Trump administration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Xinjiang and crimes against humanity: speaking and acting | Editorial

      by

      It took a long time for leaders to notice, longer to condemn, and longer still to act. It took time for researchers to amass evidence of China’s treatment of Uighurs in Xinjiang – from mass detention to forced sterilisation – given the intense security and secrecy in the north-west region. Beijing initially denied the existence of the camps, believed to have held about a million Turkic Muslims, before describing them as educational centres to tackle extremism. But the hesitation by other governments also reflected the anxiety to maintain relations with the world’s second-largest economy.The US, on Donald Trump’s final day in office, became the first country to declare that China is committing genocide. The administration has already targeted officials and issued a ban on any cotton or tomato products from the region. On Tuesday, the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, described a “systematic attempt to destroy Uighurs by the Chinese party-state … forced assimilation and eventual erasure”. A more cautious report from a bipartisan US Congressional commission said that China had committed crimes against humanity and “possibly” genocide.Mr Pompeo’s statement is a parting shot, made with some cynicism. (Not all criticism of human rights abuses, however merited, is motivated solely by human rights concerns; Mr Trump reportedly told Xi Jinping that the camps were “exactly the right thing to do”.) But the announcement is unlikely to be the end of the matter. Joe Biden’s campaign called it genocide months ago. While Mr Trump broke with the previous approach to China, the US has undergone a bipartisan shift, forged primarily by Beijing’s actions – not only in Xinjiang but also in Hong Kong, its handling of the pandemic and in international relations more broadly.The same change is evident in the UK, as evidenced by the sizeable Conservative rebellion in parliament on Tuesday, in which an amendment to the trade bill was narrowly defeated by 319 to 308. The genocide amendment originated in the Lords and was backed by all opposition parties, as well as a broad coalition outside parliament, including the Muslim Council of Britain and the Board of Deputies of British Jews. It proposes that the UK high courts could determine whether genocide is taking place, potentially leading to the revocation of trade deals. The Foreign Office argues that genocide determinations are complex matters better made by international institutions – knowing full well that in reality they will not consider them in this case, and that this is not a requirement of the Genocide Convention. The foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, struck a far stronger tone than before when he spoke recently of “torture and inhumane and degrading treatment … on an industrial scale” in Xinjiang. But the remedies he put forward – requiring firms to do better on due diligence – were feeble.A genocide finding is an extremely high bar: it is unclear whether a court would agree that Chinese actions passed it. It could not address Britain’s continuing sale of arms to Saudi Arabia despite its grotesque record, nor the recent agreement with Egypt, said by campaigners to be seeing its worst human rights crisis for decades. China – whose spokespeople have described “the so-called ‘genocide’” as “a rumour deliberately started by some anti-China forces and a farce to discredit China” – has shown itself increasingly impervious to international opinion.But at the very least, it must be ensured that western businesses do not profit from abuses such as forced labour. The willingness to say that human rights matter, and not only when it is convenient for the UK to do so, is important. MEPs too have promised to focus on them in their scrutiny of the new EU-China investment treaty, although Anglophone countries are taking a stronger stance towards Beijing in general. The political ground internationally is shifting. But measures can only hope to have an impact if like-minded nations act together and support each other. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Rapper Lil Wayne in line for last-day pardon from Donald Trump

      by

      The rapper Lil Wayne was among those reportedly expected to receive a pardon or clemency from Donald Trump on his last full day in office on Tuesday.Sources familiar with the matter who spoke to Reuters suggested that neither the president himself, nor Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, or former aide Steve Bannon would be on the list, which may number up to 100. Neither would members of Trump’s family get pre-emptive pardons, reports suggested.While the legality of a presidential self-pardon remains untested, aides have cautioned Trump that pardoning himself and members of his family may imply guilt that becomes a liability in future state or civil lawsuits.It has also been suggested that a self-pardon could antagonise some Republican senators who will be voting during the second impeachment trial, expected later this month.Lil Wayne pleaded guilty last month to possessing a loaded, gold-plated handgun when his chartered jet landed in Miami in December 2019. He faces up to 10 years in prison at a 28 January hearing in Miami.The rapper appeared to support Trump during last year’s presidential campaign when he tweeted a photo of himself with the president and said he backed Trump’s criminal justice reform programme and economic plan for African Americans.On Tuesday morning, the New York Times reported that the list of new pardons or acts of clememcy “includes the names of people who have been serving life sentences for drug or fraud charges and who for years have been seeking clemency”.The paper said the White House was keen to blunt criticism for Trump’s handing of pardons to allies and cronies, reporting: “Tuesday’s group includes non-violent offenders whose names have been percolating for years among advocates who believe their punishments never fit their crimes and whose cases underscore the broken nature of the country’s criminal justice system.”The Times also reported that the list of pardons and commutations was expected to include the former New York assembly speaker Sheldon Silver, 76, who was convicted of corruption charges in 2015. After a lengthy legal process, Silver was sentenced in July 2020 to six-and-a-half years in prison and a $1m fine. He is held in the federal prison at Otisville, New York.Also said to be under consideration for a pardon was Sholam Weiss. Weiss was sentenced to 835 years in prison in 2000 for crimes including racketeering, wire fraud and money laundering. It is frequently described as the longest sentence imposed in the US for a “white collar” crime.Bannon, 66, who has pleaded not guilty to charges that he defrauded donors to “We Build the Wall”, an online fundraising campaign that raised $25m, was not expected to be on the list. Neither was Giuliani.It has been reported Giuliani has fallen out with the president over unpaid legal fees, and the former New York mayor has recused himself from defending Trump in his Senate impeachment trial, since Giuliani was also involved in the rally on 6 January that preceded a pro-Trump mob ransacking the US Capitol.He notoriously told the crowd “Let’s have trial by combat,” a remark he has since claimed was a reference to Game of Thrones.Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder, another name frequently mentioned in connection to a possible Trump pardon, was also not expected to be on the list.The list of pardons was prepared over the weekend in a series of meetings involving the White House counsel, Pat A Cipollone, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.It is traditional for US presidents to issue pardons and clemency at the end of their term in office. Barack Obama commuted the sentence of Chelsea Manning, George W Bush commuted the sentence of former staffer Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who had been found guilty of perjury, and Bill Clinton controversially pardoned the financier Marc Rich in a move widely criticised as being corrupt, after Rich’s ex-wife had made substantial donations to Clinton-related causes. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Open letter calls for publishing boycott of Trump administration memoirs

      by

      Five-hundred American authors and literary professionals have signed a letter calling on US publishers not to sign book deals with members of the Trump administration, saying “those who enabled, promulgated, and covered up crimes against the American people should not be enriched through the coffers of publishing”.Put together by the author Barry Lyga, the letter, which is continuing to add names, has been signed by bestselling writers including Celeste Ng, author of Little Fires Everywhere, Holly Black and Star Wars author Chuck Wendig. Titled “no book deals for traitors”, it opens by stating that the US “is where it is in part because publishing has chased the money and notoriety of some pretty sketchy people, and has granted those same people both the imprimatur of respectability and a lot of money through sweetheart book deals”.Lyga told Publishers Weekly: “Traditionally, members of an outgoing administration can – and do – rely on the cushion of a fat book contract with a healthy advance. In the case of the Trump administration and its history of outrages, lies, and incitement to insurrection, we cannot allow this to stand. No one should be enriched for their contribution to evil.”Endorsed by a range of editors, authors, booksellers and publishing staff, the letter goes on to state that “no participant in an administration that caged children, performed involuntary surgeries on captive women, and scoffed at science as millions were infected with a deadly virus should be enriched by the almost rote largesse of a big book deal”, and that “no one who incited, suborned, instigated or otherwise supported the 6 January 2021 coup attempt should have their philosophies remunerated and disseminated through our beloved publishing houses”.In November, the Rupert Murdoch-owned tabloid the New York Post claimed that Trump was “being bombarded with book and TV deals that could be worth a staggering $100m”, although his son, Donald Trump Jr, chose to self-publish his most recent tome.Lyga’s letter comes in the same week that rightwing Missouri senator Josh Hawley was forced to find a new publisher for his book The Tyranny of Big Tech, after it was dropped by Simon & Schuster over his backing of baseless claims that the election was stolen. America’s National Coalition Against Censorship has spoken out against the cancellation of Hawley’s deal, saying that while it shares “the outrage of our fellow citizens” over the attack on the US Capitol, it was deeply concerned about Simon & Schuster’s decision to drop the book. “Cancelling the book weakens free expression … It is crucial that publishers stand by their decision to publish, even when they strongly disagree with something the author has said,” said the free speech organsiation. “Cancelling a book encourages those who seek to silence their critics, producing more pressure on publishers, which will lead to more cancellations. The best defence for democracy is a strong commitment to free expression.”The debate comes in the midst of a reckoning for big publishers about the titles they release. In November, staff at Penguin Random House Canada protested over the press’s decision to publish a new book from Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, the self-styled “professor against political correctness”. Hachette dropped Woody Allen’s memoir last year after a staff walkout, and Hachette imprint Little, Brown in the UK cancelled a contract with Julie Burchill to publish Welcome to the Woke Trials after it said she “crossed a line” with her comments about Islam on Twitter to the journalist Ash Sarkar.Tony Schwartz, who ghostwrote Donald Trump’s 1987 memoir The Art of the Deal, was given the nickname Dr Frankenstein by his former editor for the gloss his book brought to the man who would become president. Schwartz spoke out about how “staggeringly dangerous” he felt a Trump presidency would be in 2016, saying: “Oh my god, I’ve contributed to creating the public image of the man who is sociopathic and people don’t realise it.”Lyga’s letter points to Son of Sam laws, which prevent criminals from benefiting financially by writing about their crimes. “In that spirit, those who enabled, promulgated, and covered up crimes against the American people should not be enriched through the coffers of publishing,” say the publishing professionals, adding: “We believe in the power of words and we are tired of the industry we love enriching the monsters among us, and we will do whatever is in our power to stop it.”Lyga told the LA Times that each signatory to his letter “will act to the dictates of their conscience and to the extent they are able to effect change”, pointing to the Hachette walkout which led to the cancellation of the Allen memoir. “We are committing to doing what we individually can when and if the time comes,” he added.“To those who believe this is censorship, I can say only this,” he wrote on Twitter. “If the first amendment guarantees book deals, then there are some publishers who turned down books of mine in the past who now owe me money.” More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Russia: the spectre that loomed over Trump's presidency

      by

      When historians look back at Donald Trump’s presidency they are likely to pick out two defining themes. One is the coronavirus pandemic. It dominated his last year in office, and saw the president become the virus’s most celebrated victim cum White House super-spreader.The other is Russia, a subject that consumed American public life for four long years. The question first came up when Trump was a long-shot candidate for president. In a Republican party that had once regarded Vladimir Putin as a cold-eyed KGB killer, why was Trump’s behaviour towards Russia’s leader so ingratiating?There were Trump’s flattering public statements about Putin on the campaign trail. And his blatant appeal in July 2016 for Moscow to locate emails that he claimed Hillary Clinton had deleted. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he told a press conference in Florida.As it turned out Russia was indeed listening. That evening a group of hackers working for GRU military intelligence returned after-hours to their office in central Moscow. They tried to break into the accounts of senior Clinton aides, unsuccessfully. A rival spy agency once headed by Putin, the FSB, launched its own electronic attacks.Across 2016 the Russians ran an aggressive and multifaceted operation to help Donald Trump win. In spring the GRU stole tens of thousands of Democratic party emails, including from Clinton’s campaign chief John Podesta. These were fed to WikiLeaks and given to reporters via a GRU persona, Guccifer 2.0.Meanwhile trolls working out of St Petersburg launched an unprecedented anti-Clinton social media operation. The Russians – employed by Putin’s ally Yevgeny Prigozhin – impersonated Americans, organised pro-Trump rallies, and even hired an actor to dress up as Clinton and sit in a cage.Moscow rumoursDuring the 2016 campaign there were swirling rumours concerning Trump and Moscow. No media outlet could quite stand them up, but the topic burst into the public domain in January 2017 when BuzzFeed published a dossier by the former MI6 officer Christopher Steele, commissioned by the Democratic party. It would torment Trump for the rest of his presidency.The dossier alleged the Kremlin had been cultivating Trump for five years at least. It claimed Putin’s spies had collected kompromat, secretly filming Trump and two sex workers inside the Ritz-Carlton hotel during his 2013 visit to Moscow for the Miss Universe beauty pageant.Trump vehemently denied the seedy allegations. He and his Republican supporters on Capitol Hill and within the Justice Department sought to discredit its British author and to out his sources. Steele was a “failed spy” and “lowlife”, and collusion allegations a “witch-hunt” and a “hoax”, Trump insisted.‘Russia thing’Hoax or not, Trump’s efforts to make the “Russia thing” go away backfired. In May 2017 he sacked James Comey as FBI director. This resulted in the appointment of the former FBI chief Robert Mueller as special prosecutor. Mueller’s brief was to investigate whether Trump and his inner circle had conspired with Moscow during the election. To answer yes, a criminal standard of proof was necessary.For almost two years the workings of Mueller’s team stayed secret. The prosecutor was both Washington’s most present personality – endlessly discussed – and a ghost. From time to time his office issued indictments. These were against 26 Russians including GRU hackers. And against Americans: Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, national security adviser Michael Flynn, attorney Michael Cohen, and others.When it arrived in spring 2019, Mueller’s report was a disappointment to liberal Americans who hoped it might sweep Trump from power. It identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign but did not find a criminal-level conspiracy. Nor did it rule on whether the president had obstructed justice. Mueller said he had not considered collusion, which was not a “legal term”.Trump, we learned, had been secretly negotiating in 2015-16 to build a Trump Tower in Moscow while simultaneously praising Putin. Cohen had even written an email asking Putin’s press spokesman Dmitry Peskov for help and spoke to Peskov’s assistant. When asked about this by Congress, Cohen lied. The cover-up led to a feud with Trump – and, for Cohen, to federal jail.Back-channelsThe most significant back-channel to Moscow involved Manafort and his one-time Russian aide Konstantin Kilimnik. In a series of clandestine meetings Manafort gave Kilimnik internal polling data, including from the rustbelt states that proved crucial to Trump’s 2016 victory. The two men used burner phones, encrypted chats, and a secret email account, with messages shared in drafts.Mueller identified Kiliminik as a career Russian intelligence officer. His employer was the GRU. What Kilimink did with the information he got from Manafort is unknown. He refused to cooperate with the FBI and fled to Moscow.Critics said the Mueller investigation was hobbled by an excess of legal caution and a failure to meet face to face with Trump. Its biggest shortcoming, arguably, was a lack of Russian witnesses.Much of the Trump-Russia story is still unknown. For example, does the Trump Organization have financial ties with Moscow? After a series of bankruptcies in the 1990s Trump was only able to borrow cash from one lender: Germany’s Deutsche Bank, which gave him lavish credit. At the same time its Moscow division was facilitating a $10bn money-laundering scam for the benefit of Kremlin VIPs.The US public never found out when Putin ordered the DNC hacking operation and why. Nor did it discover what the Russian and American presidents discussed in their private meetings, including during a notorious 2018 encounter in Helsinki. A good guess is that Putin flattered rather than threatened Trump. He fed Trump’s ego and stoked his resentment of the US “deep state” and other “enemies”.‘Grave counter-intelligence threat’In August 2020 the Senate intelligence committee published its own Trump-Russia report. It said Manafort’s willingness to pass confidential material to Kilimnik was a “grave counter-intelligence threat”. And it gave some credence to Steele’s Moscow allegations, noting that an FSB officer was stationed inside the Ritz-Carlton hotel. Putin’s spy had a live video feed from guests’ bedrooms, the report said.In the end Russia did not interfere in the 2020 election in the same sweeping and systematic way. But Moscow was busy in other ways. Beginning in spring it carried out a massive cyber-raid against US federal government institutions. Russian state hackers inserted malicious code into a software update made by a Texas-based company, SolarWinds. At least six US government departments were affected, as well as the Department of Defence’s sprawling communications network, and the body that manages the US nuclear weapons stockpile. The hackers worked for Russian SVR foreign intelligence, and possibly the FSB. It was the same Cozy Bear outfit that previously hacked the DNC and the US state department.Did Trump condemn Moscow? Nope. He blamed China, in one of his final tweet’s before Twitter kicked him off its platform after the 6 January Capitol attack. The cyber-raid was a reminder of Putin viewing the US as an eternal adversary in a never-ending quasi-war. The National Security Agency has spent billions on cyber-defence and yet on Trump’s watch it was unable to deter intruders from Moscow.Russia would have preferred it if Trump had won the election. Despite Joe Biden’s clearcut victory, though, the Russian leader has much to celebrate. Over four polarising years Trump accomplished many of the KGB’s longstanding goals. These included estranging the US from its western allies and Nato; deepening domestic strife; and waging a Putin-style disinformation campaign against the 2020 result.Manchurian candidate or not, Trump did more than any previous president to discredit US democracy and suck up to the Kremlin. Back in the 1980s the Soviet government invited Trump to Moscow. Seemingly it identified him early as a person without scruples, one perhaps capable given time and opportunity of bringing down the republic.The invasion of the Capitol was the culmination of this cold war fantasy; a perfect series finale.Luke Harding’s latest book Shadow State: Murder, Mayhem and Russia’s Remaking of the West is available from the Guardian Bookshop More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Majority of Europeans fear Biden unable to fix 'broken' US

      by

      A majority of Europeans believe America’s political system is broken, that China will be the world’s leading power within a decade, and that Joe Biden will be unable to halt his country’s decline on the world stage, according to a report.
      While many welcomed Biden’s victory in November’s US election, more Europeans than not feel that after four years of Donald Trump the US cannot be trusted, according to the study by the European Council on Foreign Relations.
      “Europeans like Biden, but they don’t think America will come back as a global leader,” said the thinktank’s director, Mark Leonard. “When George W Bush was president, they were divided about how America should use its power. With Biden entering the White House, they are divided about whether America has power at all.”
      The survey of 15,000 people in 11 European countries, conducted at the end of last year, found that the shift in European sentiment towards the US in the wake of the Trump presidency had led to a corresponding unwillingness to support Washington in potential international disputes.
      At least half of respondents in all 11 countries surveyed felt, for example, that their government should remain neutral in any conflict between the US and China, while no more than 40% in any country said they would back Washington against Russia.
      “It’s clear that the tumultuous Trump presidency has left an indelible imprint on Europe’s attitude towards the US,” said Ivan Krastev, chair of the Centre for Liberal Strategies, an NGO in Sofia, and an ECFR board member. “The majority of Europeans are now sceptical about the capacity of the US to shape the world. It makes many, rightly or wrongly, want to opt for a more independent role for the EU in the world.”
      In their report, Leonard and Krastev note that while more than 60% of those polled believed the US was “broken”, most evaluated the EU and their own countries’ systems much more positively – an opportunity, they argue, to harness the collective power of the bloc for the benefit and protection of its citizens.
      The survey found that 51% of those polled did not agree with the statement that under Biden the US was likely to resolve its internal divisions and seek to address international issues such as climate change, peace in the Middle East, relations with China or European security.
      Amid a widespread sense of growing Chinese superiority, 79% of those polled in Spain, 72% in Portugal, 72% in Italy and 63% in France said they thought China would overtake the US as the world’s leading superpower within the next decade.
      Just over 32% of all respondents – and a startling 53% of respondents in Germany – felt that after voting for Trump, Americans could not be trusted. Only in Hungary and Poland did significantly more people disagree with that view than agree.
      Just 10% of those polled saw the US as a “reliable” security partner that would always protect Europe, while at least 60% in every country polled said they doubted their country could depend on US support in the event of a crisis.
      The authors say the geopolitical consequences of this shift are significant: two-thirds of those surveyed said it was now important that Europe look after its own defence, including 72% in Portugal, 71% in Sweden, 70% in France and 69% in Poland.
      At least half of respondents in every country surveyed said they would prefer their government to be neutral in a conflict between the US and China. Across the 11 states surveyed, only 23% of respondents thought their country should take Washington’s side against Russia, with 59% preferring to remain neutral.
      Between 38% and 48% of respondents in seven countries thought the EU should adopt a tougher international stance on issues such as trade, taxation and regulation, while most countries considered Germany was now a more important country to “have a good relationship” with than the US.
      The poll also revealed that in nine of the 11 countries – Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain and Sweden – where the same question was asked in previous years, the average share of people saying the EU’s political system worked very or fairly well had risen from 46% to 48%.
      It found that people who believed their own national political system was working, which was more often the case in northern than in southern Europe, were more likely to say the EU was a success.
      The report identified four “tribes” that went a long way to grouping respondents’ positions, depending on whether they felt the EU, US or China were rising or declining. The biggest tribe, “In Europe we trust”, comprised 35% of respondents, while only 9% belonged to “In America we trust”. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump to hold early morning sendoff ceremony on Biden inauguration day

      by

      Donald Trump is planning an early morning sendoff event for himself at a military airfield in Maryland on Wednesday several hours before his successor, Joe Biden, is inaugurated as the 46th US president at the Capitol in Washington DC.For his last presidential ceremony, Trump reportedly wants an ostentatious military parade and an official armed forces farewell as the commander-in-chief, as well as a large crowd of supporters, selected backers and current and former officials in his administration and their guests at a huge red-carpet affair.But latest reports indicate that Trump, who is facing an impeachment trial in the Senate and a number of criminal and civil investigations, will not be afforded a big military sendoff just two weeks after a deadly insurrection at the US Capitol that followed his exhorting supporters to fight to overturn the election.Invitations have been issued from the White House for an event taking place at Joint Base Andrews, the military base in Maryland used by Air Force One, at 8am on Wednesday – four hours before Biden will take his oath.Many details of the ceremony are not yet clear, although attendees will have to make a pre-dawn start and have been told to arrive by 7.15am, when temperatures are forecast to be below freezing.Attendees may not bring items including firearms, ammunition, explosives, laser pointers or toy guns.President Trump is leaving office on Wednesday. Plans are underway for a departure ceremony at Joint Base Andrews. This is the invite sent to supporters. It includes a list of prohibited items such as ammunition, explosives, firearms, laser pointers and toy guns. pic.twitter.com/AZNoPUxCWB— Brie Jackson (@PositivelyBrie) January 18, 2021
      In his last few hours as president, Trump will fly to his private Mar-a-Lago resort and residence in Palm Beach, Florida, aboard the Air Force One jumbo jet for the last time in a presidential capacity, ensuring he and his wife Melania are almost 1,000 miles away from the White House and Capitol when Biden takes over.Air Force One will then be at the disposal of Biden. Trump would have had to have permission from the Democrat who defeated him to use it if he had waited to leave Washington until Biden was sworn in.According to some reports, a 21-gun salute has been under consideration for the event at Andrews, and officials are considering an elaborate ceremony that would have the feel of a state visit.Senior Pentagon officials reportedly told the security and intelligence news website Defense One that no military farewell was being planned for the commander-in-chief, unlike ceremonies for Ronald Reagan, George HW and George W Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.With the sun barely up at the start of an expected-to-be-chilly Wednesday, a minimal group of staff still left in a rapidly emptying White House will see off Trump as he takes one last walk across the lawn to enter Marine One, the presidential helicopter, for the short flight to Andrews just a few miles away.Strict security arrangements in place for the inauguration, following the 6 January violence , have also limited the number of people who can attend the White House departure.Four years ago, Barack and Michelle Obama hosted Donald and Melania Trump for tea at the White House before traveling to the ceremony to watch Trump inaugurated as the 45th US president.But Trump has made it clear he would become the only president in a century and a half not to attend his successor’s inauguration and only the fourth in history not to do so, with the plans for his premature departure unprecedented.Vice-President Mike Pence is attending Biden’s inauguration, but it is not yet known if he will attend Trump’s farewell at either the White House or Joint Base Andrews beforehand.Pence traveled to thank troops in California and New York over the weekend as part of a farewell from the Trump-Pence administration, engagements that would have been expected to be carried out by the president.Trump has not been seen in public since he traveled to the US-Mexico border last Tuesday. In recent weeks he has not visited the US military. And has not visited or spoken of healthcare workers overwhelmed at hospitals and vaccination sites as the US coronavirus death toll approaches 400,000.The Bidens may be able to see and hear Trump departing aboard Marine One as they are staying close to the White House the night before the inauguration.There is no word on whether Trump will call Biden or leave the traditional letter to his successor upon the Resolute desk in the Oval Office.Reports on Monday afternoon said that the Bidens would be greeted by the White House chief usher on Wednesday, whereas traditionally it would be the departing president and first lady.Joe and Jill Biden won’t be greeted by Donald and Melania Trump Wednesday, breaking White House tradition.Instead, they’ll be greeted by the White House chief usher, @KateBennett_DC reports.— Alexis Benveniste (@apbenven) January 18, 2021
      They also said Melania Trump would become the first modern first lady not to invite her successor for a tour of the private living quarters.Melania Trump will become the first modern first lady not to invite the woman who will replace her to the White House for a walk-through of the private living quarters on the second and third floors. https://t.co/a1e9RVzq6l— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 18, 2021
      Workers have already hung bunting that reads “2021 Biden-Harris Inauguration” from temporary stands across from the White House’s north portico, visible from the third-storey residence, CNN reported.The cable network also reported that on the day the White House Military Office will ensure there are several “nuclear footballs” available, the heavy briefcase that is always carried near the president with codes to launch weapons in case of nuclear attack.One such football will reportedly travel with Trump to Florida and his codes will be deactivated by the time Biden is sworn in at noon on Wednesday, when an aide carrying another nuclear football and working codes will then begin to shadow the new president.The invitation for Trump’s sendoff specifies that masks must be worn .Late last year, Trump was criticised for hosting a series of indoor and outdoor events at the White House where social distancing and mask-wearing guidelines were not enforced, leading to several high-profile Covid cases, with the gatherings described as “super-spreader” events. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Inflated ego: Trump baby blimp joins Museum of London collection

      by

      The the Donald Trump baby blimp, a 6-metre-high inflatable caricature that became a symbol of UK protest against the US president, has secured its place in history at a leading museum.The helium-filled balloon, paid for through crowdfunding, depicts the outgoing president as a snarling orange baby wearing a nappy, with its tiny hands clutching a smartphone. It first took to the skies above Parliament Square during protests over Trump’s first presidential visit to the UK in 2018.It was present again on his state visit in 2019, and has also been flown in France, Argentina, Ireland, Denmark and various locations in the US.Now, after a global tour, the Trump baby, designed by Matt Bonner, and constructed by Imagine Inflatables of Leicester, has been acquired by the Museum of London. It will be conserved and could be displayed as part of the museum’s protest collection, which includes artefacts from the Suffragette movement, climate-crisis rallies and peace activism.The creators of the effigy said they hoped it served as a reminder of the fight against the “politics of hate”.“While we’re pleased that the Trump baby can now be consigned to history along with the man himself, we’re under no illusions that this is the end of the story,” they said in a statement to PA Media.“We hope the baby’s place in the museum will stand as a reminder of when London stood against Mr Trump – but will prompt those who see it to examine how they can continue the fight against the politics of hate.“Most of all, we hope the Trump baby serves as a reminder of the politics of resistance that took place during Trump’s time in office.”On the blimp’s first outing in 2018, Nigel Farage called it “the biggest insult to a sitting US president ever”. Trump himself said: “I guess when they put out blimps to make me feel unwelcome, no reason for me to go to London.”Sharon Ament, the director of the Museum of London, said: “Of course the museum is not political, and does not have any view about the state of politics in the States.” But the blimp touched on a typical British response, she said: satire. “We use humour a lot. And we poke fun at politicians. This is a big – literally – example of that.”The blimp had just arrived at the museum, she said, squashed into a suitcase. “It is timely, because it’s coming to us in the final days of President Trump being President Trump … the most ironic and fitting thing now is that it’s currently in quarantine in the museum. All objects have to be put into quarantine before they go into the collection because they could have insects.”The museum is a fitting home for the effigy, which is “a response from Londoners”, she said. “It was born in London … it was an extraordinary and imaginative idea.”“This large inflatable was just a tiny part of a global movement,” said the blimp’s creators. “A movement that was led by the marginalised people who Trump’s politics most endangered – and whose role in this moment should never be underestimated.” More