Republicans

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      US Congress agrees to funding deal to avert shutdown in blow to Trump

      by

      US congressional leaders have agreed to a short-term funding deal in a move that averts a damaging pre-election government shutdown and also amounts to a snub for Donald Trump.The prospect of a shutdown at the expiration of the current government funding on 30 September had been looming after Republicans insisted on tying future funding to legislation that would require voters to show proof of US citizenship – known as the Save Act and backed by Trump but opposed by Democrats.After weeks of backroom maneuvering, the Republican House speaker, Mike Johnson, announced a compromise that provides funding for another three months while decoupling it from the Save Act. Any other path would have been “political malpractice”, he added.The new package continues present spending levels while also giving $231m in emergency funds to the beleaguered Secret Service to enable it to provide added protection for Trump – the Republican presidential nominee, who has been the subject of two failed apparent assassination attempts – as well as his Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris, before the presidential election on 5 November.It represents a climbdown for Johnson, who had previously adhered to Trump’s demand that government funding be conditioned on passing the Save Act. The bill – has become an article of faith for the former president and his supporters due to their belief, unsupported by evidence, that electoral fraud is rife.Writing to congressional colleagues, Johnson made it clear he was bowing to the inevitable.“While this is not the solution any of us prefer, it is the most prudent path forward under the present circumstances,” he wrote. “As history has taught and current polling affirms, shutting the government down less than 40 days from a fateful election would be an act of political malpractice.”The temporary settlement – known as a continuing resolution and which will have the effect of postponing haggling over spending until after the presidential election – was welcomed by Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate majority leader, who nevertheless said it could have been reached earlier.“While I am pleased bipartisan negotiations quickly led to a government funding agreement free of cuts and poison pills, this same agreement could have been done two weeks ago,” Schumer said. “Instead, Speaker Johnson chose to follow the Maga way and wasted precious time.”Trump is believed to have been in favour of provoking a shutdown by insisting on the Save Act’s passage – believing that the Biden administration, including Harris, the vice-president, would be blamed, as he was for a five-week closure when he was president in 2018.Johnson held talks with Trump, even visiting his club in Mar-a-Lago in Florida, over how to resolve the impasse.The compromise “officially defies” Trump, Politico wrote in its Monday Playbook column, noting that the ex-president had not, at the time of publication, responded to Johnson’s move.The website Punchbowl argued that Johnson and Trump had been guilty of a political misjudgment in pushing the Save Act, suggesting that the speaker had weakened his position in the process.“The Save Act hasn’t been the political hammer that Johnson or Trump hoped it would be,” it wrote. “Thus Johnson ends up with little here. Not empty handed but close. And he’ll be negotiating a spending deal during a lame-duck session held in what’s certain to be a highly polarised post-election period with his own political future on the line.” More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Harris calls out Trump again for ‘looking for an excuse’ to avoid a second debate

      by

      Kamala Harris laid down another challenge to Republican rival Donald Trump to meet her for a second debate before November’s presidential election, telling supporters in New York that her opponent “seems to be looking for an excuse” to avoid a second confrontation.On Saturday, the vice-president and Democratic nominee said she had accepted an invitation from CNN to debate the former president, but Trump said it was already “too late”.In her remarks at a New York fundraiser, Harris doubled down in her taunting of Trump over the issue, saying: “I think we should have another debate.”“I accepted an invitation to debate in October, which my opponent seems to be looking for an excuse to avoid when he should accept,” she added. “He should accept because I feel very strongly that we owe it to the American people, to the voters, to meet once more before election day.”The question of the US’s high stakes presidential debates has hung over the candidates since Joe Biden dropped out of the race following a disastrous performance in June. The single scheduled debate between Trump and Harris, earlier this month, was widely viewed to have gone Harris’s way and been a serious blow to Trump.But it did not move the polls as much as the Harris campaign hoped and her campaign is still tasked with introducing her to US voters. Last week, Harris went on Oprah to help smooth the introduction along.This week Harris is due to reveal a set of new economic policies. Polls show she is steadily gaining trust on the key issue of the economy, which often favors Trump and the Republican party.On Sunday, Harris returned to the key themes of the message Democrats wish to underline – a threat to democracy they perceive a second Trump terms represents and the knife-edge that polls suggest the race remains balanced upon.“This is a man who said he would be a dictator on day one … just imagine Donald Trump with no guardrails,” Harris said in New York. “This race is as close as it could be. This is a margin of error race … and I am running and we are running as the underdog.”Harris called Trump an “unserious man”, but said the consequences of putting him back in the White House were “very serious”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHead-to-head polls tend to show Harris with a narrow but solid lead over Trump, though the situation is more mixed in the crucial swing states that will decide the race to the White House. That is a reverse of the situation when Biden was in the race, where Trump had established a firm lead over the US president. More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump says he won’t run for president again in 2028 if he loses in November

      by

      Donald Trump said in an interview released on Sunday that he did not think he would run for president again in 2028 if he loses this year’s race for the White House.In an interview on the Full Measure television show with Sharyl Attkisson, the former US president – who ran in 2016 and 2020 – was asked whether he saw himself running yet again in four years time.“No, I don’t,” Trump answered. “I don’t see that at all.”He said: “Hopefully, we’re going to be successful.”In the polls, Kamala Harris leads Trump in most head-to-head surveys after Trump had previously established a solid lead over Joe Biden – before he scotched his re-election campaign after a disastrous debate performance. But the presidential race remains tight ahead of November’s election, especially in the key battleground states that will hold the key to victory.Attkisson asked Trump what positions he saw people such as the tech billionaire Elon Musk, the former Democratic congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard and the ex-independent presidential candidate Robert F Kennedy Jr, holding in his administration. Trump said he had not made deals with anybody because “it’s not appropriate to do it” and “it’s too early”.Still, he laid out what Musk, Gabbard and Kennedy, who are all former Democrats or supporters of the party, could potentially work on if he were to be elected.“Bobby will do great on health and on the environment,” he said. “He looks at other countries where they don’t use chemicals, where they use much less than we use, and the people are healthier than they are in the United States, which is not that healthy a country.”Kennedy has been campaigning for Trump since he ended his own independent presidential bid to support the Republican nominee.Trump described Gabbard, a military veteran who served as a Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii before retiring, as “a common sense person”. She recently said she would “be honored to serve” under a second Trump administration. Gabbard ran for president as a Democrat in 2020, but chose to support the Republican nominee in this year’s elections.During a Fox News interview, Gabbard said she was aiming for a role working on foreign policy.“I’ve known her a little bit, and it was a great honor when we got her,” Trump said in Sunday’s interview.Last month, both Gabbard and Kennedy were appointed to Trump’s transition team, which would help Trump choose policies and personnel if he were to win White House in November.Trump praised Musk as a person who can advance policies to cut costs in the federal government, an idea he has raised along with a “government efficiency commission”.“Elon is Elon,” he said. “He’s a big cost-cutter. He’s always been very good at it, and I’m good at it. But Elon, I’ll tell you what, he will go in, and he’ll say: ‘This is what you have to do. You have to do this.’ He is so into that, he feels there’s so much waste and fat in this country, and he’s right.” More

    • 200 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Trump’s attacks on migrants: smirking racism is no less dangerous | Editorial

      by

      There is a humanitarian crisis involving Haitians and, despite JD Vance’s lies, it isn’t in Ohio. It’s in Haiti itself, where violence has reached terrifying levels. Five children a week are killed and injured and almost 5 million people – about half the population – face acute hunger. Little wonder families flee. Most of the 15,000 Haitian immigrants in the town of Springfield are in the US through the temporary protected status (TPS) granted to them because of the turmoil in their own country.Now they face fresh danger thanks to the vicious and baseless lies of Donald Trump’s campaign. In his debate with Kamala Harris, Mr Trump declared that “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in. They’re eating the cats.” He had picked up on his running mate Mr Vance’s slanders on X that “pets [have been] abducted and eaten by people who shouldn’t be in this country”.These were claims first spread by far-right groups and neo-Nazis. Promoting them had predictable results. Hospitals, schools and government buildings have been forced to close after bomb threats. The town as a whole has been endangered, though of course the Haitian population – or those who might be mistaken for them – are most at risk. Some say they are living in constant fear, and are too scared to leave their homes.The woman who first aired the pet-eating slurs has admitted they are baseless. The city’s Republican mayor, Rob Rue, has stressed that “your pets are safe”. Ohio’s Republican governor, Mike DeWine, has dismissed the claims. A grieving father, Nathan Clark, asked Mr Trump and others to stop exploiting his 11-year-old child’s death in a bus crash involving a Haitian immigrant to stoke hatred in the town. The lies have led to an emergency order being issued in Springfield. When Mr Trump said he was planning a visit there, Mr Rue, backed by Mr DeWine, said it would be better if he stayed away.Mr Trump and Mr Vance continue to lie because it allows them to focus, in a hateful way, on immigration. The Republican vice-presidential nominee openly admits as much. The former president has already called migrants who enter the US illegally “animals” and “not human”, and accused them of “poisoning the [country’s] blood”. The claim about pets taps into old tropes about “savagery”, the threat of the sinister outsider, and associating foreigners with “weird” eating habits, evoking not only loathing but disgust.The current administration is not beyond criticism when it comes to Haiti – despite the TPS measures, it has continued to deport some Haitians. But that’s a world away from this cynical fomentation of hatred. As Joe Biden put it last week: “We don’t demonise immigrants. We don’t single them out for attacks. We don’t believe they’re poisoning the blood of the country. We’re a nation of immigrants, and that’s why we’re so damn strong.”Writing of the Trump presidency’s cruelties, the author Adam Serwer observed that “the cruelty is the point” and that “their shared laughter at the suffering of others is an adhesive that binds them to one another, and to Trump”. Now Arizona Republicans run LoLtastic “EAT LESS KITTENS” hate posters and Mr Vance instructs his supporters to “Keep the cat memes flowing”. Smirking racism is no less lethal. Haitians in Ohio have not been singled out because they are a threat, but because the far right knows they are an easy target.

      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

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Lindsey Graham calls reports of Mark Robinson’s ‘black Nazi’ posts ‘beyond unnerving’

      by

      The senior Senate Republican Lindsey Graham has said reports that the North Carolina Republican candidate for governor, Mark Robinson, calling himself a “black NAZI!” in posts on the porn forum Nude Africa a decade ago are “beyond unnerving” and should see him end his political career if proven true.“If they’re true, he’s unfit to serve for office,” the long-serving South Carolina senator said Sunday. “If they’re not true, he has the best lawsuit in the history of the country for libel.”But Graham stopped short of calling for Robinson, who has denied claims made by CNN that the incendiary entries on the forum are his own, to step down from his bid for the state governorship or that Donald Trump, who has called Robinson “Martin Luther King on steroids”, should drop his endorsement of the candidate.“I think what’s going to happen here is that he deserves a chance to defend himself,” Graham said. “He’s claiming they were artificially created.”Graham advised Robinson, who has a history of controversial and racist statements, to “hire me the best lawyer I could find. I’d sue the hell out of CNN, because what they’re saying about him is just unbelievable.”But Graham said Robinson “needs to do more … he has a right to defend himself. He has an obligation to defend himself. This is hanging over his campaign.” But he said he did not think that the Trump protegee’s comments “hurt Trump”.“But as to Robinson, he’s a political zombie if he does not offer a defense to this that’s credible,” Graham added.Robinson’s alleged porn site comments dominated the US Sunday talk shows, a day after Trump held a rally for 10,000 supporters in North Carolina without mentioning Robinson or the candidate appearing on stage.“These are not my words and this is not anything characteristic of me,” Robinson, who is the first Black lieutenant governor of North Carolina, has said of the alleged posts. He has said that he intends to remain in the race.Robinson’s opponent, the former state attorney general Josh Stein, told CNN that his opponent’s “vile insults” made him “utterly unqualified” to be governor.“What he said in the posts is in keeping with what he has said publicly on Facebook” Stein said. “He embraced Hitler, he compliments Hitler, he says he’s a Nazi, he buys little toy SS soldiers, he insists he wants to bring back slavery … things that defy comprehension.”One of Robinson’s alleged comments on the site, which was made while Barack Obama was in the White House, included: “I’d take Hitler over any of the shit that’s in Washington right now!” and “Slavery is not bad. Some people need to be slaves. I wish they would bring [slavery] back. I would certainly buy a few.”The controversy over Robinson’s alleged comments come as North Carolina, a typically red state, is a must-win state for Trump if he is to reach the 270 electoral votes necessary to win the White House.Polls show Stein averaging about a 10-point lead over Robinson, but other Democratic candidates on the ballot in the state, including the presidential nominee, Kamala Harris, are in tighter races.How far Robinson’s alleged comments will affect Trump’s support is unknown, but Democrats are hoping to tie them to Republican campaigns locally and nationally.The North Carolina Democratic party chair, Anderson Clayton, has said Robinson is a “standard bearer” amid signs that local Republicans will stand by their candidate. “He represents their party … The rest of the Republican ticket would serve as nothing but a rubber stamp for his agenda,” she said.On Sunday, the former New Jersey governor Chris Christie told ABC This Week that a controversy of Robinson was “predictable” because Robinson’s tenure in public life “has shown erratic, sometimes highly offensive statements over and over again”.But Christie acknowledged that it was a problem for Republicans because “as Donald Trump is your recruiting agent for candidates in swing states, we’re going to continue to get our rear ends handed to us.”Christie said he doubted that other Republicans would be affected, a political concept know as “reverse coattails”, but said Robinson “is starting to get the feel for what it’s like to have been a former friend of Donald Trump’s”.He added: “Donald Trump, from a political perspective, smells rotting flesh better than anybody you’ll ever find … And I bet you, George, before we get to November 5, he’s going to claim to not even really know who Mark Robinson is.” More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Morally indefensible’ – but George W Bush will not come out against Trump

      by

      The MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell this week hit out at George W Bush, the Republican former president, for refusing to weigh in on America’s looming presidential election.“All any decent person wants him to do is to say, ‘Don’t vote for Donald Trump, and here’s why,’ and he won’t even do that,” O’Donnell told the Fast Politics podcast, of the Republican president who was in office from 2001 to 2009.Increasingly, Bush – and some other top Republicans from his political era – are looking lonely in their ongoing refusal to take a side in an election in which many have warned that US democracy is under threat from Trump’s open sympathies with autocracy.Bush’s vice-president Dick Cheney and his daughter Liz Cheney, whose January 6 committee role cost her a US House seat in Wyoming, have endorsed Kamala Harris. So have other senior Republicans, including more than 100 who this week signed a letter declaring that Trump, their party’s nominee for a third election running, must never return to the White House.“We believe that the president of the United States must be a principled, serious and steady leader,” the officials said. “We expect to disagree with Kamala Harris on many domestic and foreign policy issues, but we believe that she possesses the essential qualities to serve as president and Donald Trump does not.”Big-name signatories included Chuck Hagel, a former senator and defense secretary; Gen Michael Hayden, a former CIA and NSA chief; and John Negroponte, once ambassador to the UN. Robert Zoellick, a longtime aide to both presidents Bush and a deputy to James Baker, secretary of state to the elder Bush, was on the list too.Missing from the list, however, were Baker, the younger Bush and his own secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. As perhaps the three most senior Republicans who have not come out against Trump in this election cycle, Bush, Rice and Baker’s lack of comment excites growing comment itself.Bush’s office recently said he would not endorse, having “retired from presidential politics years ago”, perhaps ensuring that his most lasting comment on his successor will be the one he reportedly delivered on the dais at the Capitol after Trump’s inaugural speech in 2017, “American carnage” and all: “That was some weird shit.”Rice did oppose Trump in 2016. Amid the Access Hollywood scandal, over Trump’s boasts about sexual assault, Rice said he should withdraw as the Republican candidate, in favor of “someone who has the dignity and stature to run for the highest office in the greatest democracy on earth”.She has commented on Trump’s presidency too. In 2021, she said his appeal to people who felt let down by establishment politicians was “something that we probably still really need to pay attention to”. Earlier this year, Rice spoke out against isolationism, another central tenet of Trumpism. But that drew a rebuke from Adam Kinzinger, the former congressman from Illinois who sat with Cheney on the January 6 committee and who endorsed Harris at the Democratic national convention.“It’s time to speak up and do more,” Kinzinger said. “You’re not fighting against ‘isolationism’. You’re fighting against Trump and you need to say this out loud. No more straddling the fence, Republicans. You’re for Trump or against him. Pick a side.”Baker has not taken a public position on Trump but in 2020, his biographers reported that though the “myriad ethical scandals surrounding Trump were head-spinning, Baker kept telling himself it was worth it to get conservative judges, tax cuts and deregulation”.“I will vote for the Republican,” Baker was quoted as saying. “I really will.”Now 94 but still active in the public realm, Baker has not publicly indicated how he will vote this year. A source close to him said he had been sharply critical of Trump’s attempt to overturn the election in 2020. Nonetheless, the former secretary of state’s words in his biography ring loud.“I won’t leave my party. You can say my party has left me because the leader of it has. But I think it’s important, the big picture.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn most eyes, though, the big picture has only grown more alarming. Trump has incited a deadly attack on Congress; beaten a second impeachment arising from that attack; been convicted on 34 criminal charges with more than 50 pending; been ordered to pay hundreds of millions in civil cases regarding business fraud and a defamation suit arising from a rape allegation a judge called “substantially true”; and launched an election campaign of breathtaking racist invective and lies.“Taxes go up, taxes go down. Regulations are imposed, they are withdrawn. But a democracy? You can’t squander that. Our reputation in the world, the Nato alliance at a time of extreme danger – once those things are gone, they would be exceptionally hard to rebuild.”That was the view of one Washington Republican, a White House official under both Bushes whose job now precludes public endorsements but who was granted anonymity to speak frankly and said they would vote for Harris.With a laugh, the former official suggested George W Bush “may write in Condi Rice again”, a reference to the protest vote Bush said he lodged in 2020, rather than support Joe Biden.As for Baker, the former official said: “Don’t forget, he’s from Houston. I think if you spend 50 years around Houston, you just absorb the oil and gas view of the world. Many people in the oil and gas industry are very anti-Biden, very anti-Harris, largely because of the perception that Biden was for the Green New Deal, which is false, and then the natural gas export review.”For Republicans, the former official said, it is easier to come out against Trump in the national security space and what might be called the democracy space, given the enormity of Trump’s election subversion and January 6 and anxious questions about his relationships with autocrats including Vladimir Putin of Russia, Xi Jinping of China and Kim Jong-un of North Korea.“There are the Dick Cheneys of the world, who basically say: ‘This is about democracy. This is about January 6. Donald Trump cannot be trusted with power.’ I would also suspect that in Cheney’s case, this goes back to his tenure in the defense department [under George HW Bush], and if you recall the op-ed that all the living secretaries of defense wrote on 3 January 2021, it’s all coming out of that.”That column, for the Washington Post, urged all Americans to ensure a peaceful transfer of power. Three days later, Trump ensured that did not happen.The former official continued: “While there have been a number of more moderate Republicans who have endorsed Harris, I do not see this as ideological. I see it as, principally, first stop Trump, then attempt to rebuild the party.”Such ambitions may also motivate establishment Republicans who have chosen to back Trump, among them the New Hampshire governor, Chris Sununu, and Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor who fought Trump in the primary. All may have eyes on a post-Trump world – either in 2024 if he loses or 2028 if he wins.If so, the former White House official suggested, it may not prove a wise course.“I think it would be hugely, hugely difficult to rebuild the party, largely because the Trumpers just have control of pretty much everything in the states, in the state parties.“But I think that is the task of a generation, and even more moderate figures are going to have to make nods in the direction of Trumpism for the foreseeable future.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      More than 700 national security officials endorse Kamala Harris for president

      by

      More than 700 national security leaders and former military officials publicly endorsed Kamala Harris for president in a letter released on Sunday, calling her a candidate who “defends America’s democratic ideals”.They also said her Republican rival, Donald Trump, was “unfit” for the job.The letter, signed by retired US navy R Adm Michael Smith and hundreds of others, criticized the former president’s remarks about “terminating” the US constitution over his lie that the 2020 election was stolen and his suggestion of becoming a “dictator” if re-elected.The group also condemned Trump’s lack of remorse for the January 6 Capitol attack.The letter is a further boost to the vice-president and her bid for the White House. Since Joe Biden dropped his bid for re-election in July, Harris has opened up a narrow lead over Trump and performed more strongly in the crucial swing states needed for victory. She has also secured the endorsement of some key anti-Trump Republicans.The security and military officials wrote in the latter that Harris “grasps the reality of American military deterrence, promising to preserve the American military’s status as the most ‘lethal’ force in the world”.“The contrast with Mr Trump is clear: where Vice President Harris is prepared and strategic, he is impulsive and ill-informed,” the letter reads.Among those signing the letter is the former secretary of state and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Jeff Bleich, who served as the US ambassador to Australia under Barack Obama, and the former CIA director John Deutch.In her new book, Clinton expressed her excitement of the prospect of a woman becoming president.“When I imagine Kamala standing before the Capitol next January, taking the oath of office as our first woman president, my heart leaps,” she said. “After hard years of division, it will prove that our best days are still ahead and that we are making progress on our long journey toward a more perfect union.”The letter made public also criticized Trump’s relationship with leaders overseas, including China’s president, Xi Jinping, the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe national security leaders also slammed Trump’s decision to criticize leaders in the UK, Israel, Australia, Canada and Germany.“Mr Trump denigrates our great country and does not believe in the American ideal that our leaders should reflect the will of the people,” says the letter. “Mr Trump is the first president in American history to actively undermine the peaceful transfer of power, the bedrock of American democracy.”The pro-Harris letter comes on the heels of another endorsement earlier this month by a group of 10 retired top US military officials, including retired Gen Larry Ellis, condemning Trump’s comments disparaging members of the military.Last month, Trump was pictured giving a thumbs up with family members at a ceremony to mark the deaths of US soldiers in Afghanistan. The army accused two campaign officials of pushing aside a worker at the cemetery who told them that it was not permitted to take photographs at the graves of recently deceased soldiers. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Why Trump and Vance’s strategy is ‘say anything, make up anything’

      by

      JD Vance was holding court on CNN’s State of the Union programme. “The American media totally ignored this stuff,” he complained last Sunday, “until Donald Trump and I started talking about cat memes.”But it wasn’t just a meme, objected interviewer Dana Bash. The Republican vice-presidential nominee gave a telling response: “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do, Dana, because you guys are completely letting Kamala Harris coast.”If ever there was a case of saying the quiet part out loud, Vance had perfected the art. The cat memes he referred to were prompted by baseless rumours about legal Haitian immigrants in his home state of Ohio eating house pets – rumours that led to bomb threats and evacuations of schools and government buildings in Springfield.But Vance’s willingness to “create stories” to grab attention before the November’s election hinted at a new frontier in post-truth America, where a lie is no longer slyly distributed but rather brazenly flaunted as a tactic to win political support and stir up social chaos.Some commentators draw a parallel with Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway’s coining of “alternative facts” when, on another Sunday politics show back in 2017, she sought to defend then White House press secretary Sean Spicer’s false statements about the crowd size at Trump’s inauguration.Kurt Bardella, a Democratic strategist, said: “It’s a logical continuation of what once was called ‘alternative facts’ by the same camp. It’s obvious that is a long-term mission statement, more than just an offhand comment.“Their entire strategy is to say anything, make up anything, invent false narratives to try and distract away from the very real consequences of their radical and extreme agenda that is so far out of the mainstream of the American people’s interests. They think they have a better chance of winning by making up insane stories about people eating pets versus having a subsequent conversation about the consequences of their policy agenda.”Dishonesty in politics is hardly new, from President Richard Nixon’s cover-up of the Watergate scandal to the false claim of weapons of mass destruction used as a pretext for the Iraq war. In 2004, the New York Times Magazine quoted an unnamed official in the George W Bush administration as saying: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.”View image in fullscreenIt was fertile soil for Trump, who had spent years exaggerating his personal wealth and charity giving, misleading the public about ventures such as Trump University and even misrepresenting his own height and weight. From 2011, he was a leading promoter of the false conspiracy theory that Barack Obama had been born in Kenya and was therefore not eligible to be US president.From his inauguration on, Trump made more than 30,000 false or misleading claims during his four years in the White House, according to a count by the Washington Post. He memorably claimed to have presided over the biggest tax cut ever – in fact, Ronald Reagan’s was bigger – and repeatedly downplayed the coronavirus pandemic, telling the public that it would soon “disappear”.But perhaps the biggest lie of all came on the night of the 2020 presidential election when Trump claimed that he had won. He stuck to this position, arguing that it had been “stolen” from him through widespread voter fraud, ultimately leading to a deadly insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021. He has since recast the rioters as martyrs and “patriots”.Now making his third consecutive bid for the White House, Trump’s mendacity has, if possible, shifted up a gear. He made more than 30 false claims during the presidential debate against Joe Biden in Atlanta, according to a fact-check by host network CNN, but escaped close scrutiny because of Biden’s feeble performance.In the debate against Harris in Philadelphia, he made false assertions about topics including inflation, immigration, tariffs, House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s role on January 6, Joe Biden’s role in the criminal cases against him and popular support for the overturning of the constitutional right to abortion.Astonishingly, he also plucked the racist Springfield conspiracy theory from the fever swamps of the internet and gave it a national platform before tens of millions of viewers when he said: “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in, they’re eating the cats. They’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”Not for the first time that night, ABC News’s moderators were forced to step in with a fact-check. There is no evidence for such a claim. The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported that on the day Vance first promoted the rightwing rumours, Springfield’s city manager told his office that they were baseless.Vance’s team gave the Journal a police report in which a resident claimed her cat may have been stolen by Haitian neighbours. But a Journal reporter tracked down the resident and learned that her cat had been in the basement the whole time, prompting her to apologise to her neighbours.Yet still Trump and Vance persisted with the knowing falsehoods at rally after rally on the campaign trail, undeterred by warnings from the White House that they could stoke an ugly backlash against Haitians in Springfield. Then came Vance’s shocking admission that he would make stuff up and be proud of it.Days after the CNN interview, Vance continued to defend the comments while admitting that he had not fact-checked residents’ claims about the pets. “The media has a responsibility to fact-check,” he said at a rally in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, in an effort to shift blame.View image in fullscreenCharlie Sykes, a conservative author and broadcaster, said: “What JD Vance is saying is that the facts don’t matter and that I am completely unashamed to have peddled a false story.“It underlines the degree to which Trump and Vance and the Maga movement are addicted to these fake online internet memes and unshakeable in their attachment to them. Even when they are refuted, they stick with them, which is a dangerous thing because it means that no matter how much evidence you can provide, no matter how dangerous the lies turn out to be, they’re not going to back off.”Sykes warned: “They’re going to keep pushing. Extrapolate this to what’s going to happen in November and the election results. Extrapolate it to anything.”On Saturday, Vance is due to appear with conspiracy theorist Tucker Carlson on the former Fox News host’s live tour in Hershey, Pennsylvania. This is despite Carlson having recently hosted Nazi apologist and Holocaust denier Darryl Cooper on his podcast, a decision roundly condemned by Jewish members of Congress.Trump, meanwhile, has been joined on the campaign trail by far-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer. She turned up at the debate and then a day later in New York to commemorate the 23rd anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks.Loomer, who commands a following of 1.2m people on the X social media platform, has previously suggested that 9/11 was an inside job. At a rally in Las Vegas, Trump said he had heard that Harris had used a secret earpiece during their debate, a baseless conspiracy theory that Loomer has promoted on X.Loomer also posted on X that if Harris, who is of Indian descent, wins the election, “the White House will smell like curry & White House speeches will be facilitated via a call center”. Even far-right Republican representative Marjorie Taylor Greene denounced the comment as racist.Sykes, author of How the Right Lost Its Mind, regards Loomer as a symptom rather than a cause. “Run through a list of all the conspiracy theories that Donald Trump has embraced or pushed and it’s lengthy,” he said. “It’s not as if Laura Loomer is making Donald Trump into a conspiracist. Donald Trump has been one for years. He’s now finding people who will stroke and validate his darker impulses.”There is another reason for Trump and Vance’s sense of impunity. Their lies originate from and are legitimised by a rightwing media ecosystem that now includes X, formerly Twitter, owned by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, who has endorsed Trump, hosted an interview with him and sought to portray his critics as enemies of free speech.Matt Gertz, a senior fellow at the watchdog Media Matters for America, said: “This is a rightwing media ticket. Donald Trump and JD Vance are both people who are fully immersed in the information ecosystem of the far right and they’ve adopted its complete lack of standards and willingness to use any means necessary to achieve their ends of political gain and political victory. What we’re seeing here is how these lies can spiral totally out of control. Springfield, Ohio, is experiencing some real chaos right now.”Heading into the final sprint of the election, where he could face prison if he loses, Trump is surpassing himself with a blitz of falsehoods. On Thursday, CNN’s fact-checkers produced a list of “12 completely fictional stories” that he has told in the last month, including Harris reintroducing the military draft, schools sending children for gender-affirming surgeries without their parents’ knowledge and Harris negotiating with Russian president Vladimir Putin in 2022 in an effort to prevent the invasion of Ukraine.Michael Steele, a former chair of the Republican National Committee, said: “There’s nothing worse than a desperate man. There’s nothing worse than a desperate racist man who cannot control the woman in front of him who happens to be African American. Cannot control the conditions around him that have changed – the tightening of the political race for the presidency.“Cannot control what people are saying about him, the fact that Republicans are now coming out and speaking against a second Trump term and are creating lanes in which we are willing to support the Democrat over Donald Trump because he is that bad and that dangerous. When he cannot control that, he becomes even more dangerous and more desperate and you need to be aware of that because there’s more of this coming between now and November.” More