More stories

  • in

    Donald Trump kept boxes with US nuclear program documents and foreign weapons details, indictment says – live

    From 4h agoThe indictment reads that Trump stored in his boxes “information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack, and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack”.It goes on:
    The unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military, and human sources and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods.
    A lawyer for the Republican congressman and serial fabulist, George Santos, has said that the co-signers on a $500,000 bail package connected to Santos’ federal indictment are members of his family.In a letter to a New York judge, attorney Joseph Murray appealed an order this week to reveal the identities of three people who guaranteed Santos’ $500,000 bond on fraud charges.Murray wrote:
    Defendant has essentially publicly revealed that the suretors are family members and not lobbyists, donors or others seeking to exert influence over the defendant.
    At his arraignment in Long Island last month, Santos, 34, pleaded not guilty to multiple charges of fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and making false statements.The New York Times sought the identification of Santos’s bail guarantors, arguing they should be identified as they had a chance to exert political influence over a congressman. Other news outlets joined the Times in its effort.In news not related to Donald Trump but involving one of his supporters, Markus Maly of Virginia received a six-year prison sentence for his role in the January 6 attack on Congress, federal prosecutors announced Friday.A grand jury had previously found Maly, 49, guilty of interfering with police during a civil disorder, resisting or impeding officers using a dangerous weapon as well as entering and remaining in a restricted building while armed, among other charges, prosecutors said.Authorities established that Maly joined a mob of Trump supporters who rioted at the Capitol on the day Congress convened to certify the former president’s defeat to Joe Biden in the 2020 election.He was convicted of spraying a chemical irritant at a line of police officers who were defending the Capitol’s lower west terrace. In addition to serving time in prison, Maly must also spend three years under supervision after his release, prosecutors said.His co-defendants Jeffrey Scott Brown and Peter Schwartz were also found guilty of roles in the case. Schwartz later received a 14-year prison sentence. And Brown was given a prison sentence of four years.Maly raised more than $16,000 in funds for his defense from an online campaign that described him as a January 6 prisoner of war, the Associated Press had reported earlier. Prosecutors sought to take that money back in the form of a fine, arguing that Maly had a public defender and did not owe any legal fees.But neither court records nor prosecutors’ announcement about Maly’s sentence mentioned a fine for him as part of his sentence.Maly is among more than 1,000 people to be charged in connection with the January 6 attack, according to prosecutors. Numerous defendants have been convicted and sentenced to prison.Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer and House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries, the two top Democrats in the Congress, have released a joint statement calling for the indictment to “play out through the legal process, without any outside political or ideological interference”.The statement reads:
    No one is above the law – including Donald Trump.
    It goes on to say:
    We encourage Mr Trump’s supporters and critics alike to let this case proceed peacefully in court.
    The US secret service is preparing for Donald Trump’s appearance at a federal court in Miami on Tuesday, but the agency “will not seek any special accommodations outside of what would be required to ensure the former Presidents continued safety”, according to spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi.A statement by Guglielmi reads:
    As with any site visited by a protectee, the Secret Service is in constant coordination with the necessary entities to ensure protective requirements are met,
    He added:
    We have the utmost confidence in the professionalism and commitment to security shared by our law enforcement partners in Florida.
    Trump is expected to surrender himself to authorities in Miami on Tuesday at 3pm ET.Donald Trump took classified documents including information on nuclear weapons in the US and secret plans to attack a foreign country, according to a 49-page federal indictment unsealed Friday afternoon.The former US president, alongside a military valet, now faces a sweeping 37-count felony indictment related to the mishandling of classified documents.Here are five of the most shocking revelations in the indictment, according to my colleague Maya Yang.We have a clip of the statement by Jack Smith, the US justice department special counsel who filed charges against Donald Trump.In a short address earlier today, Smith said his team would seek “a speedy trial” after the department unsealed a 37-count indictment against the former president.Donald Trump ally, Republican Arizona representative Andy Biggs responded to Trump’s indictment from the justice department by saying that “we have no reached a war phase.”Biggs, who previously spoke out against Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg over Trump’s indictment in March, went on to add:
    Eye for an eye.
    John Bolton, Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, has reacted to his former boss’s indictment, calling for his immediate withdrawal as a presidential candidate.With Donald Trump being the first US president to be federally indicted, what will come next? Will he go to prison? What are other Republicans, including his presidential contenders such as Florida governor Ron DeSantis, saying?The Guardian’s David Smith reports: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 raises 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. The 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.”For the full story, click here:Here are some of the images coming out Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort where he has been accused of possessing classified documents: More

  • in

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

    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

  • in

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

    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

  • in

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

    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

  • in

    Digested week: A beer with Mike Pence to figure out what his deal is? Possibly …

    MondayIn a reversal of the who-would-you-most-like-to-have-a-drink-with test, candidates declaring for the Republican presidential race this week presented as so singularly unappetising as to beg the question who among them would you leave the bar to avoid? Trump is not, weirdly, at the top of this list, since when he cares to use it one knows his charm is considerable. Mike Pence, who declared his candidacy on Monday and remains enduringly weird, would definitely break the top three, although a small part of me would like to take a crack, over a beer, at figuring out what his deal is. The former vice-president and evangelical Christian’s very clenched personality and eagerness to be photographed at the weekend in leathers on a Harley-Davidson, is suggestive of a range of possibilities.Also throwing his hat into the ring this week is Chris Christie, the former governor of New Jersey and, for my money, the least appealing candidate in the current Republican lineup, even taking into account Ron DeSantis. Christie, you may remember, was for a hot minute in 2016 spoken of as a credible centrist Republican before everyone remembered who he was. (My favourite Christie story is the one from 2017 when he was snapped from a news helicopter enjoying a deserted beach with his family during a state-wide shutdown when the beaches were closed.) In the years since, he has flip-flopped between craven appeasement and condemnation of Trump and is now running – hollow laugh – as a moral standard-bearer on the strength of his objection to the events surrounding the storming of the US Capitol on January 6.Other candidates in the race include the requisite comedy multimillionaire who has never held office – in this case, the former pharmaceutical company CEO Vivek Ramaswamy whose manifesto seems to be the single word “anti-woke” – and a lone woman, Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina. Described by the former CNN host Don Lemon earlier this year as a woman who “isn’t in her prime”, Haley, at 51, is among the youngest of the candidates. There are reasons to dislike Haley (“America is not racist”) as strong as any triggered by the rest of the field, but assuredly, that isn’t one of them.TuesdayAs hot takes continue to fly around in the wake of Hannah Gadsby’s “disastrous” (ARTnews), “silly” (New York Times) curated exhibition about Picasso at the Brooklyn Museum, let’s turn instead to Françoise Gilot, whose death at the age of 101 was announced on Tuesday. Gilot was an artist, an icon in her own right and – there’s no avoiding her connection to the man, although it was the source of career-long irritation to her – the only one of Picasso’s lovers ever to walk out on him. I met her a few years ago in her apartment on the Upper West Side where she presented with the kind of fanatical chic only French women of a certain age can pull off. She wasn’t interested in false modesty. “I was considered astonishingly good,” she said of herself as a young artist. And she wasn’t sentimental about the past. “I have to admit,” she told me, “that I was never so much in love with anyone that I could not consider my own plan as interesting.” When I asked if leaving Picasso had been a liberating experience, she looked at me as if I was mad. “No, because I was not a prisoner. I’d been there of my own will and I left of my own will. That’s what I told him once, before I left. I said watch out, because I came when I wanted to, but I will leave when I want. He said, nobody leaves a man like me.” She smiled and the thrill of that moment, 70 years later, disturbed the air in the room. “I said, we’ll see.”WednesdayThe school field trip to Staten Island is cancelled because of air quality in New York, a decision parents bemoan in the morning and revisit at lunchtime when the sky darkens to a Martian glow. The air is nicotine yellow; the sun is an eery orange disc; the cars have their headlights on at midday. While Californians fold their arms and say to New Yorkers “We told you”, people in the city re-mask and shut the windows. Outside my apartment, it smells as if there is a five-alarm fire a block away.The fires burning in Canada cover an area 10 times larger than is usual for this time of year and Kathy Hochul, the governor of New York, describes the smoke across the state as “an emergency crisis”, while New Yorkers describe it, variously, as smelling like “a barbecue”, “cigars”, and “9/11”. It smells to me like cigarette smoke, carried 500 miles down wind by an area of low pressure and bringing a forecast to terrify us all.ThursdayThe spectacle of Harry in court this week makes one wince for the gap between what he might hope his appearance will achieve and how things in reality are likely to play out. I don’t mean in terms of judgment, exactly, but as John Crace wrote this week, the court system is an imprecise mechanism for the deliverance of closure and it is more likely to aggravate than soothe your unease. As ever with Harry, one understands that while the Mirror group is the main target of his ire, there is a family dynamic playing out, too. The 38-year-old prince must know how unbearable his father will find the breach of protocol inherent in his appearance in court, not to mention the implied criticism that while the king did nothing, Harry is the only one in the family with the mettle to take on the tabloids. And the corrupt you-asked-for-it logic of justifying the way he was hounded on the basis that he still seeks publicity seems likely to trail him until he retires to Gloucestershire and is never heard of again.FridayDrew Barrymore on the cover of New York magazine this week exhibits a style of celebrity that seems to date back to Lucille Ball. Barrymore, at 48, has a daytime chatshow in the US in which she giggles and sits on her legs and drops her jaw when someone says something mildly diverting, and empathises so busily with her guests that at times she looks in danger of exploding. (This style is described, by the magazine, as “radically intimate” and involves a lot of “manifesting” of “precepts”.) I urge you to look up her recent interview with the actor Melanie Lynskey, during the course of which Barrymore seizes on the alcoholism of Jason Ritter, Lynskey’s husband, with the avidity of a shark happening upon a seal. I would pay good money to see her apply that unruly energy to the field of Republican candidates for president. More

  • in

    Texas Republicans turn on their own in attorney general impeachment scandal

    Everything is bigger in Texas, including the drama unfolding within the chambers of its government.The impeachment of Texas attorney general Ken Paxton came as a shock to many, not just because of the nature of his alleged crimes, but because it is a rare instance of the party holding its own to account.William Flores, a political and social science professor at the University of Houston-Downtown called the situation “absolutely historic.”“This is a Republican-led impeachment against one of the highest Republican leaders in the state. It is absolutely unprecedented, at least in recent times,” Flores said.The Republican-majority Texas congress had largely remained silent on Paxton’s ethically questionable conduct that dates back before his first term in 2014, when the Texas state securities board fined him for violating financial laws.In 2020, things heated up when aides from his own office asked the FBI to investigate him. They alleged Paxton abused his power by accepting bribes in the form of donations from a real estate developer. They also claimed Paxton recommended that a wealthy donor to his campaign hire a woman with whom he was having an affair.When Paxton fired the staff members, they claimed he was unlawfully retaliating.In May, the house general investigating committee, composed of four Republicans and one Democrat, voted unanimously to recommend Paxton’s impeachment. Twenty articles of impeachment were brought against him.It’s not surprising for politicians to be embroiled in a scandal, but it is unusual for Texas Republicans, who usually remain in lockstep, to eat their own.Paxton belongs to the most extreme wing of his party. He is the architect of some of the most severe voting restrictions imposed on the state, such as preventing most mail-in ballots and disbanding drive-through voting, two methods counties have tried to implement to make voting widely accessible. He established an “election integrity” division in his office that dedicates tens of thousands of hours to investigating voter fraud cases, despite no evidence that it is a widespread problem.More recently, Paxton launched an investigation into Austin’s Dell children’s hospital for the gender-affirming care it provided, which led to the swift departure of doctors from its adolescent unit, disrupting treatment not just for transitioning teens, but also those with cancer and eating disorders. He is now pursuing a similar investigation into the Texas children’s hospital, the largest such facility in the country.He also stands in staunch opposition to reproductive choice and federal immigration policy, and in firm support of gun rights despite the string of school mass shootings his state has suffered.In 2022, faced with a subpoena to testify in a lawsuit filed by abortion advocacy organizations at his doorstep, Paxton fled in a truck driven by his state senator wife, Angela Paxton.Animosity towards Paxton culminated when he tried earlier this year to use state funds to pay a legal settlement of over $3m to the former office members who blew the whistle on their boss’s dealings.In order to use taxpayer dollars to pay legal fees for an elected official, the state legislature needs to give approval. But obtaining that approval was not as simple as Paxton might have hoped.If there’s one thing that can be counted on in tax-averse Texas, it’s less spending and limited government. And that extends to the Republicans in charge.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHouse members Andrew Murr and Ann Johnson are some of the Republicans who drafted the articles of impeachment against Paxton, but also the two that serve on the far-right Texas Freedom Caucus.David Spiller, a Republican who also serves on the general investigation committee, began a statement with praise for the attorney general’s “brilliant legal mind” but said: “I have a duty and obligation to protect the citizens of Texas from elected officials who abuse their office and their powers for personal gain. I cannot be complicit in condoning the improper actions of Attorney General Paxton. I cannot ignore it and pretend it didn’t happen.”Even more atypical is the infighting now seen among party members. Hours before the investigation into Paxton was announced, Paxton called for the resignation of Republican house speaker Dade Phelan, whom he accused of drunken behavior while serving in office. Phelan’s retort was presented through his spokesperson, who called Paxton’s move “a last-ditch effort to save face”.Abbott remains silent on the impeachment of his attorney general and the fault lines emerging within his party. The state’s lieutenant governor, Dan Patrick, offered a milquetoast statement which was neither informative nor indicative of where he stood.However, Donald Trump weighed in on the drama on the Truth Social social media platform in defense of Paxton.Trump wrote: “The Rino Speaker of the House of Texas, Dade Phelan, who is barely a Republican at all and failed the test on voter integrity, wants to impeach one of the most hard working and effective Attorney Generals in the United States, Ken Paxton, who just won re-election with a large number of American Patriots strongly voting for him.”Although the spectacle has shaken up the party, Flores said not much will change within the state’s Republican party regardless of if Paxton gets ousted or not.“The red meat kind of issues that go to the core and are very popular not only in the state of Texas, but with conservatives – it’s a national playbook,” Flores said. “Texas is filled with with contradictions, but the conservatives are pretty unified around conservative issues.”Now, a senate trial will be held no later than 28 August. A two-thirds majority is needed to remove Paxton from office, including possibly one vote from his wife who has yet to recuse herself due to an unethical conflict of interest.In the event that happens, Abbott will be forced to appoint his permanent replacement and Texas will see the historic toppling of a leader not seen before in the state. More

  • in

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

    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