US Politics

President Joe Biden has ordered the federal prison sentences of 31 people to be reduced, punishments which were given to them after nonviolent drug-related convictions.In an announcement released on Friday, the White House revealed that those whose sentences were commuted would be under home confinement until a 30 June expiration date for their respective punishments. The plan is for them to then be on supervised release, with the duration of that based on their original sentence.Among those with commuted sentences were a handful of women and men who were convicted of drug possession in Iowa, Indiana, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Hawaii and Texas. Most of the convictions involved methamphetamine. Others involved cocaine, heroin and marijuana.Others on the list released Friday hailed from California, Louisiana, Missouri, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Illinois, Tennessee, Ohio and Illinois. Those given commuted sentences will not have to pay the remainder of their fines, which range from $5,000 to $20,000, the White House’s statement said.“These individuals, who have been successfully serving sentences on home confinement, have demonstrated a commitment to rehabilitation, including by securing employment and advancing their education. Many would have received a lower sentence if they were charged with the same offense today, due to changes in the law, including the bipartisan First Step Act,” the White House’s statement added.The First Step Act is a 2018 bipartisan prison and sentencing reform bill that Donald Trump signed during his presidency which seeks to expand rehabilitative opportunities for people completing their incarceration.In addition to increasing credits for time already spent in custody awaiting the resolution of cases as well as for good conduct in federal prison, the act reduces mandatory minimum sentences for certain drug-related crimes. It also officially bans a number of correctional practices, including the shackling of pregnant women.The White House on Friday also announced the release of an “evidence-informed, multi-year Alternatives, Rehabilitation, and Re-entry strategic plan”.The plan seeks to strengthen public safety by reducing unnecessary criminal justice interactions so police officers can focus on fighting crime, supporting rehabilitation during incarceration and facilitating a successful return to their communities, the White House said.It went on to lay out a variety of ways the plan aims to support people in the federal justice system, including expanding healthcare access, securing access to safe and affordable housing, enhancing educational opportunities and improving access to food and subsistence benefits.The plan additionally calls for job opportunities and access to business capital, as well as strengthening access to banking and other financial services. It also promises to reduce voting barriers for those who are eligible.Biden last October pardoned thousands of people who had been convicted in federal court of simple marijuana possession, saying: “Sending people to prison for possessing marijuana has upended too many lives and incarcerated people for conduct that many states no longer prohibit.“It’s time we right these wrongs,” Biden said at the time of those pardons. More

Marianne Williamson is taking over TikTokMarianne Williamson, the self-help author who is making her second bid for the presidency, has a history of saying things that can be characterized as either “deranged” or “quirky” depending on how charitable you’re feeling. Some of her greatest hits include: Tweeting that the “power of the mind” might have changed the course of Hurricane Dorian and stopped it from hitting the US in 2019. (She later deleted the tweet.) Publishing a book in 1992 called A Return to Love where she said that “cancer and Aids and other physical illnesses are physical manifestations of a psychic scream … sickness is an illusion and does not actually exist.” (She’s since said that she’s pro-medicine and pro-science.) Saying that she would “harness love” to defeat Donald Trump during her closing statement at the Democratic presidential debate in 2019. We all know how that one worked out.Unsurprisingly, Williamson’s presidential campaign isn’t being taken remotely seriously by the media or the White House. The Biden administration has laughed off any idea that she’s a proper contender – when the White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, was asked about Williamson’s political aspirations in March she joked about not having “a crystal ball”.It’s certainly easy to make fun of Williamson but, while she’s said a lot of questionable things, it’s wrong to dismiss the author as a joke. When she’s not talking about the “power of the mind” Williamson has a lot to say about institutional inequality, the need for universal healthcare, the problems with capitalism, the importance of cancelling student debt, and the complacency of the Democratic establishment. And guess what? An awful lot of young people are listening. Williamson’s very left-leaning videos draw millions of views on TikTok and her speeches often go viral.“If engagement on TikTok is any indication, a Democratic presidential primary held today among people under 50 would result in a landslide for the bestselling author now making her second bid for the nomination,” the Intercept recently noted. And it’s not just TikTok where Williamson is popular: the Intercept further notes that “a recent poll found Williamson hovering above 20% with voters under 30”. Which is a lot better than she was doing in 2020 and is pretty impressive when you consider what a political outsider she is.Then again, of course, it’s the very fact that Williamson is a political outsider that makes her so popular among young people. Williamson has an energy and urgency that is severely lacking in the Democratic party. And she’s not shy about calling the Democrats out for their complacency.Even without a crystal ball, I think we all know that Williamson has zero chance of being in the White House – and I’m certainly not advocating that she should be. But wouldn’t it be nice if the White House adopted some of her energy and a few of her ideas about structural reform? Williamson’s popularity on TikTok isn’t some insignificant online phenomenon – it’s a sign of how disillusioned young people feel with the current system. Establishment Democrats have long preached incrementalism as the only way to move forwards but, when it comes to things like women’s rights, we only seem to be moving backwards. Marianne Williamson isn’t the answer to America’s woes but her TikTok popularity should have the Democrats asking a lot of questions.Half of women have dense breast tissue that doesn’t show up on mammograms“Dense breast tissue is simply tissue that is thicker and glandular, hasn’t turned into fat over time, and it puts women at an automatic four times higher risk of cancer,” Elizabeth L Silver writes. If you have dense breast tissue then a mammogram alone will have a hard time detecting cancer – you need additional screenings such as an ultrasound or MRI. “Yet the decision to supplement a mammogram with this additional screening is, shockingly, one of the largest controversies in women’s health,” Silver explains. “[T]he question has essentially been left to the patient, who knows little about it.”Trump lawyer asks E Jean Carroll why she didn’t scream for help during assault“Women who come forward, one of the reasons they don’t come forward is because they’re always asked, ‘why didn’t you scream?’” Carroll retorted. “He raped me whether I screamed or not.” As Amanda Marcotte writes, Trump’s entire defense in the E Jean Carroll rape trial seems to rest on shameless misogyny.Ghosted is not romantic – it’s a walking red flagChris Evans and Ana de Armas star in a new action-romance called Ghosted with some dire reviews and misogynistic tropes. “What’s sold as a love story, based on following your heart, presents us instead an entitled man who won’t take no for an answer,” Jess Bacon writes in the Guardian. “Sadly, this is nothing new.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionNude landlord no excuse for holding back rent, rules German courtA Frankfurt court found “the usability of the rented property was not impaired by the plaintiff sunning himself naked in the courtyard”.At the CEO level, women finally outnumber men named JohnHowever, there are 60 James/Robert/John CEOs compared with 41 women, according to Bloomberg.Thai conservatives vow to legalise sex toys in bid to shake up electionIt is currently illegal to sell sex toys in Thailand although that obviously doesn’t stop it happening. Now the country’s Democratic party wants to change that, arguing that they’re missing out on lots of taxes. They also came up with some social benefits for legalization: “Sex toys are useful because they could lead to a decrease in prostitution as well as divorce due to a mismatch of sexual libido, and sex-related crimes.” Not sure that vibrators are going to stop sex-related crime, but it’s certainly a creative argument.Voluptuous mermaid statue causes outrage in southern Italy“It looks like a mermaid with two silicone breasts and, above all, a huge arse never seen before on a mermaid,” one critic complained. “At least not any I know.”The week in parrotarchyVideo phone calls are for the birds. Or, to be more specific: the parrots. A new study has found that parrots that are allowed to make video calls to other birds seem to become less lonely. Now we just need to get them on Twitter. More

In Shasta county, a deep red enclave in far northern California, officials are intensifying their push to replace voting machines with a costly and experimental hand-count system that could cost an additional $4m over two years.The decision of the far-right majority on the region’s governing body, the Shasta county board of supervisors, to press ahead with the controversial plan comes as half the county’s workforce is preparing to strike over wages. Officials on the board recently said the county did not have enough money to pay requested wage increases for workers.The move has deepened divisions in a small county where public spending budgets are tight, with critics denouncing the price tag of an overhaul based on lies about election fraud.In a tense meeting that saw one county supervisor served with recall paperwork, the board’s ultra conservative majority renewed their support for a system that will cost three times more than the voting machines the county previously used.“We’re going to have free and fair elections in Shasta county,” said Patrick Jones, the chair of the board of supervisors, at a meeting on Tuesday. “Apparently money seems to be more important than making sure our elections are fair.”The board of supervisors has pushed the rural county of 180,000 people into the national spotlight with its decision this year to upend the county’s voting system without a replacement, and attempt to create a new system from scratch.Conspiracy theorists who believe that voting machines helped to steal the presidency from Donald Trump have seized on the county with high-profile figures in the movement, such as the MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, offering their support.Some in Shasta, which has became a hotbed for far-right politics in the pandemic years, have cheered the board’s decision.Since Trump’s loss, a group of residents had spoken regularly at county meetings, urging the board to cut ties with Dominion Voting Systems, the company at the center of baseless conspiracy theories about election fraud. They argued that the machines were a threat to elections both nationally and locally.Their vision became a reality shortly after an ultra-conservative majority took hold of the board of supervisors and, against the advice of colleagues and elections staff, decided in a 3-2 vote to cut ties with Dominion and pursue a hand tally.“We have disenfranchised roughly 110,000 voters and that is truly the epitome of denying our residents their first amendment right and they should be outraged,” said supervisor Mary Rickert, who voted against the decision.Meetings on the matter have drawn large crowds, including election deniers and dozens of residents who begged the county not to do away with Dominion machines, pointing out that the supervisors themselves had been elected by voters using the technology.The official who oversees voting had warned against a hand-count system, arguing that it is “exceptionally complex and error prone” and could cause the county to miss state elections deadlines, and ultimately disenfranchise voters.Cathy Darling Allen, Shasta’s registrar of voters, told officials in March the new system would require at least 1,200 additional temporary employees, funding to pay them, and a space large enough to accommodate them.This week the county’s deputy executive told the board that moving to a hand-count would increase costs by a minimum of $3.8m in the fiscal year 2024-2025, which she described as a conservative estimate.But despite financial concerns and protests from residents, the county board has once again opted to move ahead with the effort, and this week agreed to fund seven new positions to implement it. Rickert, the supervisor, again urged the board to reverse its previous decision, which she deemed “reckless and irresponsible” and unsuccessfully tried to a call a vote to do so.Her constituents are deeply concerned, she said recently.“I’ve had many people come up to me and say ‘whats going on’? These are people that are rock solid conservative as you will find – ranchers and farmers,” she said. “Those are the people who are most upset, they see total fiscal irresponsibility with their tax dollars.” More

Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani has admitted to a “dirty trick” that his campaign used to suppress the Hispanic vote during the city’s 1993 mayoral race.On Tuesday, Giuliani revealed his voter suppression tactics to the far-right Donald Trump ally Steve Bannon and Arizona’s defeated Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake during a discussion on his America’s Mayor Live program.In the conversation, Giuliani – who was central to Trump’s efforts to subvert the result of the 2020 presidential election – lamented that he had been “cheated” during the 1989 mayoral race in which he lost before explaining his 1993 campaign strategy, saying: “I’ll tell you one little dirty trick,” to which Lake replied: “We need dirty tricks!”“A dirty trick in New York City? I’m so shocked,” Bannon sarcastically responded. Giuliani then interrupted the former Trump adviser, saying: “No, played by Republicans!”“Republicans don’t do dirty tricks,” Bannon said before Giuliani enthusiastically said: “How about this one?” Bannon replied: “Okay give it to me.”Giuliani explained that he spent $2m to set up a so-called Voter Integrity Committee which was headed by Randy Levine, current president of the New York Yankees baseball team, and John Sweeney, a former New York Republican congressman.“So they went through East Harlem, which is all Hispanic, and they gave out little cards, and the card said: ‘If you come to vote, make sure you have your green card because INS are picking up illegals.’ So they spread it all over the Hispanic …” said Giuliani, referring to the now defunct US Immigration and Naturalization Service before trailing off.“Oh my gosh,” Lake replied as she raised her eyebrows.Following its closure in 2003, the INS transferred its immigration enforcement functions to other agencies within the Department of Homeland Security, including US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.Giuliani went on to reveal that following the election, which he won against then incumbent mayor David Dinkins by around 53,000 votes, then president Bill Clinton’s justice department launched an investigation into him.“[Then-attorney general] Janet Reno is coming after us, we violated civil rights,” Giuliani recalled his lawyer Dennison Young telling him. Giuliani then reassured Young, saying: “What civil rights did we violate? They don’t have civil rights! All we did was prevent people who can’t vote from voting. Maybe we tricked them, but tricking is not a crime.”“In those days, we didn’t have crazy prosecutors. Nowadays, they’ll probably prosecute you for it … and that’s the way we kept down the Hispanic vote,” Giuliani said.“Not the legal vote, the illegal vote,” Lake interjected.“Of course! The Hispanic illegal vote, which takes away the Hispanic legal vote,” Giuliani responded.The Huffington Post compiled a handful of media reports from the time which collectively point towards Giuliani’s voter suppression tactics during the election.A 1993 New York Times article published at the time of the election reported that Dinkins had called for a news conference to “accuse the Giuliani camp of waging ‘an outrageous campaign of voter intimidation and dirty tricks’”.One of the charges included English and Spanish pro-Dinkins posters that were allegedly put up at the time in Washington Heights and the Bronx, predominantly Hispanic and Black areas. “The posters suggested that illegal immigrants would be arrested at the polls and deported if they tried to vote,” the New York Times reported.An article published in the socialist journal Against the Current months after the election also mentioned the posters.“Cops put up phony Dinkins posters in mostly Dominican Washington Heights, saying the INS would be checking voters’ documents at the polls. In some cases police themselves asked Latino voters for their passports,” wrote labor and social activist Andy Pollack.Similarly, a Washington Post report published days after the election cited complaints surrounding voter suppression in the city.“Among the complaints are the placing of signs on telephone poles and walls in Latino areas warning that ‘federal authorities and immigration officials will be at all election sites … Immigration officials will be at locations to arrest and deport undocumented illegal voters,’” the Post reported.A statement issued by the then justice department on 2 November 1993 said: “The Department of Justice is aware that posters have been placed throughout New York City misinforming voters about the role of federal officials in today’s elections … Federal observers are in New York to protect the rights of minority voters. They are not there to enforce immigration laws.”Speaking to the Huffington Post, Sweeney dismissed Giuliani’s claims as “nonsense” and said that he ran a “legitimate” operation alongside Levine. Levine echoed similar sentiments to the outlet, explaining that the purpose of the operation was “getting poll watchers and attorneys when there was a dispute”.He added that he had “no knowledge” of the trick Giuliani described.Since the 1993 mayoral elections, voter suppression tactics have continued to be carried out in various ways across the city.In December 2021, the New York City council approved a bill that would have allowed for non-US citizens to vote in local elections. However, the law was struck down months later in June 2022 after state supreme court judge Ralph Porzio of Staten Island ruled the law “unconstitutional”.The same month Porzio struck down the law, the Democratic New York governor Kathy Hochul signed the John R Lewis Voting Rights Act into law, which seeks to prevent local officials from enacting rules that may suppress voting rights of individuals as a result of their race.In addition to local governments or school districts with track records of discrimination now being required to obtain state approval before passing certain voting policies, the new law expands language assistance to voters for whom English is not a first language, as well as provides legal tools to fight racist voting provisions.“We’re going to change our election laws so we no longer hurt minority communities,” Hochul said as she signed the bill into law. More

It is the envy of the world for its diversity and vitality. Yet America appears on a likely course for a presidential election between a white man in his 80s and a white man in his 70s. And yes, they’re the same guys as last time.Joe Biden, the 46th president and oldest in history, this week formally launched his campaign for a second term in a video announcement. The 80-year-old faces no serious challenge from within the Democratic party and told reporters: “They’re going to see a race, and they’re going to judge whether or not I have it or don’t have it.”Donald Trump, the 45th president and second oldest in history, is the frontrunner for the Republican nomination. He holds a 46-point lead over Ron DeSantis in the latest Emerson College poll amid growing doubts over the Florida governor’s readiness for the world stage. Trump, 76, has chalked up far more endorsements from members of Congress.There is a very long way to go, and Trump faces myriad legal perils, but most pundits currently agree that a replay of the 2020 election is the most likely scenario next year – one that polls show voters have little appetite for.“I don’t think Americans want to see a sequel,” said Chris Scott, a 34-year-old Democratic strategist from Detroit, Michigan. “Americans are fed up with the Donald Trump saga, even though he still has a number of acolytes in the GOP. They’re just ready to be over that chapter and move on.“With Biden, there’s a lot of people that question: does he have the stamina to do another four years, even though there’s things in his record that have been effective and he’s gotten done? I don’t think anybody wants to see exactly the same rematch that we got four years ago.”Biden’s re-election bid was all but inevitable. This will be his fourth run for the presidency in four decades and, having finally achieved his ambition in 2020, he has little cause to walk away. He can point to arguably the most consequential legislative agenda since President Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s and sealed the deal with a better-than-expected performance in last year’s midterm elections, where abortion rights were a pivotal issue.Furthermore, he has no obvious challenger with the Democratic party and benefits from the same conditions as 2020: the fear that Trump poses an existential threat to democracy and the calculation and Biden is best placed to beat him.The president duly promised this week to protect American liberties from “extremists” linked to Trump. A video released by his new campaign team opened with imagery from the 6 January 2021 attack on the US Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters.Biden said: “When I ran for president four years ago, I said we’re in a battle for the soul of America, and we still are. This is not a time to be complacent. That’s why I’m running for re-election … Let’s finish this job. I know we can.”To retain the White House, Biden will need to enthuse the coalition of young voters and Black voters – particularly women – along with blue-collar midwesterners, moderates and disaffected Republicans who helped him win in 2020.But while the leftwing senator Bernie Sanders and most Democratic elected officials are backing him, voters have doubts about a man who would be 86 by the end of a prospective second term, almost a decade older than the average American male’s life expectancy.Some 44% of Democratic voters say he is too old to run, according a Reuters/Ipsos poll, although it showed him with a lead of 43% to 38% over Trump nationally. Trump also faces concerns about his age, with 35% of Republicans saying he is too old.The Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that a majority of registered voters do not want either Biden or Trump to run again. But they may be stuck with it as both men are difficult to dislodge. Biden has the advantage of incumbency while Trump, as a former president with an iron-like grip on his party’s grassroots base, is a quasi-incumbent on the Republican side.Michael Steele, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, said: “Until both parties put something different on the ballot, what’s America going to do? Now the challenge becomes how to keep the respective party bases animated, how to engage independent voters and young people to participate in an election that they’re not thrilled about.”He observed bleakly: “There’s nothing inspirational about American politics today.”Bill Galston, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton, said: “I’ve believed for a long time we’re in for a rematch. There is not a lot of enthusiasm for the rematch but, in the end, people are going to choose sides very firmly and I do not expect it to be a low-turnout election.”America is diversifying culturally and racially but it is also ageing – since 2000, census records show, the national median age has increased by 3.4 years. Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution thinktank in Washington, added: “It is still the case that people above the age of 50 vote in much higher percentages than people below the age of 50 and especially below the age of 30.“The new generation will become much more decisive when it begins to vote in numbers commensurate with its potential demographic clout. But not before.”Following Hillary Clinton v Trump in 2016, and Biden v Trump in 2020 (which saw the highest turnout in more than a century), a rematch between the two men would be the third consecutive election to foreground negative partisanship, with many voters animated by their dislike of other side’s candidate.John Zogby, an author and pollster, said: “Republicans have been worked into a frenzy about Biden and Democrats view Trump as the devil incarnate.“Significant numbers of ‘antis’ really hate the other person. That in itself is a driver. That helps turnout for both sides. At this moment I’ve got to think advantage Democrat. But there’s a long way to go here. There is pressure on Biden. He can’t stumble physically, he can’t make a horrible gaffe, and that’s enormous pressure.”A Biden v Trump rematch would also leave America facing its 250th birthday in 2026 with no female presidents and only one Black president in its history. It fares poorly by comparison with Australia, Britain, Finland, Germany, New Zealand and numerous nations that have elected women as leaders.Trump could choose a female running mate, with potential candidates including Nikki Haley, a former US ambassador to the UN and one of his rivals for the Republican nomination. Biden will be joined in his 2024 bid by his vice-president, Kamala Harris, who features prominently in his campaign video.Bonnie Morris, a history lecturer at University of California, Berkeley, and author of books including The Feminist Revolution, said: “An interesting question is, given the concerns about Biden’s age or his possible frailty, it sets up the potential for a Black woman to take over should he be elected and fall ill.”The race is not a foregone conclusion, however. Some Republicans say they are weary of Trump’s grievance politics and boorish behaviour – and his repeated electoral defeats. DeSantis has not yet formally launched his campaign and Trump could also face competition from his former vice-president, Mike Pence, Senator Tim Scott and others.Trump is uniquely vulnerable this time after becoming the first former president to face criminal charges and because of an array of investigations. In a jarring contrast to Biden’s campaign announcement, Trump was on trial in a civil lawsuit this week over writer E Jean Carroll’s accusation that he raped her in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. He has denied raping Carroll.But if Trump does prevail, Democrats insist that they can overcome voter fatigue.Malcolm Kenyatta, 32, the first openly LGBTQ+ person of colour elected to the Pennsylvania general assembly, said: “This campaign is going to be the clearest contrast that maybe you’ve ever seen because I do believe Donald Trump is going to be the nominee. A lot of times you have somebody who’s never been president running against the incumbent and they’ve talking about what they want to do. You have two presidents who have actual records.“Under Trump, you saw the most job losses of any president in American history, an economic moment of turmoil coming out of Covid. I’m excited to get out there and be a part of telling the story of what the president’s real successes have been. You don’t have to sadly vote for President Biden. I’m going to be happily, vigorously excited to vote for him because he has accomplished so much and frankly I don’t give a damn how old he is. I give a damn about what it would mean for working families like mine.” More

Ben Smith is a willing passenger on the rollercoaster also known as the internet. He reported for Politico, was founding editor-in-chief at BuzzFeed News and did a stint as a columnist for the New York Times. Then he co-founded Semafor. Graced with a keen eye and sharp wit, he has seen and heard plenty.People and businesses crash, burn and sometimes rise again. BuzzFeed News is no more. The New York Times trades 75% higher than five years ago. Tucker Carlson is off the air. Roger Ailes is dead. Twitter ain’t what it used to be.Smith’s first book, Traffic: Genius, Rivalry, and Delusion in the Billion-Dollar Race to Go Viral, captures the drama with light prose and a breezy tone. He observes that internet news morphed from being a vehicle for the left into the tool of the right. It’s a lesson worth remembering.Technology is agnostic. The market yearns to build the better mousetrap. Secret sauce seldom stays secret for long. Barack Obama demonstrated a then-unparalleled mastery of electoral micro-targeting; in turn, the first Trump campaign harnessed Facebook and social media in a manner few envisioned.Traffic is the narrative of an industry and its personas. Smith spills ink on the overlapping relationships between the late Andrew Breitbart, founder of the eponymous rightwing website, Arianna Huffington and Matt Drudge. He stresses that ideology tethered to accessible if potentially inflammatory content gains eyeballs and clicks. Kittens are cute. Listicles are good for laughs. On the other hand, dick pics get stale quickly unless there’s a story behind them. Brett Favre is the exception that proves the rule.Smith recounts discussions with Steve Bannon, the dark lord of Trumpworld. He describes a Trump Tower meeting, amid the 2016 campaign. Bannon, then Trump’s campaign chairman, “exuded confidence, but it didn’t feel like a winning campaign”, Smith observes. “He didn’t seem to have much to do.”But there was more to the confab than atmospherics. There was insight.“Breitbart hadn’t just chosen Trump, Bannon told me, based on the candidate’s political views.” Rather, “Bannon and his crew had seen the energy Trump carried, the engagement he’d driven, and attached themselves to it.”Charisma counts. Said differently, Hillary Clinton was only a candidate. Unlike Trump, she did not spearhead a movement, evoke broad loyalty or elicit passion. Bernie Sanders, the Brooklyn-born socialist, stood in marked contrast. And he didn’t give speeches at Goldman Sachs or summer on Martha’s Vineyard.Sanders connected with the white working class and Latinos. A creature of the beer track, he came within two-tenths of a point of beating Clinton in Iowa then clobbered her in New Hampshire. The Democratic primary extended into July. The performance of the senator from Vermont presaged Clinton’s election day woes.“BuzzFeed, in Bannon’s view, had failed to recognize that Bernie Sanders could generate the same energy, the same engagement,” Smith writes. “Why hadn’t we gone all in for Bernie, he asked me.”Smith’s answer satisfied no one, not even himself: “I told Bannon that we came from different traditions.”Greed, sex and ambition also marble Smith’s tale. Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the FTX crypto exchange and a $10m investor in Semafor, faces a dozen federal criminal counts. The company plans to repurchase his shares. Tainted money is a flashpoint for aggrieved creditors.The pursuit of coolness, cash and desirability seldom respects boundaries. Like moths, journalists gravitate to flames only to be burned. In one chapter, Smith recalls the plight of BuzzFeed’s Benny Johnson.Johnson came from the Blaze, the hard-right brainchild of Glenn Beck, purveyor, Smith says, of “deranged conspiracies about Barack Obama before [Fox] pushed him out in 2011”. As for Johnson, he generated clickable copy. “He had a gift for traffic,” Smith writes. Johnson also had a plagiarism problem. In hindsight, he flashed warning signs. Apparently, Smith elected to ignore them.“I wasn’t really worried about whether Benny would fit in,” he admits. “I should have been.”Johnson was not another David Brooks or George Will. He was not “a bridge between BuzzFeed’s reflexive progressivism and the other half of the country”. Rather, Johnson crystallized something new, “a conservative movement more concerned about aesthetics than policy, motivated by nostalgia and culture more than by the overt subject matter of politics”.These days, owning the libs takes precedence over policy debate. Exhibit A: Marjorie Taylor Greene. Mien matters more than ever.Smith writes: “I sometimes wonder now if Benny was headed toward the kind of rightwing populism that Donald Trump came to embody.”Perhaps. Then again, “bullshit” and looks have always populated politics and the ranks of politicians. Smith’s words, again. After BuzzFeed, Johnson bounced to the National Review then on to the Daily Caller. He is now at Newsmax and Turning Point USA, the $39m non-profit led by Charlie Kirk.Elsewhere, Smith recalls an offer made by Disney in 2013, to purchase BuzzFeed for $450m with the “potential of earning $200m more”. Smith’s colleagues rejected the deal. The Disney chief, Bob Iger, exploded: “Fuck him, he loses, the company will never be worth what it would have been worth with us.”He was prescient.“By 2022, the internet had splintered,” Smith notes.America now faces a rerun of the last presidential election, Biden v Trump again.In his conclusion, Smith writes: “Those of us who work in media, politics and technology are largely concerned now with figuring out how to hold these failing institutions together or to build new ones that are resistant to the forces we helped unleash.”Rome wasn’t built in a day. Nor was the web. Sometimes, creative destruction is just destruction, slapped with a gauzy label.
Traffic: Genius, Rivalry, and Delusion in the Billion-Dollar Race to Go Viral is published in the US by Penguin Random House More

Samuel Alito said the decision he wrote removing the federal right to abortion made him and other US supreme court justices “targets of assassination” but denied claims he was responsible for its leak in draft form.“Those of us who were thought to be in the majority, thought to have approved my draft opinion, were really targets of assassination,” Alito told the Wall Street Journal in an interview published on Friday.“It was rational for people to believe they might be able to stop the decision in Dobbs by killing one of us.”Alito wrote the ruling in Dobbs v Jackson, the Mississippi case that overturned Roe v Wade, which established the right to abortion in 1973.Alito’s draft ruling was leaked to Politico on 2 May last year, to uproar and protest nationwide. The final ruling was issued on 24 June.On 8 June, an armed man was arrested outside the home of Brett Kavanaugh, with Alito one of six conservatives on the nine-justice court. Charged with attempted murder of a United States judge, the man pleaded not guilty.The conservative chief justice, John Roberts, voted against overturning Roe, but the three rightwingers installed by Republicans under Donald Trump ensured it fell regardless.Progressives charged that a conservative, perhaps the hardline Alito, might have orchestrated the leak in an attempt to lock in a majority for such a momentous decision.Alito said: “That’s infuriating to me. Look, this made us targets of assassination. Would I do that to myself? Would the five of us have done that to ourselves? It’s quite implausible.”The leak was investigated by the supreme court marshal, without establishing a perpetrator.Saying the marshal “did a good job with the resources that were available”, Alito said he had “a pretty good idea who is responsible, but that’s different from the level of proof that is needed to name somebody”.Alito said the leak “was a part of an effort to prevent the Dobbs draft … from becoming the decision of the court. And that’s how it was used for those six weeks by people on the outside, as part of the campaign to try to intimidate the court.”He also said the leak “created an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust”. The justices “worked through it”, he said, “and last year we got our work done … but it was damaging”.Last November, after a bombshell New York Times report, Alito denied leaking information about a decision in a 2014 case about contraception and religious rights.His Wall Street Journal interview seemed bound to further anger Democrats and progressives. Justices regularly claim not to be politically motivated, but even with a Democrat in the White House the court has made other momentous conservative rulings, notably including a loosening of gun-control laws.Joe Biden’s administration has shied from calls for reform, including the idea justices should be added to establish balance or give liberals a majority, reflecting Democratic control of the White House and Senate.Alito told the Journal he did not “feel physically unsafe, because we now have a lot of protection”. He also said he was “driven around in basically a tank, and I’m not really supposed to go anyplace by myself without the tank and my members of the police force”.Complaining that criticism also stoked by corruption allegations against two more conservatives, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, were “new during my lifetime”, Alito said: “We are being hammered daily, and I think quite unfairly in a lot of instances.“And nobody, practically nobody, is defending us. The idea has always been that judges are not supposed to respond to criticisms, but if the courts are being unfairly attacked, the organised bar will come to their defense.”Alito said legal authorities had, “if anything … participated to some degree in these attacks”.He declined to comment on reporting by ProPublica about Thomas’s friendship with Harlan Crow, a Republican mega-donor who has bestowed gifts and purchases which Thomas largely did not disclose.But Alito did complain about how Kavanaugh was treated when allegations of sexual assault surfaced during his confirmation process.“After Justice Kavanaugh was accused of being a rapist … he made an impassioned speech, made an impassioned scene, and he was criticised because it was supposedly not judicious, not the proper behavior for a judge to speak in those terms.“I don’t know – if somebody calls you a rapist?”Accusations against Kavanaugh included attempted rape while a high school student. On Friday, the Guardian reported that new information showed serious omissions in a Senate investigation of the allegations, mounted when Republicans controlled the chamber.Polling shows that public trust in the supreme court has reached historic lows.“We’re being bombarded,” Alito complained, “and then those who are attacking us say: ‘Look how unpopular they are. Look how low their approval rating has sunk.’“Well, yeah, what do you expect when … day in and day out, ‘They’re illegitimate. They’re engaging in all sorts of unethical conduct. They’re doing this, they’re doing that’?”Such attacks, he said, “undermine confidence in the government [as] it’s one thing to say the court is wrong; it’s another thing to say it’s an illegitimate institution”.With some court-watchers, the interview landed heavily.Robert Maguire, research director for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, an independent watchdog, said: “There is no depth to the pity [justices] – and Alito in particular – feel for themselves when they face public criticism.” More

Florida officials are threatening to revoke the teaching license of a school superintendent who criticized the governor, Ron DeSantis.The educator is accused of violating several statutes and DeSantis directives and allowing his “personal political views” to guide his leadership.A revocation by the state education department could allow DeSantis to remove the Leon county superintendent, Rocky Hanna, from his elected office.The Republican governor did that last year to an elected Democratic prosecutor in the Tampa Bay area who disagreed with his positions limiting abortion and care for transgender teens and indicated he might not enforce new laws in those areas.Disney sued DeSantis this week, saying he targeted its Orlando theme parks for retribution after it criticized the governor’s so-called “don’t say gay” law that banned the discussion of sexuality and gender in early grades and has now been expanded.Hanna has publicly opposed that law, once defied the governor’s order that barred any mandate students wear masks during the Covid pandemic, and criticized a DeSantis-backed bill that will pay for students to attend private school.The Leon county district, with about 30,000 students, covers Tallahassee, the state capital, and its suburbs.“It’s a sad day for democracy in Florida, and the first amendment right to freedom of speech, when a state agency with unlimited power and resources, can target a local elected official in such a biased fashion,” Hanna said.A Democrat then running as an independent, Hanna was elected to a second four-year term in 2020 with 60% of the vote. He plans to run for re-election next year and does not need a teacher’s license to hold the job.“This investigation has nothing to do with these spurious allegations, but rather everything to do with attempting to silence myself and anyone else who speaks up for teachers and our public schools in a way that does not fit the political narrative of those in power,” Hanna said.He said the investigation was spurred by a single complaint from a leader of the local chapter of Moms for Liberty, a conservative education group.“We are fighting tirelessly with our local school board to no avail,” Brandi Andrews wrote to DeSantis, citing Hanna’s mask mandate, opposition to new education laws and directives and public criticism of the governor.Andrews noted she had appeared in a DeSantis re-election TV commercial. Her letter was stamped “Let’s Go Brandon”, a code used by some conservatives to replace a vulgar chant against Joe Biden. Andrews said her complaint against Hanna was one of many.An education department spokesman, Alex Lanfranconi, said that while officials would not discuss the Hanna investigation in detail, “nothing about this case is special”.“Any teacher with an extensive history of repeated violations of Florida law would be subject to consequences up to and including losing their educator certificate,” he said.The threatened revocation was first reported by the Tallahassee Democrat newspaper.Hanna can have a hearing before an administrative judge, attempt to negotiate a settlement or surrender his license. He said he had not decided what to do.Hanna received a letter from the education commissioner, Manny Diaz Jr, earlier this month saying an investigation found probable cause he violated a 2021 directive barring districts from mandating that students wear masks.Hanna required students to wear masks after a Leon third-grader died of Covid. The fight went on for several months until Leon and other districts had their legal challenge rejected.Diaz also cited a memo Hanna issued before this school year telling teachers, “You do You!” and to teach as they always had, allegedly giving approval to ignore laws enacted by DeSantis.His letter also cites the district’s failure for a month in 2020 to have an armed guard or police officer at every school as required after the 2018 Parkland high school shooting. Hanna said there were not enough available officers to meet that requirement. The education department cleared him of wrongdoing.Diaz also complains parents were told children could get an excused absence if they chose to attend a February protest at the state capitol opposing DeSantis’s education policies.Offering students a “free day off of school” to attend the rally “is another example of [Hanna] failing to distinguish his political views from the standards taught in Florida schools”, Diaz wrote. More