The far right

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Mike Lindell backs rightwing California county as it ditches voting machines

      by

      Mike Lindell backs rightwing California county as it ditches voting machinesShasta county officials have ended their contract with Dominion Voting Systems, leaving them with no replacementProponents of the lie that the presidency was stolen from Donald Trump are eying an often overlooked region of California as they continue to promote falsehoods around the 2020 election: Shasta county, population 182,000.Shasta county, a conservative stronghold in the state’s far north, recently ended its contract with Dominion Voting Systems, the voting machine company that has been the subject of a conspiracy theory that it played a role in swinging the election for Biden. The move has left the semi-rural county without a voting system and no replacement ready to implement when its Dominion contract ends next week.Mike Lindell, the chief executive of MyPillow and one of the leading promoters of falsehoods about election fraud and Dominion, has pledged to support the county’s efforts, even offering financial assistance. Lindell and other Trump allies have maligned the company for years and Dominion is suing the chief executive, as well as Fox News, for defamation.“As I promised, if you have any pushback, including lawsuits against you or your county, I will provide all of the resources necessary, including financial and legal for this fight,” Kevin Crye, a Shasta supervisor, said while reading an email from Lindell at a meeting this week. Lindell confirmed his support for the county to the LA Times.The northern California county may seem an unlikely target for Lindell, but it’s become a growing hotbed for fringe thinking and far right politics since the pandemic began. Anger over pandemic restrictions and the loss of Donald Trump brought tensions in Shasta to a boiling point, fueling a political upheaval. With outside funding from a Connecticut millionaire and support from the area’s militia groups, an ultra-rightwing majority gained control of local government and has overseen a “devastating” exodus of county employees.Those contentious politics were on full display this week during a 13-hour public meeting, during which the board weighed a hand-counting paper-ballot system and speakers offered passionate praise and criticism of the county’s decision, with some calling the election process “competent and honest” and others a “facilitated fraud”.The culture of misinformation led to harassment and threats against election officials in Shasta county, who have have reported hostility and bullying from residents who believe there is widespread voter fraud, some of whom have inundated elections offices with public records requests to try to prove their claims.Proponents of the national election denial movement have visited the area, speaking to the board of supervisors, which has a hard-right majority, and holding events at local churches. Local supporters of the movement have spoken regularly at county board meetings, gathered in large numbers for election observation, and visited the homes of some voters while wearing gear labeled “official voter taskforce”.Shasta county has had a longtime relationship with Dominion that goes back decades, Cathy Darling Allen, the Shasta county clerk and registrar of voters, told the Guardian last fall. “It’s people that we have long standing relationships with, that we know and trust.”Dominion, one of three companies whose voting equipment is permitted to be used in California, is used by 40 of the state’s 58 counties. But as falsehoods about the company spread, some Shasta residents were increasingly critical of the county’s connection to the company and management of elections. They urged the board to do away with Dominion and to make Shasta and example for other areas of the US.“I believe California is going to benefit from the efforts of Shasta county because we have conscience here,” a resident said last fall as she urged the county to do away with its voting system. “This is our Tiananmen Square. We’re going to stand in front of the tanks and say no more to the machines.”The board opted to cut ties with Dominion earlier this year in a 3-2 vote, a move that was taken “with little regard to the financial burden it places on our community, no plan of action to install new voting technology and no input from the county clerk/registrar of voters”, Allen said in a letter to voters.Seven nonpartisan voter advocacy groups wrote a letter to the board urging them to reconsider their “hasty” decision, warning the county that changing its system so close to an election, without another plan ready to implement, could create difficulties for voters.“[It] could result in numerous otherwise avoidable errors and administrative problems that could, in turn, erode public trust in the county’s voting processes, undermining the stated intent behind the Board’s initial decision,” the letter said.The groups also expressed concern that “the right of people with disabilities to vote privately and independently will be compromised by this process”.They hoped to see the board rescind its decision, said Kim Alexander, the president of the non-partisan California Voter Foundation, one of the groups behind the letter, which did not happen. But Alexander hopes the supervisors will broaden their understanding of how technology is used “responsibly and securely in the voting process”.“There certainly are extra steps the county could take to provide more verification and transparency if they choose to. I think it wold be unfortunate if they decide the right decision is to hand count all their ballots because I don’t think it will provide accurate counts.”Meanwhile, Allen’s office will have an even greater workload as it implements a new voting system. The office, like others across California, has been challenged by back-to-back elections for the last few years, including 2021’s recall election of the governor and a local recall election months later.Misconceptions about voting and election security have grown in recent years, Alexander said, and officials should try to shore up confidence in the process. Switching systems so close to next year’s presidential primary could have to opposite effect, she said.“The next statewide election we have in California is the presidential primary and it is the most complicated of any kind of election in California, so to layer on whole new voting system is a big challenge,” Alexander said. “That can create confusion and result in errors that could exacerbate the problem the supervisors are trying to address – now you’re further undermining voter confidence.”TopicsUS elections 2024CaliforniaThe far rightUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      January 6 insurrection has proved an obsession for Fox News’s Tucker Carlson

      by

      AnalysisJanuary 6 insurrection has proved an obsession for Fox News’s Tucker CarlsonAdam GabbattWhatever the TV host claims the footage from Kevin McCarthy shows will be worth taking with a generous pinch of saltIn the two years since the US Capitol attack, Tucker Carlson has described the violent assault on American democracy connected to the deaths of nine people as “vandalism” and a “forgettably minor” outbreak of “mob violence”.Kevin McCarthy denounced for giving January 6 tapes to Fox News hostRead moreThe Fox News host has said the attack on Congress by supporters of Donald Trump, which has prompted more than 900 arrests, was a “false flag” operation, part of alleged persecution of conservatives by shady government forces. Carlson even devoted much of a conspiracy-laden TV series to undermining the severity of the attack.It is not difficult to imagine, then, what Carlson might do with the 44,000 hours of Capitol surveillance footage from January 6 handed to him exclusively by Kevin McCarthy, the Republican House speaker. In fact Carlson gave an indication on his show on Monday night.“Our producers, some of our smartest producers, have been looking at this stuff and trying to figure out what it means and how it contradicts or not the story we’ve been told for more than two years,” Carlson said.He added: “We think already in some ways that it does contradict that story.”The January 6 insurrection has proved an obsession for Carlson.He has devoted countless hours of his nightly show to defending the paticipants, belittling politicians who investigated the attack, and advancing conspiracy theories.In Patriot Purge, a documentary that ran on the Fox Nation streaming service in November 2021, Carlson led a multipronged attack against the accepted version of what happened on January 6.Across the three-part series, which attempted to downplay what actually took place while passing off any violence as not the fault of Trump supporters, Carlson dabbled in conspiracy theories and gave a clue as to what we can expect once his producers are done with the Capitol footage.Carlson used Patriot Purge to claim, without evidence, that the insurrection was actually an FBI-led operation intended to “purge” Trump voters in a “new war on terror”.He hosted guests who claimed, without evidence, that antifascist activists were seen “changing clothes” into “Trump gear” before the attack began. This claim was overlaid, Media Matters reported, with a clip of a man putting on a sweatshirt. It’s likely Carlson will fish out similar clips over the coming weeks.The Fox News host has also repeatedly said police were to blame for hundreds of people illegally entering the Capitol.“Why did authorities open the doors of the Capitol to rioters and let them walk in, usher them in the doors?” Carlson said last year. “That’s utterly bizarre. You saw that live. No one’s ever explained it.”No one has ever explained it because, according to multiple fact checks, it didn’t happen. Whether that will stop Carlson plucking footage to support the lie remains to be seen.Whatever happens, it seems unlikely Carlson’s analysis will produce findings similar to those of the bipartisan House committee which investigated the attack.The committee, which conducted more than a thousand interviews and reviewed much of the footage Carlson has now been given, found that Trump was “was directly responsible for summoning what became a violent mob”, and that the attack was part of an orchestrated “scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election.Fox News did not respond to a request for comment about Carlson’s access to the January 6 footage.Democrats, as might be expected, responded furiously, a wave of party grandees suggesting McCarthy had made the move to appease the far-right of the Republican party which opposed his bid to be speaker.As targets of many of the January 6 rioters, Democrats are also worried for their safety in future. Jamie Raskin, the Marylander who served on the January 6 committee, called McCarthy’s move an “ethical collapse”.“What security precautions were taken to keep this from becoming a roadmap for 2024 insurrection?” Raskin asked on Twitter.Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, said the footage would “allow those who want to commit another attack to learn how Congress is safeguarded”.“By handpicking Tucker Carlson, Speaker McCarthy laid bare that this sham is simply about pandering to Maga election deniers, not the truth,” Schumer wrote in a letter to his colleagues.“If the past is any indication, Tucker Carlson will select only clips that he can use to twist the facts to sow doubt of what happened on January 6 and feed into the propaganda he’s already put on Fox News’ air, which based on recent reports he may not even believe himself.”That was a reference to a batch of Carlson’s text messages made public as part of a $1.6bn defamation lawsuit against Fox News from Dominion Voting Systems, which appeared to show the host’s private views do not always match what he says on air.How Dominion Voting Systems filing proves Fox News was ‘deliberately lying’Read moreIn one text following the 2020 election Carlson described Trump, who he spent hours praising on his show, as a “demonic force” good at “destroying things.“He’s the undisputed world champion of that,” Carlson wrote. “He could easily destroy us if we play it wrong.”Other Carlson messages described Sidney Powell, an attorney who claimed Dominion machines flipped votes from Trump to Joe Biden, as “a lunatic”, while conceding “there wasn’t enough fraud to change the outcome” of the election.In all, it suggests that whatever Carlson and his team now dig out of the January 6 security footage, and whatever Carlson claims that footage shows, will be worth taking with a generous pinch of salt.TopicsUS Capitol attackFox NewsUS politicsRepublicansThe far rightanalysisReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Oregon, a hotbed of extremism, seeks to curb paramilitaries

      by

      Oregon, a hotbed of extremism, seeks to curb paramilitariesAs incidents increase, state lawmakers seek to allow civil suits against paramilitaries – but critics say rights will be infringed on An armed takeover of a federal wildlife refuge. Over 100 straight days of racial justice protests that turned downtown Portland into a battleground. A violent breach of the state capitol. Clashes between gun-toting rightwingers and leftist militants.Over the past decade, Oregon experienced the sixth-highest number of extremist incidents in the nation, despite being 27th in population, according to an Oregon secretary of state report. Now, the state legislature is considering a bill that, experts say, would create the nation’s most comprehensive law against paramilitary activity.US officer fed details to far-right leader before Capitol attack, messages showRead moreIt would provide citizens and the state attorney general with civil remedies in court if armed members of a private paramilitary group interfere with, or intimidate, another person who is engaging in an activity they have a legal right to do, such as voting. A court could block paramilitary members from pursuing an activity if the state attorney general believed it would be illegal conduct.All 50 states prohibit private paramilitary organizations or paramilitary activity, but no other law creates civil remedies, said Mary McCord, an expert on terrorism and domestic extremism who helped craft the bill. The Oregon bill is also unique because it would allow people injured by private, unauthorized paramilitary activity to sue, she said.Opponents say the law would infringe on rights to freely associate and to bear arms.The bill’s sponsor, state representative Dacia Grayber, a Democrat from suburban Portland, said the proposed reforms “would make it harder for private paramilitaries to operate with impunity throughout Oregon, regardless of their ideology”.But dozens of conservative Oregonians, in written testimony, have expressed suspicion that the Democrat-controlled legislature aims to pass a bill restricting the right to assemble and that the legislation would target rightwing armed groups like the Proud Boys and Patriot Prayer, but not black-clad anarchists who have vandalized downtown Portland and battled police.“This bill would clearly put restrictions on who could gather in a group and for what reasons they choose to,” wrote Matthew Holman, a resident of Coos Bay, a town on Oregon’s south-west coast.The pioneering measure raises a host of issues, which Oregon lawmakers tried to parse in a house judiciary committee hearing last week:If residents are afraid to go to a park with their children while an armed militia group is present, could they later sue the group? What constitutes a paramilitary group? What is defined as being armed?Oregon department of justice attorney Carson Whitehead said the proposed law would not sanction a person for openly carrying firearms, which is constitutionally permissible. But if members of a paramilitary group went to a park knowing their presence would be intimidating, anyone afraid of also going to the park could sue for damages, Whitehead said.“This particular bill is not directed at individuals open-carrying. This is directed at armed, coordinated paramilitary activity,” added McCord, who is the executive director of Georgetown University Law Center’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection.On the other side of the country in Vermont, a bill making it a crime to operate a paramilitary training camp got final approval from the state senate on Friday. The measure, which senators earlier approved by a 29-1 vote, also allows prosecutors to seek an injunction to close such a facility.“This bill gives the state the authority it needs to protect Vermonters from fringe actors looking to create civil disorder,” said state senator Philip Baruth, a Democrat and Progressive from Burlington.Baruth introduced the measure in response to a firearms training facility built without permits in the town of Pawlet. Neighbors frequently complained about gunfire coming from the Slate Ridge facility, calling it a menace. Baruth’s bill now goes to the Vermont house.Under the proposed Oregon law, a paramilitary group could range from groups whose members wear uniforms and insignia, like the Three Percenters, to a handful of people who act in a coordinated way with a command structure to engage in violence, McCord added.State representative Rick Lewis, a Republican from Silverton, asked pointedly during the committee hearing whether rocks and frozen water bottles, which Portland police said had been thrown at them during demonstrations in 2021, would fall under the proposed law.A frozen water bottle and rocks could cause serious injury or death, so they would be considered dangerous weapons under Oregon law, responded Kimberly McCullough, attorney general Ellen Rosenblum’s legislative director.Multnomah county district attorney Mike Schmidt, whose jurisdiction encompasses Portland, testified in favor of the bill, expressing frustration that police often can’t single out violent actors lurking among peaceful protesters.“Our current inability to get upstream of this violence before it starts leaves us vulnerable to organized criminal elements who enter into a protest environment with the express intention of escalating the situation into an assault or arson or a riot,” Schmidt said.McCord, the terrorism expert, said the measure would mark a milestone in the US, where the FBI has warned of a rapidly growing threat of homegrown violent extremism.“This bill as amended would be the most comprehensive statute to address unauthorized paramilitary activity that threatens civil rights,” she said.The tactic of enabling private residents to file lawsuits against paramilitary groups may be a novel one, but it has been used in other arenas.Environmental groups, for example, can sue businesses accused of violating federal pollution permits. In Texas, a 2021 law authorizes lawsuits against anyone who performs or aids in an abortion. In Missouri, a law allows citizens to sue local law enforcement officers who enforce federal gun laws.But the Oregon bill differs from these laws because only people who are injured by unlawful paramilitary activity could sue, McCord said. The Oregon bill also opens a path for a government enforcement mechanism, since it allows the state attorney general to seek a court injunction to prevent a planned paramilitary activity, she said.Whether the bill will pass is unclear. It needs a simple majority in both the Oregon house and senate before it can be sent to the Democratic governor, Tina Kotek, for her approval or veto. Kotek’s spokesperson, Elisabeth Shepard, said the governor generally doesn’t comment on pending legislation.TopicsOregonThe far rightUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      US officer fed details to far-right leader before Capitol attack, messages show

      by

      US officer fed details to far-right leader before Capitol attack, messages showWashington court sees string of messages from Shane Lamond to Proud Boys’ Enrique Tarrio in weeks before deadly 2021 riot A police officer frequently provided Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio with internal information about law enforcement operations in the weeks before other members of the far-right group stormed the US Capitol, according to messages shown at the trial of Tarrio and four associates.January 6 rioter who used stun gun on officer Michael Fanone pleads guiltyRead moreIn court in Washington DC on Wednesday, a federal prosecutor showed jurors a string of messages that Shane Lamond, a Metropolitan police lieutenant, exchanged with Tarrio in the run-up to the attack on the Capitol on 6 January 2021. Lamond, an intelligence officer, was responsible for monitoring groups like the Proud Boys.On 6 January, supporters of Donald Trump stormed Congress in an attempt to block certification of Joe Biden’s election win. Nine deaths have been linked to the riot, including suicides among law enforcementLess than three weeks before the riot, Lamond warned Tarrio that the FBI and Secret Service were “all spun up” over talk on an Infowars internet show that the Proud Boys planned to dress as Biden supporters on inauguration day.A justice department prosecutor, Conor Mulroe, asked a government witness, the FBI special agent Peter Dubrowski, how common it was for law enforcement to disclose internal information in that fashion.“I’ve never heard of it,” Dubrowski said.Tarrio was arrested in Washington two days before the Capitol attack and charged with burning a Black Lives Matter banner taken from a historic Black church in December 2020. He was released and was not in Washington on 6 January.In a message to Tarrio on 25 December 2020, Lamond said Metropolitan police investigators had asked him to identify Tarrio from a photograph. He warned Tarrio that police might be seeking a warrant for his arrest.On the day of his arrest, Tarrio posted a message to other Proud Boys leaders that said: “The warrant was just signed.”Before trial, Tarrio’s attorneys said Lamond’s testimony would be crucial, supporting Tarrio’s claims he was looking to avoid violence.In court, Mulroe said Lamond asserted his fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Tarrio’s attorneys have accused prosecutors of bullying Lamond into keeping quiet by warning the officer he could be charged with obstructing the investigation into Tarrio, a Miami resident who was the national chairman of the Proud Boys. Prosecutors deny that claim.Tarrio’s attorney Sabino Jauregui said other messages showed that Tarrio cooperated with police and provided useful information. Jauregui said prosecutors “dragged [Lamond’s] name through the mud” and falsely insinuated he is a “dirty cop” who had an inappropriate relationship with Tarrio.“That was their theme over and over again,” Jauregui told the presiding US district judge, Timothy Kelly.Lamond was placed on administrative leave in February 2022, according to Mark Schamel, an attorney who said Lamond aided in Tarrio’s arrest for burning the banner. On Wednesday, Schamel said Lamond’s job required him to communicate with protesting groups and his conduct “was appropriate and always focused on the protection of the citizens of Washington DC”.“At no time did Lt Lamond ever assist or support the hateful and divisive agenda of any of the various groups that came to DC to protest,” Schamel said. “More importantly, Lt Lamond is a decorated official who does not condone the hateful rhetoric or the illegal conduct on January 6 and was only communicating with these individuals because the mission required it.”Tarrio and four lieutenants are charged with seditious conspiracy for what prosecutors say was a plot to stop the peaceful transfer of power.Proud Boys members describe the group as a politically incorrect men’s club for “western chauvinists”. They often brawl with antifascist activists.In a message to Tarrio on 18 December 2020, Lamond said other investigators had asked if the Proud Boys were racist. The officer said he told them the group had Black and Latino members, “so [it was] not a racist thing”.“It’s not being investigated by the FBI, though. Just us,” Lamond added.“Awesome,” Tarrio replied.In another exchange, Lamond asked Tarrio if he called in a tip claiming responsibility for the banner burning.“I did more than that,” Tarrio said. “It’s on my social media.”In a message to Tarrio on 11 December 2020, Lamond told him about the whereabouts of antifascist activists. The officer asked Tarrio if he should share that information with uniformed officers or keep it to himself.Two days later, Tarrio asked Lamond what the police department’s “general consensus” was about the Proud Boys.“That’s too complicated for a text answer,” Lamond replied. “That’s an in-person conversation over a beer.”TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Utah bans gender-affirming surgery for young trans people

      by

      Utah bans gender-affirming surgery for young trans peopleRepublican governor Spencer Cox signs into law bill that denies gender-affirming care, as other states weigh similar measures Utah’s Republican governor on Saturday signed a bill that bans young people who are transgender from receiving gender-affirming healthcare as other states consider similar legislation.The governor, Spencer Cox, who had not taken a public position on the transgender care measure, signed it a day after the state legislature sent it to his desk. Utah’s measure prohibits transgender surgery for young people and disallows hormone treatments for minors who have not yet been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.Republicans controlling Utah’s legislature made the ban a priority and weighed a first draft of the measure less than two days after the state’s lawmakers opened this year’s legislative session on 17 January.Cox’s signing of the bill comes as lawmakers in at least 18 states consider similar legislation taking aim at young transgender people’s healthcare.In a statement, Cox said that he based his decision to sign the bill on a belief that the safest thing to do was halt “these permanent and life-altering treatments for new patients until more and better research can help determine the long-term consequences”.He added: “While we understand our words will be of little comfort to those who disagree with us, we sincerely hope that we can treat our transgender families with more love and respect as we work to better understand the science and consequences behind these procedures.”Utah’s chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union stood among the organizations who had urged Cox to veto the bill, admonishing him in a letter about “the damaging and potentially catastrophic effects this law will have on people’s lives and medical care and the grave violations of people’s constitutional rights it will cause”.The ACLU’s letter continued: “By cutting off medical treatment supported by every major medical association in the United States, the bill compromises the health and wellbeing of adolescents with gender dysphoria.“It ties the hands of doctors and parents by restricting access to the only evidence-based treatment available for this serious medical condition and impedes their ability to fulfill their professional obligations.”Sponsoring the bill Cox signed was a Republican state senator named Mike Kennedy, who works as a family doctor and has argued that it is right for the government to oversee healthcare policies pertaining to gender and young people.The Associated Press contributed reportingTopicsUtahUS politicsThe far rightLGBTQ+ rightsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Marjorie Taylor Greene keeps rising in Republican ranks despite ‘loony lies’

      by

      Marjorie Taylor Greene keeps rising in Republican ranks despite ‘loony lies’ The extremist who has supported QAnon is firmly on her way to becoming a senior figure in the party as a key ally of the House speaker, Kevin McCarthyWhen Marjorie Taylor Greene was elected to America’s House of Representatives in 2020, she became one of the most visible of a wave of extremists to enter the Republican party whose often bizarre utterings stretched the bounds of what had previously been the norm of US politics.The Georgian congresswoman, who has suggested Jewish space lasers are responsible for wildfires, speculated whether 9/11 was a hoax and supported the QAnon conspiracy theory, was part of a new wave of Trumpian Republicans and was mocked, ridiculed and reviled in equal measure – including by some in her own party.‘We don’t know his real name’: George Santos’s unravelling web of liesRead moreBut in 2023, Greene is now firmly on her way to becoming one of the senior figures in the Republican party. She has become a favorite, and key ally, of Kevin McCarthy, the new House speaker, and preparing to take up assignments on some of Congress’s most prominent committees.It’s been a remarkable rise that few could have seen coming during a checkered first half of 2021, when Greene was making her name known through her penchant for unhinged conspiracy theories and strange remarks, but her ascension to the upper echelons of the GOP was confirmed this week by McCarthy, in an interview with the New York Times.“If you’re going to be in a fight, you want Marjorie in your foxhole,” McCarthy said.“When she picks a fight, she’s going to fight until the fight’s over. She reminds me of my friends from high school, that we’re going to stick together all the way through.”This apparent fondness for a tussle has seen Greene rewarded with positions on the homeland security committee, despite her previously musing that no plane crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11, and on the oversight committee, where she is expected to be part of a subcommittee investigating the government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic.If the latter seems problematic, given Greene’s loudly stated suspicions and conspiracy theories about the pandemic – in January she was permanently banned from Twitter for repeatedly violating rules about Covid-19 misinformation – then that’s only because lots of things Greene has said and done are problematic.In 2021 Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, condemned Greene’s “loony lies and conspiracy theories” in relation to Greene having claimed support for executing Democratic politicians and harassing the survivor of a mass school shooting.Later that year McCarthy himself, who had earlier attempted to avoid conflict, felt compelled to step in after Greene compared Covid masking rules to the treatment of Jewish people in Nazi Germany.“Marjorie is wrong, and her intentional decision to compare the horrors of the Holocaust with wearing masks is appalling,” McCarthy said.“The Holocaust is the greatest atrocity committed in history. The fact that this needs to be stated today is deeply troubling,” he said.The multiple rebukes, and the egregiousness of Greene’s beliefs – whether disavowed or not – make her rise to prominence, as she takes up her seat on some of Congress’s most powerful committees, all the more remarkable.Greene’s rapid recent rise began when she backed McCarthy for the House leadership, two months ahead of the ultimately farcical vote that saw him elected after 15 ballots. Greene had got in early, declaring her support in November on Steve Bannon’s podcast.For McCarthy, who has been an unpopular figure among far-right voters and politicians – it was a selection of the latter that meant the manner of his ascension to speaker was embarrassing at best, it was a boost he needed.McCarthy and Greene had spent months forging a working relationship they believed could be beneficial for both, with Greene placating the zaniest wing of both Republicans in the House and voters at home, and McCarthy providing relevance to someone who had been stripped of her committee assignments in 2021, leaving her, essentially, having nothing to do in Washington.The New York Times reported that McCarthy, as he prepared to take up the speakership, had been mindful of the problems his centrist predecessors, John Boehner and Paul Ryan, faced in dealing with their furthest-right colleagues.Both Ryan and Boehner – who would later describe some of his rightwing colleagues as “assholes” – endured battles with the Freedom Caucus, a conservative and often obstructionist group of GOP congressmen, when trying to pass legislation.Greene remains one of the most popular figures among Trump supporters and believers, evidenced by her 758,000 followers on Trump’s Truth Social website – McCarthy has 113,000, Steve Scalise, the House majority leader, has 109,000 – and enjoys a close relationship with the former president, even calling Trump from the House floor during the debacle of January’s leadership vote.Greene is also a successful fundraiser, bringing in $12.5m in the 2021-22 election cycle, the fifth most of any Republican representative, her popularity among the base and alignment with Trump making her the model of the new Republican politician.On Greene’s part, she has sought to sanitize, somewhat, the ill-informed, conspiracy-minded viewpoints that have characterized her political career. In early 2022 Greene began a deliberate, “methodical” reinvention, a confidante told the Washington Post.From her position on the sidelines, with a congressional office but no meaningful role in the House, she began to think of the future. Greene, like most observers, believed McCarthy would be the next House speaker, and saw a role for herself as a bridge between the far right and the less kooky Republicans, the Post reported.As she tried to make herself palatable to a wider audience, Greene set about trying not to speak at any more white nationalist rallies, or discuss the “gazpacho police” who are apparently patrolling the US Capitol. (Her remark was widely understood to mean Gestapo.) She is also yet to repeat her 2018 claim that the Clinton family orchestrated the plane crash that killed John F Kennedy Jr more than two decades ago.In addition to this new reserve, Greene hired a new aide with a track record in conventional conservative politics, and eventually began meeting with McCarthy once a week, as the pair forged a close bond, each aware of the potential benefits.McCarthy would go on to win the speakership. But his concessions to the right, personified by his promotion of Greene, have come at a cost. Already McCarthy has pursued Greene-backed, far-right strategies on vaccines and treatment of January 6 perpetrators, something that has left Greene delighted.“People need to understand that it isn’t just me that deserves credit,” Greene told the New York Times.“It is the will and the voice of our base that was heard, and Kevin listened to them. I was just a vehicle much of the time.”If Greene was displaying an amount of faux humility, her conviction that she is channeling the will of the people and willingness to make it heard are a warning as to the level of influence she now wields.In her new roles Greene said she will be investigating: “How many of our enemies got pallets of cash!?” from Covid-19 unemployment benefits, a question she posed without any context or explanation, and has pledged to impeach the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, for his perceived failures in handling immigration.From Greene’s political position in February 2021, when she was removed from her committee assignments by Democrats – and some Republicans – in a rebuke over incendiary and racist statements, which included her posting a mocked-up image of her holding a gun next to three Democratic lawmakers, all women of color, on Facebook, it has been a remarkable turnaround.Less than two years on, Greene has taken up positions on two of the most prominent committees in the House. She has a metaphorical seat at the House speaker’s right hand, and will enjoy the visibility that all this brings.It’s a testament to how quickly things can change in politics, but also a very visible reminder of what the Republican party increasingly stands for.Greene may have sought to sanitize her image, but it is clear that her brand of populism, outrage and misinformation is not the embarrassment it once was to the party leadership: this is the modern version of the Republican party.TopicsRepublicansKevin McCarthyHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsThe far rightfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Four Oath Keepers convicted of seditious conspiracy

      by

      Four Oath Keepers convicted of seditious conspiracyMembers of anti-government militia found guilty for roles in January 6 attack at the US Capitol Four members of the Oath Keepers anti-government militia were convicted on Monday of seditious conspiracy relating to the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump, after the second major trial accusing far-right extremists of plotting to forcibly keep the former US president in power.The verdict against Joseph Hackett of Sarasota, Florida, Roberto Minuta of Prosper, Texas, David Moerschel of Punta Gorda, Florida, and Edward Vallejo of Phoenix, Arizona, came a few weeks after a different jury convicted the group’s leader, Stewart Rhodes, in the mob’s attack that delayed the certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Republican Trump.Proud Boys on defensive at sedition trial haunted by absent TrumpRead moreThe convictions were another major victory for the Department of Justice, which is also trying to secure sedition verdicts against the former leader of the hard-right, violent, all-male nationalist group the Proud Boys and four associates. The trial against Enrique Tarrio and his lieutenants opened earlier this month in Washington DC and is expected to last several weeks.They are some of the most serious cases brought so far in the sweeping investigation into the Capitol attack, which continues to grow two years after the riot. The justice department has brought nearly 1,000 cases and the tally increases by the week.Defense attorneys sought to downplay violent messages as mere bluster and said the Oath Keepers came to Washington to provide security at events before the riot.They seized on prosecutors’ lack of evidence that the Oath Keepers had an explicit plan to storm the Capitol before January 6 and told jurors that the extremists who attacked the Capitol acted spontaneously like thousands of other rioters.Rhodes founded the Oath Keepers, whose members include current and retired military personnel, law enforcement officers and first responders, in 2009.Members have showed up, often heavily armed, at protests and political events including demonstrations following the May 2020 murder of George Floyd by a white police officer in Minneapolis.TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightUS crimenewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Proud Boys on defensive at sedition trial haunted by absent Trump

      by

      Proud Boys on defensive at sedition trial haunted by absent TrumpFive leaders of the far-right group on trial for their role in the January 6 attack have tried to turn attention to the ex-president While federal prosecutors are casting the Capitol insurrection trial of five far-right Proud Boys leaders as an attempt to bring participants of an attack on US democracy to account, the members of the group are using the proceedings to ask one question even some of their opponents on the political left agree is valid.We Are Proud Boys review: chilling exposé illuminates Republicans’ fascist turnRead moreWhy have prosecutors so far only focused their energy on the supporters of Donald Trump who are accused of a coordinated invasion of the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent the congressional certification of his defeat to Joe Biden in the previous year’s presidential election? Is it because they regard the former Republican president himself – who urged his supporters to “fight like hell” that deadly day – as too formidable and them as easier targets?Attorneys for the ex-Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and four of his lieutenants have sought to ingrain that question in the minds of jurors chosen after a particularly turbulent selection process which began last month and gave way to opening arguments and witness testimony beginning 12 January.They do so even as the strategy has not proven effective in other cases where it has been suggested that it is really Trump who is culpable for the Capitol attack – not his less powerful sycophants and camp followers.Weeks after the seditious conspiracy convictions of two leaders of the Oath Keepers – another far-right group – in connection with the Capitol attack, prosecutors in the Proud Boys case have broadly asserted that Tarrio, Zachary Rehl, Ethan Nordean, Dominic Pezzola and Joseph Biggs mustered up a “fighting force” to halt Biden from ever assuming the presidency.Tarrio and his fellow self-described “western chauvinists” believed a Democratic Biden presidency would threaten the group’s very existence, therefore they engaged in seditious conspiracy, headed a mob that forced its way into the Capitol and tried to drive a stake through “the heart of our democracy”, prosecutor Jason McCullough contended.Tarrio and his four co-defendants have pleaded not guilty to their alleged roles in the attack, which has been linked to nine deaths, including the suicides of law enforcement officers who protected the Capitol and were left traumatized. An attorney for Rehl, Carmen Hernandez, has insisted that her client went to the nation’s capital on 6 January not to riot but to exercise his free speech rights in protest of Trump’s loss to Biden.Meanwhile, an attorney representing Tarrio, Sabino Jauregui, argued that his client and the others were simply on trial because “it’s too hard to blame Trump,” whose full-throated defense to any prosecution would be mounted by an “army of lawyers”.“It’s easier to blame … the Proud Boys,” Jauregui added, saying his client and his fellow co-defendants were mere “scapegoats”.Similar arguments have been made before by others among the nearly 950 people who have been criminally charged with having participated in the Capitol riot, including about 540 who have been convicted. Those hefty numbers notably do not include Trump, though the former president has been recommended for prosecution by a congressional committee which investigated the attack.Just days ago, a judge ruled that a woman who helped attack the Capitol was indeed merely following orders from Trump, who fired up his supporters with false claims that he had been robbed of victory over Biden by electoral fraudsters.But, presiding over a bench trial, the judge concluded that the woman was still responsible for her actions, convicted her of charges of violent entry and disorderly conduct in a Capitol building, and offered up a stark reminder of how flimsy the “Trump made me do it” defense is.Nonetheless, a recent article in Salon agreed with Jauregui that “it’s ridiculous that Trump’s not in prison” over the Capitol attack.The willingness of Jauregui and others in the Proud Boys case to so pointedly ask why low-ranking followers of Trump are having their fates tried by juries while he runs for the White House again could reflect “a growing sense of frustration in the larger public” over how the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, has handled what to do about the former president.It could be a couple of weeks more, if not longer, before jurors decide the outcome of the charges against Tarrio, Rehl, Nordean, Pezzola and Biggs, who each face up to 20 years in prison if convicted of seditious conspiracy.The most powerful evidence and witnesses against the accused Proud Boys almost certainly remains ahead after court wrapped up Friday, the seventh day since jurors in the case began hearing arguments and testimony.Prosecutors have said they intend to make their case with private communications between the defendants, their statements in public, their coordinated movements at the Capitol, and their celebrations of the attack before they then tried to make it seem like they were never involved.But the trial’s already had plenty of drama.Beginning before Christmas, jury selection was turbulent, in part because Rehl’s lawyer Hernandez moved to dismiss nearly every prospective juror who mentioned having any knowledge whatsoever of the well-publicized Proud Boys, CNN reported.Then, when prospective jurors claimed they had not heard of the Proud Boys, Tarrio’s lawyers Jauregui and Nayib Hassan objected, saying those people could be lying to get on the jury in hopes of convicting their client.Prosecutors also reportedly contributed to the spectacle by blaming their failure to provide evidence binders to the defense because their office had gone through their supply of dividers and had not gotten permission to buy new ones.Then, after being seated, jurors heard grueling recordings of radio transmissions among police officers who were trying to defend the Capitol during the attack.“Send all you have!” one officer said as Trump supporters stormed their way into the building. Another voice later lamented: “Our situation here is dire.”They later also heard from a British film-maker, Nick Quested, who explained that he began following the Proud Boys and recording video of them because he wanted to document worsening political divisions across the US. He ended up capturing footage of the Proud Boys among the January 6 mob, he testified, according to the left-leaning Daily Kos website.Quested filmed as mob members screamed “treason” and “honor your oath” at police in riot gear who were desperately trying to maintain order. But the odds were overwhelmingly against the officers.“There was maybe a dozen police officers at the first line,” Quested said on the witness stand, “and you can see there are a couple hundred people at least at this point and more coming.”The Associated Press contributed reportingTopicsThe far rightUS politicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpfeaturesReuse this content More