Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 225 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      After the destruction of the Kakhovka dam, another threat lies on Ukraine’s horizon: Donald Trump | Jonathan Freedland

      by

      The war for Ukraine gets darker and more terrifying, and now a new front has opened up many miles away – in a US Republican party whose biggest players are itching to abandon Ukraine to its fate.Proof of the conflict’s deepening horror came this week, with the destruction on Tuesday of the Kakhovka dam in Russian-controlled Ukraine, releasing a body of water so massive it’s best imagined not as a reservoir but as a great lake. The result has been the flooding of a vast swath of terrain, forcing thousands to abandon their homes and flee for their lives. But the menaces unleashed by this act go further than the immediate and devastating effect on the people who live close by.For one thing, this calamity has hit a region of rich and fertile farmland, the same soil that long made Ukraine a breadbasket for the world: the fifth-largest exporter of wheat on the planet, the food source on which much of Africa and the Middle East has relied. Now there are warnings that the fields of southern Ukraine could “turn into deserts” by next year, because the water held back by the dam and needed to irrigate those fields is draining away. That will have an impact on food supplies and food prices, with an effect in turn on inflation and the global economy.Not that the international impact can be measured in dollars and cents alone. Volodymyr Zelenskiy has warned that contaminated floodwaters now carry with them sewage, oil, chemicals and even anthrax from animal burial sites. That toxic material will, said the Ukrainian president, poison rivers and, before long, the water basin of the Black Sea. “So it’s not happening somewhere else. It is all interrelated in the world.”Meanwhile, the Red Cross has sounded an alarm of its own: the bursting of the dam does grievous damage to its ongoing effort to locate and clear landmines in the area. “We knew where the hazards were,” the organisation lamented. “Now we don’t know. All we know is that they are somewhere downstream.” Dislodged by the racing waters, those devices are now floating mines. And that’s before you reckon with the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the biggest in Europe, which relies on water from the now-draining reservoir for the essential process of cooling.Small wonder that Zelenskiy speaks of “an environmental bomb of mass destruction,” while others now mention Kakhovka in the same breath as Chornobyl. Except few believe this was an accident.Naturally, Moscow insists that this was not a Russian act: it says the Ukrainians did this to themselves. Still, and even though investigations are ongoing, it’s worth heeding the advice of the specialist in Ukrainian history Timothy Snyder, and remembering the fundamentals of detective work. “Russia had the means,” Snyder notes, in that Russia was in control of the relevant part of the dam when it appeared to explode. Russia had the motive, in that it fears a Ukrainian counteroffensive aimed at taking back territory – and flooded ground is ground over which tanks cannot advance.And there is the pattern of behaviour, the record of past crimes. Russia has scarcely restrained itself from targeting Ukraine’s civil infrastructure over the last 15 months: Kakhovka would just be the latest and most wanton example. Indeed, the destruction of dams to trigger mass flooding is no more than Russia’s ultra-nationalist talking heads and TV pundit class have been demanding for a while. This week one such voice suggested Moscow give the Kyiv dam the Kakhovka treatment and that it “raze the city to the ground”. As if weighing up the moral implications, he asked, “Why should we be holier than the pope?”The official denials should not be taken too seriously, given the Kremlin’s history of disinformation and outright lies. Better to judge Russia by its deeds than its words. So what did Russia do to help those made desperate by the floods? The answer was swift and it came from Russian artillery units, seemingly firing on Ukrainian rescue workers and evacuees as they tried to flee to safety. It’s a strategy familiar from Moscow’s war in Syria: pile pain upon pain, misery upon misery.Supporters of Ukraine say that this is a sign of Russian weakness, that it is resorting to barbaric methods because it knows that, in key respects, Ukraine has the upper hand – not least because it enjoys the support of a united west. That is true, for now. But there is a threat from within the alliance’s most powerful member.Freshly indicted though he is, Donald Trump remains the frontrunner for the Republican nomination for president. And Trump is a well-documented friend of Vladimir Putin and a sceptic on the merits of continued US support for Kyiv. When asked on CNN last month, the former president couldn’t say who he wants to prevail in the contest between Russia and Ukraine, between invader and invaded. Nor would he commit to supplying aid to Kyiv: “We don’t have ammunition for ourselves, we’re giving away so much.” Asked about war crimes charges against Putin – centred on the alleged mass abduction of Ukrainian children and their transfer across the border to be “re-educated” as Russians – Trump again refused to condemn the “smart guy” in the Kremlin.Because Trump has remade the Republican party in his own image, this is not a danger confined to him alone. His nearest current rival, the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, echoed Moscow talking points in March when he referred to the war as a “territorial dispute”, a remark he later sought to undo. But the window into his thinking had been opened.Most Republicans in Congress still back Ukraine, but the right of the party has moved into a different place, one illuminated by Tucker Carlson’s debut Twitter show this week, his first since his firing by Fox News. There he described Zelenskiy, who is Jewish, as “sweaty and rat-like … a persecutor of Christians … shifty, dead-eyed”, suggesting without evidence, and in a perfect echo of Moscow, that the hand of Kyiv lay behind the destruction of the Kakhovka dam.We already knew that much is at stake in the November 2024 presidential election, not least the life expectancy of US democracy. But there is something else, too. Ukraine is engaged in a profound battle for its own survival as an independent nation, and for larger principles essential to the whole world: that freedom must prevail, and that aggression must not. Ukraine cannot win that fight alone. It cannot win only with the backing of its European neighbours, which, though necessary, is not sufficient. It requires the United States, its muscle and its money. The plight of Kherson and the indictment in Miami are linked: the world desperately needs the defeat of Donald Trump.
      Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist More

    • 225 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump once led chants of ‘lock her up’. Now he’s been indicted on seven counts | Lloyd Green

      by

      On Thursday night, word of the government’s indictment of Donald Trump seeped out. The 45th president is reportedly slated to be arraigned this coming Tuesday on seven separate counts. He stands accused of violating the Espionage Act, false statements and conspiracy to obstruct justice.Irony abounds. As a first-time candidate, he led chants of “lock her up”. From the White House, he sought jail for his political opponents. Now on his third bid for the presidency, Trump must contend with an array of pending federal and state prosecutions and investigations.For the first time ever, the leading contender for a major party’s presidential nomination will be running while under the cloud of indictment and possible imprisonment. In October, he faces a civil fraud trial in New York. Then in March 2024, he will be tried as a criminal defendant on charges related to hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels.Imagine Trump on the receiving end of the court’s direction: “Will the defendant please rise.”Still, there is no indication that his Republican rivals will go at him full-bore. The party’s base still belongs to Trump. In that sense, the rest of the Republican field are intruders and would-be usurpers. Already, Ron DeSantis and Mike Pence, together with broad swaths of the Republican congressional leadership, have fallen into line.On cue, Florida’s mirthless governor blasted the justice department, much as he attacked Alvin Bragg, Manhattan’s district attorney, weeks earlier. “The weaponization of federal law enforcement represents a mortal threat to a free society,” DeSantis tweeted.To be sure, “free society” and DeSantis in the same sentence is an oxymoron. In office, he has repeatedly sought to muzzle free speech. He also signed a six-week abortion ban, and established an election police force to root out imagined incidents of fraud.This time, however, DeSantis did not couple his attack on the prosecution with a direct defense of Trump. There is only so much swill that DeSantis, now a declared candidate, can be expected to swallow.As for Trump’s hapless vice-president, he remains as wishy-washy as ever. Pence described the reported charges as “unprecedented” and “divisive”, while intoning that “no one’s above the law”. His latest bromides are akin to “thoughts and prayers” after a mass shooting.A reminder. On January 6, there were people who seemed ready to hang Pence from makeshift gallows. Yet hours later, Pence’s own brother, Greg, a congressman from Indiana, voted against certifying the election. The show must go on, apparently.Indeed, even Chris Christie hesitates to rush in. “Let’s see what the facts are when any possible indictment is released,” the former federal prosecutor and New Jersey governor tweeted. “As I have said before, no one is above the law, no matter how much they wish they were. We will have more to say when the facts are revealed.”Previously, Christie had opined that Trump’s legal woes are “all self-inflicted wounds”.At this juncture, only a precipitous drop in donations stands to upend Trump’s campaign. Faced with mounting legal bills, a never-ending parade of woes and little spare cash, the ex-reality show host feeds on other people’s money to stay in the game. For him, politics is about monetization and avoiding jail. After the Bragg indictment, Trump raised $12m.Looking at the calendar, it is highly unlikely that Trump will be tried on federal charges before the 2024 election. Between his trials in New York, the Republican convention and justice department policy, his figurative dance card is full. If re-elected, Trump would be in the perfect position to force the dismissal of any and all pending federal charges against him.We have already witnessed a variation of this movie. Back in May 2020, Bill Barr’s justice department moved to dismiss the government’s case against Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser. The fact that he had entered a guilty plea in 2017 was not a deal-breaker. Flynn had not yet gone to jail and was fighting to toss his prior plea.“It looks like to me that Michael Flynn would be exonerated based on everything that I see,” Trump said more than three years ago. “I’m not the judge, but I have a different type of power.”We may yet find out how different that power actually is.
      Lloyd Green is an attorney in New York and served in the US Department of Justice from 1990 to 1992 More

    • 238 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      The charges mount, but Trump’s not worried. He’s just the guy to make jail great again | Marina Hyde

      by

      Donald Trump announced his latest indictment last night in front of a painting of a guy literally twirling his moustache. “I am an innocent man,” the former president insisted, next to this cartoon shorthand for villainy. The oil painting in question is not so much an artwork as a lift-music version of an artwork, and seems to hang at Trump’s Bedminster golf club in New Jersey – which is the same place he buried his former wife Ivana, as all admirers of both exquisite taste and private-cemetery tax breaks may already know. Either way, Ivana’s there, right near the first tee. It’s what she would have wanted.As for her surviving ex-husband, it’s fashionable to say that anything that would represent a catastrophic setback for any other human being is exactly what Trump would have wanted. By this metric, his indictment on federal charges for the first time, including under the Espionage Act, is an absolute gift and a triumph. He’ll use it to pull in fundraising, it’ll rally his base, it’ll make every Republican beta – which is to say, every Republican – feel they have to swear loyalty to him. Furthermore, it’s already got him right where he most loves to be: with everyone talking about him. And these are all reasonable points – or at least reasonable in a through-the-looking-glass way, given that to many outside observers the United States passed reason two or three election cycles ago. If only they could invade themselves to bring democracy.Even so, it must be said the Espionage Act is one of the not-great laws to allegedly break, rather like obstruction of justice, of which Trump also stands accused. Individuals convicted of those felonies can face long stretches in facilities that are often entirely oil painting-free, and have never even been offered the chance to host a golf major. They do, however, have “lively” canteens and communal areas, which could make Mr Clubhouse feel at home.As always with this defendant, however, let’s not run ahead of ourselves. Trump has been indicted by the justice department on seven counts that are still under seal, but relate to his mishandling and retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. He is due in court on Tuesday in Miami. Following an incomplete search of his Palm Beach estate and club last year by members of his own legal team, then an FBI raid some months later, the documents saga constitutes something Trump keeps calling the “boxes hoax”. Quick note on vocab: down the rabbit hole we all descended some years ago now, “hoax” is the antidote to “-gate”: a sort of all-purpose bolt-on Trump can use to dismiss any scandal. Once he’s called it a hoax, the true scandal becomes the fact that anyone is trying to tar him with scandal. Trump himself becomes the poor local innocent who is being persecuted on account of his being mildly unconventional. See also: “witch-hunt”.To Mar-a-Lago, then, where someone saw Goody Trump with a classified document about Iran’s missile programme. And another about US intelligence work in China. And at least a hundred other mildly unconventional classified souvenirs of his time in office. Clearly, these are the sorts of keepsakes that any of us, had we ascended to the presidency, may afterwards wish to retain and transport to our home, which is also a members’ club thronging with hundreds of terrible people at any given time.Anyone now taking the opportunity to chant “Lock him up!” is indulging in pure McCarthyism.Unfortunately, that is not how Jack Smith, special counsel for the documents investigation, seems to have seen it. I am also confused that Mr Smith has not accepted Trump’s earlier suggestion that he could declassify documents merely by thinking about it. Last September, the former president told Fox News: “There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it.” Yet according to that old spoilsport “the law”, there apparently does. So here we are.In terms of where Trump himself is, it’s complicated. He’s the hot favourite for the Republican nomination, and also the defendant or potential defendant in a number of ongoing legal actions. There simply isn’t the space to recap all of them, but the standouts are the charges of hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels, on which he has already been indicted by Manhattan state prosecutors, and the federal criminal investigation into his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, which remains in train and for which Smith is also the special counsel.Speaking of McCarthys, finally, the house speaker, Kevin McCarthy, reacted to news of the Trump indictment in that hyper-partisan, truth-free way that has become so commonplace that it should surely redefine “McCarthyism” for our own era. Having begun with a false claim (that Joe Biden indicted Trump), Kevin sought to delegitimise a legitimate process before kowtowing to Trump in entirely abject style. Even Trump’s not-very-arch rival for the Republican nomination, Ron DeSantis, was too weak to do anything other than obediently defend Trump – while elsewhere, a new poll found that 43% of Republicans believed Trump should be allowed to serve again even if he were convicted of a felony. However positive some may feel about the charges, the whole picture is – how to put this? – no oil painting. Ultimately, Trump will be easier to deal with than the culture he has created.
      Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist
      On Tuesday 13 June, Marina Hyde will join Gary Younge at a Guardian Live event in Brighton. Readers can join this event in person
      What Just Happened?! by Marina Hyde (Guardian Faber, £9.99). To support the Guardian and Observer, order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply
      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

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      12m Americans believe violence is justified to restore Trump to power

      by

      Two and a half years after the January 6 attack on the Capitol, an estimated 12 million American adults, or 4.4% of the adult population, believe violence is justified to restore Donald Trump to the White House.Though the number of adults who believe this has declined since the insurrection, recent survey data from the University of Chicago reveal alarming and dangerous levels of support for political violence and conspiracy theories across the United States.The university’s Chicago Project on Security & Threats (CPOST) research center has been conducting Dangers to Democracy surveys of American adults on political violence and attitudes towards democracy since shortly after the January 6 attacks. In new data from April shared exclusively with the Guardian, researchers found a continued support for violence to achieve various political goals on both sides of the aisle, and a general distrust for democracy.The results are particularly alarming as the 2024 election approaches without essential safeguards that some lawmakers say could help prevent another violent attack on US democracy.For the next year and a half through the 2024 election, CPOST will be releasing new survey data tracking continued dangers to democracy every three months. The data will be published first with the Guardian. This data will be critical at a time when efforts to erode democracy feel increasingly prevalent in the United States, from candidates who deny the results of their elections to governmental taskforces attempting to prosecute people who unintentionally violate voting laws.“We’re heading into an extremely tumultuous election season,” said Robert Pape, a professor at the University of Chicago who directs CPOST. “What’s happening in the United States is political violence is going from the fringe to the mainstream.”The most recent survey from April 2023 found that an estimated 142 million Americans believe that elections won’t solve America’s most fundamental problems – up from 111 million last September. And one in five American adults still believe that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump, representing very little change from 2021.“What you’re seeing is really disturbing levels of distrust in American democracy, support for dangerous conspiracy theories, and support for political violence itself,” Pape said.Pape said it was important to track sentiments about political violence, comparing it to the kindling for a wildfire. Though many were unaware that the events on January 6 would turn violent, research shows that public support for violence was widespread, so the attacks themselves should not have come as a surprise.“Once you have support for violence in the mainstream, those are the raw ingredients or the raw combustible material and then speeches, typically by politicians, can set them off,” he said. “Or if they get going, speeches can encourage them to go further.”Before the January 6 insurrection, there was chatter on online forums and among far-right groups about potential political violence when Congress met to count electoral votes and certify Joe Biden the winner of the presidential election. But it was Trump’s speech at the White House Ellipse that day that touched off the actual violence, Pape said.That’s why it’s important to track public sentiment about political violence regularly. The instigating event, usually a speech or comment by a person in power, is unpredictable and can set people off at any moment, but the underlying support for violence is more predictable and trackable.The survey found that almost 14% – a minority of Americans, but still a significant number – believe the use of force is justified to “achieve political goals that I support”. More specifically, 12.4% believe it’s justified to restore the federal right to abortion, 8.4% believe it’s justified to ensure members of Congress and other government officials do the right thing, 6.3% think it’s justified to preserve the rights of white Americans, and 6.1% believe it’s justified to prevent the prosecution of Trump.Peter Feaver, a political science professor at Duke University and the author of a forthcoming book on public trust in the military, said that while public support for political violence might seem extreme, a confluence of factors is necessary for actual violence to occur – which is still rare. On January 6, there was a time-sensitive action, an already existing rally, and inciters including Trump who encouraged others to commit violence.“You needed all of that at the same time to turn what would have been latent sentiment of the sort that this survey captures into actual violence,” he said.In addition to wide support for Trump’s big lie about the 2020 election, the survey also found that significant numbers of American adults believe conspiracy theories about the US government, and the number of believers has remained steady over almost two years. For example, 10% of American adults in April said they believe the government is run by Satan-worshipping pedophiles.“The survey confirms what we already knew, which is that rhetoric is really hyperbolic in American political life,” Feaver said. “You can get folks to express support for pretty extreme statements.”An even greater percentage of American adults said they believe in the “great replacement” theory, a white nationalist conspiracy theory that holds there is an active effort to replace white people with non-white populations, including immigrants and other people of color, in white-majority countries.While much of the survey reveals an alarming level of political polarization in the United States, there are areas where the majority of people do agree. Almost 55% of American adults feel like elections won’t solve our most fundamental political and social problems, and close to 50% believe political elites on both sides of the aisle are the most corrupt people in America.Perhaps more optimistically, the largest share of Americans believe in a potential solution to political violence. More than 77% think Republicans and Democrats in Congress should make a joint statement condemning any political violence.“There’s a tremendous amount of opposition to political violence in the United States, but it is not mobilized,” Pape said.CPOST’s research is supported by the University of Chicago, the Pritzker Military Foundation, the Hopewell Fund, and Anti-Defamation League and contributions from the CPOST board of advisers More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Could Trump go to jail? Federal charges over classified docs show momentum is building

      by

      He really might be going to jail.Donald Trump just became the first former president in American history to face federal criminal charges.On Thursday night it emerged that Trump had been indicted for allegedly mishandling classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.He has reportedly been charged with seven counts including wilfully retaining national defence secrets in violation of the Espionage Act, making false statements and an obstruction of justice conspiracy. He is due in court in Miami, Florida, on Tuesday afternoon.It is often tempting to hype every Trump drama out of proportion and then lose sight of when something genuinely monumental has happened. Thursday night’s action by the justice department was genuinely monumental.First, it begs the question: what was Trump doing with government secrets? It was reported last month that prosecutors obtained an audio recording in which Trump talks about holding on to a classified Pentagon document related to a potential attack on Iran.Second, Trump could soon join a notorious club that includes Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, Nicolas Sarkozy and Jacques Chirac of France and Park Geun-hye and Lee Myung-bak of South Korea. All have been prosecuted and convicted of corruption in the past 15 years.It’s Trump’s latest stress test for American democracy: can the state hold a former president accountable and apply the rule of law? There was a near miss for Richard Nixon, who could have faced federal charges over Watergate but was pardoned by his successor, Gerald Ford.The White House knows it cannot afford to put a foot wrong. Joe Biden tries to avoid commenting on Trump’s myriad legal troubles. Attorney general Merrick Garland has also kept them at arm’s length by appointing Jack Smith as special counsel. It is Smith who investigated the Mar-a-Lago documents case.Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond in Virginia, says: “I don’t think he’s an overreaching prosecutor. He’s very rigorous and vigorous and independent and that’s what you want here and that’s what’s needed. I don’t think Merrick Garland had anything to do with it except appointing him.”But what of the Republican party? Did it solemnly accept news of the indictment and call on Americans to allow justice to take its course? Did the Trump fever finally break, with party leaders denouncing the old demagogue and ushering in a new era?It did not.“It is unconscionable for a President to indict the leading candidate opposing him,” tweeted Kevin McCarthy, speaker of the House of Representatives. “I, and every American who believes in the rule of law, stand with President Trump against this grave injustice.”Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida and chief rival to Trump in the Republican presidential primary election, wrote on Twitter: “The weaponization of federal law enforcement represents a mortal threat to a free society …. Why so zealous in pursuing Trump yet so passive about Hillary or Hunter?”Senator JD Vance of Ohio described it as a “sham indictment”, senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee compared the US to a “banana republic” and senator Josh Hawley of Missouri told Fox News “if the president in power can just jail his political opponents, which is what Joe Biden is trying to do tonight, we don’t have a republic any more.”Trump’s base will be equally unmoved. They will swallow his claim of “election interference” by his enemies. They will say both Biden and former vice-president Mike Pence were also caught with classified documents while forgetting – or wilfully ignoring – that Biden and Pence complied with the authorities while Trump allegedly obstructed justice.They will also point to House Republicans’ increasingly noisy bribery allegations against Biden and his family (for which they have provided no evidence) as proof of a double standard. A Fox News interview with congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene was accompanied by the chyron: “Trump indicted on same day Burisma scandal potentially confirmed,” – the word potentially doing an awful lot of work.In short, this is less a gamechanger than a replay of less than three months ago when Trump was charged by state prosecutors in New York with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records over a hush money payment to an adult film star. The former president saturated the news cycle, enjoyed a boost in the polls and forced his primary rivals to rally around him. He raised more than $4m in the 24 hours after the indictment became public.The same rinse, repeat cycle seems likely if and when Trump is hit by even more charges over the January 6 insurrection and election tampering in Georgia. But there is a sense of gathering momentum, as the electoral calendar and legal calendar hurtle towards a great collision.Could Trump accept the Republican nomination while wearing an ankle bracelet? Could he run against Biden from a prison cell? Could the American presidency become the ultimate get-out-of-jail card? Today’s jokey speculation has a habit of becoming tomorrow’s headline news. More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      What is the Trump Mar-a-Lago case about and why is it significant?

      by

      Donald Trump has been criminally charged over his handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, one of the most significant legal developments for the former president since leaving the White House.The case marks the first time the justice department has charged Trump and adds to the mounting legal troubles Trump faces as he seeks to return to the presidency. Here’s a breakdown of where things stand:What is this case about?When Donald Trump left the White House, he took documents related to his presidency with him to Mar-a-Lago, his residence in Florida. Federal law requires presidential documents to be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (Nara). In May of 2021, Nara discovered it was missing records from Trump’s presidency and began requesting that the former president return them. Trump’s attorneys later turned over 15 boxes of records that included 184 documents that were classified in some way. Nara referred the matter to the justice department, and the FBI began investigating in February of 2022.Over the next few months, the FBI and justice department went about trying to retrieve additional classified documents from Mar-a-Lago. In June of 2022, Trump’s lawyers turned over 38 additional documents with classified markings. In August of 2022, the FBI conducted a raid on Mar-a-Lago and found more than 100 documents with classified markings.The justice department has been investigating whether classified material was mishandled and whether there was obstruction of its investigation in the matter.What is Trump charged with?Trump is charged with wilful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document, corruptly concealing a document, concealing a document in a federal investigation, engaging in a scheme to conceal and false statements, people familiar with the matter told the Guardian.Why are these charges significant?This is the first time that Trump has faced federal criminal charges. The other criminal matters pending against Trump are in state courts.The justice department is generally extremely careful when it chooses to bring cases and so the fact that prosecutors felt confident enough to indict Trump, knowing the political maelstrom that would result, is a signal of the strength of the case against him.Where do the other criminal cases and investigations against Trump stand?Trump was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury in March and also faces criminal charges in New York over hush money payments to Stormy Daniels.The district attorney in Fulton county, Georgia, is also investigating Trump’s efforts to overturn the election there and has signaled charges could come this summer.What’s some of the strongest evidence in the classified documents case?Prosecutors obtained a 2021 recording of Trump in which he discusses a classified document in his possession dealing with a military confrontation with Iran, CNN reported earlier this month. On the recording, Trump reportedly acknowledges that the document is classified. That admission is significant because it could undercut a key defense from Trump’s team – the idea that he declassified the documents while he was president.Prosecutors have also obtained roughly 50 pages of dictated notes from Evan Corcoran, one of Trump’s attorneys, that shed light on Trump’s response to a justice department subpoena demanding the return of any classified documents. In one instance, Corcoran recounted warning Trump that he was obligated to return every classified document in his possession.The notes also detail Corcoran’s attempt to locate the documents at Mar-a-Lago. As he recounted, Trump employees suggested that he search the storage room at the property. When Corcoran asked if he should look anywhere else, the Guardian has reported, he was told that should be sufficient – advice that turned out to be flawed when the FBI later found classified material also in Trump’s office.How has Trump responded?Trump has decried the investigation as politically motivated and downplayed the significance of handling the documents. He has said he had the right to take some documents from office and did nothing different than Joe Biden and Mike Pence, both of whom had classified documents in their possession after leaving office. A separate special prosecutor is looking into Biden’s handling of classified material and justice department officials have said they will not charge Pence.Who is leading the investigation?The attorney general, Merrick Garland, appointed a special counsel, Jack Smith, to take over the investigation in November. Smith is a former chief prosecutor of the Hague. He is also the former head of the justice department’s public integrity section and a former federal prosecutor with experience in public corruption cases.Is this related to January 6?No. Smith is separately overseeing an investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.Does a federal indictment prevent Trump from running for president?No. Neither the indictment itself nor a conviction would prevent Trump from running for or winning the presidency in 2024.And as the New York case showed, criminal charges have historically been a boon to his fundraising. The campaign announced that it had raised over $4m in the 24 hours after that indictment became public, far smashing its previous record after the FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort.Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Jack Smith: veteran special counsel at the center of Trump investigations

      by

      Donald Trump has been charged on seven counts, including violating the Espionage Act and conspiring to obstruct the criminal investigation, in a decision by special prosecutor Jack Smith.Smith, a veteran prosecutor and justice department official, has been at the center of two federal investigations into Trump’s misconduct – one concerning Trump’s interference with the certification of the 2020 election, and the other over the former president’s mishandling of classified documents found at his Florida Mar-a-Lago resort.Over a seven-month investigation, Smith and his team interviewed former White House officials, Trump aides and Mar-a-Lago staff in the classified documents investigation before handing down the decision on Thursday.A registered independent, Smith was appointed by the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, in November 2022 to serve as special prosecutor overseeing the two investigations. The Department of Justice has yet to deliver a decision concerning Trump’s role in the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.After he was appointed, Smith, then the chief prosecutor at the international criminal court, worked first from the Netherlands while he recovered from a cycling accident. Smith resigned from that role, where he investigated war crimes in Kosovo, to take up the special prosecutor post in the US.A career prosecutorSmith, whose career as a prosecutor spans three decades, spent more than a decade in New York, where he worked as an assistant US attorney from 1999 to 2008 after a stint as a prosecutor in the Manhattan district attorney’s office. Its current head, Alvin Bragg, filed in April a 34-count indictment against Trump for falsifying business records to conceal hush payments to the adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election cycle.He was an assistant US attorney in Tennessee – and served for a short time as acting US attorney. From 2010 to 2015, Smith oversaw the justice department’s public integrity section, which was created following the Watergate scandal to oversee corruption and prosecute crimes by government officials.Smith was appointed chief prosecutor of the international criminal court (ICC) in 2018.Garland’s announcement that he would appoint Jack Smith as special prosecutor overseeing the two federal criminal investigations came days after Trump announced he would again run for president.Smith’s investigation revealed Trump acknowledged he kept classified documentsEarlier this week, Smith was seen meeting with justice department lawyers and members of Trump’s defense team, in a sign he would soon hand down a decision. Smith’s team then informed Trump’s lawyers in a letter that the ex-president was a target of the documents investigation, according to multiple reports.Mark Meadows, formerly Trump’s chief of staff, testified before a Florida grand jury on Wednesday, in another sign the investigation was nearing its end.Trump, however, had maintained he was unaware of the indictment.“No one has told me I’m being indicted, and I shouldn’t be because I’ve done NOTHING wrong,” Trump said in a Truth Social post.But Smith’s investigation proves otherwise: among the evidence is an audio tape where Trump says he kept a classified document detailing a potential attack on Iran, CNN first reported.Trump is currently the top contender for the Republican nomination in 2024. More

    • 225 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump attempts to cut sexual abuse damages for E Jean Carroll to $1m – as it happened

      by

      From 2h agoDonald Trump has asked a federal court in New York to slash the $5m penalty awarded against him in the sexual assault and defamation civil case won by writer E Jean Carroll down to just $1m – or grant him a new trial.The case went in Carroll’s favor last month when a jury decided that Trump had sexually abused and defamed her.Trump’s legal team has argued to the court that the damages awarded against him are excessive and the court should either slash them or allow a new trial.Reuters adds:
      The lawyers noted in a written submission that a Manhattan federal court jury last month rejected a rape claim made by the writer, E. Jean Carroll, concluding instead that she had been sexually abused in spring 1996 in the store’s dressing room.
      “Such abuse could have included groping of Plaintiff’s breasts through clothing, or similar conduct, which is a far cry from rape,” the lawyers wrote.
      They said the $2 million granted by the jury on a sexual abuse claim was “grossly excessive” and another $2.7 million issued for compensatory defamation damages was “based upon pure speculation.”
      The award should consist of no more than $400,000 for sex abuse, no more than $100,000 for defamation and $368,000 or less for the cost of a campaign to repair Carroll‘s reputation, the lawyers wrote.
      If a judge does not grant the suggested reduction in the award, then he should permit a new trial on damages, they said.
      Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney, said in an emailed statement that the arguments by Trump’s lawyers were frivolous.
      She said the unanimous jury had concluded that Trump sexually assaulted Carroll and then defamed her “by lying about her with hatred, ill-will, or spite.”
      “This time, Trump will not be able to escape the consequences of his actions,” Kaplan said.
      Trump may still face a second defamation trial resulting from another lawsuit Carroll filed against him. That case has been delayed with appeals as the U.S. Justice Department sought to substitute the United States as the defendant in place of Trump. Government lawyers say Trump can’t be held liable for the comments he made as president.
      Hello US politics blog readers, it’s been an eventful day in US political news. We’re closing this blog now and will start afresh on Friday. We have stand alone stories on some of the biggest news of the day, links in the bullet points below.Here’s where things stand:
      Donald Trump has asked a federal court in New York to slash the $5m penalty awarded against him in the sexual assault and defamation civil case won by writer E Jean Carroll down to just $1m – or grant him a new trial.
      The White House has had to postpone a party due for this evening, where thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer-plus (LGBTQ+) people were invited to a celebration and, essentially, a political defiance event. Reuters further reports that Biden said violence against LGBTQ+ people in the United States is on the rise and anti-LGBTQ rhetoric is an appeal to fear that is “unjustified” and “ugly.”
      Hardline Republicans have effectively paralyzed the chamber because they’re unhappy at speaker Kevin McCarthy over the deal with Democrats that resolved the problem with the US debt ceiling. The spat appears to have widened to envelop No 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who appears unhappy with the speaker.
      The US supreme court ruled that Alabama discriminated against Black voters when it drew its seven congressional districts last year. The ruling in Allen v Milligan means that Alabama will have to draw its congressional map afresh to include a second majority-Black district.
      Donald Trump has asked a federal court in New York to slash the $5m penalty awarded against him in the sexual assault and defamation civil case won by writer E Jean Carroll down to just $1m – or grant him a new trial.The case went in Carroll’s favor last month when a jury decided that Trump had sexually abused and defamed her.Trump’s legal team has argued to the court that the damages awarded against him are excessive and the court should either slash them or allow a new trial.Reuters adds:
      The lawyers noted in a written submission that a Manhattan federal court jury last month rejected a rape claim made by the writer, E. Jean Carroll, concluding instead that she had been sexually abused in spring 1996 in the store’s dressing room.
      “Such abuse could have included groping of Plaintiff’s breasts through clothing, or similar conduct, which is a far cry from rape,” the lawyers wrote.
      They said the $2 million granted by the jury on a sexual abuse claim was “grossly excessive” and another $2.7 million issued for compensatory defamation damages was “based upon pure speculation.”
      The award should consist of no more than $400,000 for sex abuse, no more than $100,000 for defamation and $368,000 or less for the cost of a campaign to repair Carroll‘s reputation, the lawyers wrote.
      If a judge does not grant the suggested reduction in the award, then he should permit a new trial on damages, they said.
      Roberta Kaplan, Carroll’s attorney, said in an emailed statement that the arguments by Trump’s lawyers were frivolous.
      She said the unanimous jury had concluded that Trump sexually assaulted Carroll and then defamed her “by lying about her with hatred, ill-will, or spite.”
      “This time, Trump will not be able to escape the consequences of his actions,” Kaplan said.
      Trump may still face a second defamation trial resulting from another lawsuit Carroll filed against him. That case has been delayed with appeals as the U.S. Justice Department sought to substitute the United States as the defendant in place of Trump. Government lawyers say Trump can’t be held liable for the comments he made as president.
      Here’s New York civil rights campaigner and politician Al Sharpton on the supreme court decision.
      This was an unexpected decision that hopefully means the Supreme Court’s era of disenfranchising voters is coming to an end.
      Alabama’s gerrymandering policies were quintessential, modern-day Jim Crow tactics to suppress Black voters in the state. That you had two conservative-leaning judges rule against the state all but confirms that.
      This is a major step forward in the fight to protect voting rights. Let’s not forget that we’re in this mess because the Supreme Court took a sledgehammer to the Voting Rights Act a decade ago when it ruled on Shelby v. Holder.
      States essentially got the green light to recut lines, purge voter rolls, and take any other steps to keep Black and Brown Americans from showing up at the polls. Today’s ruling only goes to show why Congress has a moral imperative to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act this year.
      We have been promised since we lost John Lewis three years ago, amid historic protests against racial injustice, and we will not wait until next year when lawmakers need our vote again. On August 26th, we will gather for the 60th Anniversary of the March on Washington to send a clear message that this legislation must pass now.”
      US attorney general Merrick Garland has issued a response to the supreme court’s decision on Alabama and also a fresh call to the US Congress to pass some of the voting rights legislation that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris campaigned on in 2020 but is growing mildew on Capitol Hill.Garland said:
      Today’s decision rejects efforts to further erode fundamental voting rights protections, and preserves the principle that in the United States, all eligible voters must be able to exercise their constitutional right to vote free from discrimination based on their race.
      The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, the right from which all other rights ultimately flow.
      Over the past two years, the Justice Department has rededicated its resources to enforcing federal voting rights protections. We will continue to use every authority we have left to defend voting rights. But that is not enough. We urge Congress to act to provide the Department with important authorities it needs to protect the voting rights of every American.”
      Here’s Janai Nelson, president and director- counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF), on the Scotus decision.There is praise to go around.On Deuel Ross, racial justice attorney at the Legal Defense Fund:More reaction now to the surprise decision by the US supreme court earlier to defend the Voting Rights Act in a case involving Alabama’s electoral map.The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has released a statement thus, which includes some useful background:
      The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled in Allen v. Milligan in favor of Black voters who challenged Alabama’s 2021-enacted congressional map for violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for diluting Black political power, affirming the district court’s order that Alabama redraw its congressional map.
      By packing and cracking the historic Black Belt community, the map passed by the state legislature allowed Black voters an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice in only one of seven districts even though they make up 27 percent percent of the voting-age population. In its decision, the court also affirmed that under Section 2 of the VRA, race can be used in the redistricting process to provide equal opportunities to communities of color and ensure they are not packed and cracked in a way that impermissibly weakens their voting strength.
      The case was brought in November 2021 on behalf of Evan Milligan, Khadidah Stone, Letetia Jackson, Shalela Dowdy, Greater Birmingham Ministries, and the Alabama State Conference of the NAACP who are represented by the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Alabama, Hogan Lovells LLP, and Wiggins, Childs, Pantazis, Fisher & Goldfarb. It was argued before the court on Oct. 4, 2022.
      “This decision is a crucial win against the continued onslaught of attacks on voting rights,” said LDF senior counsel Deuel Ross, who argued the case before the court in October. “Alabama attempted to rewrite federal law by saying race had no place in redistricting. But because of the state’s sordid and well-documented history of racial discrimination, race must be used to remedy that past and ensure communities of color are not boxed out of the electoral process. While the Voting Rights Act and other key protections against discriminatory voting laws have been weakened in recent years and states continue to pass provisions to disenfranchise Black voters, today’s decision is a recognition of Section 2’s purpose to prevent voting discrimination and the very basic right to a fair shot.”
      Davin Rosborough, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, said, “The Supreme Court rejected the Orwellian idea that it’s inappropriate to consider race in determining whether racial discrimination led to the creation of illegal maps. This ruling is a huge victory for Black Alabamians.”
      It’s been a busy morning in US politics and there will be plenty more developments on subjects ranging from Trump and E Jean Carroll to the supreme court’s surprise ruling on Alabama’s biased voting maps.Here’s where things stand:
      Donald Trump has asked for a new trial in the civil case brought by author E Jean Carroll, in which a Manhattan jury last month found the former US president liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer and awarded her $5m in damages.
      The White House has had to postpone a party due for this evening, where thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer-plus (LGBTQ+) people were invited to a celebration and, essentially, a political defiance event.
      Hardline Republicans have effectively paralyzed the chamber because they’re unhappy at speaker Kevin McCarthy over the deal with Democrats that resolved the problem with the US debt ceiling. The spat appears to have widened to envelop No 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who appears unhappy with the speaker.
      The US supreme court ruled that Alabama discriminated against Black voters when it drew its seven congressional districts last year. The ruling in Allen v Milligan means that Alabama will have to draw its congressional map afresh to include a second majority-Black district.
      Another quick reminder that British prime minister Rishi Sunak and US president Joe Biden are about to hold a press conference at the White House.It’s beginning any moment and our London colleagues are glued to it. There’s a live feed and all the developments as they happen, via the UK politics blog, here.No sooner had a New York jury found for E Jean Carroll than Donald Trump verbally attacked her during a live town hall-style interview on CNN (the broadcast which was probably the penultimate nail in the coffin for departing CNN chair Chris Licht before the crushing Atlantic article).Carroll promptly went back to court to to demand “very substantial” additional damages from Trump for the disparaging remarks, filing an amended lawsuit seeking an additional $10m in compensatory damages – and more in punitive damages.During the town hall in New Hampshire the day after the 9 May verdict, Trump further and repeatedly demeaned Carroll and her experiences.Trump said her account of a sexual assault, in the case which he is appealing, was “fake” and a “made-up story” and referred to it as “hanky-panky”. He repeated past claims that he’d never met Carroll and considered her a “whack job”.The filing by Carroll the following week claimed Trump’s statements at the televised town hall “show the depth of his malice toward Carroll, since it is hard to imagine defamatory conduct that could possibly be more motivated by hatred, ill will or spite”.Now Trump wants a new trial.Last month a New York jury found that Donald Trump sexually abused the former advice columnist, E Jean Carroll, in one of New York City’s most upscale stores, in the changing room at Bergdorf Goodman on Fifth Avenue, 27 years ago.The verdict on 9 May, for the first time, essentially legally branded a former US president as a sexual predator. It was the result of a civil not criminal case, and the only legal sanction Trump faced was financial.At the time, my colleagues Chris McGreal and Martin Pengelly noted that: In explaining a finding of sexual abuse to the jury, the judge said it had two elements: that Trump subjected Carroll to sexual contact without consent by use of force, and that it was for the purpose of sexual gratification.The jury deliberated for less than three hours. It did not find Trump raped Carroll, but did find him liable for sexual abuse.It awarded about $5m in compensatory and punitive damages: about $2m on the sexual abuse count and close to $3m for defamation, for branding her a liar.In an interview the following day, Carroll said she was “overwhelmed with joy for the women in this country”.It would be staggering if Donald Trump succeeded in getting a new civil trial in the issues brought against him by E Jean Carroll, after she sued him for defamation and sexual abuse and won hands down after a brisk jury decision.But the former US president is having a go.Donald Trump has asked for a new trial in the civil case brought by author E Jean Carroll, in which a Manhattan jury last month found the former US president liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer and awarded her $5m in damages, Reuters reports.This according to a new court filing. More on this asap.Smoke gets in your eyes. Sadly, the White House has had to postpone a party due for this evening at the White House, where thousands of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer-plus (LGBTQ+) people were invited to a celebration and, essentially, a political defiance event at the White House.The smoky air drifting south from the Canadian wildfires that’s been causing havoc on the eastern seaboard and further inland has put paid to tonight’s party.BUT in better news, it is currently rescheduled for Saturday.NBC reports that the event was/is designed as:
      A high-profile show of support at a time when the community feels under attack like never before and the White House has little recourse to beat back a flood of state-level legislation against them.
      Biden is also announcing new initiatives to protect LGBTQ+ communities from attacks, help youth with mental health resources and homelessness and counter book bans, White House officials said.
      The event is a:
      Picnic featuring food, games, face painting and photos. Queen HD the DJ was handling the music; singer Betty Who was on tap to perform.
      Karine Jean-Pierre, the first openly gay White House press secretary, said Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and their spouses are strong supporters of the LGBTQ+ community and think that having a celebration is an important way to “lift up” their accomplishments and contributions.
      She said LGBTQ+ people need to know that Biden “has their back” and “will continue to fight for them. And that’s the message that we want to make sure that gets out there.”
      FYI Harris is in the Bahamas today on business and is expected back in DC tonight. Biden’s meeting Rishi Sunak at the White House and holding a presser soon.You can follow all the latest developments on the Canadian wildfires and the smoke impact on the US in our dedicated live blog:There’s some context on the relationship between House speaker Kevin McCarthy and his chamber GOP No. 2, Steve Scalise, the House majority leader, from the Punchbowl report, prior to the hardliners’ spat now rippling out on Capitol Hill.The outlet points out that a captain having friction with his supposed wingman “is a tale as old as time in House leadership” and these two have known each other for decades.Punchbowl reports:
      The pair met as young College Republicans and their interactions have always been professional. But there’s no doubt some bad blood between the two men.
      Scalise considered running against McCarthy for Republican leader in 2019, but ultimately decided against it — something we cataloged at length in a book we wrote. And again, McCarthy tapped [Louisiana congressman Garrett] Graves and [North Carolina congressman Patrick] McHenry for the most sensitive negotiations of the last few months, leaving Scalise aside.
      Scalise said in the interview that McCarthy is still viable as speaker of the House. But the House majority leader noted repeatedly that there is “a lot of anger on a lot of sides of our conference.”
      An old article from Politico notes that McCarthy and Scalise’s “parallel rise” dates to the late 1990s. McCarthy was national chairman of the Young Republicans and Scalise was an up and coming Louisiana politician and their friendship developed from that time.British prime minister Rishi Sunak, from the Conservative Party, is in Washington DC, this week and is meeting right now with Joe Biden at the White House.The premier and the US president are due to hold a press conference at 1.30pm US east coast time. Our colleagues in London are focusing on this and will be covering it as it happens via the UK politics blog, with a live stream of the event.You can keep up with that blog here.Selma native and Alabama congresswoman Terri Sewell just hopped on the phone for a live interview with CNN on air to express her relief and delight about the supreme court decision on voting rights and the relevant district maps in her state.“This is so exciting, it’s really amazing … it’s an amazing victory for Alabama Black voters, for the Voting Rights Act, for democracy,” she said.She tweeted about a “historic victory”.Sewell said the ruling reflected the legacy of the long legacy of fighting for civil rights for Black voters in Alabama and elsewhere and she was “reeling” from the good surprise.“And to have the supreme court give us this huge win, it’s historic,” she told CNN.She noted this would have implications more widely and was a closely watched case by legislatures creating voting maps, especially in states such as North Carolina and Ohio. “Everyone is looking at this decision,” she said, adding “it will have a positive ripple effect.”She noted that the late civil rights activist, champion and congressman John Lewis “must be smiling” and that those who challenged Alabama’s discriminatory voting rights did was Lewis always encouraged people do to: “we got into some good trouble.”This is Sewell’s pinned tweet: More