More stories

  • in

    Trump launches new cryptocurrency venture but declines to share details

    Donald Trump launched his family’s cryptocurrency venture, World Liberty Financial, on a livestreamed interview on the social media platform X on Monday. The Republican presidential nominee gave few details about the venture but did offer his first public comments on the apparent assassination attempt against him a day earlier.Trump did not discuss specifics about World Liberty Financial on Monday or how it would work, pivoting from questions about cryptocurrency to talking about artificial intelligence and other topics. Instead, he recounted his experience on Sunday, saying he and a friend playing golf “heard shots being fired in the air, and I guess probably four or five.“I would have loved to have sank that last putt,” Trump continued. He credited the Secret Service agent who spotted the barrel of a rifle and began firing toward it as well as law enforcement and a civilian who he said helped track down the suspect.World Liberty Financial is expected to be a borrowing and lending service used to trade cryptocurrencies, which are forms of digital money that can be traded over the internet without relying on the global banking system. Exchanges often charge fees for withdrawals of bitcoin and other currencies.Other speakers after Trump, including his eldest son, Don Jr, talked about embracing cryptocurrency as an alternative to what they allege is a banking system tilted against conservatives.Experts have said a presidential candidate launching a business venture in the midst of a campaign could create ethical conflicts.“Taking a pro-crypto stance is not necessarily troubling, the troubling aspect is doing it while starting a way to personally benefit from it,” Jordan Libowitz, a spokesperson for the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said earlier this month.During his time in the White House, Trump said he was “not a fan” of cryptocurrency and tweeted in 2019: “Unregulated Crypto Assets can facilitate unlawful behavior, including drug trade and other illegal activity.” However, during this election cycle, he has reversed himself and taken on a favorable view of cryptocurrencies.He announced in May that his campaign would begin accepting donations in cryptocurrency as part of an effort to build what it calls a “crypto army” leading up to election day. He attended a bitcoin conference in Nashville this year, promising to make the US the “crypto capital of the planet” and create a bitcoin “strategic reserve” using the currency that the government currently holds.Hilary Allen, a law professor at American University who has done research on cryptocurrencies, said she was skeptical of Trump’s change of heart on crypto.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“I think it’s fair to say that that reversal has been motivated in part by financial interests,” she said.Crypto enthusiasts welcomed the shift, viewing the launch as a positive sign for investors if Trump retakes the White House.Meanwhile, Kamala Harris’s campaign has not offered policy proposals on how it would regulate digital assets like cryptocurrencies.In an effort to appeal to crypto investors, a group of Democrats, including New York senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, participated in an online Crypto 4 Harris event in August. Neither Harris nor members of her campaign staff attended the event. More

  • in

    ‘His ego will not accept defeat’: the story behind Trump’s attempt to steal an election

    By now, 6 January 2021 has so thoroughly saturated the American political consciousness – a single date conjuring up images of the once unthinkable, mentioned every day in news about criminal court cases, the future of democracy and Donald Trump’s ongoing presidential campaign – that you could argue we are used to it. Election denialism has become a feature, not a bug, of a major political party for nearly four years. The fact that Trump, when given the opportunity by ABC moderators to distance himself from efforts to discredit the 2020 election during this month’s presidential debate, still refused to acknowledge Joe Biden’s legitimate victory is no longer surprising, though we are also inured to shock.But a new HBO documentary argues, through forensic chronological detail and, perhaps ironically, the testimony of Republican election officials and former members of Trump’s administration, for remembering just how beyond the pale attempts to subvert the 2020 election were. As recounted in Stopping the Steal, a new film from the Leaving Neverland director, Dan Reed, the period between election night 2020 and 6 January 2021 was a series of genuinely shocking, potentially devastating opportunities for democratic disaster that often came down to clashes between obscure, local Republican officials and the president of the United States. January 6, in fact, “isn’t the scary bit”, Reed said. “The really scary bit is all the machinations that happened before. Because had they succeeded, the knock-on effect would have been to just gum up the system.“Step by step, you can see that enough uncertainty was being injected into the system, and enough small gains were being made, to result in potentially a cataclysmic outcome.”Though Trump may deny any responsibility for January 6, his efforts to undermine the American electoral process and discredit the result in 2020 began the night of the election, before any network had even called it for Biden. At 2.30am, after news networks projected a Biden win in the crucial swing state of Arizona, Trump held an impromptu press conference in which he falsely claimed: “Frankly, we did win this election.” What happened next is a matter of real-time journalistic record, playing out over several weeks and relived in Stopping the Steal by the people who were there: administration pressure on election officials in Arizona and Georgia to support evidence-free claims of fraud or, in one infamous Trump phone call, to find him “11,780 votes”; activation of misinformation channels and true believers, who latched on to claims of fraud, harassed election officials and showed up outside county offices armed with AR-15s; a media campaign by Trump’s lawyers Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis and others bringing fringe legal “theories” into the mainstream; and finally the legitimization of crackpot legal theories to hijack the arcane electoral college, culminating in Trump’s January 6 rally.Stopping the Steal synthesizes these many episodes, through the perspectives of the officials – the then attorney general, Bill Barr; the Maricopa county supervisor, Clint Hickman; the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger; the Georgia election operations manager, Gabriel Sterling – who worked to prevent the steal by simply doing their jobs. The framing offers “a story told by people who love Trump, but who love democracy more, who love the institution more”, said Reed – mostly, Republicans who “held the line and who came under extraordinary pressure”.By their own admission in Stopping the Steal, these officials would have entertained evidence of voter fraud, even celebrated it, had there been any. “I had every motivation,” says Rusty Bowers, Arizona’s former speaker of the house, in the film. But there wasn’t – and Trump knew it. “He knows he lost,” says Stephanie Grisham, a Trump campaign and White House official for six years. “But he’s a narcissist and his ego will not accept defeat. And when you have people who will so willingly come around you and tell you you didn’t lose and the things you want to hear … that enables him to double down and triple down.”So he tripled down, with the help of (seemingly) true believers, some of whom also appear in the film – Jacob Chansley, also known as the QAnon Shaman, and Marko Trickovic, who spread numerous conspiracy theories about votes being stolen or discounted. “The guys on the grassroots level, I think they really believe,” said Reed. “I don’t think they have any doubt that the election was stolen, because they inhabit a universe in which that is a given.”Reed, who also recently performed a similar forensic analysis on January 6 called Four Hours at the Capitol, maintains that including the perspective of the so-called “Stop the Steal” movement does not platform its beliefs; if anything, it puts the alternate universe of the “stolen” 2020 election in starker relief to the facts. “Whether you think they’re sincere or insincere, they’re protagonists in this drama,” he said. “It’s always good and fair to hear from them, and give them a chance to express what they have to say in a coherent way.View image in fullscreen“I presume my audience is intelligent,” he added. “I presume that they’re smart enough to know the difference between someone who’s indulging wish fulfillment or embracing a fantasy, and other people who are doing it for more cynical reasons.”Stopping the Steal ends with January 6, and makes no presumptions about what will happen in November if Trump wins or, perhaps just as distressingly, if he refuses to lose again, which some Republicans are already preparing for. “I’m not a political pundit,” said Reed. “I made the film because I want it to be a timeless film, because it marks a turning point in the way that we do elections. Now we have an option of: the Republicans won, the Democrats won, or someone stole it. We never had that option. That narrative didn’t exist before.“The blueprint is there, the playbook is there – why would it be different this time, if Kamala Harris wins?”The day-by-day recounting of how the votes in 2020 were counted, and then protected – in nondescript county buildings, secretary of state offices, board meetings and eventually the US Congress – only underscores that a democracy is only as strong as its most obscure, smallest offices, whose character can make the difference between business as usual and a steal. “The functioning of democracy depends on people who buy into the idea that it should be fair,” said Reed. “If the system isn’t populated with people who embrace the basic idea of it, that it should be fair and everyone gets their fair shot, then the system no longer works.”Stopping the Steal, in revisiting the timeline largely through Republicans’ first-person narratives – it was not Democratic officials that Trump personally called – acts as a “non-partisan” review of the facts, “the look back that we can all share”, said Reed. The election in November will come down to how many people vote, where they vote, and for whom. But it will also be determined by “the remote gearboxes and the little bits of democracy you can’t see”, he said. “And that’s what we need to look out for. That’s what we need to shine a light on this time.”

    Stopping the Steal is now available on Max in the US. In the UK, Trump’s Heist: The President Who Wouldn’t Lose is on Channel 4 on 17 September and 18 September at 9pm. More

  • in

    We live in an era of political violence. The rich and famous aren’t the primary targets | Moira Donegan

    It is not a good sign for US politics that an apparent second assassination attempt against the former president and current Republican nominee, Donald Trump, seems to be fading into the media’s background noise as a relatively minor story. In part, this might be because of the particulars of the incident at Trump’s Palm Beach golf club in Florida, not far from his resort home at Mar-a-Lago.For one thing, the suspect never fired a shot, though he was armed with an AK-47-style assault rifle with the serial number scratched off; having hidden in the bushes on the golf course for an estimated 12 hours, apparently waiting for Trump to appear, the would-be shooter was apprehended by Secret Service agents, who shot at him and missed.That makes this apparent second attempt somewhat less severe than the first, fewer than three months ago, at a Trump rally outside Pittsburgh, where a sniper on a nearby roof not only managed to fire shots at Trump, but was able to graze the former president’s ear.This time, the former president was never in real danger; he was hundreds of yards away at the time, and the Secret Service said on Monday that the alleged gunman did not have Trump in his sights. The golf course seems to have been relatively empty at the time; there have been no reports of other players being endangered by the plot. Unlike at most of Trump’s public outings, there were no crowds – which means that fewer people were at risk. And unlike most of Trump’s public outings, there were also no cameras – which means that his campaign will have a harder time spinning the incident into pro-Trump propaganda.In fact, no one seems to have been shot at all in Palm Beach. Though the Pittsburgh shooting injured several and claimed the life of one of Trump’s rally-goers, Corey Comperatore, a Butler county resident, in the Palm Beach shooting, not even the alleged assailant himself was harmed: though he fled the scene, he was captured later in a traffic stop as he headed north. That means he may well become one of those rare historical creatures: the would-be presidential assassin who lives long enough to stand trial. For that much, we can all breathe a sigh of relief: despite the gunshots that were fired and the powerful weapons that the suspect possessed, no one was hurt.Another reason why the apparent second attempt on Trump’s life this cycle may not make much of a dent in the media ecosystem is because the suspect appears recognizably unstable, rendering the case one of the US’s de rigueur tragedies in which profound mental illness mixes with easy access to guns. It’s true that Ryan Wesley Routh, the alleged gunman, did seem to have some degree of political agenda: he appears, oddly enough, to be a partisan of the Ukraine war effort. But Ruth’s long, checkered past and odd personal statements make it seem unlikely that his political motives were coherent.They were certainly not partisan. Routh voted for Trump in 2016 and has made public statements supporting other candidates since, seeming to mostly believe in a hawkish foreign policy. He has voiced support for Nikki Haley, for example; he seems to have hoped, during 2024’s abortive Republican primary, that she would run for vice-president on a ticket topped by the businessman Vivek Ramaswamy. His decades-long criminal record includes arrests for writing bad checks, a hit and run, resisting arrest, a concealed weapons violation and possession of a weapon of mass destruction – with that last charge, a felony, stemming from an incident in which he barricaded himself inside a house with an automatic weapon.Perhaps not the most lucid political thinker, Routh nevertheless followed his passion to Ukraine in recent years, when he was interviewed by several news outlets reporting on a minor trend of Americans traveling to eastern Europe to fight against the Russian invasion. He told the New York Times back in 2022 about a cockamamie scheme he cooked up there, in which Afghans who had previously fought the Taliban would be transported, somehow at his own direction, to Ukraine, to join the anti-Russian cause. The Times reporter who interviewed Routh said that at the time that he thought the man seemed out of his depth. That might be an understatement.Routh, then, does not appear to be a leftwing extremist or Democratic partisan, motivated by fear of what Trump would do to the country. He seems, rather, like an addled man, perhaps not entirely in possession of his own mind, with a penchant for violence and persistent fantasies of Rambo-like military heroism. Among the devices that the Secret Service discovered at the suspect’s hiding spot in the bushes at the Palm Beach golf course was a GoPro: whatever he imagined he was going to do there, it seems that he intended to stream it.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn another country, Routh’s thin political understandings and ardent delusions of grandeur would make him marginal, an outcast or perhaps someone seen as in need of help. In ours, he is a public danger. Despite being a felon, Routh was able to get himself a weapon of war; despite having been violent and dangerous to others in the past, he was still free, without any apparent restraints on his movement or psychiatric care. We are all very lucky that it wasn’t worse.But living in the US, now, means taking a risk that the combination of a man’s grievance and insanity will collide with our dangerously lax gun laws in a way that will cost you your life. Immigrant Americans may be massacred in a Walmart by nativist scaremongers for having the temerity to come to this country. Black Americans may be gunned down in a grocery store by a white supremacist. Women may be slaughtered by husbands, boyfriends or exes who decide that their inability to control them is an insult that demands the sacrifice of their lives. These, too, are the product of our polarized, hateful and hierarchical culture, and yet these incidents do not get described as “political violence”. And yet our politics has become highly violent, and usually, the rich and famous are not its primary targets. Every American risks getting shot in public. Most of us do not get to face that risk with Secret Service protection.

    Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

  • in

    Melania Trump has a memoir coming out – and she’s acting pretty strangely | Arwa Mahdawi

    There’s something weird going on with Melania Trump. I know that’s an evergreen statement – but bear with me, OK, because we’ve got a bit of a mystery on our hands. The former first lady, you see, has a memoir coming out on 8 October. There’s nothing particularly surprising about this: every grifter who spent five minutes in the Trump White House seems to have written a tell-all book. It was inevitable she would put pen to paper at some point. After all, if there’s a dollar to be squeezed from something – be that Mother’s Day jewellery, Bibles, steaks or cryptocurrency – you can be sure to find a Trump with their hands out.What is surprising is how little fanfare there has been around this new book – which is simply titled Melania. Indeed, unless you keep a close eye on the Trumps, you may have missed news of the forthcoming memoir altogether. We’re only a few weeks away from the release date and there hasn’t been a big press tour. This seems bizarre. Presuming Melania wants to sell as many books as possible, you’d have thought she would have spent the last few months doing nonstop PR to drum up preorders. Then again, she may assume there is no need for marketing if the Republican National Committee does what it did with Donald Trump Jr’s “bestselling” book in 2019 and just bulk buys copies.I’m not saying there has been no PR, of course. There was a press release in July that described the book as “a powerful and inspiring story of a woman who has carved her own path, overcome adversity and defined personal excellence”. It also revealed the cover, which is about as basic as you can get: a black background with MELANIA in white type on it. Although, to be fair, the collector’s edition (a mere $150) is white with black type and comes with a digital collectible. So a little thought went into the design.Melania also tweeted a simple promotional video to go with the press release, saying, “May your experience reading my book be as enjoyable as the writing process was for me.” Which begs the question: what was her writing process? Did she stay up into the early hours like Rumaan Alam, who smashed out his first novel between 7pm and 2am? Did she emulate Haruki Murakami’s schedule and start writing at 4am every morning? Or is it possible – just throwing it out there – that she might have lounged by a pool and dictated a few stories to a ghostwriting minion? It’s a mystery we might never solve.The handful of cryptic promotional videos, which have a David Lynch-like quality to them, and brief quotes to Fox News that have followed haven’t shone much light on Melania’s writing process or the contents of the book, although there are a few intriguing titbits. In a 5 September video, for example, Melania says she feels “a responsibility to clarify the facts [and share] the truth”. Then, in a video posted on 10 September, she implies the July assassination attempt on Trump might have been a conspiracy and says: “There is definitely more to this story and we need to uncover the truth.” What she leaves out, alas, is whether her new book uncovers any of this “truth” or whether it’s just a bunch of photos of fancy rugs with fanciful captions. (During the riots on 6 January, Melania was reportedly in the middle of a photoshoot of decorative objects she had amassed at the White House for a rumoured coffee table book.)The ever hopeful mischief-making part of my mind would like to think that Melania’s memoir contains some exciting truths we haven’t heard before. Some insights into where the proverbial bodies are buried – and why Ivana Trump’s actual body is interred on the former president’s golf course. Perhaps Melania, who is rumoured to hate politics and her husband, has played the long game and her memoir contains an October surprise that will sink Trump’s election chances?You don’t need to tell me this is all wishful thinking. Rather than any bombshells, one imagines the book contains glossy photos of ugly and incredibly expensive knick-knacks interspersed with self-aggrandising drivel about her charity initiatives. The truth about Trump is out there but it’s not going to be in Melania’s memoir. Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist

    Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

  • in

    Democrats face campaign dilemma after second apparent Trump assassination plot

    In comments to Fox News Digital on Monday, Donald Trump blamed Democrats for the repeated attempts on his life. “Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country and they are the ones that are destroying the country – both from the inside and out,” he said.Also on Monday, the former president released a list of quotes that the campaign described as incendiary. At the top of that list was a quote from Kamala Harris saying: “Trump is a threat to our democracy and fundamental freedoms.”The election is seven weeks away. Though Democrats want to place the threat of a repeat of political violence such as the January 6 attacks at the center of their political argument, Trump can adopt the language of victimhood, because he is a victim in this case – the target of a second apparent assassination attempt in less than two months. Democrats face a dilemma about how to effectively campaign against a candidate who has been the target of violence and who continues to claim that the other side’s rhetoric is inciting that violence.Democrats still talk about Trump as a threat to democracy. But they don’t lead with it any more. Instead, Trump is “weird”. Project 2025 is nightmarish and unpopular. Abortion will be illegal. It’s harder for Trump to allege that Democrats are inciting violence when they’re talking about unpopular policies.Leaders can also effectively reinforce social norms against violence, said Lilliana Mason of Johns Hopkins University, who studies political violence in the US electorate. “It can be pretty simple. You can just say ‘political violence has no place in a democratic election,’” she said. “Make it very clear, and often a very simple rejection of violence will make people step back.”Joe Biden delivered just that message Monday, condemning political violence in remarks in Philadelphia at the National HBCU Week Conference.There is “no place for political violence in America – none. Zero,” Biden said. “In America, we resolve our difference peacefully at the ballot box, not at the end of a gun.” Violence “solves nothing. It just tears the country apart. We must do everything we can to prevent it and never give it any oxygen.”Anti-violence political messaging is most effective when it comes from the political perspective of those who have committed violence, Mason said. “The problem with these attempts on Trump is that it’s really perpetrators who are not clearly from one side or the other.”Such is the apparent case with Ryan Wesley Routh, a 58-year-old entrepreneur from Hawaii who had donated to Democrats and supported Ukraine’s war against Russia, but also voted for Trump in 2016 and advocated for Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy to win the Republican nomination.Louisville mayor Craig Greenberg remembers how people reacted when a gunman shot at him in his campaign headquarters as he was running for office two years ago. There was an outpouring of support from both Democrats and Republicans, he said.“I think extremists on all sides need to turn down the heat of their rhetoric,” Greenberg said. “I think antisemites and racists have no place in political discourse.”Quintez Brown, a social justice activist running for the Louisville metro council, walked into Greenberg’s office on Valentine’s Day and shot at him six times. One bullet passed through Greenberg’s sweater before staffers could barricade the door. Support for Greenberg was bipartisan, though the rhetoric wasn’t always nonpartisan.“I think candidates and elected officials should be held to the highest standards and encourage civil discourse that does not fan the flames of hatred and violence,” Greenberg said. “This often happens, sometimes directly, more often indirectly, with dog whistles and metaphors and tweets.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStill, some see the need for Democrats to tread carefully as unnecessary, given Trump’s history of inciting violence.The idea that Trump – after the events of January 6 and recent fabrications about the conduct of Haitian refugees that have led to school closures amid threats – could offer criticism on incitement raised the rancor of David Brand, a Democratic activist and operative in Atlanta.“We have strongly condemned in the strongest possible term what he did, what this individual did and called for swift justice,” Brand said. “It is ironic also that he is being prosecuted by a Haitian American immigrant who will be protecting Donald Trump’s civil rights. Donald Trump never gave Paul Pelosi the same respect that we are giving again, and the same respect for the rule of law.”But Trump’s campaign described criticism of this contradiction as itself an incitement.But concerns among Democrats about how to effectively campaign may be short-lived. The most surprising thing about political violence right now is how quickly people move on, Greenberg said.“Whether it’s with the assassination attempts now on President Trump or other acts of political violence or violence in general,” he said. “I mean, just look at Georgia two weeks ago. [A] horrible school shooting. I know I shouldn’t be surprised, but how quickly people seem to forget how much gun violence is impacting our country.” More

  • in

    There’s a danger that the US supreme court, not voters, picks the next president | David Daley

    It’s frighteningly easy to imagine. Kamala Harris wins Georgia. The state elections board, under the sway of its new Trump-aligned commissioners, grinds the certification process to a slow halt to investigate unfounded fraud allegations, spurring the state’s Republican legislature to select its own slate of electors.Perhaps long lines in Philadelphia lead to the state supreme court holding polls open until everyone has a chance to vote. Before anyone knows the results, Republicans appeal to the US supreme court using the “independent state legislature” (ISL) theory, insisting that the state court overstepped its bounds and the late votes not be counted.Or maybe an election evening fire at a vote counting center in Milwaukee disrupts balloting. The progressive majority on the state supreme court attempts to establish a new location, but Republicans ask the US supreme court to shut it down.Maybe that last example was inspired by HBO’s Succession. But in this crazy year, who’s to say it couldn’t happen? The real concern is this: if you think a repeat of Bush v Gore can’t happen this year, think again.There are dozens of scenarios where Trump’s endgame not only pushes a contested election into the courts, but ensures that it ends up before one court in particular: a US supreme court packed with a conservative supermajority that includes three lawyers who cut their teeth working on Bush v Gore, one whose wife colluded with Stop the Steal activists to overturn the 2020 results, and another whose spouse flew the insurrectionist flag outside their home.That’s why those scenarios should cause such alarm, along with very real actions and litigation over voting rolls already under way in multiple states. Meanwhile, in Georgia, Arizona, Texas and elsewhere, Republican legislators and boards that might otherwise fly under the radar are busy changing election laws, reworking procedures, altering certification protocols, purging voters and laying the groundwork for six weeks of havoc after Americans vote on 5 November but before the electoral college gathers on 17 December.Lower courts may brush aside this mayhem, as they did after the 2020 election. But if the election comes down to just one or two states with a photo finish, a Bush v Gore redux in which the court chooses the winner feels very much in play. The court divided along partisan lines in 2000; its partisan intensity, of course, has greatly intensified in the two decades since.What’s terrifying is that the court has already proved the Republican party’s willing ally. The Roberts court laid much of the groundwork for this chaos in a series of voting rights decisions that reliably advantaged Republicans, empowered Maga caucuses even in swing states, then unleashed and encouraged those lawmakers to pass previously unlawful restrictions based on evidence-free claims of voter fraud.Right now in Georgia, a renegade state election board – with Trump’s public gratitude – has enacted broad new rules that would make it easier for local officials to delay certifying results based on their own opinion that “fraud” occurred. Democrats have filed suit to block these changes; even the Republican governor, Brian Kemp, has sought to rein them in. But if those efforts fail, it could create a cascade of litigation and missed deadlines in perhaps the closest state of all.That, in turn, could jeopardize the certification of Georgia’s slate of electors – and even encourage the Republican state legislature, a hotbed of election denialism in 2020, to select their own.If that creates a terrifying echo of Bush v Gore, it should. In his influential 2000 concurrence, then chief justice William Rehnquist noted that Florida’s legislature would have been within its rights to name electors if court challenges threatened the state’s voice from being heard as the electoral college met. (A young Brett Kavanaugh explained the nascent independent state legislature theory to Americans during Bush v Gore; on the bench two decades later he would elevate it in a Moore v Harper concurrence that weaponized it for this post-election season.)Georgia’s not-so-subtle chicanery was enabled by the court’s 2013 decision in Shelby county v Holder, which freed state and local entities in Georgia, Arizona and elsewhere from having to seek pre-approval before making electoral changes.This was known as preclearance. It was the most crucial enforcement mechanism of the Voting Rights Act and required the states with the worst histories on voter suppression to have any changes to election procedures pre-approved by the Department of Justice or a three-judge panel in Washington DC.Its evisceration has had far-reaching consequences. Nearly all of them have helped Republicans at the ballot box by allowing Republican legislatures or other bodies to change the rules and place new barriers before minority voters, most of whom vote overwhelmingly Democratic.If preclearance remained intact, these changes – and a wide variety of voter ID schemes, voter purges in Texas, Virginia and elsewhere that confuse non-citizens and naturalized citizens and perhaps intimidate some from voting, as well as new laws about absentee ballots and when and how they are counted – would have certainly been rejected by the Biden justice department. Much of Trump’s predictable post-election madness could have been brushed aside before it did damage.That’s not the case now. Make no mistake: many actions underway at this very moment, with the very real risk of sabotaging the count, slowing the process and kicking everything into the courts, are Shelby’s demon chaos agents, bred for precisely this purpose.Whether enabling extreme gerrymanders, freeing radicalized lawmakers to change procedures they could not touch without supervision only a few years ago, or transforming Rehnquist’s footnote into the dangerous ISL theory, the conservative legal movement and the court’s own decisions, time and again, have made it easier for a contested election to land on its doorstep.And in that case, 180 million Americans might vote for president this fall, but the six Republicans on the US supreme court will have the final say. It shouldn’t surprise anyone if those robed partisans manufacture the theory to ensure the winner they prefer.

    David Daley is the author of the new book Antidemocratic: Inside the Right’s 50 Year Plot to Control American Elections as well as Ratf**ked: Why Your Vote Doesn’t Count More

  • in

    Biden’s green policies will save 200,000 lives and have boosted clean energy jobs, data shows

    The environmental policies of Joe Biden’s administration will save approximately 200,000 Americans’ lives from dangerous pollution in the coming decades and have spurred a surge in clean energy jobs, two independent reports outlining the stakes of the upcoming US presidential election have found.The first full year of the Inflation Reduction Act, the sprawling climate bill passed by Democratic votes in Congress in 2022, saw nearly 150,000 clean energy jobs added, according to a new report by nonpartisan business group E2.Nearly 3.5 million people now work in these fields in the US, more than the total number of nurses nationwide, with 1m of these jobs centered in the US south, a region politically dominated by Republicans.Clean energy jobs grew by 4.5% last year, nearly twice as fast as overall US employment growth, and account for one in 16 new jobs nationally, the report found. New roles in energy efficiency led the way, followed by an increase in jobs in renewable energy, such as wind and solar, electric car manufacturing and battery and electric grid upgrades.But the future of the IRA, which provides tax credits and grants for new clean energy activity, is a flashpoint in the election campaign, with Donald Trump vowing to “terminate Kamala Harris’s green new scam and rescind all of the unspent funds”.The former president and Republican nominee has accused Harris, his Democratic opponent, of waging a “war on American energy” and called for an end to incentives encouraging Americans to drive electric cars.Harris, who has promised in unspecified ways to build upon the IRA, has attacked Trump for “surrendering” on the climate crisis as well as in the US’s attempts to compete with China, the world’s clean energy manufacturing powerhouse.Bob O’Keefe, executive director of E2, said the IRA has helped lead “an American economic revolution the likes of which we haven’t seen in generations”.“But we’re just getting started,” Keefe added. “The biggest threats to this unprecedented progress are misguided efforts to repeal or roll back parts of the IRA, despite the law’s clear benefits both to American workers and the communities where they live.”Should Trump return to the White House, he will need congressional approval to completely repeal the IRA, although his administration could slow down and even claw back funding allocated but not yet released for clean energy projects, such as the $500m pledged for a green overhaul of a steel mill in JD Vance’s home town of Middletown, Ohio.A new Trump administration would have more discretion, though, over the future of air pollution regulations set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Biden. “One of the things that is so bad for us is the environmental agencies, they make it impossible to do anything,” Trump has complained while on the campaign trail.Any major rollbacks will have a heavy toll upon public health, however, with a new analysis of 16 regulations passed by the EPA since Biden’s term started in 2021 finding that they are on track to save 200,000 lives and prevent more than 100m asthma attacks by 2050.The analysis, conducted by the Environmental Protection Network, a group founded by retired EPA staff, calculated the public health benefits of the suite of new rules that aim to limit pollution flowing from cars, power plants and oil and gas operations.Jeremy Symons, a former climate policy adviser at the EPA and a co-author of the report, said the findings were “jaw-dropping”. He added: “The EPA’s accomplishments have been nothing short of lifesaving over the last four years. These are real people who wouldn’t be alive if not for the non-partisan work of the EPA to start doing its job again after the last administration.”It’s unclear what Trump’s exact plan for the EPA would be should he regain power but he attempted to radically cut the agency’s budget when he was president, only to be rebuffed by Congress, and oversaw the elimination and weakening of a host of pollution rules.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump has directly promised oil and gas industry executives a fresh wave of deregulation should he return to the White House, in return for $1bn in campaign contributions.Project 2025, a conservative blueprint authored by many former Trump officials but disavowed by the Trump campaign, demands the dismantling of parts of the agency, a rollback of environmental rules and a politicization of decision making.“This would put polluters in charge of air regulations and put millions of Americans at needless risk of cancer, heart disease and asthma,” said Symons.“Several of the authors of Project 2025 used the years of working at the EPA under Trump as a training ground for more reckless plans should they get their hands on the agency again. This plan would be a wrecking ball to the EPA.”Asked to comment, the Trump campaign criticized the Biden-Harris administration on inflation and what it called its “war on energy”.“Kamala Harris cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate for the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, which actually created the worst inflation crisis in a generation. She proudly helped Joe Biden implement all of his disastrous policies including his war on American energy that is driving up prices astronomically for American consumers,” said Karoline Leavitt, Trump campaign national press secretary.“President Trump is the only candidate who will make America energy dominant again, protect our energy jobs, and bring down the cost of living for all Americans,” Leavitt added.An EPA spokesperson said: “We appreciate the work of the Environmental Protection Network and look forward to reviewing their report. EPA remains committed to protecting public health and the environment by implementing science-based pollution standards that address climate change and improve air quality for all Americans.” More

  • in

    Trump recounts apparent assassination attempt as new details emerge

    Donald Trump has given his first detailed account of what he experienced on Sunday during what the FBI has said “appears to be an attempted assassination of the former president”, as authorities revealed new details about the incident at his West Palm Beach golf club.Trump said he was playing golf with friends, including businessman Steve Witkoff, when he heard gunshots.“Everything was beautiful, nice place to be, and all of a sudden we heard shots being fired in the air, and – I guess probably four or five – and it sounded like bullets but what do I know about that? But Secret Service knew immediately it was bullets,” Trump told cryptocurrency personality Farokh Sarmad during a livestream on X.In his first public event since the apparent assassination attempt, Trump thanked the Secret Service, saying that soon after the shots were heard: “We got into the carts and we moved along pretty good. I was with an agent and the agent did a fantastic job, there was no question that we were off that course.”“The secret service did a great job, everybody did a great job,” he said later.Trump said the gunshots were the sound of another agent firing at the barrel of a gun he had seen pointing out of bushes at the golf course, and that “the other one never got a shot off”, appearing to refer to the suspected shooter.Cellphone records show that the alleged gunman, Ryan Wesley Routh, camped out near the golf course for about 12 hours with food before being confronted by a Secret Service agent. In court documents unsealed on Monday, officials said Routh’s phone was shown near the tree line at Trump’s golf course from 1.59am until 1.31pm on Sunday, around which point a Secret Service agent shot at him after seeing his rifle through the foliage, reported the Associated Press.Trump’s account – given on X during the launch of a cryptocurrency platform owned by his sons, broadly matched what authorities said on Monday. Ronald Rowe Jr, the US Secret Service acting director, said earlier that the alleged attacker did not fire any shots but that an agent discharged their firearm after spotting a rifle poking through the fence on the golf course perimeter.“He [the suspect] did not fire or get off any shots at our agent,” Rowe Jr said. “With reports of gunfire, the former president’s close protection detail immediately evacuated the president to a safe location.”Rowe also told reporters that Trump was “out of sight of the gunman” during his unscheduled visit to the golf club.Trump also praised the civilian who captured the suspect’s license plate, which helped authorities to track his car down. “The civilian did a phenomenal job”, he said.Where Trump differed from authorities was in his description of the political views of Routh and Thomas Matthew Crooks, the gunman killed in the assassination attempt on Trump in Pennsylvania on 13 July.Asked what he made of this being a potential second attempt on his life, he said: “Well there’s a lot of rhetoric going on, a lot of people think that the Democrats when they talk about ‘a threat to democracy’ and all of this, and it seems that both of these people were radical lefts.”Routh, the man suspected of carrying out the second apparent assassination attempt on Donald Trump, has professed a variety of political convictions that elude partisan definition.Although records show the 58-year-old former roofing contractor making small financial donations to Democratic candidates in recent years, Routh has acknowledged voting for Trump in his 2016 election before subsequently embarking on a ideological odyssey the aims of which appear incoherent and confused.Thomas Matthew Crooks’s motivation remains unclear. In July, investigators said they were examining a social media account with antisemitic and anti-immigrant posts that they suspected might be connected to Crooks, according to the FBI deputy director, Paul Abbate.Earlier on Monday, Trump sought to blame president Joe Biden and vice-president Kamala Harris for the shooting. “Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country and they are the ones that are destroying the country – both from the inside and out,” Trump told Fox News Digital.“These are people that want to destroy our country,” he added. “It is called the enemy from within. They are the real threat.”Harris, her campaign, her running mate Tim Walz and the Biden administration have condemned political violence. The White House said earlier Biden had called Trump, “and conveyed his relief that he is safe. The two shared a cordial conversation and former president Trump expressed his thanks for the call.”Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection on 6 January 2021 but was later acquitted when he secured enough Republican support in the senate.In the X event on Monday evening, Trump repeated his complaints about Biden choosing to drop out of the presidential race. He said he had spoken to Biden on Monday, saying “he couldn’t have been nicer”.However, Trump went on to attack his rival presidential candidate, Harris, saying: “We can’t have a Marxist Communist president”. More