World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Pro-Palestinian protesters take over Columbia University building

      by

      Dozens of protesters have taken over a building at Columbia University in New York, barricading the entrances and unfurling a Palestinian flag out of a window in the latest escalation of demonstrations against the Israel-Hamas war that have spread to college campuses across the US.Video footage showed protesters on Columbia’s Manhattan campus locking arms in front of Hamilton Hall early on Tuesday and carrying furniture and metal barricades to the building, one of several that was occupied during a 1968 civil rights and anti-Vietnam war protest on the campus.Posts on an Instagram page for protest organisers shortly after midnight urged people to protect the encampment and join them at Hamilton Hall.The student radio station, WKCR-FM, broadcasted a play-by-play of the hall’s takeover – which occurred nearly 12 hours after Monday’s 2pm deadline for the protesters to leave an encampment of about 120 tents or face suspension. Representatives for the university did not immediately respond to emails requesting comment early on Tuesday.Universities across the US are grappling with how to clear out encampments as commencement ceremonies approach, with some continuing negotiations and others turning to force and ultimatums that have resulted in clashes with police.View image in fullscreenDozens of people were arrested on Monday during protests at universities in Texas, Utah and Virginia, while Columbia said hours before the takeover of Hamilton Hall that it had started suspending students.Demonstrators are sparring over the Israel-Hamas war and its mounting death toll, and the number of arrests at campuses nationwide is approaching 1,000 as the final days of class wrap up. The outcry is forcing colleges to reckon with their financial ties to Israel, as well as their support for free speech. Some Jewish students say the protests have veered into antisemitism and made them afraid to set foot on campus.At the University of Texas at Austin, an attorney said at least 40 demonstrators were arrested on Monday. The confrontation was an escalation on the 53,000-student campus in the state’s capital, where more than 50 protesters were arrested last week.Later on Monday, dozens of officers in riot gear at the University of Utah sought to break up an encampment outside the university president’s office that went up in the afternoon. Police dragged students off by their hands and feet, snapping the poles holding up tents and zip-tying those who refused to disperse. Seventeen people were arrested.The university said it was against code to camp overnight on school property and that the students were given several warnings to disperse before police were called in.The plight of students who have been arrested has become a central part of protests, with the students and a growing number of faculty demanding amnesty for protesters. At issue is whether the suspensions and legal records will follow students through their adult lives.The Texas protest and others – including in Canada and Europe – grew out of Columbia’s early demonstrations that have continued. On Monday, student activists defied the 2pm deadline to leave the encampment. Instead, hundreds of protesters remained. A handful of counter-demonstrators waved Israeli flags, and one held a sign reading: “Where are the anti-Hamas chants?”While the university did not call the police to remove the demonstrators, school spokesperson Ben Chang said suspensions had started but could provide few details. Protest organisers said they were not aware of any suspensions as of Monday evening.Columbia’s handling of the demonstrations has prompted federal complaints.A class-action lawsuit on behalf of Jewish students alleges a breach of contract by Columbia, claiming the university failed to maintain a safe learning environment, despite policies and promises. It also challenges the move away from in-person classes and seeks quick court action requiring Columbia to provide security for the students.Meanwhile, a legal group representing pro-Palestinian students is urging the US Department of Education’s civil rights office to investigate Columbia’s compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for how they have been treated.A university spokesperson declined to comment on the complaints. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Kristi Noem’s story of killing her dog points to class two misdemeanor

      by

      Kristi Noem, the South Dakota governor and Republican vice-presidential hopeful, may have committed a class two misdemeanor offence when her fated dog Cricket, a 14-month-old wirehair pointer Noem deemed “untrainable” for hunting pheasant, killed a neighbor’s chickens.Under South Dakota law, “any person owning, keeping, or harboring a dog that chases, worries, injures, or kills any poultry or domestic animal is guilty of a class two misdemeanor and is liable for damages to the owner thereof for any injury caused by the dog to any such poultry or animal.”Though Cricket’s chicken attack has made headlines in recent days, however, it was not the main subject of such reports.Instead, Noem’s startling description of her decision to kill Cricket – and also an unnamed, un-castrated and unruly goat – has pitched her into an unprecedented political storm.The story is included in Noem’s new book, No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong With Politics and How We Move America Forward.The book will be released next month. Last week, the Guardian obtained a copy and reported the passage in which Noem describes killing Cricket and the goat after Cricket first ruined a pheasant hunt, then killed the chickens.“I hated that dog,” Noem writes, before describing how she shot Cricket and the goat in the same gravel pit, the goat having to be shot twice, the second shotgun blast after Noem left the goat to fetch more shells from her truck.Noem says what she thought she had to do was not “pleasant”, and describes how her actions startled a construction crew and confused her young daughter.She also seems to acknowledge the possible effects of including the story in her book, writing: “I guess if I were a better politician I wouldn’t tell the story here.”News of Noem’s tale did indeed set off a political firestorm, with observers suggesting she had irrevocably damaged her chances of being named running mate to Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president who faces 88 felony charges of his own and was adjudicated a rapist but nonetheless maintains his grip on his party.Noem twice defended her account of killing Cricket and the goat, saying as she does in the book that such actions are sometimes necessary in farming, and show her willingness to do difficult things in life as well as in politics.But each defense added to her problems.In the first statement, Noem both referred to recently putting down three horses and advertised her book, promising “more real, honest and politically incorrect stories that’ll have the media gasping”. That drew accusations of insensitivity.In her second statement, Noem said she could “understand why some people are upset about a 20-year-old story of Cricket” but added: “The fact is, South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill livestock can be put down.“Given that Cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them” – Noem says the dog “whipped around to bite me” after killing the chickens – “I decided what I did.”In a separate section of South Dakota’s codified laws, the definition of livestock makes no mention of poultry, which would have meant the law did not apply to Noem.But asked about a South Dakota legislature definition that says livestock “means cattle, sheep, horses, mules, swine, goats, and buffalo”, omitting chickens or poultry in general, Ian Fury, Noem’s communications chief, advised the Guardian to “take a look at SDCL 40-34-1 and 40-34-2.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWhen the Guardian did, questions arose.Section 40-34-1 of the South Dakota codified laws – Killing of dog lawful when disturbing domestic animals – says: “It shall be lawful for any person to kill any dog found chasing, worrying, injuring, or killing poultry or domestic animals except on the premises of the owners of said dog or dogs.”Noem writes that she killed Cricket on her own property.The following section – 40-34-2, Liability of owner for damages by dog disturbing domestic animals – seems to contain greater potential legal jeopardy.It says: “Any person owning, keeping, or harboring a dog that chases, worries, injures, or kills any poultry or domestic animal is guilty of a class two misdemeanor and is liable for damages to the owner thereof.”In her book, Noem writes that she apologised to the family that owned the chickens Cricket killed, “wrote them a check for the price they asked, and helped them dispose of the carcasses littering the scene of the crime”.Asked if SDCL 40-34-2 indicated that Noem might have committed a class two misdemeanor, Fury did not immediately comment.The South Dakota laws apparently applicable to the case of Noem and Cricket were passed before the dog’s death.In her weekend statement, Noem said her story was 20 years old. That would place it in 2004, when she was in her early 30s, three years before she entered South Dakota state politics and six years before she won a seat in Congress as part of the hard-right Tea Party wave. Noem was elected governor of South Dakota in 2018.South Dakota was the last of the 50 states to make animal cruelty a felony, passing legislation in 2014. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Kristi Noem defends killing dog: ‘Cricket had shown aggressive behavior’

      by

      Kristi Noem, the South Dakota governor and Republican vice-presidential hopeful, on Sunday again defended killing a family dog and goat on her farm, two days after the Guardian revealed how she describes those actions in a forthcoming book.“I can understand why some people are upset about a 20-year-old story of Cricket, one of the working dogs at our ranch, in my upcoming book – No Going Back,” Noem wrote on Twitter/X.“The book is filled with many honest stories of my life, good and bad days, challenges, painful decisions, and lessons learned.”Noem’s book comes out in May. The Guardian obtained a copy and reported how Noem recounts the story of Cricket – a 14-month-old, wire-haired pointer – ruining a pheasant hunt and killing a neighbour’s chickens.“I hated that dog,” Noem writes, adding that Cricket tried to bite her, proving herself “untrainable”, “dangerous to anyone she came in contact with” and “less than worthless … as a hunting dog”.“At that moment,” says Noem, “I realised I had to put her down.”The governor describes taking Cricket to a gravel pit and killing her – then deciding to mete out the same fate to the unruly, uncastrated goat. The second killing took two shots, says Noem, adding that when it was all over her daughter Kennedy came home from school and asked: “Hey, where’s Cricket?”Kennedy Noem is now 27 years old, making her, by the governor’s statement, just seven at the time of her mother’s decision to shoot Cricket and the unnamed goat.Amid widespread disbelief that a contender to be selected as Donald Trump’s running mate would commit such a tale to paper, many observers deemed Noem’s hopes of national office as dead as Cricket and the unnamed goat.Noem defended her story on Friday, saying it demonstrated the harsh realities of rural life that only recently saw her family put down three horses too.But animal rights groups condemned Noem.“There’s no rational and plausible excuse for Noem shooting a juvenile dog for normal puppy-like behavior,” said a statement from Wayne Pacelle, president of Animal Wellness Action and the Center for a Humane Economy. “If she is unable to handle an animal, ask a family member or a neighbor to help. If training and socializing the dog doesn’t work, then give the dog to a more caring family or to a shelter for adoption.“Raising and caring for a dog takes patience and kindness. Tens of millions of Americans who know and love dogs have to wonder about a person who expresses hatred for a young female dog and kills her.”Meanwhile, one South Dakotan wrote to police Friday asking them “to ascertain whether all the legal and ethical guidelines were followed, given the high-profile nature of the incident”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Governor Kristi Noem … has publicly stated that she shot and killed her own dog,” said the missive that Chaz Stevens, the chief executive officer of ESADoggy, sent to police. “This incident raises significant concerns about animal welfare and the circumstances that led to such a drastic action.In her Sunday post, Noem said: “What I learned from my years of public service, especially leading South Dakota through Covid, is people are looking for leaders who are authentic, willing to learn from the past, and don’t shy away from tough challenges.“My hope is anyone reading this book will have an understanding that I always work to make the best decisions I can for the people in my life.“The fact is, South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill livestock can be put down. Given that Cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them, I decided what I did.”According to the South Dakota legislature, livestock “means cattle, sheep, horses, mules, swine, goats, and buffalo”.A spokesperson for Noem did not immediately respond to a request for comment about how chickens are not mentioned in the state’s definition of livestock.The governor’s post Sunday did not mention her decision to kill the goat.Ramon Antonio Vargas contributed reporting More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Mike Johnson’s busy week: Ukraine aid and threats to protesters – what next?

      by

      Democrat Nancy Pelosi cited his “integrity” and described him as “courageous”. Republican Michael McCaul called him a “profile in courage”. CNN hailed him as “an unlikely Churchill”.Mike Johnson, speaker of the House of Representatives, began the week showered in plaudits for leading the House in approving $95bn in urgently needed wartime aid for Ukraine, Israel and other US allies.It was widely noted that Johnson had done his homework, changed his mind, prayed for guidance and risked his job by facing down far-right extremists in his own party including Marjorie Taylor Greene, who had threatened to oust him if he helped Ukraine.But the chorus of praise-singers echoed past renditions when the likes of William Barr, Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney were valorised for doing the bare minimum by denouncing the serial liar and election denier Donald Trump. (Barr, incidentally, now says he will support Trump in November.) That is how low the bar is now set.Any liberals tempted to celebrate the anti-abortion climate sceptic Johnson as moderate adjacent – perhaps even a secret member of the anti-Trump resistance – received a wake-up call on Wednesday when he staged a performative press conference at Columbia University in New York, telling protesters against Israel’s war in Gaza to “go back to class” and threatening to cut federal funding for colleges.The speaker followed up with an interview on CNN in which he pushed the widely debunked claim that Hamas placed babies in ovens and cooked them alive during the 7 October attack, and the sweeping generalisation that students were waving flags to celebrate the perpetrators – thereby dismissing honest concerns for the lives of innocent Palestinian men, women and children.It was a blatant attempt to play to the Fox News audience, whipping up hysteria about student demonstrations spiralling out of control, just as Republicans did about the Black Lives Matter protests in the summer of 2020. Johnson and others sense what a difficult wedge issue this is for Joe Biden and Democrats.Ilhan Omar, a Democratic congresswoman from Minnesota, told MSNBC: “This is a man who is holding on to his speakership. He knows he might be on the chopping block. And it is not surprising that he would go out to Columbia University and stir up really more anger and hate and endanger the lives of young people who are at the encampment at Columbia.”Indeed, Johnson’s position remains precarious in the House as Greene of Georgia, Paul Gosar of Arizona and Thomas Massie of Kentucky threaten to move to oust him. Rightwing media personalities have turned against him: Steve Bannon, host of the influential War Room podcast, called the Ukraine aid package “a desecration” and called for Johnson to be fired.That is because, not quite six months on the job as speaker, Johnson appeared to heed the advice of the CIA and others that leaving Ukraine to fend for itself as it loses ground against the Russian invasion would be catastrophic for Europe and the world. He moved past the populist far-right flank, relying on Democrats to push the package forward, a highly unusual move in the bitterly polarised House.Johnson, who helped lead Trump’s failed legal efforts to overturn the 2020 election loss to Joe Biden, told colleagues: “I want to be on the right side of history.” He added to reporters that he would “let the chips fall where they may” regarding his own job. It appeared to be a principled conversion, a noble sacrifice by the Christian conservative.But there were other factors at play. Johnson had displayed his loyalty to Trump by joining him at Mar-a-Lago and proclaiming he could be the “most consequential president yet” if he is returned to the White House. The ever transactional former president expressed support for a plan to structure some Ukraine aid as a loan by way of compromise and said, “I stand by the speaker,” distancing himself from Greene’s effort to remove Johnson.Back in Washington, Johnson disclosed that his son was heading to the Naval Academy this autumn. “To put it bluntly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys,” he told reporters. “This is a live-fire exercise for me, as it is so many American families. This is not a game. This is not a joke.”As so often in history, the political and personal had converged to make the answer obvious. Michael Steele, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, says: “His son is going into the Naval Academy this fall and he recognises, oh, yeah, if I don’t get this right now, my son could be shipped off to Ukraine in four years. When it becomes personal for all these people, it is amazing how their tune changes, and the same is true with other issues like abortion and military service.“But in the main he looked at it objectively and realised that he was in a no-win. They [the far right] weren’t going to give him the latitude he needed to secure the right solution that would appease the hardliners, because what they were asking for no one in Congress would agree to. How do we know that? Just look at the margins by which the measures passed.”Johnson seems likely to stagger on as speaker until November’s elections, having given Democrats cause to prop him up if Greene pulls the trigger. They did not trust his ill-fated predecessor, Kevin McCarthy; they do trust Johnson a little more. But his crude interventions in the Gaza protests could soon call that bargain into question, forcing some to re-examine whether his motives on Ukraine were quite so heroic.Comedian Ronny Chieng observed on Comedy Central’s Daily Show: “I salute you, Mike Johnson. I mean, not now. But six months from now I’ll work up the courage to do it.” More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Kristi Noem dogged by poor polling amid fallout from tale of killing puppy

      by

      Kristi Noem, the South Dakota governor and Republican vice-presidential hopeful, saw polling numbers plummet after the Guardian revealed that she writes in a new book about the day she shot dead a hunting dog and an un-castrated goat, a revelation that ignited a political storm.Announcing what it called its “Noem Puppy Murder Poll Findings”, New River Strategies, a Democratic firm, said 81% of Americans disapproved of Noem’s decision to shoot Cricket, a 14-month-old wire-haired pointer who Noem says ruined a pheasant hunt and killed a neighbour’s chickens, thereby earning a trip to a gravel pit to die.According to Noem’s account, the goat, which Noem did not name, followed Cricket to the pit because Noem deemed his odour and behaviour unacceptable on her farm. By Noem’s own detailed admission, it took two blasts from a shotgun, separated by a walk back to her truck for more shells, to finish the goat off.Noem’s book – No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward – will be published in May. The Guardian obtained a copy.The governor’s extraordinary admission made news because she has long been seen to be auditioning to be picked for vice-president by Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.On Friday, amid widespread disbelief that Noem chose to tell such a horrific story in such detail in a campaign book, most observers thought her chances of winning the Trump veepstakes were over.Wrote Meghan McCain, a conservative pundit whose father, John McCain, in 2008 made one of the most disastrous vice-presidential picks of all time, in the form of extremist Sarah Palin: “You can recover from a lot of things in politics, change the narrative etc – but not from killing a dog.“All I will distinctly think about Kristi Noem now is that she murdered a puppy who was ‘acting up’ – which is obviously cruel and insane. Good luck with that VP pick[,] lady.”According to New River Strategies: “While 37% of Republicans are still not sure if [Noem] would be a good choice, 84% of them report liking or loving dogs – not a promising sign.”Fourteen percent of respondents to the poll still thought Noem would be a good choice for vice-president to Trump. Among Republicans, 21% thought Noem would be a good pick, to 42% who did not.Among self-identified “very conservative voters”, 28% said Noem would be a good choice, against 32% who said she would not.New River noted: “A plurality of Americans who do not like dogs still disapprove of the governor’s action. While 87% of Americans who love dogs disapprove of what the governor did, so too do 48% of Americans who do not care for the animals.”Politico, which reported the New River poll, also noted Noem had fallen in a ranking of potential Trump running mates offered by PredictIt, an online betting firm.By Saturday, Noem had fallen from second, behind Tim Scott, the South Carolina senator, to fourth, also behind Elise Stefanik, the New York representative, and Tulsi Gabbard, a former representative and Democratic presidential hopeful whose own campaign book, out on Tuesday, does not contain any scenes of shooting puppies.Noem responded to reports about her book by saying: “We love animals, but tough decisions like this happen all the time on a farm.” She added that her family recently put down three horses.Her communications director, Ian Fury, cited polling showing Noem as the only potential Trump vice-presidential pick with a positive favourability rating in four battleground states: Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.“This is why the liberal media is so eager to attack Kristi Noem,” Fury said. “She’s the potential running mate they fear most.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe poll from Kaplan Strategies, which describes itself as bipartisan, was conducted the previous weekend but released on Friday, the day the Guardian broke the story of Noem, Cricket the dog and the unnamed goat.On Saturday, the Guardian attempted to contact public figures whose glowing recommendations of Noem’s book are printed on its jacket and introductory pages.In his blurb, Trump calls Noem “a tremendous leader, one of the best”, adding: “This book, it’s a winner … you’ve got to read it!”Asked whether Trump had read the whole book before recommending it, and whether he had comment about the controversy over Noem’s tale of killing domestic animals, the former president’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, did not immediately respond.Fox News spokespeople did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Rachel Campos-Duffy, a host whose quote on Noem’s book salutes her “common sense and fearless fight for freedom”, adding: “Get ready to be inspired!”No Going Back is also blurbed by Chaya Raichik, creator of the trolling Libs of TikTok social media account; James Golden, also known as Bo Snerdley, formerly sidekick to the late rightwing shock jock Rush Limbaugh; and Riley Gaines, a former college swimmer who campaigns against transgender participation in women’s sports.By Saturday, Raichik had not commented about Noem’s dog-killing confession. Snerdley had reposted a Daily Mail version of the Guardian report.Gaines, who calls Noem’s book “the perfect blueprint for young Americans on how to move our nation forward”, did not comment on the controversy over Noem’s decision to kill a 14-month-old dog. She did, however, post a video of eight puppies sleeping in a pile on a pink rug.“The pups have arrived!” she wrote. “Be still my heart.” More

    • 263 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Hush-money trial live: Trump appears to repeat call for lifting of gag order after Pecker testimony ends – as it happened

      by

      In a post written, unusually, in the third person on Donald Trump’s Truth Social account, the former president has once again demanded Judge Juan Merchan lift a gag order in his trial on charges of falsifying business documents:
      45th President Donald J. Trump is again the Republican Nominee for President of the United States, and is currently dominating in the Polls. However, he is being inundated by the Media with questions because of this Rigged Biden Trial, which President Trump is not allowed to comment on, or answer, because of Judge Juan Merchan’s UNPRECEDENTED AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL Gag Order.
      …
      We request that Judge Merchan immediately LIFT THE GAG ORDER, so that President Trump is able to freely state his views, feelings, and policies. He is asking for his Constitutional Right to Free Speech. If it is not granted, this again becomes a Rigged Election!
      Prosecutors, meanwhile, have alleged that Trump has violated Merchan’s order prohibiting him from speaking publicly about witnesses, prosecutors, jurors, court staff and their relatives 14 times. They’ve asked the judge to hold Trump in contempt, but he has yet to rule on the request.Here is a wrap-up of the day’s key events:
      David Pecker, the former National Enquirer publisher and Trump ally, took to the stand in the Manhattan courtroom for a fourth day of testimony.
      Trump’s lawyers continued their cross-examination of Pecker, presenting a granular look into a hush-money scheme that prosecutors allege was meant to sway the 2016 election in Trump’s favor.
      Trump attorney Emil Bove’s questions prompted Pecker to effectively say that coverage beneficial to Trump had been business as usual, as the defense team tried to chip away at the prosecution’s claim that there had been an illicit conspiracy to sway the 2016 election.
      Pecker testified that the Enquirer had run negative stories about the Clintons as part of the effort to help the Trump campaign, agreed to in a meeting in August 2015, as the defense attempted to show that Pecker helped run positive stories about Trump and negative stories about other politicians even before the alleged catch-and-kill scheme.
      Trump’s legal team also appeared to try driving wedges into the notion that Trump’s 2006 affair with Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model, had been any real threat to Trump’s reputation. Pecker admitted Trump had not paid him any money directly related to McDougal.
      Rhona Graff, Trump’s longtime executive assistant, was called to the stand on Friday afternoon as the prosecution’s second witness.
      Pecker testified earlier in the week that Graff had often been the conduit for his communications with Trump, routing his calls and summoning him to a January 2017 meeting at Trump Tower in which he and Trump discussed some of the hush-money arrangements at issue in the case.
      Graff testified that contact information for Daniels and McDougal had been in Trump’s contacts. She said Daniels had once been at Trump’s offices in Trump Tower, and that she had assumed Daniels was there to discuss potentially being a contestant on The Apprentice.
      Gary Farro was called as the prosecution’s third witness. Farro works at Flagstar Bank as a private client adviser and was previously at First Republic, which was used by Cohen.
      Prosecutors accused Trump of violating a court-imposed gag order – which bars him from speaking publicly about witnesses, prosecutors, jurors, court staff and their relatives – four more times over the course of the week, bringing the total violations to 14, prosecutors allege.
      Prosecutors said judge Juan Merchan should hold Trump in contempt of court and fine him $1,000 for each violation. Merchan has yet to rule on the alleged violations.
      Nevertheless, in a post written, unusually, in the third person on his Truth Social account, the former president has once again demanded Judge Juan Merchan lift a gag order in his trial on charges of falsifying business documents. “We request that Judge Merchan immediately LIFT THE GAG ORDER, so that President Trump is able to freely state his views, feelings, and policies,” the post said.
      That’s it as we wrap up the blog for today. Thank you for following along.With court ending for today, here’s a look at how David Pecker says he ran negative stories on Hillary Clinton to boost Donald Trump.The Guardian’s Lauren Aratani and Victoria Bekiempis report:The testimony of former tabloid publisher David Pecker in Donald Trump’s criminal trial on Friday presented a granular look into a hush-money scheme that prosecutors allege was meant to sway the 2016 election in the real estate mogul’s favor.On cross-examination, defense attorney Emil Bove’s questions prompted Pecker to in effect say that coverage beneficial to Trump had been business as usual, as the ex-president’s legal team tries to chip away at the prosecution’s claim that there had been an illicit conspiracy to sway the 2016 race.Pecker was instrumental in coordinating three hush-money payments that were made during the 2016 election campaign to quash negative stories about Trump.In cross-examination on his fourth day of testimony, Pecker was grilled by Bove about whether he benefited from running positive stories about Trump and negative stories about other politicians even before the alleged catch-and-kill scheme.Pecker testified that the Enquirer had run negative stories about the Clintons as part of the effort to help the Trump campaign, agreed to in a meeting on August 2015.For the full story, click here:Farro’s testimony is done for the day, and the jurors have left.As Trump left the courtroom for the weekend, he seemed to flatten his lips, as if in recognition of an observer.Farro just discussed Cohen’s interest in opening up an account for Essential Consultants LLC, which he claimed was for a real estate consulting business.While testimony about bank records is most often very dry, observers have had a brief reprieve due to Farro’s sense of humor. “When Mr Cohen called me, I was on the golf course,” Farro said, offering a wry smile. “Very cliche for a banker, I know.”Farro is now talking about Michael Cohen’s establishment of a business bank account for Resolution Consultants LLC.Farro explained that it hadn’t officially been opened because Cohen hadn’t deposited money in the account.In a post written, unusually, in the third person on Donald Trump’s Truth Social account, the former president has once again demanded Judge Juan Merchan lift a gag order in his trial on charges of falsifying business documents:
      45th President Donald J. Trump is again the Republican Nominee for President of the United States, and is currently dominating in the Polls. However, he is being inundated by the Media with questions because of this Rigged Biden Trial, which President Trump is not allowed to comment on, or answer, because of Judge Juan Merchan’s UNPRECEDENTED AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL Gag Order.
      …
      We request that Judge Merchan immediately LIFT THE GAG ORDER, so that President Trump is able to freely state his views, feelings, and policies. He is asking for his Constitutional Right to Free Speech. If it is not granted, this again becomes a Rigged Election!
      Prosecutors, meanwhile, have alleged that Trump has violated Merchan’s order prohibiting him from speaking publicly about witnesses, prosecutors, jurors, court staff and their relatives 14 times. They’ve asked the judge to hold Trump in contempt, but he has yet to rule on the request.The next witness called to the stand is Gary Farro, who works at Flagstar Bank.Let’s hear what he has to say.After Rhona Graff’s testimony, Donald Trump left the courtroom without speaking to reporters gathered in the hallway outside.Someone from the press shouted a question about why Stormy Daniels had been at Trump Tower, but Trump did not respond.In her cross-examination of Graff, Susan Necheles appeared to try to set the stage for the defense that Trump might have been distracted while he was signing checks.Was he multi-tasking when signing checks? Was he on the phone? she asked. “I believe it happened. It wasn’t unusual,” Graff said.Donald Trump’s former executive assistant Rhona Graff has departed the witness stand after testimony in which she elaborated on how her former boss may have come to know adult film actor Stormy Daniels.As Graff was walking out of the courtroom, she passed Trump, who stood to greet her. It was unclear what he said to her, but one had the impression that he thanked her. This all happened in front of the jury.Necheles worked hard to downplay Daniels’ presence at Trump Tower.She asked about the evolution of The Apprentice. “He wanted people who were sort of controversial sometimes, right?” Necheles asked. Did Graff ever get the sense that Daniels was trying out for a slot?“I vaguely recall hearing … that she was one of the people that may be an interesting contestant on the show,” Graff said.“And the prosecutor just referred to her as an adult film actress, correct?” Necheles asked.“Uh, yes,” Graff replied.Necheles then asked: ”You understood that to mean, colloquially speaking, a porn star?”“I’d say that’s a good synonym,” Graff replied.Asked if she’d heard Trump say that Daniels was potentially being considered, Graff replied: “I can’t recall a specific instance where I heard it, it was part of the office chatter.”“You understood that she was there to discuss being cast for The Apprentice, correct?” Necheles inquired.“I assumed that,” Graff said.Susan Necheles, an attorney for Trump, is handling the cross-examination of Graff.“Was he a good boss?” Necheles asked early on.“I think that he was fair,” said Graff, who worked for Trump for 34 years. “He was fair and a respectful boss to me … all that time.”Hoffinger also asked Graff about Trump’s email contacts.Graff said that Karen McDougal’s information was in Trump’s contacts; there was also someone named “Stormy”.Hoffinger asked whether, on one occasion, she saw Stormy Daniels at Trump Tower.“I have a vague recollection of seeing her in the reception area on the 26th floor,” she said, adding that to the best of her recollection, this was before the 2016 election.“When you saw her at Trump Tower, did you know she was an adult film actress?” Hoffinger asked.”Yes, I did,” Graff replied.An attorney for Trump then rose to cross-examine Graff.Graff, who was Trump’s longtime executive assistant, said that she is testifying pursuant to a subpoena.Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked whether she had lawyers with her today. Graff said yes. Who was paying for the attorneys, Hoffinger pressed” “The Trump Organization,” Graff said.And who did she understand to be the current owner of the Trump Organization? “Mr Trump,” Graff replied.David Pecker is now off the witness stand after Donald Trump’s attorneys briefly cross-examined him a second time.The prosecution has now called its second witness: Rhona Graff, Trump’s longtime executive assistant.She isn’t in the spotlight much, but New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, did subpoena Graff for testimony two years ago as part of her civil investigation into his business dealings. That case ultimately resulted in a judge issuing a $454m judgment against the former president earlier this year. Here’s more on Graff’s testimony:We’re again discussing David Pecker’s unwillingness to deal with the Stormy Daniel story – and why he nonetheless urged Michael Cohen to snap up her account.On the stand, Pecker recalled discussing money for payoffs with Cohen. “I said to Michael Cohen, after paying for the doorman and the Karen McDougal story, I wasn’t going to pay anything further and I wasn’t a bank,” Pecker told jurors. He also described, again, his discussions with Dylan Howard when the Stormy Daniels story came to light.“When he first reach out to you about the story, what did you tell Dylan Howard?” Steinglass asked.“I told Dylan Howard that there is no possible way would I buy this story for $120,000 and I didn’t want to have anything to do with a porn star.”Why did he contact Cohen about Daniels?“Based on our original agreement,” Pecker recalled, “any stories … that would be very embarrassing, I want to communicate that to Michael Cohen right away. If he heard it from somebody else, [Cohen] would go ballistic.”“But you were still going to fulfil your obligation … so that the campaign could squash it?” Steinglass pressed.Pecker said yes. More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Ruby Bridges: civil rights pioneer rejects claim book makes white children uncomfortable

      by

      Increasingly, the US civil rights icon Ruby Bridges – the first Black child to integrate a school in Louisiana – has seen some adults seek to prevent grade-school students from accessing the books and films that chronicle her story, saying the tale makes white children feel bad about themselves.But that justification is “ridiculous” because “my biggest fans are kids all around the world”, Bridges told NBC’s Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker in an interview airing on Sunday morning’s episode of the show.“All of the letters, all of the mail, I have little girls from all walks of life, different nationalities that dress up like Ruby Bridges,” the now 69-year-old activist said in an excerpt of the interview that NBC shared in advance with the Guardian.“I found through … traveling that they resonate with the loneliness, probably the pain that I felt. There’s all sorts of reasons that they are drawn to my story. So I would have to disagree [that it makes certain children feel guilty].”Delivered in a recurring segment known as Meet the Moment, which aims to spotlight people who influence political issues outside Washington, Bridges’ remarks to Welker come a little more than a year after one parent’s complaint prompted a school in Florida to stop showing its students a 1988 made-for-TV movie about her.The parent in question complained that the movie – which some schools usually show to students during Black History Month in February – might teach children that “white people hate Black people”.Separately, Bridges’ autobiographical picture book I Am Ruby Bridges was included in a collection of 64 “diverse” titles from Scholastic Books – the US’s largest children’s book publisher – that librarians are allowed to opt out of for popular book fairs that Scholastic helps stage at campuses nationwide.Scholastic defended itself by saying it had been forced into that position to shield teachers and librarians in largely conservative regions which may have enacted prohibitions against children’s books addressing race, gender and sexuality.Other works by Bridges have also been targeted by book bans schemed up by groups such as Moms for Liberty.In her conversation with Welker, Bridges dismissed the idea that her experience could unduly make white children uncomfortable.“That’s just an excuse not to share the truth, to cover up history,” Bridges said. “But I believe that history is sacred – that none of us should have the right to change or alter history in any way.”Bridges was six years old in November 1960 when US deputy marshals escorted her past jeering crowds into New Orleans’ William Frantz elementary school.With her white sweater, matching hair bow, black patent leather shoes and a small satchel in her right hand that day, she became the first Black child to desegregate an all-white elementary school in New Orleans – a scene immortalized in the 1963 Norman Rockwell painting named The Problem We All Live With.Bridges grew up to start an eponymous foundation dedicated to promoting tolerance and change through academic education. Meanwhile, the Akili Academy now occupying the school which Bridges integrated has a majority Black student population and is a stop on Louisiana’s Civil Rights Trail. More

    • 225 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      How much did #MeToo change for women? Let’s ask Harvey Weinstein today – or Donald Trump | Marina Hyde

      by

      According to his representatives, former Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein is still digesting the overturning of his rape conviction by a New York court, but they did come out to say he was “cautiously excited”. Cautiously excited? I’m not sure these are the words I’d alight on to paint a word-picture of a rapist. You might as well say “tentatively aroused”. Then again, as we’re about to discuss, quite a lot of guys don’t particularly have to worry about what they say or do, or how they say or do it. It’s only natural that Harvey should very much want to be one of them again.Speaking of word-pictures, though, how’s this for a vignette of our times? When they heard the news that Weinstein’s conviction had been overturned on Thursday, a whole host of reporters happened to be looking at the exact spot in the exact New York courtroom that he’d sat in when that original judgment had been handed down. This was because they were waiting for Donald Trump to sit in it for Thursday’s proceedings in his hush money trial. Mr Trump, you might recall, is in such a lot of trouble that he is the presumptive Republican nominee and current bookies’ favourite to win the US presidency again, though admittedly he lags behind Weinstein on the sexual assault and misconduct front, given that only 26 women have accused him of it. Ultimately, though, I guess the question is: if #MeToo “went too far”, what would “going just far enough” have looked like?In seeking to answer that question, I’m somehow picturing the Best Picture climax of this year’s Oscars, with lifetime dictator Donald J Trump opening the envelope and calling it for Oppenheimer, before cackling: “I’m kidding with you, Nolan – the award goes to The Passion of the Harvey. Come on up here, all the guys from the Weinstein Company. And, Louis, you did a beautiful job with the role. You can add this one to your latest Grammy.”Or hang on – maybe #MeToo going just far enough would just look like a supreme court justice who is credibly accused of sexual assault deliberating with his colleagues/fellow placemen on whether the president can commit crimes absolutely without consequences, and then them deciding that it’s honestly too hard to decide on for now, thus delaying the guy’s trial for trying to overturn the results of a democratic election. Because that one really happened, also on Thursday.View image in fullscreenNot to flit too giddily between courtrooms, but we should note that despite Thursday’s news, Weinstein’s rape conviction in a Californian court still stands. As for what went wrong with his New York trial, it includes the legal error of the trial judge’s decision to allow testimony from four women who were not directly part of the case in hand. Long story short: unfortunately, simply too many women told the court that Weinstein had sexually assaulted them, which has now rendered his sexual assault trial null and void. The whole thing will have to be run anew, forcing an approved selection of those women to have to testify all over again. And yes – we might all have a number of strong views about those who benefit from the vagaries of the US legal system, but quite often you can’t print those views over this side of the Atlantic because of the vagaries of the UK legal system. Maybe we all get the legal systems we deserve. Except lawyers. You can’t help feeling those guys are the one set of people reaping unjust deserts from the legal system.Anyhow, back to even more of Thursday’s court news coming out of New York, where another judge was also ruling against Trump’s appeal of the $83m defamation verdict in the case brought against him by the writer E Jean Carroll, who alleged he raped her in a department store changing room. Given Trump was in the aforementioned courtroom across town, it’s quite something to be able to say that the day nevertheless still turned out to be a net good one for him, what with the supreme court’s decision not to yet make a decision on whether he can stand trial on charges of conspiring to overthrow the election. Certainly it was news about which he could be cautiously excited.But perhaps not about which he could be completely surprised, given his supreme efforts to bend the court to his will. Only the day before, the court had been hearing the state of Idaho argue for a ban on abortion even in cases where it is required for health-saving care. Trump’s campaign trail rallies see him frequently and repeatedly boast of being the puppet master of the judgment that overthrew Roe v Wade, the 1973 supreme court judgment that protected federal abortion rights. And he’s arguably right about that, what with having appointed three justices to the court and upset a balance the rest of the world is supposed to regard as fabled. Obviously, Trump’s pride in the achievement means so much more coming from a man who I’d love to joke has probably paid for more abortions than there are compromised supreme court justices, even if legal discussions over retaining that statement in this column are likely to run to more time than it took to write the column.On balance, you couldn’t accuse Thursday of being a great day for Lady Justice – or indeed for lady justice. As it turns out, all the so-called reckonings of the past few years can be unreckoned with far more easily than they were won. The only thing that’s gone “too far” is the pretence that anything went far enough.
      Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist
      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