More stories

  • in

    Harrison Butker’s jersey sales rise as right wing lauds Chiefs kicker after rant

    Harrison Butker’s university commencement address at Benedictine College excoriating Pride month, working women, abortion rights activists and others has prompted the National Football League to disavow his remarks – but the Kansas City Chiefs placekicker’s jersey sales have spiked as conservatives seize on their latest culture war.Butker has also drawn an impassioned statement of support from Josh Hawley, the far-right US senator from Missouri known for his opposition to abortion and a viral video which showed him running away from the mob he incited during the US Capitol attack on 6 January 2021.“We need a different generation of kids that are willing to say no that’s not right, there is such a thing as right and wrong, I’m not going in for all of this lefty garbage and I just thought that his calls for folks to stand up and be bold was great,” Hawley said in reference to Butker during an interview on Wednesday with Spectrum News.An NFL spokesperson on Thursday said the comments Butker delivered as the graduation speaker at Benedictine College five days earlier ran contrary to the league’s “commitment to inclusion”.“Harrison Butker gave a speech in his personal capacity,” said the statement from the NFL senior vice-president Jonathan Beane, the league’s chief diversity and inclusion officer. “His views are not those of the NFL as an organization.”The NFL’s statement aligned relatively closely with a separate one issued by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (Glaad), which dismissed Butker’s 20-minute address as “a clear miss” and “woefully out of step with Americans about Pride, LGBTQ people and women”.Another notable rejection of Butker’s opinions came in the form of a statement from the Benedictine Sisters of Mount Saint Scholastica, which co-founded the college where the kicker spoke.“The sisters … do not believe that Harrison Butker’s comments … represent the Catholic, Benedictine, liberal arts college that our founders envisioned and in which we have been so invested,” their statement said. “Instead of promoting unity in our church, our nation, and the world, his comments seem to have fostered division.”Yet, in scenes that called to mind the political right wing’s enthrallment with the film Sound of Freedom last year, Butker’s jersey was among the most sold as of Thursday, according to NFL.com.His jersey sales still trailed that of his Chiefs teammate Travis Kelce, whose support for vaccines and the Black Lives Matter movement – as well as his relationship with Taylor Swift – have infuriated the far-right set that is now coddling Butker. However, Butker’s jersey sales were outpacing that of the Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes, who has led Kansas City to three Super Bowl victories since the 2019 season.The Kansas City news station KCTV reported that a local store named the Rally House had completely sold out of Butker jerseys amid his speech’s controversy.“Just the demand after the speech – it’s been men and women. It’s been both calling to get his jersey,” the store’s manager, Aaron Lewis, reportedly told KCTV.Hawley on Wednesday then offered himself as one of the most public faces of the conservative delight inspired by the offense Butker caused with his speech.“He talks about not being too nice when you’re standing up for your convictions,” Hawley said to Spectrum News, a little more than three years after he threw up a clenched fist at – and then was caught on video running from – a mob of Donald Trump supporters who carried out the deadly Capitol attack after the former president’s 2020 election defeat to Joe Biden. “And I just think he’s right about that.”In his speech to the conservative Catholic school’s graduating class, Butker referred to “dangerous gender ideologies” in an apparent allusion to Pride month, which has been celebrated annually in June since the Stonewall riots in 1969.He also told the women in the audience that “homemaker” should be the “most important title” they hold.“I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world,” Butker said.Among a host of other arguments, Butker contended that access to abortion – which most Americans favor – stemmed from “pervasiveness of disorder”.The 28-year-old Butker’s conservative Catholic beliefs are well known, and so are his on-field exploits, including booting a field goal that forced the decisive overtime period in Kansas City’s Super Bowl victory over the San Francisco 49ers in February.Benedictine, a private liberal arts school about 60 miles north of Kansas City, invited Butker to be its commencement speaker nearly three years to the day after the college removed its chaplain from his position after he disclosed “inappropriate conduct” with a female student.Meanwhile, a report on Friday from the Chicago Sun-Times documented how an Illinois-based monk belonging to the religious order which is associated with Benedictine pleaded guilty to a felony battery charge against a former student of the school where he taught – and has now landed on a list of organization members deemed to have been credibly accused of child sexual abuse.
    The Associated Press contributed reporting More

  • in

    MTG v AOC: House hearing dissolves into chaos over Republican’s insult

    The two most famous sets of initials in US politics clashed in a chaotic House hearing on Thursday, as the progressive star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or AOC, objected fiercely to an attack on another Democrat by the far-right Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene, or MTG.The oversight committee hearing concerned Republican attempts to hold the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, in contempt, for refusing to release tapes of interviews between Joe Biden and the special counsel Robert Hur.Things went wrong when MTG made a partisan point, trying to tie Democrats to the judge in Donald Trump’s criminal hush-money case – which, by drawing a number of Republicans to the New York courtroom to support Trump, was responsible for the hearing starting late in the day.In answer to MTG, Jasmine Crockett of Texas said: “Please tell me what that has to do with Merrick Garland … Do you know what we’re here for? You know we’re here about AG Garland?”Greene, a conspiracy theorist from Georgia, said: “I don’t think you know what you’re here for … I think your fake eyelashes are messing up what you’re reading.”Amid jeers and calls for order, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the committee, said: “That’s beneath even you, Miss Greene.”AOC, of New York, demanded MTG’s words be taken down.As defined by the Congressional Research Service, that meant AOC thought MTG had “violated the rules of decorum in the House” and should withdraw her words.“That is absolutely unacceptable,” AOC said. “How dare you attack the physical appearance of another person?”MTG said: “Are your feelings hurt?”AOC said: “Move her words down.”MTG said: “Aw.”AOC said: “Oh, girl. Baby girl.”Amid laughter, MTG said: “Oh really?”AOC said: “Don’t even play.”MTG said: “Baby girl? I don’t think so.”AOC said: “We’re gonna move and we’re gonna take your words down.”James Comer, the Republican chair from Kentucky, struggled to impose order, eventually saying: “Miss Greene agrees to strike her words.”AOC said: “I believe she must apologise.”MTG said: “I’m not apologising.”AOC said: “Well then, you’re not retracting your words.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionMTG said: “I’m not apologising.”Comer banged his gavel, pleading: “C’mon, guys.”MTG said: “Why don’t you debate me?”As Raskin tried to interject, AOC said: “I think it’s pretty self-evident.”MTG said: “Yeah, you don’t have enough intelligence.”Comer cried, “You’re out of order, you’re out of order,” and tried to recognise Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, another pro-Trump extremist. Jeers broke out, Raskin calling: “I move to strike the lady’s words.”“That’s two requests to strike,” AOC said.MTG said: “Oh, they cannot take the words.”Raskin told Comer: “Please get your members under control.”MTG said: “I repeat again for the second time, yes, I’ll strike my words but I’m not apologising. Not apologising!”Extraordinarily enough, that wasn’t the end. Crockett asked Comer: “I’m just curious, just to better understand your ruling. If someone on this committee then starts talking about somebody’s bleach-blond, bad-built, butch body, that would not be engaging in personalities, correct?”Comer said: “A what now? … I have no idea what you just said.”Next to him, Raskin buried his face in his hands.Comer imposed a five-minute recess. When the hearing resumed, Lauren Boebert – the Colorado extremist and theatrical exhibitionist who usually battles for attention with MTG – was of all people the one to offer an apology “to the American people”.“When things get as heated as they have,” Boebert said, “unfortunately, it’s an embarrassment on our body as a whole.” More

  • in

    Biden and Trump are betting on debates to help magnify the other’s weaknesses

    It’s game on for a pair of presidential debates between two unpopular candidates most Americans wish weren’t running for the nation’s highest office.In a ratatat social media exchange on Wednesday, Joe Biden and Donald Trump agreed to participate in two debates on 27 June, hosted by CNN, and on 10 September, hosted by ABC.“Make my day, pal,” Biden said in a video, challenging his predecessor and rival to a high-stakes showdown. Trump, who had been insisting for months he would debate Biden “anytime, anyplace”, quickly accepted the offer: “Let’s get ready to Rumble!!!”The arrangement jolted a general election campaign that had begun to feel stagnant. And if their plans hold, Americans will be treated to a presidential matchup far earlier than usual – before either candidate will have formally accepted his party’s nomination.“The candidates realize the value of the debates, especially given their ages,” said Aaron Kall, director of debate at the University of Michigan. “They need to show that they have the stamina to debate for 90 minutes or two hours to reassure the country.”The decision to square off at least twice before the November election reflects a careful calculation by both candidates who believe televised confrontations will help magnify the other’s weaknesses.Trump has repeatedly cast the 81-year-old president as greatly diminished. At his rallies, Trump, just four years the president’s junior, often mocks Biden as confused in an exaggerated impersonation that draws laughter and applause.But Democrats argue that Biden can more easily draw a contrast with Trump and remind voters why they rejected his Republican rival in 2020.“We need voters to see Trump 2024 with their own eyes,” the Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg wrote on Thursday, “a candidate who is far more extreme and dangerous; whose performance is far more erratic, wild, impulsive and disturbing.”Biden is clearly eager for an opportunity to change the trajectory of the race, which has remained largely unchanged despite the start of Trump’s criminal trial in New York, a brightening economic outlook and tens of millions of dollars in advertising touting the president’s record and blaming Trump for the wave of unpopular abortion bans.While both campaigns are bracing for an extremely close contest in November, a series of recent New York Times/Siena College surveys found Biden trailing Trump in five of six critical battleground states.Widespread discontent over his handling of the economy, immigration and Israel’s war in Gaza have hurt the president’s standing with key Democratic constituencies, particularly young people.Even in a polarized media environment, presidential debates remain the “SuperBowl” of politics, Kall said, offering candidates what is likely to be the most prominent platform of the election cycle. For both Biden and Trump, the events are high-risk, but also potentially high-reward.“Everyone is expecting the election to be decided by half a dozen states. Those states will be decided by thousands or tens of thousands of votes,” he said. “So a debate that 70 or 80 million people watch could certainly change enough votes to matter.”In 2020, Biden and Trump’s first face-off drew 73 million viewers, according to Nielsen ratings, while Trump’s debate against the Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in 2016 captured 84 million viewers.Many more Americans will not watch the events live but will pay attention to reactions on social media.“A lot of people who don’t tune into the actual debate will likely know what the breakout moments of the debate are,” said Yanna Krupnikov, professor of communication and media at University of Michigan. “What happens afterward is going to be really, hugely important.”Americans are arguably more familiar with Biden and Trump than any pair of presidential challengers in American history. Voters may still tune in to hear what the president and former president have to say about major issues, such as the Israel-Hamas war. But Emily Van Duyn, an associate professor of communication at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, who specializes in political communication, expects most will be watching for how the candidates perform.“For the most part, it’s going to be an assessment of: can these dudes hold up?” Van Duyn said.Democrats say Biden must deliver an energetic performance that reassures voters unsure whether the oldest president in American history is up for a second term.“The debate is the hurdle he has to cross,” David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to Barack Obama, said on CNN. “He needs to dispel that notion in that debate.”Voters tend to express fewer concerns about the 77-year-old former president’s age, but Democrats believe a debate could highlight Trump’s tendency toward verbal slips and gaffes.He is also likely to be pressed on his criminal cases. By then, the Manhattan hush-money case should be finished. Polls suggest a sizable share of Republican and independent voters would be uncomfortable voting for a candidate convicted of a felony.The format poses different challenges for each candidate.Trump feeds off the energy of a crowd. CNN has said its debate at the network’s Atlanta studios will take place without an audience, which was a prerequisite for the Biden campaign.Trump turned off voters in 2020, when he repeatedly hectored and interrupted Biden during their first debate. “He needs to play to the voters that may like his policies but not his temperament,” Kall said.Biden, meanwhile, has built a political brand around defying expectations, as he did earlier this year with a rousing State of the Union speech and in the 2020 debates.. “People will say he can’t do it, it’s too late at night,” Kall said. “Then as long as he doesn’t fall down or forget something, people will say he did OK.”The terms of the campaigns’ agreement, which bypasses the non-partisan commission that has hosted presidential debates for more than three decades, was designed to ensure a head-to-head between Biden and Trump.In a tweet, Robert Kennedy Jr, the independent candidate for president who is unlikely to qualify for the CNN debate, accused the frontrunners of “colluding” to exclude him. “Keeping viable candidates off the debate stage undermines democracy,” he said.While jumpstarting the debate season creates an opportunity for an early reset, it also makes the events less “existential” for the campaigns, said Tommy Vietor, a co-host of Pod Save America, discussing the development on his podcast with the former White House press secretary Jen Psaki.After the September debate, there are still weeks to recover from a potentially subpar performance or embarrassing gaffe. Though momentum from a strong showing could fade before election day, early voting ​m​eans millions of Americans will have already cast their ballots.Psaki said the back-and-forth between Biden and Trump this week was part of a new approach. Whereas four years ago, Biden led with sophisticated appeals to democracy and civility, he’s now playing humor as a way to tweak his famously thin-skinned opponent.“It’s figuring out how to land the best needles,” Psaki said.In a sign of Biden’s more pugnacious approach, the president opened public negotiations over the general election debate on Wednesday, the one day a week Trump is not confined to a New York courtroom. “I hear you’re free on Wednesdays,” Biden said in the video, suggesting a date for their face-off. His campaign is now selling merchandise that read: “Free on Wednesdays.”On Thursday, Biden’s re-election campaign also announced that it had accepted an offer from CBS News to participate in a vice-presidential debate and proposed two dates for that fall after the Republican national convention in July. Trump has yet to choose his running mate, but a carousel of Republican hopefuls have been openly auditioning for the role.With just weeks before the first debate, both candidates have an abbreviated timeline to prepare.Neither has participated in a debate since their final showdown in 2020. This year, Trump declined to take part in the Republican primary debates and Biden as the incumbent faced only nominal challenges.In an MSNBC interview this week, Mitt Romney, the Utah senator and 2012 Republican presidential nominee, insisted that the debates still mattered to voters and predicted a “huge audience” would tune in for the spectacle.As far as what they would see, Romney quipped: “the image that comes to mind is those two old guys on the Muppets”. More

  • in

    Biden asserts executive privilege to block release of special counsel interviews

    Joe Biden asserted executive privilege to stop House Republicans obtaining recordings of his interviews with Robert Hur, the special counsel who investigated Biden’s retention of classified information after his time as a senator and as vice-president to Barack Obama.In a letter reported by the New York Times and other outlets on Thursday, the White House counsel, Edward Siskel, told the Republican chairs of the House judiciary and oversight committees: “The absence of a legitimate need for the audio recordings lays bare your likely goal – to chop them up, distort them and use them for partisan political purposes.“Demanding such sensitive and constitutionally protected law enforcement materials from the executive branch because you want to manipulate them for potential political gain is inappropriate.”The two chairs, Jim Jordan of Ohio (judiciary) and James Comer of Kentucky (oversight), both close allies of Donald Trump, have led Republican efforts to ensnare Biden in damaging investigations including a sputtering impeachment.Biden’s retention of classified information was discovered as Trump, Biden’s opponent in this year’s election, came to face 40 criminal charges on the same issue.Unlike Trump – who faces 48 other criminal charges and has been hit with multimillion-dollar civil penalties – Biden cooperated with the special counsel appointed to investigate the matter.Hur, who was appointed as a US attorney by Trump, cleared Biden of wrongdoing. But Hur caused uproar when in his report he made repeated reference to the 81-year-old president’s age, including saying if he had brought charges, jurors would have seen Biden as “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory”.Hur has defended his work. Republicans have clamoured for access to recordings of Hur’s interviews with Biden, particularly after Biden’s own angry claims about what was said were contradicted by transcripts.News organisations have sued to obtain the recordings.In Congress, Republicans threatened to hold the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, in contempt after he rejected subpoenas for the recordings and other materials.In a letter to Biden, reported by the Times, Garland said handing over Hur’s interviews “would raise an unacceptable risk” of undermining “similar high-profile criminal investigations – in particular, investigations where the voluntary cooperation of White House officials is exceedingly important”.The Department of Justice said the decision to withhold the interviews was not made for partisan reasons.Carlos Uriarte, assistant attorney general for legislative affairs, told Jordan and Comer: “It is the longstanding position of the executive branch held by administrations of both parties that an official who asserts the president’s claim of executive privilege cannot be prosecuted for criminal contempt of Congress.”In response, House Republicans cited comments in February in which a Biden spokesperson said the president had “nothing to hide”, and asked: “Why is Biden hiding behind executive privilege now?”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionComer said: “It’s a five-alarm fire at the White House … Today’s Hail Mary from the White House changes nothing for our committee.”Jordan told reporters transcripts already handed over were not “sufficient evidence of the state of the president’s memory” and said: “This last-minute invocation does not change the fact that the attorney general has not complied with our subpoena.”Jordan’s House judiciary committee later voted to advance contempt proceedings against Garland. The oversight committee was due to take up the issue.Trump’s campaign spokesperson, Steven Cheung, said Biden “and his feeble administration have irretrievably politicised the key constitutional tenet of executive privilege, denying it to their political opponents while aggressively trying to use it to run political cover for Crooked Joe”.But Glenn Ivey, a Maryland Democrat who sits on the House judiciary committee, told the Times Republicans’ demands were “purely political”.“The only reason they want the recording is to try to use clips for campaign ads, or something along those lines, which obviously doesn’t meet the legislative purpose standard that the supreme court set for congressional oversight.” More

  • in

    Michael Cohen accused of lying over phone call at Trump hush-money trial

    Donald Trump’s lawyer on Thursday attacked the core charge against the former president as he sought to undercut Michael Cohen, the former attorney whose $130,000 hush-money payment to the adult film star Stormy Daniels is at the heart of the criminal trial in New York.The defense, led by the Trump lawyer Todd Blanche, had Cohen admit that technically Daniels entered into a legal contract to sell the rights of her story about a sexual encounter with Trump, apparently in an attempt to justify labelling the repayments as legal expenses.During the hours-long cross-examination, the defense forced Cohen to concede that he had previously lied to protect Trump because it affected the stakes for him personally, and that he lied to the federal judge when he was prosecuted for tax evasion and false statements.As Cohen returned to the stand for the third day, Blanche suggested Cohen’s latest objective was to see Trump go to jail, seeding the possibility that he might have also lied about the extent of Trump’s involvement in the hush-money scheme with Daniels.Blanche also directly accused Cohen of lying in his trial testimony. Cohen said earlier in the week that when he called Trump’s then bodyguard Keith Schiller on 24 October 2016, it was to apprise Trump that he was moving forward with paying hush-money to Daniels.But relying on texts Cohen sent to Schiller complaining about prank calls from a 14-year-old, Blanche raised his voice to tell Cohen he must have phoned Schiller primarily about the prank calls and that he could not have had enough time in a one-minute 30-second call to tell Trump about the Daniels deal.“You can admit,” Blanche said, that you lied. “No sir, I can’t,” Cohen responded, sticking to his account.Trump was joined in court on Thursday by his son Eric Trump and the US representatives Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz. The trio appeared to be engaged in a dynamic conversation, at times smiling, laughing and whispering into each other’s ears shortly before Cohen took the stand.Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of felony falsification of business records. Prosecutors must prove Trump authorized what he knew to be hush-money repayments to be falsely characterized as “legal expenses” in the Trump Organization’s records, with an intent to commit a second, election crime.The criminal case against Trump – the first against a US president – stems from his attempts to suppress negative stories about alleged sexual encounters he had with Daniels and others for fear that they could negatively affect his campaign just weeks before the 2016 election.Cohen has been a dramatic witness for the prosecution as he recounted how he used a home equity loan to raise $130,000, which he then wired to Daniels’s lawyer through a shell company he established. Cohen did so in the belief that Trump would reimburse him, he testified.In January 2017, Cohen previously recounted, he discussed with Trump and the former Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg about being repaid for the $130,000, an overdue bonus, and other expenses he incurred doing work that benefited the Trump 2016 campaign.Cohen produced 11 invoices seeking payment pursuant to a legal “retainer” that did not exist according to Cohen, that led to 11 checks being cut to Cohen and the Trump Organization recording 12 entries for “legal expense” on its general ledger – totaling 34 instances of alleged falsifications.Under New York law, prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump either made or caused a false entry to be made in the business records of an enterprise. Cohen’s testimony provided the first direct evidence that Trump directed the nature of the reimbursement to be obscured.But Blanche relentlessly attacked Cohen’s credibility and motivations in recounting that story.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBlanche played clips from Cohen’s podcast Mea Culpa, including when Cohen said “thinking about Trump in Otisville prison makes me giddy with joy”. He also got Cohen to concede that he believed he played a large role in the indictment being brought against Trump – and bragged about it.The defense later dug into Cohen’s previous lies under oath and how he seemingly lied about details big and small. When Cohen testified to Congress in 2017 about a Trump real estate deal in Moscow, Blanche elicited, Cohen lied about how many times he spoke to Trump about the deal.And although Cohen told William Pauley, a US district court judge, in 2018 that he had not been induced to plead guilty to federal tax evasion and false statements charges, Blanche elicited, Cohen later said he felt he was cornered into pleading guilty so that his wife wouldn’t also be charged.“The reason you lied to a federal judge was because stakes affected you personally?” Blanche asked. “Yes,” Cohen replied, affirming that he told lies not just to protect Trump, as he has previously claimed, but for his personal benefit, when it suited him.In an apparent effort to undercut Cohen’s testimony on direct examination that Trump was responsible and involved in the effort to cover up the hush money to Daniels, Blanche elicited from Cohen that he had a track record of trying to shift blame for his own actions on to other people.“You’ve blamed … Your bank? Your accountant? You blamed federal prosecutors? The judge? President Trump?” Blanche asked. “Yes, sir,” replied Cohen to each of the questions.The cross-examination of Cohen is expected to conclude on Monday morning. The redirect-examination is unlikely to take longer than an hour, prosecutors told the judge. After Cohen is done, Trump’s lawyers may call Bradley Smith, an expert in federal elections law.Smith’s potential testimony is not likely to take particularly long, in large part because the judge imposed limits on expert testimony in a pre-trial ruling. Smith would only be able to testify about general definitions about federal campaign contributions.Whether Trump testifies in his own defense remains uncertain, even if Trump has suggested he wants to take the stand. Should Trump not testify, closing arguments in the case could come on Tuesday. But the judge still has to issue jury instructions, which means the jury might only start deliberating on Thursday. More

  • in

    Gaetz invokes Trump’s call to far-right Proud Boys at hush-money trial

    Matt Gaetz echoed Donald Trump’s infamous remarks about the far-right Proud Boys on Thursday, as the Florida Republican congressman and other rightwing supporters of the former US presidentattended his criminal trial in Manhattan.“Standing back, and standing by, Mr President,” Gaetz wrote on social media, with a photo of his group of supporters standing behind Trump outside the court where Trump is on trial on election subversion charges arising from hush-money payments to an adult film star during the 2016 campaign.The Proud Boys, a “western chauvinist” group, were involved in street violence during Trump’s years in power, clashing with leftwing protesters.Identifiable by their black and yellow colors, they participated in the attack on Congress of 6 January 2021, when Trump told supporters to “fight like hell” to block certification of his 2020 defeat by Joe Biden, in service of Trump’s voter fraud lie.Proud Boys leaders convicted of crimes including seditious conspiracy are among hundreds of rioters jailed over the attack.Trump faces jail himself if convicted in New York, where he faces 34 charges, or in three other cases containing 54 more criminal counts, concerning election subversion and retention of classified information.Gaetz offered a form of a famous Trump utterance. In a debate with Biden in September 2020, the then president was asked if he would condemn white supremacist and militia groups who clashed with social justice protesters that summer, following the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police.Trump said: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa [anti-fascist groups] and the left.”Amid uproar about an apparent endorsement of violent extremists, Trump said “I don’t know who the Proud Boys are” and: “Whoever they are, they have to stand down. Let law enforcement do their work.”But Proud Boys celebrated. Membership “tripled, probably”, one member, Jeremy Joseph Bertino, told the House January 6 committee. Bertino pleaded guilty to plotting with other Proud Boys to violently stop the transfer of power.View image in fullscreenIn the current campaign, Proud Boys have shown up at Trump rallies. At some rallies, Trump has played a chorus of January 6 prisoners singing the national anthem. Vowing to pardon January 6 rioters, he has called such prisoners “hostages”.Gaetz, of Florida, was part of the latest contingent of rightwing lawmakers to show up in Manhattan in Trump’s support.Asked if Gaetz intentionally used verbiage adopted by the Proud Boys, a spokesman, Joel Valdez, told the Associated Press: “The tweet speaks for itself.”Outside court, Gaetz told reporters: “We are here of our own volition, because there are things we can say that President Trump is unjustly not allowed to say.”That was a reference to a gag order which Trump repeatedly violated, paying $1,000 fines until the judge threatened incarceration.On Tuesday, one court reporter said Trump appeared to be editing comments for surrogates to make in his stead.Gaetz followed Trump supporters including the House speaker, Mike Johnson, in standing outside court to deride the charges against Trump.Alluding to a famous children’s toy, Gaetz said prosecutors had made up “the Mr Potato Head of crimes” to bring Trump to trial.Another pop culture reference surfaced when Lauren Boebert tried to speak.The Colorado extremist was subjected to cries of “Beetlejuice!” – a reference by hecklers to her ejection from a Denver theatre in September, over lewd and disruptive behaviour during a performance of a musical based on a Hollywood movie.Posting footage of the heckling, Boebert said: “I’ll never stop standing up for President Trump, even if I’m the last one standing.”Republicans control the US House by a narrow margin, 217 seats to 213. The House was open for business on Thursday but nonetheless six more GOP members were seen at the courthouse in Manhattan.The others were Andy Biggs and Eli Crane of Arizona, Mike Waltz of Florida, Andy Ogles of Tennessee, Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, Bob Good of Virginia and Ralph Norman of South Carolina. More

  • in

    Republican ‘veepstakes’ heats up as contenders court Trump at court

    Two senators, JD Vance of Ohio and Tim Scott of South Carolina, have shot to the front of the US media’s beloved “veepstakes”, the reporting, betting and outright speculation about who Donald Trump will pick as his running mate against Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in the presidential election in November.But one report from Capitol Hill quoted a source as saying that Marco Rubio, the Florida Republican senator who ran against Trump in 2016, was still an “ace in the hole” for one adviser particularly close to Trump, “if Scott gets taken out on the runway”.That might have been a pointed choice of words, given reports that Trump’s plane clipped another at a Florida airport last Sunday.Vance, meanwhile, might have stolen a march on Scott by flying to New York to attend Trump’s hush-money trial on Monday.Emerging from court in Manhattan, Vance slammed the case against Trump, which frames payments to the adult film star Stormy Daniels around the 2016 campaign as a form of election subversion, and concerns 34 of the 88 criminal charges Trump must face as he attempts to return to power.Vance was not the first Trump-supporting Republican to show up in New York but he did grab headlines by doing so.The next day, the House speaker, Mike Johnson, grabbed more when he and three VP hopefuls – North Dakota governor Doug Burgum, Florida congressman Byron Donalds and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy – followed Vance to the court. All four attacked prosecutors and the judge in virulent terms Trump cannot employ, given a gag order.One reporter said Trump may have been editing surrogates’ remarks in court.Other observers commented on Burgum, Donalds and Ramaswamy’s decision to wear blue suits and red ties, thereby following Trump’s favourite dress code and earning, from the conservative professor Jack Pitney, a Tarantino-esque nickname: “Reservoir Lapdogs”.View image in fullscreenVance wore the uniform for court on Tuesday. Scott has worn it on the campaign trail, where he challenged Trump for the Republican nomination but dropped out early, telling the ex-president: “I just love you.”According to a detailed report by the Daily Beast, Scott has now acquired a “powerful ally” when it comes to securing the VP slot: Kellyanne Conway, the longtime Republican strategist who managed Trump’s winning campaign in 2016 and was a senior White House aide.Citing three sources, the Beast said Conway was “game” to push Scott with Trump, causing Scott to “place his hopes in Conway’s hands”. The two were recently seen dining in Washington, the Beast said, and were working on a fundraising event.Citing “multiple Trumpworld sources”, the Beast said Conway had “privately encouraged Trump to partner with Scott, believing the two-term senator” – the only Black Senate Republican – “is the best of the options in front of the former president”.The Beast also pointed to a New York Times column from February, in which Conway said Trump should pick a running mate of colour – but included Rubio in that bracket.Rubio and Trump both live in Florida, raising questions about whether they are allowed, under the constitution, to run on the same ticket.But the Beast quoted another anonymous Trump source as saying: “Here’s the thing about Kellyanne: people dismiss her for a variety of reasons; she’s not particularly smart and doesn’t really come up with a lot of good ideas, she’s always chasing money and that’s what guides her decision making.“But she does have Trump figured out like no one else. If anyone can convince him to make a mistake – and later assign blame to someone else – it’s Kellyanne.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionConway said: “President Trump seeks the counsel of many men and women on the VP pick, but he and he alone will decide.”Scott did not comment. Nor did the Trump campaign.On Tuesday, according to NBC News, Trump commented on another possible VP pick once seen as a strong contender but deemed to have slipped in the running.“What a week!” Trump reportedly told an audience including Kristi Noem, the governor of South Dakota, at a Manhattan fundraiser also attended by Scott, Rubio and Burgum.“The dog, the dog!” Trump said.Last month, the Guardian first reported Noem’s decision to include in a memoir her story of using a shotgun to kill both Cricket, a 14-month-old wirehaired pointer she deemed “untrainable”, and an unnamed male goat.Noem has defended the story, which she said took place 20 years ago, as evidence of her willingness to do unpleasant things in life as well as politics. She has also endorsed her apparent threat, also in her book, to kill Joe Biden’s dog, which has a history of biting.But enduring shock and revulsion – and controversy over Noem’s claim to have met and “stared down” the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, a story revealed to be untrue – are widely seen to have killed her chances of being Trump’s VP.“I’m really curious about the dog,” Trump reportedly said in New York, before “riffing on Cricket’s story” in a “bemused” rather than critical manner.Of Noem, Trump said: “She’s been there for us for a long time. She’s loyal, she’s great.” More

  • in

    Washington is pushing policies to combat antisemitism. Critics say they could violate free speech

    Against the backdrop of demonstrations against Israel’s war in Gaza on college campuses, the White House and Congress have announced a string of policies and commitments aimed at addressing what Joe Biden warned was a “ferocious surge of antisemitism” in the United States.Antisemitism was on the rise in the US before Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October, killing roughly 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. But the ensuing war has exacerbated the problem, with the law enforcement officials recording a spike in threats against Jewish Americans.Several of the proposals coming out of Washington DC have converged around college campuses, where hundreds of students have been arrested as part of pro-Palestinian demonstrations against Israel’s ongoing offensive in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and caused catastrophic levels of hunger.Many Jewish students have said that rhetoric common to the protests – for example, their denunciations of Zionism and calls for a Palestinian uprising – too often veers into antisemitism and poses a threat to their safety. A number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as the president, have echoed their fears, condemning documented instances of antisemitism on campus.But critics say some of the actions and polices under consideration threaten free speech and are part of a broader effort to silence legitimate criticism of Israel.“The view that these encampments, these student protests, are per se antisemitic, which I think some people have, is leading to very aggressive repression,” said Genevieve Lakier, a professor of law at the University of Chicago law school and an expert in the first amendment. “I also think it is incorrect, particularly when the student movement is being populated and led in many ways by Jewish students.”​The wave of student activism​ against the war in Gaza has renewed a charged debate over what constitutes antisemitism.Many supporters of Israel say the situation on college campuses validates the view, articulated in 2022 by the Anti-Defamation League’s chief executive, Jonathan Greenblatt, that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism”. But the Jewish and non-Jewish students involved with campus protests say their critiques of Israel, and its rightwing government’s prosecution of the war, are legitimate political speech that should not be conflated with antisemitism.In remarks at a Holocaust remembrance ceremony at the Capitol last week, Biden vowed to leverage the full force of the US government to fight hate and bigotry against Jews and outlined specific policy steps his administration was taking to confront antisemitic discrimination in schools and universities.The debate is also playing out on Capitol Hill, where the Senate is considering a bill that would codify into federal law a definition of antisemitism adopted in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental organization based in Stockholm.The IHRA defines antisemitism as “certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”. But it also includes several modern examples of antisemitism that alarm free speech advocates, among them “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination”, claiming Israel’s existence is a “racist endeavor” and “applying double standards” to Israel that are not expected of other countries.Supporters say the bill, known as the Antisemitism Awareness Act, is critical.“We really believe it’s the single most important thing that Congress could do right now to help bring under control the rampant antisemitism we’ve seen on campus,” said Eric Fingerhut, president and CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America, which is lobbying in support of the legislation.But opponents are urging the Senate to block the bill, recently approved by the House in a resounding 320-91 vote,“In a democratic society, we’re allowed to engage in political advocacy and political protests that criticize any government in the world,” said Tyler Coward, lead counsel for government affairs at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (Fire). “Taking some ideas off the table for one country is classic viewpoint discrimination that the courts just won’t tolerate.”Fire has opposed iterations of this bill since it was introduced in 2016, citing concerns that the definition is “vague, overbroad, and includes criticism of Israeli government policy”.If enacted, the Department of Education would be required to use the definition when conducting federal investigations into alleged incidents of discrimination against Jewish students. Colleges or universities found to have violated the law could be stripped of federal funding.Fingerhut said free speech concerns were a “red herring”, arguing that the legislation was designed to give the Department of Education and academic institutions a “clear” standard for punishing acts of antisemitism.But the bill has drawn condemnation from pro-Palestinian advocacy groups who view it as an attempt to quash their ascendent movement.The Council on American-Islamic Relations (Cair) condemned the legislation as a “one-sided, and dishonest proposal about campus antisemitism that ignore[s] anti-Palestinian racism and conflates criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism”.Since the Israel-Hamas conflict began seven months ago, the law enforcement officials have also warned of a rise in threats against Muslim and Arab Americans, and advocates are monitoring an uptick in Islamophobia on college campuses.One of the effort’s most notable opponents is a lawyer and scholar who authored the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism. Kenneth Stern, who is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate and is Jewish, has said the definition was created with the purpose of collecting better data on antisemitism across borders, not to be turned into a campus hate-speech code.“In my experience, people who care about campus antisemitism, and want to do something about it, sometimes advocate things that feel good … but actually do great harm,” he testified in 2017 against a previous iteration of the bill.That version stalled, but two years later, proponents won a significant victory when Donald Trump issued a sweeping executive order instructing federal agencies to use the IHRA definition when investigating civil rights complaints.In recent months, alarm over rising antisemitism – which Jewish groups say is not unique to college campuses – appears to have broadened support for the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Still, the vote split House Democrats, including some Jewish members of the caucus, who disagreed over whether it was the right legislative fix.The representative Josh Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat who sponsored the House bill, said it was a necessary response to the “tidal wave” of antisemitism, while Maryland representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat and constitutional scholar, voted for the bill but called it “essentially symbolic”.“At this moment of anguish and confusion over the dangerous surge of antisemitism, authoritarianism and racism all over the country and the world, it seems unlikely that this meaningless ‘gotcha’ legislation can help much – but neither can it hurt much,” Raskin said.But the representative Jerry Nadler of New York, who describes himself as “an observant Jew, a proud Zionist, a strong supporter of Israel”, voted against the bill. In an op-ed for the Washington Post, Nadler explained that he supported the sentiment behind the bill, but feared the it could “sweep in perfectly valid criticism of the state of Israel that, alone, does not necessarily constitute unlawful harassment or antisemitism”.“I want my Jewish community to feel safe on campus, but I do not need it shielded from controversial views simply because those views are unpopular,” he wrote.The legislation has also drawn opposition from some conservatives over concerns that it could be used to persecute Christians who express the belief that Jews killed Jesus, an assertion widely regarded as antisemitic that historians and Christian leaders, including Pope Benedict, have rejected.Civil liberties advocates are also raising concerns about an anti-terrorism bill approved overwhelmingly by the House last month in the wake of Iran’s unprecedented missile assault on Israel. Proponents say the measure is a necessary guardrail to prevent US-based organizations from providing financial support to Israel’s enemies. But critics have called it an “Orwellian bill aimed at silencing nonprofits that support Palestinian human rights”.Last week, Biden announced a series of actions that build on what the White House has called “the most comprehensive and ambitious US government effort to counter antisemitism in American history”.It included new guidance by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, sent to every school and college, that outlines examples of antisemitic discrimination and other forms of hate that could lead to a federal civil rights investigation. Since the 7 October attack, the Department of Education has launched more than 100 investigations into colleges and public school districts over allegations of “discrimination involving shared ancestry”, which include incidents of antisemitism and Islamophobia.The initiative also includes additional steps the Department of Homeland Security would take to help campuses improve safety.Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, House Republicans have vowed to use their majority to intensify scrutiny of antisemitism on college campuses, part of their election-year strategy to use the unrest as a political cudgel against Biden and the Democrats, who are deeply divided over the Israel-Gaza war.Wielding their oversight powers, several House Republican chairs have announced plans to investigate universities where pro-Palestinian student protests have flourished. On Wednesday, a House subcommittee held a hearing, titled Antisemitism on College Campuses, in which Jewish college students testified that their university administrations had failed to stop antisemitic threats and harassment. And during a congressional panel last week, Republicans challenged the leaders of some of the nation’s largest public school systems to do more to counter antisemitism in their schools.It follows a tense hearing on antisemitism with administration officials from some of the nation’s most prestigious universities that precipitated the resignations of the presidents of Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania. A congressional appearance last month by Columbia University’s president, Minouche Shafik, escalated the antiwar protests at her school that then spread to campuses across the country.“There are a lot of shades of McCarthyism as the House keeps calling people in to shame and name them, to spread moral panic,” said Lakier of the University of Chicago law school.Facing enormous pressure from Congress and the Department of Education, as well as from students, faculty, donors and alumni, universities and colleges, Lakier argued, are collectively showing less tolerance for the pro-Palestinian student protests than they did for Vietnam war-era campus activism.On dozens of university campuses, state and local police officers, sometimes in riot gear, have dispersed pro-Palestinian protesters, often at the request of university officials. As many as 2,400 people have been arrested during pro-Palestinian campus protests in recent weeks, while many students have been suspended or expelled.“From a first amendment perspective, one hopes you learn from the past,” Lakier said, “but to be repeating it is distressing.” More