US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 288 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      The future of the world may depend on what a few thousand Pennsylvania voters think about their grocery bills | Timothy Garton Ash

      by

      On 5 November, people around the globe will tune in to watch the world election. It’s not a “world” election in the sense of the World Cup – a football championship in which many nations actively participate – but it’s much more than a World Series, the curiously named baseball championship that involves only teams from North America. This year has been called the biggest election year in history. By the end of it, something approaching half the world’s adult population will have had the possibility to put a cross against a name on a ballot paper. But the US presidential election is the year’s big match.Why? Because this is a genuine democratic election that will result in a single person holding exceptionally concentrated executive power in what is still the world’s most powerful country. It’s a highly watchable soap opera, with a classic plot familiar to all. And one of this year’s two contenders, Donald Trump, is a danger to his own country and the world. If the “election” of the president of China, the world’s other superpower, were a genuine democratic choice, that event would perhaps be as consequential. But it isn’t, so it isn’t. Russia had a presidential “election” earlier this year, but at issue was only the size of Vladimir Putin’s declared majority.Equally, if the US were a parliamentary democracy, and especially if it had an electoral system of proportional representation, the stakes would not be so high. The resulting government would depend on the party-political composition of parliament and in many such countries you routinely end up with coalition governments. Even in Britain’s “elective dictatorship”, as the Conservative politician Lord Hailsham (Quintin Hogg) once characterised the British political system, the prime minister has significantly less power than a US president. President Emmanuel Macron of France is now behaving as if he thinks he is the US president, with an unrestricted right to form the nation’s government, but that’s not what his country’s constitution says.As the American political scientist Corey Brettschneider reminds us in his new book, The Presidents and the People, the danger inherent in this concentration of power was already highlighted by Patrick Henry, a hero of the American war of independence, when the US constitution was debated at the Virginia ratifying convention in 1788. What if a criminal were elected president, Henry asked. What if he could abuse his position as singular head of the executive branch and commander in chief of the military to realise his criminal ambitions? Well, here we are 236 years later, and a convicted felon and notorious fan of autocrats is neck-and-neck with the newly crowned Democratic candidate, Kamala Harris.If her opponent were Nikki Haley, the runner-up in the Republican primary contest, the drama would be nothing like as intense. This would be something like a normal election. But it’s Trump, so it isn’t.I arrived in the US the day before Joe Biden finally conceded that he would not stand again. Since then we have witnessed a tidal wave of hope flow into the candidacy of Harris and her folksy running mate, Tim Walz. This culminated in the Democratic national convention in Chicago, where the usual orgy of razzmatazz was accompanied by genuine joy and unabashed flag-waving patriotism.View image in fullscreenTo their own and everyone else’s surprise, the Democrats give every impression of being united. Harris raised about $500m for her campaign in just a month. She is not a great orator, like Bill Clinton and both Obamas, but she gave an excellent acceptance speech. She introduced herself to the American public as the child of an indomitable Indian immigrant mother. She elaborated on her campaign’s brilliantly chosen theme of freedom – therefore taking what has been for years a Republican leitmotif and reconnecting liberty with liberalism. She listed some of those freedoms from that are also freedoms to: women’s freedom to decide about their own bodies, the freedom to live safe from gun violence, the freedom to love whom you choose, the freedom to breathe clean air, the freedom to vote.Importantly for a female candidate with a left-liberal background, Harris successfully conveyed the image of a strong leader who would give the US “the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world” and enable it to out-do China in the competition for the 21st century and “stand strong with Ukraine and our Nato allies”. In substance, 90% of this could equally have been said by Biden, but the way she said it – not least in seeming credibly to care about the heartbreaking scale of Palestinian suffering – made it feel new and promising.As a result, enthusiasm for the Democratic candidate has soared – but only to the point where this election has become too close to call. Recalling his own electrifying slogan from the 2008 election, “Yes we can”, Barack Obama told the convention, “Yes she can!”Yes, she can; but that doesn’t mean she will. She may be marginally ahead in nationwide polling, but with the antiquated electoral system that the US uses for its presidential election, she could win the popular vote, as Hillary Clinton did in 2016, and still lose because of a few tens of thousands of swing voters in battleground states in the midwest and the sun belt.One leading pollster tells me that the top three issues for the electorate are the economy, crime and immigration, and on all three, Republicans typically have the edge. Trump himself looks all over the place, giving long rambling speeches, but he’s a formidable political counter-puncher.The social aquifers of white working-class anger are still very full, especially among men. (The gender gap is very marked in the Harris v Trump contest.) Moreover, if it’s a narrow victory for Harris, Trump will immediately declare the election “stolen”, and we will be set for a long bout of bitter litigation, as happened in 2000, but with the supreme court now seen by many as biased towards the Republican side.All of which is a long way of saying: nobody knows. And that, after all, is the hallmark of a genuine democratic election. But here’s the uniquely curious thing about this one. Millions of people all over the world, from Austria to Zimbabwe, not only follow it closely but also know many of the sometimes arcane psephological details that may decide the result in the electoral college. This is not just because Washington is the world’s political theatre, as much as Netflix is now the world’s movie theatre, but because the result will have important consequences for them. If you are Ukrainian or Palestinian, it may literally be a matter of life and death.Ultimately, what is most peculiar about this world election is the sheer incongruity of cause and potential effect. Whether women and children in Kharkiv or Rafah live or die may depend on what Mike the mechanic in Michigan and Penny the teacher in Pennsylvania think about their grocery bills.

      Timothy Garton Ash is a historian, political writer and Guardian columnist More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Was Kamala Harris’s big interview a success? Sort of | Moira Donegan

      by

      How much of an incentive does Kamala Harris really have to lay out a thorough policy agenda? With fewer than 70 days until the general election, the newly official Democratic presidential nominee has exited her party’s Chicago convention riding a a wave of tight but improving poll numbers and tremendous party goodwill.Her move to the top of the ticket has prompted waves of enthusiasm and barely concealed relief, as young voters and weary Democrats greeted the happy prospect of an election campaign that was, at last, not between Biden and Trump. The shift of candidates initiated a new shift in the campaign’s voice, with a more playful, irreverent and optimistic turn coming to characterize the Democrats’ public messaging. When the vibes are this good, few people ask about specifics.There are pitfalls, too, for a politician who is too precise about what they aim to do in office. After all, much of the Democrats’ 2024 campaigning has featured deep dives into Project 2025, the 900-plus-page policy prescription for a second Trump term that was compiled by conservative thinktanks under the auspices of the Heritage Foundation. Democrats, including Harris herself, have used the document as a near-depthless well of possible attacks, making each one of the plan’s copious number of proposals into an attack that they can make Republicans answer for. As Harris heads into the final weeks of the campaign, one can see a certain cynical logic to her imprecise policy positions: why would she bother painting a target on her own back?So maybe it’s not surprising that on Thursday night, in her first major interview since ascending to the presidential nomination, the vice-president did not seem interested in making any news. She was competent, personable and a forceful defender of the Biden administration; she was attentive to issues where her campaign believes her to be vulnerable, such as on immigration and energy policy; and she was deliberate in depicting herself as a hawkish advocate for stricter border controls.She did not talk much about her opponent, Donald Trump, brushing off a question from CNN’s Dana Bash about his recent slanderous claim that Harris had only recently “turned Black”. She did not endorse an arms embargo to Israel, whose genocidal war in Gaza has killed upwards of 40,000 Palestinians with the aid of American weapons. And with the exception of a few economic proposals – like for an expansion of the child tax credit, a $25,000 tax credit for first-time homebuyers and a repeat of her promise to punish price gauging – she was light on specifics.The interview seemed to be less about presenting a policy vision for the American people than about presenting them with a character. The character that emerged in the form of Vice-President Harris was one who is confident, intelligent and at ease with her authority; one who was unfazed by Bash’s sometimes pointed questioning, in part because she has mastered the art of the dodge.Among the interview’s surprising omissions was abortion, the issue that has redefined the status, health and civil rights of half of Americans as a result of the presidency of her opponent. The word was only mentioned once over the course of the interview, when the vice-presidential nominee, Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, mentioned the issue as something that voters were more interested in than his own previous verbal gaffes. He’s probably right that voters care more about it, but both he and Harris declined to address the issue further.Harris, historically a forceful advocate for abortion rights who was largely tasked with campaigning on the issue while Biden was still in the race, seemed to demur from the historical nature of her candidacy more broadly. When Bash asked her about a viral photo from the Democratic national convention – which pictured Harris at the podium, being gazed up at by her great-niece, a pigtailed young girl – she avoided the question’s implicit inquiry into how she feels about the prospect of becoming the nation’s first female president. Harris said only that she was running because she believed herself to be the best person for the job, and that she aimed to be a president for Americans of all races and genders.It was a nice sentiment, and probably even true. But her words avoided the gender issue that has come to shape the campaign, and left aside an opportunity to rally voters in the 10 states that will have abortion rights measures on the ballot in November. If anyone in the Harris campaign feels that electing a woman president now, in this post-Dobbs era, could be a righteous rebuke to the backward and bigoted misogyny that has come to define the Trump-Vance ticket, then that is not an argument they are interested in having their candidate make.Harris will be criticized on the left for her refusal to endorse an arms embargo to Israel, whose war has become a generational moral catastrophe that threatens to destabilize the region. When asked about the conflict, Harris spoke of the atrocities of 7 October in lurid terms; of the unfathomable human cost that has been imposed on Palestinians, she said only that “far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed”. (An unfortunate phrase that implies that there is an acceptable number of innocents that Israel can murder.) Her unwillingness to speak with more empathy and commitment about this issue threatens to alienate young voters, a disorganized but growing left, and the large cohorts of Muslim and Arab voters she needs to win over in places like Minnesota and Michigan.That unwillingness also threatens to give more credence to other leftwing suspicions of Harris, such as the marginal but noticeable suspicion among activists over whether she will maintain Biden’s enthusiasm for antitrust enforcement.Maybe Harris is calculating that these voters have nowhere else to go; maybe she just doesn’t really share their values on these issues. But the central argument for her candidacy is about values: that she is a more moral, more principled, more trustworthy candidate than Donald Trump; that she will bring less bigotry, less selfishness, less recklessness and less tedious narcissism to the White House. It’s a low bar, but she still has to clear it. If Harris’s campaign is about values, but she is unwilling to more forcefully champion women’s rights and the value of Palestinian lives, she risks making some wonder just what those values are.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘The chilling effect’: behind GOP-led states’ efforts to purge some voters from the rolls

      by

      Earlier this week, Texas governor Greg Abbott sent out a press release with an eye-popping headline: his state had removed more than 1 million people from its voter rolls since 2021. Among them were 6,500 non-citizens. A little under a third of those non-citizens had some sort of voting history in Texas, where there were nearly 18 million registered voters as of March, and were referred to the attorney general for further investigation.Two days later, the governor’s office quietly revised the statement posted online. Instead of saying 6,500 non-citizens had been removed, the updated version said 6,500 potential non-citizens had been removed. Renae Eze, an Abbott spokesperson, said that the statement sent out to an email list of reporters on Monday contained the phrasing “potential non-citizens”. She did not respond to a query on why the version that was publicly posted initially omitted the word “potential”.The statement was the latest example of how Republican-led states are touting aggressive efforts to remove people with early voting, scheduled to begin in weeks and less than 70 days until election day. Tennessee, Virginia, Alabama and Ohio have all made similar announcements recently.Voting rights groups are concerned these announcements are misleading, and that the efforts to purge are putting naturalized citizens – eligible voters – at risk for being removed. There is also concern that these efforts are running afoul of a federal law that prohibits systematic removal of voters from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election.Looking closer at the Texas announcement, there were other questions. The vast majority of people removed had been cancelled for routine reasons – they had either died or moved. The number of voters cancelled for these reasons is similar to totals from past years, according to a New York Times analysis.“Releasing these numbers without context is a thinly disguised attempt to intimidate voters of color and naturalized citizens from exercising their rights to vote, which is particularly concerning given the upcoming election,” said Savannah Kumar, a voting rights attorney with the Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.“With the state having invented the fabricated issue of widespread illegal voting as a tactic to intimidate people of color from exercising their right to vote, we’re seeing now that the state has to resort to spinning otherwise ordinary data to make it look like it’s addressing this invented problem.”In Tennessee, state election officials sent out notices to more than 14,000 suspected non-citizens on the eve of early voting in June, warning them of the criminal penalty they could face for voting illegally. The effort immediately drew scrutiny because Tennessee was looking to see whether someone reported being a non-citizen at the DMV to flag them as a non-citizen. That kind of comparison has been shown to be unreliable in the past, because people may get a driver’s license and become naturalized citizens before they have to renew it.The state sent out 14,375 notices, and at least 3,200 people – around 22% – responded saying they were in fact citizens. Election officials eventually admitted that those who didn’t respond would not be removed from the rolls, even if they didn’t respond.In Alabama, the state’s Republican secretary of state, Wes Allen, announced that his office had identified 3,251 people on the voter rolls who had received a non-citizen identification number at one point from the Department of Homeland Security. While he acknowledged that some of those people may have since become naturalized citizens and eligible voters, he nonetheless designated all of them inactive voters and requested that they prove their citizenship. All 3,251 were also referred to the Alabama attorney general’s office for further investigation.A coalition of civil rights groups sent a letter to Allen on 19 August warning him that his actions violated the National Voter Registration Act, the 1993 federal law that sets guardrails on how states can remove people from the voter rolls. Among other things it says that any systematic efforts to remove people must be “uniform” and “non-discriminatory”. The state also can’t complete any mass removal program within 90 days.“We’re extremely concerned about the chilling effect this has on registered voters generally speaking, and particularly newly naturalized citizens,” said Kate Huddleston, a lawyer at Campaign Legal Center, one of several groups that signed on to the letter warning Alabama that it may be running afoul of federal law.The Alabama secretary of state’s office did not say how many people had responded indicating they were citizens. In Jefferson county, one of the largest in the state, 557 were flagged as potential non-citizens, according to Barry Stephenson, the county’s registrar. Three people have responded to notices that went out so far, Stephenson said. Two people said they did not know how they had become registered voters. The third said they were a citizen.One Alabama voter, a Huntsville man named James Stroop, told the local news outlet WAFF 48 that he had been wrongly flagged. The Alabama department of labor had incorrectly noted he was a non-citizen on a form years ago. Even though he had corrected the issue with the department of labor, he was still marked as a non-citizen when the agency sent data to the Alabama secretary of state.“Imagine if Alabama’s DMV had different information about a different group of voters and they knew that some vanishingly small percentage of people with green eyes were ineligible to vote for some reason,” she added. “And then they pulled everyone with green eyes off the rolls. I think the problem would be obvious to everyone that you can’t just deregister voters because some vanishingly small percentage of them may be ineligible to vote.”In Virginia, Governor Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, issued an executive order noting that his administration had removed 6,303 non-citizens from the rolls since taking office. That represents an incredibly small fraction of the more than 6.3 million people registered to vote in the state as of 1 July.Like Tennessee and Alabama, Virginia is flagging non-citizens on its rolls using both data from its DMV and the Department of Homeland Security to identify potential non-citizens. Anyone removed is given 14 days to indicate they are in fact citizens. It’s unclear how many of the people removed were actually non-citizens and how many simply didn’t respond.“We take seriously the potential for errors in database matching, the consequences for voters and the public at large of any erroneous removal of eligible voters from the voter registration rolls, and Virginia’s recent history of mistakes and errors with data sharing protocols in particular,” a group of civil rights groups wrote to Youngkin and Susan Beals, who runs the state’s department of elections.Ohio’s secretary of state Frank LaRose has promoted his office’s efforts to remove 137 suspected non-citizens from the voter rolls using DMV data. Several naturalized citizens have come forward to say they were wrongly flagged, including one man who said his voter registration was challenged months after he was naturalized.“We know that the number of non-citizens who vote is a vanishingly small number based on all available evidence,” Huddleston said. “By inflating the issue and sweeping in very predictably naturalized citizens, the Alabama secretary of state and others are preventing naturalized citizens from being able to vote and creating this chilling effect.” More

    • 225 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk is getting out of control. Here is how to to rein him in | Robert Reich

      by

      Elon Musk is rapidly transforming his enormous wealth – he’s the richest person in the world – into a huge source of unaccountable political power that’s now backing Trump and other authoritarians around the world.Musk owns X, formerly known as Twitter. He publicly endorsed Donald Trump last month. Before that, Musk helped form a pro-Trump super political action committee. Meanwhile, the former US president has revived his presence on the X platform.Musk just hired a Republican operative with expertise in field organizing to help with get-out-the-vote efforts on behalf of Trump.Trump and Musk have both floated the idea of governing together if Trump wins a second term. “I think it would be great to just have a government efficiency commission,” Musk said in a conversation with Trump earlier this month streamed on X. “And I’d be happy to help out on such a commission.”Musk reposted a faked version of Kamala Harris’s first campaign video with an altered voice track sounding like Harris and saying she doesn’t “know the first thing about running the country” and is the “ultimate diversity hire”. Musk tagged the video “amazing”. It’s got hundreds of millions of views, so far.The Michigan secretary of state has accused the Musk-supported America Pac of tricking people into sharing personal data. Although the Pac’s website promises to help users register to vote, it allegedly asks users in battleground states to give their names and phone numbers without directing them to a voter registration site – and then uses that information to send them anti-Harris and pro-Trump ads.According to a new report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate, Musk himself has posted 50 false election claims on X so far this year. They’ve got a total of 1.2bn views. None of them had a “community note” from X’s supposed fact-checking system.Evidence is mounting that Russia and other foreign agents are using X to disrupt this year’s presidential race, presumably in favor of Trump. Musk has done little to stop them.Meanwhile, Musk is supporting rightwing causes around the world.In the UK, far-right thugs burned, looted and terrorized minority communities as Musk’s X spread misinformation about a deadly attack on schoolgirls. Musk not only allowed instigators of this hate to spread these lies, but he retweeted and supported them.At least eight times in the past 10 months, Musk has prophesied a future civil war related to immigration. When anti-immigration street riots occurred across Britain, he wrote: “civil war is inevitable.”The European Union commissioner Thierry Breton sent Musk an open letter reminding him of EU laws against amplifying harmful content “that promotes hatred, disorder, incitement to violence, or certain instances of disinformation” and warning that the EU “will be extremely vigilant” about protecting “EU citizens from serious harm”.Musk’s response was a meme that said: “TAKE A BIG STEP BACK AND LITERALLY, F*CK YOUR OWN FACE!”Elon Musk calls himself a “free speech absolutist” but has accepted over 80% of censorship requests from authoritarian governments. Two days before the Turkish elections, he blocked accounts critical of the president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.And his friendly relations with authoritarians often seem to coincide with beneficial treatment of his businesses; shortly after Musk suggested handing Taiwan over to the Chinese government, Tesla got a tax break from the Chinese government.He may be the richest man in the world. He may own one of the world’s most influential social media platforms. But that doesn’t mean we’re powerless to stop him.Here are six ways to rein in Musk:1. Boycott Tesla.Consumers shouldn’t be making him even richer and able to do even more harm. A Tesla boycott may have already begun. A recent poll said one-third of Britons are less likely to buy a Tesla because of Musk’s recent behavior.2. Advertisers should boycott X.A coalition of major advertisers has organized such a boycott. Musk is suing them under antitrust law. “We tried peace for 2 years, now it is war,” he wrote on X, referring to advertisers who criticize him and X.3. Regulators around the world should threaten Musk with arrest if he doesn’t stop disseminating lies and hate on X.Global regulators may be on the way to doing this, as evidenced by the 24 August arrest in France of Pavel Durov, who founded the online communications tool Telegram, which French authorities have found complicit in hate crimes and disinformation. Like Musk, Durov has styled himself as a free speech absolutist.4. In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission should demand that Musk take down lies that are likely to endanger individuals – and if he does not, sue him under Section Five of the FTC Act.Musk’s free-speech rights under the first amendment don’t take precedence over the public interest. Two months ago, the US supreme court said federal agencies may pressure social media platforms to take down misinformation – a technical win for the public good (technical because the court based its ruling on the plaintiff’s lack of standing to sue).5. The US government – and we taxpayers – have additional power over Musk, if we’re willing to use it. The US should terminate its contracts with him, starting with Musk’s SpaceX.In 2021, the United States entered into a $1.8bn classified contract with SpaceX that includes blasting off classified and military satellites, according to the Wall Street Journal. The funds are now an important part of SpaceX’s revenue.The Pentagon has also contracted with SpaceX’s Starlink broadband service to pay for internet links, despite Musk’s refusal in September 2022 to allow Ukraine to use Starlink to launch an attack on Russian forces in Crimea.Last August, the Pentagon gave SpaceX’s Starshield unit $70m to provide communications services to dozens of Pentagon partners.Meanwhile, SpaceX is cornering the rocket launch market. Its rockets were responsible for two-thirds of flights from US launch sites in 2022 and handled 88% in the first six months of this year.In deciding upon which private-sector entities to contract with, the US government is supposed to consider the contractor’s reliability. Musk’s mercurial, impulsive temperament makes him and the companies he heads unreliable. The government is also supposed to consider whether it is contributing to a monopoly. Musk’s SpaceX is fast becoming one.Why is the US government allowing Musk’s satellites and rocket launchers to become crucial to the nation’s security when he’s shown utter disregard for the public interest? Why give Musk more economic power when he repeatedly abuses it and demonstrates contempt for the public good?There is no good reason. American taxpayers must stop subsidizing Elon Musk.6. Make sure Musk’s favorite candidate for president is not elected.

      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy at the University of California Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His newest book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      The Trump campaign’s conduct at Arlington is shocking but not surprising | Kevin Carroll

      by

      The tranquil majesty of Arlington national cemetery tends to bring forth civic virtues in Americans and eloquence in their leaders. Speaking there in 1985 above the graves of the fallen, Ronald Reagan observed that while we may imagine the deceased as old men, most “were boys when they died, and they gave up two lives – the one they were living and the one they would have lived … they gave up their chance to be husbands and fathers and grandfathers … They gave up everything for our country, for us. And all we can do is remember.”Nowhere in that vast cemetery is Reagan’s point driven home as poignantly as in section 60, which embraces those men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice at painfully young ages since 9/11. Here the dates on the simple headstones are within memory, the grief of loved ones is raw and visitors may witness acts of tenderness in response.Good manners, Jane Austen observed, hold a society together. George Washington copied longhand in boyhood and preserved into adulthood a list of 110 “Rules of Civility & Decent Behavior”. Another general turned president, Dwight Eisenhower, cautioned in his Guildhall address after VE Day that “humility must always be the portion” of any man who receives acclaim earned by others’ sacrifices.Donald Trump and his staff knew – and were reminded of – federal regulations specifically prohibiting the misconduct their campaign engaged in at Arlington’s section 60 this week. But the law aside, only a gross lack of manners, decency and humility could incline a person to film a fundraising appeal over the resting places of dead men and women who cannot decline to participate in the coarse spectacle. The photo of a grinning Trump giving a jaunty thumbs-up over these patriots’ graves is an indelible image of narcissism risen to the point of sociopathy.Worse is the allegation that two Trump staff members assaulted a small, middle-aged female Department of the Army employee who attempted to enforce the regulation and preserve the cemetery’s dignity. The victim reportedly refrained from filing charges due to a reasonable fear of violence or harassment from Trump’s supporters. Meanwhile, Trump’s campaign defamed this woman as mentally ill. His running mate, JD Vance, said Kamala Harris could “go to hell” for her campaign’s suggestion that the unauthorized footage was intended for use as political footage – just before Trump used it for exactly that.This ugly incident would have derailed the candidacy of any presidential nominee before Trump’s crude emergence on the American political scene in 2016. In 2024 it is already, probably intentionally on Trump’s part, being replaced in the news by reaction to his social media posts making lewd innuendos about Harris, and QAnon threats to imprison Democratic party leaders. But it is part of a pattern of disrespect for and misuse of the United States military that bears upon Trump’s fitness to serve again as president.Trump infamously described America’s dead from the first world war as “suckers” and “losers”. Trump also asked my former boss, White House chief of staff John Kelly – on Memorial Day and over the section 60 grave of his Marine son killed in Afghanistan – “What was in it for them?” I walked up to a visibly shocked Kelly moments after that exchange, the details of which he later confirmed.Trump demanded military equipment parades in Washington of the kind Soviet leaders held on May Day in Moscow’s Red Square, but disdained appearing with wounded service members. He called America’s service chiefs “dopes and babies” and needled them about their public sector pay – God only knows what he thinks of enlisted troops who make a fraction of a general’s salary.Trump began his run for the presidency in 2016 by mocking the late senator John McCain for being a prisoner of war; he followed this by feuding with the bereaved parents of Muslim American and African American soldiers; recently, he belittled Medal of Honor recipients shot during the brave actions that led to their awards.More serious than Trump’s words are his actions and plans regarding the armed forces. In 2018 Trump discussed having troops shoot civilian migrants, including women and children, as they tried to cross America’s south-west border – a patently illegal order. In 2020 he unlawfully used national guardsmen to clear protesters from Lafayette Park for yet another campaign photo opportunity. In 2021 Trump and his advisors planned to invoke the Insurrection Act to misuse the military to put down protests anticipated if Mike Pence and Congress refused to certify Joe Biden’s electoral college victory. Trump’s Project 2025 envisions using the national guard for internal immigration investigations, a vast and ill-advised expansion of the American military’s limited role in domestic law enforcement.Trump sees the armed services as yet another entity to be misused for his personal benefit, damaged and then discarded just as he has with his bankrupt businesses, the evangelical Christian churches and the Republican party. Beyond that, his boorish statements and bad behavior regarding the military almost certainly come from a place of self-loathing. Trump dodged the Vietnam war draft by claiming – probably falsely – to suffer from bone spurs. A gnawingly insecure man, Trump is self-conscious of his lack of the virtues towards which the military strives: as the US army puts it, loyalty to the constitution, dutiful fulfillment of responsibilities, respect for others, selfless service to both the country and subordinates, honor, integrity and personal courage.His poor form at Arlington this week therefore shocks but does not surprise, as the idea of serving others, much less giving one’s life for others, is anathema to Trump. This attitude would be a sad commentary about any man, but ought to disqualify someone seeking to serve as commander-in-chief.

      Kevin Carroll served as a senior counselor to US secretary of homeland security John Kelly, and as a CIA and US army officer More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Ilona Maher, US rugby and social media star, endorses Kamala Harris

      by

      The Democratic nominee for US president, Kamala Harris, picked up an endorsement from a key social media influencer: the Olympic rugby star Ilona Maher.“I think it’s going to be cool because there is an opportunity to have female representation and to change this country in a way that I think will benefit us,” Maher told Sports Illustrated, in an interview accompanying a swimwear shoot which saw the 28-year-old center praised as “a feminist trailblazer”.“That’s a Kamala Harris endorsement,” Maher told the magazine, which said she cited abortion rights and access to contraception as key concerns as the presidential election looms.Harris, the current vice-president, has made protecting such rights a central part of her campaign against Donald Trump. As president, the Republican nominee appointed three hardline rightwingers to the US supreme court, which then removed the federal right to abortion and suggested contraception access could also be brought into question.“I have enough money that if I didn’t need an abortion, I could raise a baby myself,” Maher said. “If I wanted to get abortion, I could do that. So I have that privilege [but] it scares me about the other girls. I have options and I want to remember that my followers don’t all have that. And so it’s like, for me, but also mostly for them.”Maher took up rugby in high school in Vermont then won three national collegiate titles with Quinnipiac University in Connecticut. She built a significant social media following in the first phase of her international career, which began in sevens in 2018 and has also brought her two 15-a-side caps. The recent Paris Games saw her rocket to global fame.Maher is now the most-followed rugby player in the world, eclipsing giants such as Siya Kolisi, the South Africa captain and double World Cup winner, and the former New Zealand fly-half Dan Carter.Speaking to SI, Maher said men “get to play rugby and they get paid millions of dollars while we make minimum wage and this won’t be a career for us. I have teammates going into the workforce now, whereas these guys are down there and rugby’s it” for them.Nonetheless, Maher has achieved fame (and endorsement deals) with a message based on body positivity and irreverent humor but also the sort of dynamic and aggressive play that helped the US win bronze in Paris. This week, Maher told followers she wanted to win a place on the US squad for the 15-a-side World Cup, to be held in England next summer.Such has been Maher’s impact since Paris, her Sports Illustrated shoot followed an appearance on NBC’s Late Night with Seth Meyers in which she called rugby “a sport that just really encourages you to be physical and show what your body’s capable of”.“I know what it’s done for me,” Maher said, “and how it’s changed my body confidence by making me feel so good about myself, and I know it can do it for so many other girls.”Speaking to Sports Illustrated, Maher said she “was a big girl growing up so I didn’t love being in pictures” and “was always … called masculine or whatever. But I never felt that way. But I don’t think you’re going to bully the girl who could probably beat you up in a rage. I love that [rugby] showed me what I can do. It showed me how capable my body is and it’s not just like a tool to be looked at and objectified.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionShe also said: “If my cellulite was lower in that perfect range, I wouldn’t be doing what I could do. I wouldn’t be that powerful for it [so] I just really think sports have been so helpful.”MJ Day, editor in chief of Sports Illustrated Swimsuit, called Maher a “revolutionary athlete and feminist trailblazer… a modern-day role model of strength, conviction and authenticity”.Maher expressed unease with being seen as a role model, saying: “I just try to really stress like I am human. But I think I do really care a lot. And I do want people to like me.”Harris, 59, has no known ties to rugby. But her current boss, Joe Biden, has often spoken of his love for the game, having played at college in New York and through following the Irish national team, two recent members of which, Rob and Dave Kearney, are the president’s distant cousins.The Harris campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Friday briefing: What we learned from Kamala Harris’ appearance on CNN

      by

      Good morning. It has been 40 days since Joe Biden pulled out of the presidential race and, until last night, Kamala Harris was yet to sit down for a major interview. Alongside her vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz, she finally did so on CNN – and directly addressed some of the more difficult issues facing her campaign for the first time.Their interview with Dana Bash was not exactly riveting TV – but it did shed some light on the state of the race, and the turf where Harris would like the rest of the campaign to be fought. Today’s newsletter runs you through what we learned – and why she probably won’t mind if voters thought it was a bit boring. Here are the headlines.Five big stories

      Health | Keir Starmer is on a collision course with the hospitality industry and political opponents after signalling plans for major curbs on outdoor smoking. The proposals, not denied by the prime minister, would potentially prohibit tobacco use outside pubs and restaurants, including on pavements.

      Israel-Gaza war | The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have said they carried out an airstrike on a humanitarian aid convoy in Gaza aimed at “armed assailants” trying to hijack it. But the charity that organised the aid said people killed in the strike were employees of the transport company it was working with.

      Environment | The UK government is considering making further commitments on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, likely to be announced at the UN climate summit this year. It is hoped the plan will help kickstart global ambitions on cutting emissions.

      Immigration and asylum | A Vietnamese man suffered a “life-limiting stroke” after being rescued from a tiny hidden compartment in a lorry with six other people being smuggled into the UK. The group was packed so tightly inside a space “the width of a human chest” that none could move their arms, a Home Office investigator has said.

      Health | People who “catch up” on missed sleep at the weekend may have up to a 20% lower risk of heart disease compared with those who do not, according to a study.
      In depth: Harris plays it safeView image in fullscreenIt’s been three weeks since Kamala Harris said she wanted to schedule a major interview before the end of August; last night, she met that pledge. As successful as her campaign has been at generating momentum since she became the Democrats’ presumptive nominee, her failure to engage in robust questioning so far has become, if not a major issue, at least A Thing.In one sense, then, the fact of the interview mattered more for Harris than its content – so long as she didn’t make any headline-grabbing howlers. While she had a few tricky moments on CNN, she cleared that bar: as David Smith sets out in this analysis, the interview was “radically normal … She turned a much-hyped first interview as nominee into a soon-to-be-forgotten pit stop along the campaign trail”. Here’s what else we learned.Policy – and changing her mindIn seeking to appeal to the progressive voters of the Democratic base during her unsuccessful run at the presidency in 2019, Harris committed to a number of positions that are a problem for her more centrist campaign today. That was a theme of the CNN interview. Three times, Harris said that her values have not changed – but she also suggested that four years of being vice-president, “travelling the country extensively”, and seeking to “build consensus” had shaped where she stands today.In 2019, she said that she would implement a federal ban on fracking – an important issue in the must-win state of Pennsylvania, one of the world’s biggest sources of natural gas. “As vice-president, I did not ban fracking. As president, I will not ban fracking,” she told CNN, adding: “What I have seen is that we can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking.”On similar questions about immigration and her U-turn on decriminalising border crossings, she said she would “enforce our laws as president going forward”. Meanwhile, on the Israel-Gaza conflict, she trod the same line as in her speech at the Democratic national convention, saying she was “unwavering in my commitment to Israel’s defence” but noting that “far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed, and we have got to get a deal done”.She waffled a bit when asked what she would do on day one, pointing to general policy priorities rather than any specific action. But there were no glaring errors, and her implicit distancing from her more progressive positions from 2019 will have left few viewers convinced by Republican claims that she is a leftwing radical.Her view of Biden’s competenceThe other inevitable feature of this interview was a question about the president’s ability to do his job. “You insisted that President Biden is extraordinarily strong,” Dana Bash said. “Given where we are now, do you have any regrets about what you told the American people?”“No, not at all,” Harris replied. She said that “he has the intelligence, the commitment, and the judgment and disposition that I think the American people rightly deserve in their president”. Nor did she distance herself from his policies – which would be tricky, obviously – or even really set out a contrast with her own plans for the next four years.At the same time, she found a formulation that maintained her loyalty but cast herself as the candidate of the future, and the Biden-Trump wars as a relic of the past: it was time to “turn the page on the last decade of what I believe has been contrary to where the spirit of our country really lies,” she said.Then she deftly focused that point as a criticism of Trump’s impact on American discourse: “I’m talking about an era that started about a decade ago where there is some suggestion, warped I believe it to be, that the measure of the strength of a leader is based on who you beat down instead of … who you lift up.”Little interest in questions about race and genderOne of the most striking features of the interview was Harris’ steadfast refusal to engage in questions about her status as a history-making candidate – whether in terms of Trump’s bigoted claim that she “was Indian all the way and then all of sudden she became a Black woman”, or in dwelling on her campaign as a powerful symbol of American progress.Asked about Trump’s comments, she said: “Same old, tired playbook. Next question, please.” “That’s it?” Bash said. “That’s it,” Harris replied. And when Bash concluded the interview by asking what her gender and race mean in the campaign, she said vaguely that it was “humbling”, but noted: “I am running because I believe that I am the best person to do this job at this moment for all Americans, regardless of race and gender.”That feels emblematic of her campaign’s wider approach: let others talk about the unprecedented nature of her candidacy, and tell voters that all she’s interested in is improving their lives.A supporting role for Tim WalzFor most of the interview, Tim Walz was basically a mascot: understandably, Bash focused her questioning on the candidate for president, and he wisely did not interrupt Harris or elaborate on her answers.The questions that were directed at Walz were about claims of misleading statements in the past – and about the viral video of his son Gus proudly shouting “that’s my dad!” during his speech at the Democratic national convention.Walz didn’t really give a satisfying answer to the criticism he has faced for saying that he carried weapons in war even though he was never deployed in a war zone, saying merely that “my grammar is not always correct”.In talking about his family and that video of his son, Walz provided probably the most human moments of the interview. “I’m grateful for so many reasons to be on this ticket,” he said. “But that moment … was just such a visceral, emotional moment that I’m just grateful I got to experience it. And I’m so proud of him.”The Trump campaign’s reactionYou will be shocked to learn that Trump and Vance did not cover themselves in glory in their response: even before the interview aired in full, Trump said that Harris “rambled incoherently”. (He clearly hasn’t been watching his own rallies.) And Vance posted a blatantly sexist message on X, comparing Harris to a Miss Team America contestant who infamously garbled her answer to a question about Americans not knowing about geography.After the interview aired, the Trump campaign statement criticised Harris for not “addressing the crime crisis in this nation”. (Crime has in fact mostly fallen under Biden.) They also said she “spent a mere three minutes and 25 seconds talking about the economy and two minutes and 36 seconds talking about immigration”.If that is a pretty weird way to analyse an interview in which CNN chose the topics and which had a half-hour time limit, it does key into a sense that the abbreviated campaign has limited discussion of Harris’ agenda. The next big chance to discuss it will be on 10 September, when the two candidates meet for a debate in Pennsylvania.What else we’ve been readingView image in fullscreen

      Kate Hutchinson has a moving interview with the Breeders and Pixies legend Kim Deal, on releasing her first solo album at 63. Hannah J Davies, deputy editor, newsletters

      Adele Zeynep Walton writes wholesomely on moving to a “sleepy town” where the median age is 48 … at just 25. “I’m surrounded by families, friendly pensioners and retired hippies,” she writes. “It would be easy to feel out of place, but in fact I feel the opposite”. Charlie Lindlar, newsletters team

      I’m probably the worst baker in London but Felicity Cloake’s perfect blueberry pie looks so delicious that I might just have to give it a try … or convince someone else tomake it for me. Hannah

      Exploring the galaxy as a lovable rogue in Star Wars Outlaws will keep me going for a while, but the Guardian’s Keza MacDonald has picked the 10 best games coming this autumn, from the next Zelda to the “deliriously joyful” Astro Bot. Charlie

      And, in case you missed it, here are the TV eds’ best shows to look out for, too, from the return of hits including Industry and Bad Sisters to a star-stuffed Apple series with Cate Blanchett. Hannah
      skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSportView image in fullscreenParis 2024 | Britain’s first gold medal of the Paralympic Games went to a teenager, and in world record time, as Poppy Maskill (above) cleared the field in the pool to win the S14 100m women’s butterfly, a moment she described as “unreal”.Tennis | Britain’s No 1 tennis players enjoyed contrasting fortunes at the US Open on Thursday as Jack Draper eased into the third round with a 6-4, 6-2, 6-2 win over Facundo Díaz Acosta to set up a potential battle with former champion Carlos Alcaraz, while Katie Boulter suffered one of her most disappointing defeats of the season, crashing out 7-5, 7-5 to Jessica Bouzas Maneiro.Cricket | Joe Root dedicated his 33rd Test century to the late Graham Thorpe, saluting the heavens upon reaching three figures in tribute to his former coach and friend. Root now sits level with Sir Alastair Cook as England’s top century-maker and is only 198 runs away from becoming his country’s top Test run scorer.The front pagesView image in fullscreenThe Guardian leads with “Starmer risks clash with pub firms over plan for outdoor smoking ban”. The PM faces criticism of another king on the Mail front page with “Outrage as Starmer removes Maggie’s portrait”. The Times reports “Workers to be weighed in office for health MoT”, while the Telegraph says “Workers to get right to demand four-day week”.The Financial Times has news from the US election, with “Vance presses billionaire Thiel to ‘get off the sidelines’ and bankroll Trump”. Finally, the Mirror reports on the cancellation of Taylor Swift’s Austrian concerts earlier this month, under the headline “Terror swoop saved thousands”.Something for the weekendOur critics’ roundup of the best things to watch, read and listen to right nowView image in fullscreenFilm
      Sing Sing
      There’s charm, energy and optimism in this big-hearted film, inspired by the Rehabilitation Through the Arts project that teaches theatre skills to US prisoners. Although Colman Domingo stars, it is performed largely by genuine former inmates playing themselves, featuring rehearsal scenes interspersed with variously tense or moving private conversations. An intriguing filmic tribute to the rehabilitation programme. Peter BradshawMusic
      Jon Hopkins: Ritual
      No one could claim that Hopkins has undersold his seventh album. The electronic producer, soundtrack composer and sometime collaborator with Brian Eno and Coldplay has described the music on Ritual as “a tool … for opening portals within your inner world”. It is obvious from the start that it carries more weight than the acres of anonymous mood music out there. But if it doesn’t quite open the portals of your inner world, it’s still worth taking. Alexis PetridisTVKaos (Netflix)
      Kaos – the new venture from Charlie Covell, the creator of The End of the F**king World, and starring Jeff Goldblum – is anything but chaotic. Multi-stranded, immaculately paced and plotted, it’s a reimagining of Greek mythology that is subtle and intricate, witty, rigorous, hugely intelligent, funny and brutal. You don’t know quite what the next twist or turn may be, but you know that it will be funny, profound, moving – or all three. Lucy ManganToday in FocusView image in fullscreenBlack Box: episode 5 – The white maskIn January 2020, Robert Williams was arrested by Detroit police for a crime he had not committed. The officers were acting on a tipoff, but not from a witness or informant. In fact, not from a person at all. This is the penultimate episode of Black Box, as revisited this week – the final episode will be available in the Today in Focus feed tomorrow.Cartoon of the day | Stephen LillieView image in fullscreenThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badView image in fullscreenUnexplained delays, sardine-like conditions, sweatbox temperatures … the stress of the commuter life is very, very real. A new test, however, has found that there is a natural solution to our rail-rage: birdsong.Research undertaken by South Western Railway on real-life commuters has found that passengers listening to nature sounds, which also included flowing rivers and storms, were 35% less stressed by their travels than those with no audio stimulation, and 24% less stressed than those listening to music or podcasts.“The results clearly demonstrate that listening to nature-inspired soundscapes exerted a significant calming effect on passengers,” said Charles Spence, a professor of experimental psychology at the University of Oxford, who analysed the results.No such news on whether its impact is as effective a cure for the words “rail replacement bus service”, however.Editor’s note: yesterday’s Upside stated that Lego was Swedish – it is of course from Denmark. Sorry/undskyld!Bored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until Monday.

      Quick crossword

      Cryptic crossword

      Wordiply More