More stories

  • in

    ‘It’s not a banger’: response to Space Force official song is less than stellar

    ‘It’s not a banger’: response to Space Force official song is less than stellarThe new song, Semper Supra, is set to a jaunty tune, but critics say its lyrics are ‘verbal word salad’ Space Force, the sixth and newest branch of the US military, unveiled its official song on Tuesday amid a less than stellar critical response.As one website dedicated to covering America’s armed forces put it: “It’s not a banger.”Space Force was created in 2019, calved from the US air force at the behest of the Donald Trump White House.Critics wondered if the new force was needed. Announcements including the badge and uniform (suspiciously like badges and uniforms in Star Trek) and the name for service members (Guardians) attracted controversy, mockery and a satirical Netflix series starring Steve Carell.US and Australia to launch second joint spy satellite from site in New Zealand Read moreBut Trump seemed proud, for instance telling writers Peter Baker and Susan Glasser – who authored a new book on his presidency – that founding Space Force was among his greatest achievements in office.The US military has a tradition of official songs, from The Marine’s Hymn (adopted in 1929, beginning “From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli / We fight our country’s battles / In the air, on land and sea”) to The Army Goes Rolling Along, from 1956.The moment you’ve all been waiting for: The Space Force has unveiled its official song pic.twitter.com/v6CG3I4sYD— Dave Brown (@dave_brown24) September 20, 2022
    The new song, Semper Supra – taken from the Space Force motto: Always above – was unveiled by Gen John “Jay” Raymond, chief of space operations, at a conference in National Harbor, Maryland.Military.com, the site which said the new tune was “not a banger”, reported that Space Force used a 1901 march by John Philip Sousa, The Invincible Eagle, as a stopgap while the new song was written.Semper Supra is set to a jaunty tune reminiscent of The Liberty Bell, another Sousa march, from 1893 but now widely known as the theme to the British comedy series Monty Python’s Flying Circus.The chief musician of the US Coast Guard Band, Sean Nelson, worked on the music for the Space Force song. The lyrics were penned by Jamie Teachenor, a country music songwriter and member of the US Air Force Band.Nelson said: “I went for it and I did what I thought was going to be the most exciting kind of sounds.”Teachenor added: “I wanted to make sure that everything that was in the song would adequately represent all the capabilities that our Space Force is involved with and make sure I didn’t mess up on the mission.”Teachenor’s lyrics are as follows: “We’re the mighty watchful eye / Guardians beyond the blue / The invisible front line / Warfighters brave and true.“Boldly reaching into space / there’s no limit to our sky / Standing guard both night and day / We’re the Space Force from on high.”Critical response was at best mixed. The executive editor of Defense One, a military news site, Kevin Baron, wrote: “The tune is a fine march. The lyrics are awful.“Grammatically, I’m dying to edit: You’re not the ‘invisible’ front line. CIA is. We literally see you singing this song. ‘Warfighter’ is NOT A WORD. ‘Both’ is redundant. Strike it.“‘Boldly’ steals from Star Trek (again). And how is one boldly ‘reaching into space’ without going there? There is a ‘limit to our sky’. It’s called space. Sky ends. Space begins. These lyrics are the verbal word salad version of a bad air force painting.”TopicsUS militarySpaceUS politicsDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Trump legal team admits possibility that ex-president could be charged

    Trump legal team admits possibility that ex-president could be chargedLawyers tell special master reviewing Mar-a-Lago case he should not have to say which documents he may have declassified Donald Trump’s legal team has acknowledged the possibility that the former president could be indicted amid the investigation into his retention of government secrets at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.Despite Trump’s claiming days earlier that he couldn’t imagine being charged, his lawyers made the stark admission that he could be in a court filing on Monday proposing how to conduct an outside review of documents that were seized by the FBI in August.80s hits and nuclear secrets: security concerns plague Trump’s Mar-a-LagoRead moreA “special master” – a court official appointed to help administer the review process, the federal judge Raymond Dearie – had previously asked Trump to detail any materials stored at Mar-a-Lago that he may have decided to declassify.In the court filing, Trump’s lawyers – who had successfully pushed for the special master’s appointment – said that requiring him to do so could hurt any possible defense should he later be charged, and that he should not have to “fully and specifically disclose a defense to the merits of any subsequent indictment without such a requirement being evident” during the review.Dearie was set to have his first meeting with Trump’s lawyers and their opponents in the case, the US justice department’s prosecutors, on Tuesday in federal court in Brooklyn. He reportedly rejected the Trump side’s request to delay asserting what materials he may have classified.As of Tuesday, Trump’s lawyers had contended he could have declassified any of the documents if he wished, but they have stopped short of saying he actually did.The former president so far has been loth to publicly consider the possibility that he could be criminally charged following the FBI’s search of his resort. In a 15 September interview with the conservative radio host Hugo Hewitt, Trump said, “I can’t imagine being indicted, I’ve done nothing wrong” – in either the classified documents case or the investigation into his efforts to undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Joe Biden.Trump also said, “I don’t think the people of the United States would stand for it,” and that charges wouldn’t deter him from running for the White House again in 2024 if he wanted.Justice department prosecutors filed their own proposal for the outside review of the seized documents, with key differences: while Trump’s team wanted Dearie to make the seized documents reviewable within days, the justice department maintained that he should first check with the federal agency in charge of managing government records.Dearie was appointed to his role by the Florida-based federal judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing the document-review process made necessary by the Mar-a-Lago search.Cannon gave Dearie a deadline of 30 November to review the documents.The FBI said its search of Trump’s resort came after agents developed compelling evidence that the former president was storing secret government materials there. According to officials, agents seized about 11,000 documents as well as nearly 50 empty folders emblazoned with classified markings.Trump and his associates have also been under congressional investigation for their actions before, during and after the deadly US Capitol attack that a mob of his supporters staged on 6 January 2021.The attack aimed to stop the US House and Congress from certifying Biden’s victory in the previous year’s race for the Oval Office. Among other things, Trump is accused of ignoring pleas to call off his supporters on the day of the siege.TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsMar-a-LagonewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Did Trump really hide classified documents in his former wife’s grave? Or is the left now as bonkers as the right? | Arwa Mahdawi

    Did Trump really hide classified documents in his former wife’s grave? Or is the left now as bonkers as the right?Arwa MahdawiIt’s easy to believe anything when it comes to the ex-president, but #Casketgate shows how liberals are just as happy as their opponents to embrace far-fetched conspiracy theories Poor Ivana Trump: even in death she hasn’t been able to escape her ex-husband’s drama. After being found dead at the bottom of her stairs in July, Donald Trump’s first wife suffered the ignominy of being laid to rest near the first hole of Trump National Golf Club in New Jersey. Burying someone on a golf course is weird – even for a Trump – and theories immediately began to swirl. New Jersey exempts cemetery land from taxes, so was this a creepy form of tax avoidance? (Short answer: possibly, but it doesn’t make much business sense and seems unlikely.)The Ivana conspiracy theories did not go gentle into that good night. Instead, they grew stranger and stranger, stoked by the feverish imaginations of #ResistanceTwitter: a collection of liberal activists who have built large social media followings by tweeting obsessively about Donald Trump. When the FBI raided his Mar-a-Lago home to recover classified documents, #ResistanceTwitter went into overdrive trying to find connections between Ivana’s death and Trump’s legal troubles. There is zero evidence that Ivana was cremated, but many high-profile #ResistanceTwitter accounts suddenly decided she definitely had been and, from there, concluded that Ivana’s casket must have been stuffed with classified documents. Jon Cooper, a Joe Biden superfan who has 1.1 million Twitter followers and whom Politico once described as “prone to outlandish statements that rack up retweets”, bears much responsibility for spreading this theory. “Seriously, is else anyone [sic) wondering – just a bit – what other stuff may be buried inside Ivana’s casket …?” Cooper tweeted on 9 August.Nancy Lee Grahn, an actor with 184,000 Twitter followers, had similar suspicions. “Dear @FBI,” she tweeted on 10 August. “I know u don’t need advice from a soap star, but having been in 10 or 10k implausible storylines in my 37 yrs, may I recommend digging up Ivana. Clearly it didn’t take 10 pall bearers to carry a liposuctioned 73 yr old who methinks was in her weight in classified docs [sic].” Rude, Nancy, rude.That was more than a month ago. Have the Ivana conspiracy theories now been laid to rest? No, they have not. Some #Resistance accounts are still demanding that the FBI dig up Ivana’s grave to check whether Trump hid documents in her casket. A few of those demands, I should note, may have started off as jokes. The problem with the internet, however, is that a gag can quickly take on a life of its own. In 2017, for example, the Guardian’s Marina Hyde joked on Twitter that Melania Trump had a body double: the impersonator did all the tedious work of being married to Donald while the real Melania flitted around having fun. This theory then got aired on Sky News and Good Morning Britain.Jokes are more likely to take on lives of their own when they are somewhat plausible. Perhaps the wildest thing about the bonkers theory that a former US president hid classified documents in a coffin supposedly containing his first wife whom he buried on his golf course, is that you can see how people could believe it. Trump, after all, had unorthodox ways of getting rid of documents. According to the New York Times correspondent Maggie Haberman, he sometimes blocked the White House drains by flushing documents down the toilet. (Photographic evidence of this was recently published). “It was an extension of Trump’s term-long habit of ripping up documents that were supposed to be preserved under the Presidential Records Act,” Haberman wrote. A commode one day, a coffin the next? You can see how people might believe that is what happened.Let me be clear, though, that is obviously not what happened. #Casketgate should serve as a reminder that it’s not just the right that is responsible for spreading online misinformation; liberals are also to blame. I am as fond as the next person of speculating about the dysfunctional Trump family, but when you start demanding that graves be dug up, it’s a sign that things may have gone a little too far.TopicsDonald TrumpOpinionUS politicscommentReuse this content More

  • in

    Taking Back Trump’s America review: Peter Navarro’s venomous Maga saga

    Taking Back Trump’s America review: Peter Navarro’s venomous Maga sagaSeeking to raise money to fight contempt of Congress charges, the former trade adviser shows contempt for his rivals Peter Navarro’s new book won’t win him many new friends. For just one example of the former Trump trade adviser’s frequently, uh, pungent turns of phrase, he compares Jared Kushner to human excrement.The Divider review: riveting narrative of Trump’s plot against AmericaRead moreNor does his disdain for the aspirant dauphin end there. Kushner, Navarro writes, is “nothing if more than a young and rich, run-of-the-mill liberal New York Democrat-cum-slum lord”.In November, Navarro will go on trial for contempt of Congress. He refused to cooperate with the January 6 committee. If convicted, he faces up to two years in prison. On that note, his new book is both a not-so-subtle jab at the Department of Justice under Merrick Garland and a vehicle for crowdsourcing his criminal defense.“Help finance legal effort AND put Trump back in” the White House, Navarro tweeted in June. “Order Taking Back Trump’s America today.” This month, he passed the plate again: “Buy the book today! We need our country back from these stooges and oppressors.”Pro-Trump Trump books, however, are often full of inadvertent self-owns. Thanks to the work of other authors, we know Trump didn’t like aides who took notes, once berating Donald McGahn, his White House counsel, for such a misstep. And yet here comes Navarro, eager to tell the reader he kept lots of notes himself.Page 240 contains a 25 June 2020 journal entry about a meeting of major donors who wanted “Kushner and Brad Parscale out the door” of the Trump campaign. Trump agreed but, Navarro writes, didn’t want to sack his son-in-law himself. One of the donors tried to do it – and failed.Showing his notes, Navarro adds to a pile of evidence that Trump, the supposedly ruthless titan who fired people on TV, actually doesn’t dare fire people. Whoops. Just as well the boss doesn’t read.On the one hand, Taking Back Trump’s America is a hurriedly written laundry list of Navarro’s many grievances. On the other hand, it is rollicking and filled with venom.Navarro has substance, holding a Harvard PhD in economics and having taught at UC Irvine. But intellectual firepower should not be conflated with prudence or restraint. In the past, Navarro has liberally quoted a China expert who turned out not to exist, other than as an anagram of Navarro’s own name.Between 1992 and 2001, Navarro mounted five campaigns for public office – each one unsuccessful. As a candidate, he derided Republicans for being wedded to “every man for himself” and argued that America “ought to progressively tax the rich to help everybody else”. Time passed. Positions shifted.But Navarro is still a bomb-thrower. In his new book, Steve Mnuchin, Trump’s treasury secretary, Gary Cohn, Trump’s first economic adviser, and Mark Meadows, Trump’s last chief of staff, all get it in the neck.Navarro recalls an argument in the Oval Office with Mnuchin over China policy. The words “Neville Chamberlain” and “Nazis” appear. Mnuchin is Jewish.Navarro quotes himself: “Hey, Neville, knowing what you know about what the Nazis did to the Jews, how is it that you don’t give a flying puck” – bowdlerization the author’s own – “about what the Chinese communists are doing to two million Uyghurs in the concentration camps of Xinjiang Province … What do you say about that, Stevie?”What does Navarro say about Trump’s adoration for Robert E Lee, Trump’s both-sides-ism over the neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville or even Trump reportedly having kept Hitler’s speeches on his nightstand? Nothing.Navarro also advises us that his “favorite Roger Ailes quote” is “Truth is whatever people believe”. As Navarro’s book comes out, Fox News is being sued for billions, for hyping nonsense about voting machines and election interference. Elsewhere, even Trump’s lawyers are lawyering up.Back to Kushner. Purportedly, Navarro came to Trumpworld via the boss’s son-in-law. If so, he demonstrates a marked gratitude deficit. He has even suggested Kushner faked a cancer diagnosis to help sell his own memoir, Breaking History.“That thyroid thing, that came out of nowhere,” Navarro shared. “I saw the guy every day. There’s no sign that he was in any pain or danger or whatever. I think it’s just sympathy to try to sell his book now.”Navarro’s renderings of Trump White House politics do make for engrossing reading. He writes that Kushner told him he wanted to “crush [Steve] Bannon like a bug” – and that Trump resented Bannon, his former campaign manager and White House strategist, for taking “too much credit for the 2016 win”.And yet, when writing about that abortive coup against Kushner during the 2020 campaign, Navarro says the plotters wanted to replace Kushner with … yes, you guessed it, Bannon.Navarro chooses not to examine the fact that had the coup succeeded, the campaign would have confronted a different set of problems. In August 2020, Bannon was arrested and charged with fraud. He denied it, took a pardon from Trump and now faces similar charges in New York state. He has pleaded not guilty again.Servants of the Damned review: Trump and the giant law firm he actually paidRead moreLegal jeopardy is in Trumpworld’s DNA. Ty Cobb, a White House lawyer during the Russia investigation, points out that it comes from the top down.Speaking after the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago, seeking confidential documents, Cobb said: “I think the president is in serious legal water, not so much because of the search, but because of the obstructive activity he took in connection with the January 6 proceeding. That was the first time in American history that a president unconstitutionally attempted to remain in power illegally.”Navarro can inveigh against Garland and the DoJ all he wants. His book does not alter a fundamental reality. His trial is set for 17 November – just in time for Thanksgiving.
    Taking Back Trump’s America: Why We Lost the White House and How We’ll Win It Back, is published in the US by Post Hill Press
    TopicsBooksTrump administrationUS politicsDonald TrumpJared KushnerRepublicansPolitics booksreviewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Kenneth Starr obituary

    Kenneth Starr obituaryAmerican lawyer whose 1998 Starr report led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton Kenneth Starr, who has died aged 76 after complications from surgery, was the independent prosecutor whose investigation of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s investment in a real-estate project called Whitewater began in somewhat pious partisanship and descended into prurience. It led to President Clinton’s impeachment for perjury based on his lying about his relationship with a White House aide, Monica Lewinsky.The Clinton impeachment was an American watershed. Following the OJ Simpson trial of the mid-1990s, it established scandal as the fuel that powered television news, but more importantly it pointed the way to use congressional investigation in order to disrupt a presidency, a tactic followed repeatedly against the Barack Obama administration, including six House investigations, lasting more than two years, of the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, over the assault on the US embassy in Benghazi, Libya.His proteges, including the supreme court chief justice, John Roberts, and justice Brett Kavanaugh, Starr’s key Whitewater aide, spoke highly of him following his death. His career was inexorably bound to sex scandals, starting with his 1993 review of the Republican Senator Bob Packwood’s diaries in Senate ethics committee hearings over accusations of sexual abuse and assault.As part of Jeffrey Epstein’s legal team, Starr crucially lobbied federal authorities to drop their sex-trafficking prosecution and allow Epstein to plead guilty, in 2008, to lesser state charges with a far lighter sentence in Florida.Towards the end of his career, in 2016, Starr was forced to step down as president of Baylor University over that institution’s failure to pursue rape charges against football players.And while supporters rejected accusations of partisan hypocrisy, the man whose Whitewater mantra was “there’s no excuse for perjury – never, never, never. There is truth and the truth demands respect,” wound up defending the then president Donald Trump during his first impeachment trial, in 2020, having already, as an analyst on Fox News, advised that Trump’s impeachment would be “bad for the country”.Starr’s Washington career had its roots in his religious upbringing. Born in Vernon, Texas, he grew up in small towns in the state’s panhandle where his father, Willie D Starr, was a barber and sometime minister in the Churches of Christ; his mother, Vannie (nee Trimble), was a homemaker. They moved to San Antonio, where Kenneth was voted “most likely to succeed” in his high school.Following two years at what is now Harding University in Arkansas, he transferred to George Washington University in DC, graduating in 1968 with a BA in history. In 1970 he took a master’s in political science at Brown University, Rhode Island, and married Alice Mendell, who worked in public relations, before getting his law degree from Duke University, North Carolina, in 1973.After working as a clerk for the supreme court chief justice Warren Burger, in 1977 Starr joined the law firm Gibson Dunn. He went on in 1981 to become chief of staff to William French Smith, Ronald Reagan’s attorney general; two years later Reagan appointed Starr to the US court of appeals for the district of Columbia.In 1989 Starr left the bench to become George HW Bush’s solicitor general; Roberts was his assistant. The following year Bush considered Starr for a place on the supreme court, but Republicans in Congress feared Starr was not conservative enough. Ironically, Bush’s appointee, David Souter, turned out to be far less conservative than they had hoped. Two years later, Starr’s review of Packwood’s diaries convinced the ethics committee chair, Mitch McConnell, of Starr’s deft conservativism.So, when the original Whitewater independent counsel, Robert B Fiske, issued his interim report clearing the Clintons of fraud and of any involvement in the suicide of the White House lawyer Vince Foster, Fiske was ousted and, in August 1994, Starr appointed.By 1997, despite plea bargains and imprisoning witnesses who refused to implicate the Clintons, Starr had done little but endorse Fiske’s findings about Foster. He wanted to leave and become dean of public policy at Pepperdine College, but was convinced to stay until the 1998 elections.In January 1998, Clinton gave a deposition in a civil suit for sexual harassment filed by Paula Jones, saying he had never had a workplace affair; one of the women included in his denial was a White House staffer named Monica Lewinsky.Ken Starr: ‘There are eerie echoes of the past’Read moreTwo days later, Starr, who had advised Jones’s lawyers, was given tapes made secretly of Lewinsky admitting her affair with Clinton. This led to the orgy of coverage about semen-stained dresses and inserted cigars, as Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony set up a perjury trap for Clinton sprung by Kavanaugh, who aimed “to make his pattern of revolting behaviour clear, piece by painful piece”.As the case grew steamier, Kenneth Starr was rebranded “Ken” in the media, in an effort to make his shock more like an average Joe’s. Clinton was forced to answer a series of graphically explicit questions about the details of his relationship with Lewinsky. The House duly impeached, but the Senate acquitted Clinton. Starr rejoined the corporate law firm Kirkwood and Ellis, best known for defending the tobacco group Brown & Williamson.In 2004 he finally went to Pepperdine, as dean of the law school. In later cases he argued for Blackwater mercenaries accused of murdering civilians in Iraq, claiming they had “constitutional immunity”, and against California’s legalisation of gay marriage.He became president of Baylor, in Waco, Texas, in 2010, and chancellor in 2013. Although at least 17 women had accused football players of rape since he became president, he claimed during an investigation that “never was it brought to my attention there were issues”.He was found to have mishandled the accusations of sexual assault against members of the football team and removed as president in 2016; he then resigned as chancellor and as a professor of law.In his 2018 memoir, Contempt, Starr wrote: “I deeply regret that I took on the Lewinsky phase of the investigation, but there was no practical alternative.”He is survived by Alice, their son, Randall, and two daughters, Carolyn and Cynthia, and by a sister, Billie Jeayne, and a brother, Jerry.TopicsUS newsBill ClintonHillary ClintonMonica LewinskyOJ SimpsonBrett KavanaughJeffrey EpsteinobituariesReuse this content More

  • in

    Trump embraces QAnon at rally by playing music similar to its anthem

    Trump embraces QAnon at rally by playing music similar to its anthemEx-president’s team insists it is a royalty-free tune but to many it is nearly identical to the extremist conspiracy group’s adopted song Donald Trump made one of his highest-profile embraces to date of the extremist conspiracy group QAnon at a political rally in Ohio on Saturday, making the apparently deliberate choice to play music that is virtually indistinguishable from the cult organization’s adopted anthem.Dozens of the former president’s supporters in Youngstown engaged in raised-arm salutes as Trump delivered a fiery address to the background of a song his team insisted was a royalty-free tune from the internet, but to many ears it was nearly identical to the 2020 instrumental track Wwg1wga.Wwg1wga’s title reflects the QAnon slogan “where we go one, we go all”, adopted by members of the antisemitic group who have convinced themselves that Trump is a messianic figure who is single-handedly battling the dark, pedophilic forces of satanism and who will return to the White House in glory having vanquished his enemies.It was arguably the most visible display to date of Trump’s growing alignment to the far-right group, whose principles were championed by many in the violent mob of his supporters who overran the Capitol during the 6 January insurrection.A joint report by the FBI and the homeland security department last year warned that QAnon members posed a significant threat of more violence, particularly because of growing disillusionment in unfulfilled predictions that Joe Biden would be removed from office.Political observers were quick to react. The liberal commentator Keith Olbermann posted a tweet with side-by-side photographs of Trump’s supporters saluting him in Ohio and followers of Adolf Hitler at a Nazi rally in the 1930s.“We must face the reality. We must use the real words. After Saturday’s rally, the modified Sieg Heil, the music, the QAnon madness … Trump IS America’s Hitler,” he wrote in another post.University of Chicago political science professor Robert Pape told CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday that the development was “extremely disturbing”.“What it means is that the former president is willing to court not just supporters of his, but those who support violence for his goals, number one of which is being restored to the White House,” he said.“If it’s just a political threat, well, then we can have elections. But once it’s not just denying an election, but using violence as the response to an election denial, now we’re in a new game.”QAnon adherents believe that a cabal of Satan-worshipping Democrats, Hollywood celebrities and billionaires runs the world while engaging in pedophilia, human trafficking and the harvesting of a supposedly life-extending chemical from the blood of abused children.Trump has previously embraced the group and its baseless theories, having frequently retweeted posts that related to or supported QAnon while he was president, and before he was permanently removed from the social media platform Twitter.The trend has continued since he left office in January 2021 and set up his own failing network Truth Social.He posted an image of himself last week wearing a Q pin on his lapel, according to the New York Times, under the phrase, “The storm is coming.” Followers believe the storm is a maelstrom that will culminate in Trump’s restoration to the presidency after his political enemies have been conquered and then executed on live television.The Guardian’s 2020 explainer on QAnon also details the antisemitic pillars on which the cult is built. The idea of the all-powerful, world-ruling cabal comes straight out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a fake document purporting to expose a Jewish plot to control the world that was used throughout the 20th century to justify antisemitism.In Youngstown, Ohio, at a rally ostensibly supporting the Republican Senate candidate JD Vance, but which looked more like a campaign event for the White House run in 2024 that Trump has repeatedly teased, supporters saluted the former president as they appeared to recognize the track being played.They raised their arms and pointed a finger into the air, signifying the “one” denoted in the Wwg1wga title.Trump had used the music last month in a post to Truth Social as a background to clips of him decrying the state of the nation under the Biden administration.Media Matters, a left-leaning online platform, said at the time it analyzed the video using Google Assistant and Apple’s Shazam, with both indicating the song featured was Wwg1wga by the artist Richard Feelgood on Spotify.According to the Times, after the Ohio rally, Trump’s spokesperson, Taylor Budowich, was incredulous that anybody could think it was QAnon’s adopted anthem being broadcast and insisted the music was a song called Mirrors by the American composer Will Van De Crommert.“The fake news, in a pathetic attempt to create controversy and divide America, is brewing up another conspiracy about a royalty-free song from a popular audio library platform,” he said.Two separate linguistic studies have determined that Paul Furber, a South African software developer, was behind Q’s early posts, before Ron Watkins took over the account in 2018.Watkins’s father, Jim Watkins, owns the 8kun site – previously called 8chan – where Q posted, and Ron Watkins is a former administrator of the platform.Ron Watkins ran for a congressional seat in Arizona earlier this year but finished last in a seven-candidate Republican primary, drawing fewer than 3,000 of the nearly 80,000 votes cast.TopicsDonald TrumpQAnonUS politicsOhionewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Liz Cheney and Zoe Lofgren to propose bill to stop another January 6 attack

    Liz Cheney and Zoe Lofgren to propose bill to stop another January 6 attackBill aims to guarantee that ‘Congress can’t overturn an election result’ Two members of the US congressional committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack have revealed details of a bill proposing to block any other attempt to coerce the House and the Senate “to steal a presidential election”.On Sunday, House members Liz Cheney and Zoe Lofgren wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal outlining reforms to the Electoral Count Act that they said would ensure “Congress can’t overturn an election result”, which is what those who staged the Capitol attack in early 2021 wanted.“It’s past time”, added Cheney – a Republican from Wyoming – and Lofgren, a California Democrat.They cited how a number of people seeking political office in November’s midterm elections, including those who would oversee the electoral process, have embraced lies from former president Donald Trump that fraudsters stole the election from him against Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential race. Those lies inspired Trump’s supporters to mount the Capitol attack in a desperate plot to prevent the House and Senate from certifying the former Republican president’s electoral college loss to his Democratic rival.“This raises the prospect of another effort to steal a presidential election, perhaps with another attempt to corrupt Congress’s proceeding to tally electoral college votes,” the piece from Cheney and Lofgren said.One of the changes which the two congresswomen propose to the Electoral Count Act – first passed in 1887 – is to make clear that a vice-president who ceremonially presides over the Senate lacks any “authority or discretion” to reject a race’s result or delay its certification.That measure is a direct response to Trump’s long-held insistence that his vice-president, Mike Pence, could have single-handedly stopped Congress’s certification of his defeat. Pence – who Trump’s supporters wanted to hang on the day of the attack – has correctly noted that he had no constitutional or legal authority to do that.Additionally, Cheney and Lofgren said they wanted to empower presidential candidates to sue any local-level officials who try to hold up sending election results to Congress for certification. And the pair wanted to limit the grounds on which members of Congress can protest against slates of electors, requiring one-third approval from both chambers for any objections to be considered and a majority to be sustained.Cheney and Lofgren said their proposal “intended to preserve the rule of law for all future presidential elections by ensuring that self-interested politicians cannot steal from the people the guarantee that our government derives its power from the consent of the governed”.The duo’s bill, which they expect to formally introduce this week, could be considered in the House in the coming days, according to the chamber’s Democratic majority leader, Steny Hoyer of Maryland.The Senate, for its part, is engaged in government funding negotiations as a 30 September deadline approaches.The bipartisan committee to which Cheney and Lofgren belong held a series of public hearings earlier this year pressing the case that Trump appears to have violated federal law, among other alleged misdeeds, when he ignored pleas to take action that would have halted his supporters’ assault on the Capitol. The Capitol attack investigation panel has also explored the potential roles that Trump and his advisers had in advance of the January 6 assault.Meanwhile, in August, FBI agents searched Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida after the bureau said it found evidence that the defeated former president was improperly retaining government secrets there without authorization.Cheney’s work on the January 6 committee – and her general opposition to Trump’s lies about his defeat to Biden – carried a steep political cost for her. She was denied another term in Congress after losing a Republican primary election in August to Harriet Hageman, who has echoed Trump’s falsehoods about the outcome of the 2020 presidential race.In June, Lofgren won her party primary and is set to face Republican challenger Peter Hernandez during the 8 November midterm elections.TopicsUS newsUS politicsLiz CheneyUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Servants of the Damned review: Trump and the giant law firm he actually paid

    Servants of the Damned review: Trump and the giant law firm he actually paidDavid Enrich delivers a withering study of how big law got into bed with the 45th president – Jones Day in particular Donald Trump stiffed his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to the tune of $2.5m. He refused to grant him a pardon. The former New York City mayor is a target of prosecutors in Fulton county, Georgia. Then again, as David Enrich of the New York Times writes in his new book, by the time Trump entered politics his “reputation for shortchanging his lawyers (and banks and contractors and customers) was well known”. Giuliani can’t say he wasn’t warned.The Divider review: riveting narrative of Trump’s plot against AmericaRead moreIn Servants of the Damned, Enrich also recounts how Trump once attempted to settle a bill for nearly $2m.“This isn’t the 1800s … You can’t pay me with a horse,” the unnamed lawyer replied.Trump eventually coughed up. It was that or another lawsuit.Enrich is the Times’ investigative editor. Dark Towers, his previous book, examined Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank. It also laid out the ties that bound Anthony Kennedy, the retired supreme court justice, to the Trump family. Kennedy’s son once worked at the bank. Brett Kavanaugh, who replaced Kennedy on the court, once clerked for the judge.Servants of the Damned is informative and disturbing. In an unflattering portrait of the rise of big law, behemoth firms that reach around the globe, Enrich homes in on Jones Day. He tags other powerhouses – Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps and Baker McKenzie – for moral failures but repeatedly returns his gaze to the Cleveland-based Jones Day. It represented Trump.Whether the intensity of Enrich’s disdain is deserved is debatable. The public holds lawyers in lower esteem than auto mechanics, nursing home operators, bankers and local politicians. On the other hand, lawyers fare better than reporters. Beyond that, the bar’s canons demand that lawyers zealously represent their clients. Reputational concern and the ease or difficulty of recruiting fresh talent and clients are often more potent restraints than finger-wagging.Beginning in 2015, Jones Day was the Trump campaign’s outside counsel – which Enrich treats as an indelible stain. Almost six years later, he writes, the roof of Jones Day’s Washington office provided “a splendid view of a violent mob storming the Capitol”.The insurrection, Enrich says, was the “predictable culmination of a president whom Jones Day had helped elect, an administration the firm’s lawyers had helped run, and an election whose integrity the firm had helped erode”.Jones Day was not Trump’s post-election counsel, but Enrich assigns culpability. In the aftermath of the 2020 vote, one Trump White House insider lamented to the Guardian that Jones Day wrongly distanced itself from Trump’s efforts to overturn his defeat. The campaign paid Jones Day millions. Gratitude and support, the insider said, were in order.Jones Day lawyers marbled the administration. Don McGahn, a partner and a pillar of the conservative bar, was Trump’s first White House counsel. Trump made Noel Francisco solicitor general. Eric Dreiband led the civil rights division at the Department of Justice. All three are back at Jones Day. The revolving door is real.McGahn played a critical role in filling the federal bench with conservative judges who had Federalist Society approval. He presided over a revolution, of sorts. Roe v Wade, the supreme court ruling that guaranteed the right to abortion, lies in tatters.But when McGahn refused to cross the proverbial line during the Russia investigation, Trump soured on him. McGahn made and kept notes – to Trump’s consternation. McGahn quit in fall 2018. The following spring, Trump tweeted: “McGahn had a much better chance of being fired than [Robert] Mueller. Never a big fan!”Enrich also sheds light on the unrest Trump caused within Jones Day, particularly among lawyers who identified as mainstream Republicans. In 2014, Ben Ginsberg and McGahn arrived from another DC law firm. Ginsberg possessed sterling GOP credentials. He had worked at the apex of George W Bush and Mitt Romney’s White House campaigns. Enrich describes his office as “a shrine to the old Republican party”.But in the 2020 cycle, Ginsberg grew discomforted by the direction of Trump’s re-election bid. He called the president’s rhetoric “beyond the pale”. In late August, he resigned. Days later, he wrote a brutal column in the Washington Post, attacking Trump for pushing the lie of widespread election fraud and rubbishing mail-in voting.“The president’s rhetoric,” he said, “has put my party in the position of a firefighter who deliberately sets fires to look like a hero putting them out.” Republicans “risk harming the fundamental principle of our democracy: that all eligible voters must be allowed to cast their ballots. If that happens, Americans will deservedly render the GOP a minority party for a long, long time.”Days before the election, Ginsberg warned that his party was “destroying itself on the altar of Trump”.Holding the Line review: Geoffrey Berman blasts Barr and dumps TrumpRead moreThen there was Donald Ayer, deputy solicitor general in the Reagan administration and deputy attorney general under George HW Bush. After a clash with Dick Thornburgh, then attorney general, Ayer resigned. Bill Barr was his replacement. Ayer returned to Jones Day. In fall 2016, Ayer publicly voiced his opposition to Trump. In 2018, he retired. Before Joe Biden’s inauguration in 2021, Ayer told Enrich Jones Day “should have gotten off the wagon, because [Trump] is a scoundrel”.But in 2020, according to Open Secrets, the firm netted more than $19.2m in reported federal campaign spending. Trump was a golden ticket.Jones Day has emerged as a “go-to firm for Republicans, mainstream and fringe alike”, as Enrich puts it. With sneakers, vodka and computers, branding matters. Law firms are a little different. Through that lens, Servants of the Damned is as much a rebuke of one large firm as it is an indictment of Trump’s Republican party.
    Servants of the Damned: Giant Law Firms, Donald Trump, and the Corruption of Justice is published in the US by HarperCollins
    TopicsBooksLaw (US)Politics booksUS politicsTrump administrationDonald TrumpRepublicansreviewsReuse this content More