Anthony Kern, a sitting state senator.Giuliani, 80, is so far the only one charged who was required by the court to post a bond, for $10,000. The former New York City mayor led the attorney general’s office on a cross-country chase, which culminated at his birthday party – after taunting the AG on social media – where court officials served him the charges. He later complained that the summons was not delivered to him “stylishly”, though it’s more stylish than usual to serve charges by crashing an 80-year-old’s birthday bash.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBiggest lieView image in fullscreenTrump. The former president was in my home state last Friday for a fundraiser where he again told a whopper: that he won Minnesota in the 2020 election.Obviously, he falsely claims nonstop that he won the entire election in 2020. But the Minnesota claim is a bit newer, as he tries to make the case that the state’s voters should swing to him.“I thought we won it in 2016. I thought we won it in ’20 – I know we won it in 2020,” he said, according to NBC.The 2020 election in Minnesota was not close: Trump lost by more than 233,000 votes, though he was closer in 2016, losing to Hillary Clinton by less than 45,000. Could he win the state in 2024? If he did, it would almost certainly mean Biden lost spectacularly nationwide: Minnesota is a Democratic stronghold for presidents, and the last Republican who won it was Richard Nixon in 1972.Elsewhere in US politicsView image in fullscreen The majority of Americans – nearly three in five – wrongly believe the US is in an economic recession, and many blame Biden, an exclusive new poll for the Guardian revealed. You can also take our quiz to see if you know how the US economy is faring. Two states have required schools to show an animated video in sex ed classes called Meet Baby Olivia, created by an anti-abortion group to show fetal development. Carter Sherman reports on the latest front of the anti-abortion movement. A Republican concerned about election fraud in 2020 found no fraud once he took over his county’s elections after winning office, Alice Herman reports from conservative Hillsdale county, Michigan.Words fail usView image in fullscreen“If I put my name on something, I really believe it”: Rudy Giuliani, who declared bankruptcy and owes massive legal fees and debts from various civil and criminal lawsuits, on his new coffee line, which he called “smooth, rich, chocolatey and gentle on your stomach”. More