Trump wanted to court-martial the retired Navy SEAL who led the bin Laden raid for criticizing him, former defense chief says

Brent D. Griffiths
Tue, May 10, 2022,

Former Pentagon chief says Trump wanted to punish former top military commanders who criticized him.

Mark Esper writes that Trump wanted to court-martial a retired Navy admiral and a retired general.

Esper says Trump's ire was "spun up" by stories in publications like Breitbart.

Former President Donald Trump wanted to take the extraordinary step of reactivating retired US Navy Adm. William McRaven so that he could court-martial the former Navy SEAL commander for criticizing him, Trump's former Pentagon chief claims in his new book.

Former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper writes that he and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, had to talk then-President Trump out of a plan to recall both retired US Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal and McRaven to active duty as a way to open the two former senior military officers up to court-martial proceedings.

"Doing this 'will backfire on you, Mr. President,' we said," Esper wrote of a May 2020 meeting in his book, "A Sacred Oath: Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense During Extraordinary Times," which is out today.

Trump told Esper and Milley that McRaven and McChrystal were "so disloyal" because of what he thought they were doing and had said about him. Esper writes that Trump "was spun up" by media stories in Breitbart claiming that McChrystal was advising Democrats on how to use artificial intelligence to "track down and counter Trump supporters."

Both McRaven and McChrystal had also crossed Trump in the past, which only further inflamed the president.

In 2018, McChrystal — who served as the head of the Joint Special Operations Command from 2003 to 2008 and later was appointed head of all international forces in Afghanistan — criticized Trump's decision to remove US troops from Syria and said he believed Trump was immoral and doesn't "tell the truth."

McRaven, a former head of US Special Operations Command whose military career included leading Operation Neptune Spear, the raid on al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, was a frequent critic of Trump throughout his presidency.

Shortly after Trump's inauguration, McRaven criticized the president's continued attacks on members of the media, arguing it was "the greatest threat to democracy" in his lifetime.

In a 2017 Washington Post column, McRaven said the Trump White House decision to revoke the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan was an effort to "suppress freedom of speech and punish critics" and said he would "consider it an honor" if his security clearance was also revoked.

McRaven gave a number of media interviews and wrote several more op-eds criticizing Trump during his presidency. While it is not uncommon for retired military officers to give their opinion for or against a president, McRaven's comments attracted significantly more attention due to his rank and notoriety.

Milley, Esper writes, finally got Trump to back down from his threat to go after retired officers by promising to "personally call the officers and ask them to dial it back."

McChrystal told Talking Points Memo that he did not remember receiving such a call from Milley. A spokesperson for Milley did not respond to a request for comment.

Esper writes in his book that the entire episode was emblematic of a White House that constantly pushed, if not sometimes crossed, the line between politics and the management of America's defense. Loyalty purges, Esper writes, targeted both current and former commanders.

"Worse yet, people were removed from positions simply because the White House wanted to replace them with more hard-core Trump loyalists, regardless of qualifications," writes Esper, who often drew Trump's ire and was fired and replaced shortly after Trump's loss in the 2020 election.

Trump, in response to the publication of Esper's book, repeatedly called his former Pentagon chief "Yesper" and claimed that he had to effectively "run the military" himself.

Mark Esper said Trump told him to 'get rid of' impeachment witness Alexander Vindman

Brent D. Griffiths
Tue, May 10, 2022,

A composite image of then-President Donald Trump (left) and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who is now retired

.Doug Mills-Pool/Getty Images; Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call via Getty

Trump's former Pentagon chief detailed a significant effort to punish an impeachment witness.


Mark Esper said the Trump White House went to great lengths to punish Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.


"He's a Never Trumper. We need to get rid of him," Esper said Trump told him of Vindman.

President Donald Trump and his White House engaged in a scorched-earth campaign to purge Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman from the US military after Vindman became a key witness during Trump's first impeachment, Trump's former Pentagon chief said in a new book.

"He lied about my great call," Trump told Defense Secretary Mark Esper during a White House meeting on April 21, 2020, Esper wrote in his new book, "A Sacred Oath: Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense During Extraordinary Times."

Esper went on to say that Trump added: Vindman "made it all up. He's a Never Trumper. We need to get rid of him."

Esper's book includes new allegations of the White House effort to derail Vindman's career and block his Pentagon-endorsed promotion to colonel, with Trump's chief of staff at one point shouting at Esper that the Army combat veteran and Purple Heart recipient would "never get promoted."

Vindman responded to an early excerpt by tweeting a photo of an angry Trump.



At the time, Vindman was a National Security Council staffer detailed to the White House. His shock to and abhorrence of Trump's July 25, 2019, call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was a major point in what became the first impeachment of the president after Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, who was running for president at the time, and his family. It was Vindman who insisted that the White House record of the call should mention Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company on whose board Biden's son Hunter had served.

Trump, who was later acquitted by the GOP-controlled Senate, has never budged from his defense that it was a "perfect phone call," and that his request for Zelenskyy "to do us a favor" in return for military aid that Trump ordered withheld was in no way evidence of a quid pro quo.

Vindman retired from the military after Trump's acquittal in the face of a massive pressure campaign. While some of these details were previously known, Esper meticulously documented alleged meetings and phone calls with Trump and Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, that underlined the effort to punish Vindman. Both Vindman and his brother Yevgeny were fired from the National Security Council days after Trump's acquittal.

Yevgeny wrote on Twitter that Esper's lack of support allowed their "actions to be politicized." He said he would join his brother in retirement later this summer.

Esper wrote that the White House's lust for revenge wasn't satiated with the Vindmans being ousted from the White House. Meadows, Esper said, was engaged in an effort to deny Vindman a proposed promotion, strongly implying that the White House would find more witnesses to support a misconduct complaint filed against Vindman.

Esper said he took particular issue with Meadows' handling of the complaint. Esper wrote that it became evident early on "that the NSC had no real evidence or witnesses to offer." Esper said this was later confirmed by an Army inspector general's investigation.

But Meadows, Esper wrote, wasn't done yet. Neither side could drag out the issue forever as the Pentagon had to submit Vindman and other prospective promotions to the Senate for approval. In July 2020, the showdown Esper said he was expecting all along over Vindman's future finally came to a head.

The National Security Council aide Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman being sworn in to testify before the House Intelligence Committee in November 2019.Andrew Harnik/AP

"I told Meadows, 'Yes, the Army was done,'" Esper wrote of a call that took place on July 6, 2020. He added that Meadows shouted back: "Then why didn't you call me, Secretary? I would have had them get you something."

Meadows then asked for "another week or so" in what Esper described as an effort "to drum up more witnesses" for the complaint. Esper said he again refused to drag out the process any longer.

"'If you don't want him on the list, then you should remove him, but I don't support it. It would be the wrong thing to do,'" I yelled into the phone. Meadows shouted back, 'He'll never get promoted!'" Esper wrote.

Esper wrote that Meadows asked for and received a White House meeting the following day to discuss the situation. Flanked by Pentagon lawyers, Esper laid out the case that there was no credible evidence to deny Vindman a promotion. Esper said Meadows finally relented in part because a White House lawyer told him that he could be accused of tampering with the investigation if he pressed too hard.

Spokespersons for Meadows and Vindman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump criticized Esper ahead of the book's publication, calling his former Pentagon chief "Yesper" and arguing that he was so ineffective that Trump himself had to run the US military.

WHITE REPUBLICANS FREEK OUT
‘Sex and Wickedness’: Ohio Parents Melt Down Over Historical Novel

Brooke Leigh Howard
Mon, May 9, 2022,

Milford Exempted Village Schools

Pearl-clutching parents in Ohio have forced a suburban school district outside Cincinnati to review a book so popular for its portrayal of historic events that it was adapted into a film.

According to a report by The Cincinnati Enquirer, parents of students at Milford Exempted Village Schools want In the Time of the Butterflies, by Julia Alvarez, on the chopping block due to its “sex and wickedness” and “unhealthy view of sexuality [and pornography],” despite the novel’s historical relevance.

“THIS CONTENT IS EXPLICIT! Our 10th graders are being forced to read this pornography in school!” Amy Boldt K posted April 25 in the Milford OH Neighborhood Group on Facebook. “I am disgusted beyond words.”

In the post, the woman claimed that students at Milford High School were required to read the book aloud in class, and she demanded the teacher be removed from her post. As an example of content she felt was unsuitable, Amy Boldt K provided an excerpt about a girl banding her breasts to keep them from growing, out of fear that they would bring her unwanted attention from men. She also added paragraphs about the book’s female protagonists being sexually assaulted.

“This is only a small content of the book [sic],” the woman wrote. “Are you concerned yet, parents?? Time for action.”

As of Monday afternoon, the post had more than 700 comments and had been shared more than 20 times.

Parents Fume After White School Board Members Can Diversity Day—Twice

In a statement to The Daily Beast, Milford Exempted Village Schools acknowledged that administrators received a “citizen’s request for reconsideration for [In the Time of the Butterflies] used in 10th grade English language arts.”

“Any time the district would receive such a request, the district follows Board Policy… which calls for the Superintendent to convene a review committee,” Milford Director of Communications Krista Boyle said in the statement. “This committee is composed of seven members, a mix of teachers, administrators, and parents.”

On its website, the school board says it understands some school literature may be controversial for students and, if parents wish, they can choose alternate reading material for their child that covers a similar “instructional purpose.” The district also says it doesn’t allow “any individual or group to exercise censorship over instructional materials and library collections, but it recognizes that, at times, a re-evaluation of certain material may be desirable.”

In the Time of the Butterflies is the fictionalized account of the Mirabal sisters, who protested the dictatorship of Rafael Trujillo in the 1960s Dominican Republic. Inspired by true events, the book focuses on the deadly massacres and human rights horrors of Trujillo’s authoritarian reign, the sisters’ opposition to his leadership, and their alleged murders by government troops. The novel was adapted into a film in 2001 that was rated PG-13.

School District Pulls Acclaimed Book on Racial Injustice Over One Parent’s Gripes

Boyle told The Daily Beast the novel encompasses themes of “magical realism and metafiction” in human nature and poses the question of how trauma carries through future generations.

In an email to The Daily Beast, Alvarez’s agent, Stuart Bernstein, said the author was “dismayed” by the furor, considering she personally experienced Trujillo’s “repressive dictatorship.”

“[It was a time] where reading books was considered suspect, where many books were banned,” she said.

Despite the fact the novel deals with true events, some Milford community members thought it was too much.

“Wow! That was rated R,” a member of the neighborhood Facebook group commented on Amy Boldt K’s post in regards to the excerpt. “I can see why kids would be uncomfortable to read this! Wtf.”

“That is beyond inappropriate!!” another member responded.

However, other community members and former students had high praise for Alvarez’s novel.

“Bro, this book is completely fine and not graphic at all,” Miri Lawrence posted. “When I was in 10th grade it was really a valuable learning experience for me. This was one of the only books I read through, and I still cherish it. Don’t tell the principal to stop giving out this book because it is so special and valuable. Your kids will be much more cultured after reading it.”

Virginia School Board ‘Wokeness Checker’ Wants Toni Morrison Banned for ‘Porn’

“When I read this book in high school, I loved it,” Ashley Honsaker, a 2018 Milford High School graduate, wrote. “I thought it was a great historical fiction book about Trujillo and the Dominican Republic during that time period. And honestly didn’t even think twice about the sexual aspects of it other than what it told about history and how sex was seen during that time.”

In a Facebook message to The Daily Beast, Honsaker, now a senior in college studying graphic design, said she loved reading the book as a high school sophomore.

“It was insightful and helped me gain understanding as to what life was like in the Dominican Republic during the 1900s,” she said. “The main takeaway I got from reading the book was a different perspective on world culture. …As a young woman, it was great to see a historical fiction novel that revolved around women during a time where they weren’t always given respect or equality.”

Honsaker said she believed the uproar is due to people not truly understanding the context of what was written.

“I also think parents sometimes overstep and hold their children back,” she said. “It is extremely sad that, in society today, we teach our children to not judge a book by its cover and to be fair and righteous, but so many parents in my community are doing the exact opposite.”

Other Facebook group members ridiculed critics for disagreeing with the novel’s content without actually reading it or finding an alternative book suitable for their children, per the district’s policy.

“Prior to posting publicly, I really feel a conversation with the school would have been more appropriate,” a member of the Facebook group wrote. “I would also suggest that those who have not done so, to read the book in question. I feel too many are just jumping to social media without having done their due diligence.”

Milford Exempted Village Schools told The Daily Beast that its review committee is currently reading In the Time of the Butterflies and is expected to complete its review by May 13.

Steve Schmidt Says John McCain Lied When He Denied Affair With Lobbyist in 2008

REPUBLICAN FAMILY VALUES; 

A WIFE & A MISTRESS TOO

Ross A. Lincoln
Mon, May 9, 2022

Former John McCain campaign adviser Steve Schmidt capped a wild weekend trashing McCain’s daughter, Meghan McCain, as well as McCain’s legacy, with a late-night follow-up exposing what he said was a particularly egregious lie by McCain.

Schmidt claimed in a Substack post published on Sunday night that in 2008 McCain lied — and that Schmidt himself lied on John McCain’s behalf — when he denied a New York Times report that John McCain had had an affair with a lobbyist. Further, Schmidt said McCain had initially lied to him about the affair before admitting it.

Schmidt noted this New York Times article, published in February 2008 and written by Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick and Stephen Labaton, that suggested McCain had carried on an affair with a Washington, D.C., lobbyist so blatantly that it alarmed his own staff, who did everything they could to keep the two apart. Concerns were not only about a potential sex scandal, but about what such behavior said about McCain’s tolerance for blatant corruption — the concern was of course that he was sleeping, literally, with someone whose job is to influence members of Congress.

“Immediately following the story’s publication, John and Cindy McCain both lied to the American people at a news conference that I prepared them for on that same day,” Schmidt wrote in the Substack post. “Both denied the story to me personally, as did the lobbyist at the center of the story. They also lied to the American people.”

Schmidt, who also formally apologized to the journalists, said that at the time, when he was 36, “I did not understand the difference between integrity and loyalty.”

“Senator McCain denied his long relationship with the lobbyist – to whom he was credibly accused of providing special favors – dozens of times to my face,” Schmidt said also. “After the New York Times story – which accurately detailed that relationship – was attacked and successfully discredited by the campaign under my direction, John McCain told me the truth backstage at an event in Ohio. Understandably, he was very concerned about this potentially campaign-ending issue. He kept saying, ‘The campaign is over.’ I reassured him that it was behind us.”

Schmidt says he was then forced to fend off the lobbyist in question, whom the New York Times identified as Vicki Iseman in 2008. Schmidt said she called frequently and “screamed at me incoherently for hours every night. I became the shock absorber for her rage, anger and humiliation.”

Schmidt said that at one point, the lobbyist said she wished his kids would die “so that I could share the depths of pain she felt” when McCain denied their relationship. Schmidt specifically tied that relationship back to McCain generally, who he says “turned a blind eye” to enormous corruption among people involved in his campaign.

Elsewhere in the post, Schmidt reiterates a lot of what he’d previously said about Meghan McCain and John McCain. You can read more about that here.

Putin’s Puppets Admit Their Army Has Been a Total Embarrassment


Julia Davis
Mon, May 9, 2022,

Photo Illustration by Thomas Levinson/The Daily Beast/Getty

In his speech preceding the Victory Day celebrations across Russia on Sunday, President Vladimir Putin continued to promote the idea that his troops in Ukraine are fighting “to liberate their native land from the Nazi filth with confidence that, as in 1945, victory will be ours.” His portrayal of Ukrainians as Nazis rings so hollow that propagandists on state television have been struggling to justify the so-called “special military operation.” The description itself was meant to portray a nearly painless blitzkrieg, akin to the annexation of Crimea. Instead, it has turned into an ongoing bloody massacre and a slew of crippling sanctions.

Russia was so unprepared for this turn of events, both militarily and economically, that even the most pro-Kremlin propagandists have been forced to acknowledge the grim reality of a pariah state fighting a war of aggression.

During Friday’s broadcast of state TV show The Evening With Vladimir Solovyov, military analyst Konstantin Sivkov argued that Russia’s “current economic market system is unfit to meet the needs of our Armed Forces and of the entire country under these conditions.” Instead, he pushed for what he described as “military socialism,” a set of wartime rules and regulations that would move all strategic resources–including land and factories–under the direct control of the government to better fund the war.

During the same show, host Vladimir Solovyov griped that Russia couldn’t compete with Ukraine’s seemingly endless supply of Turkish-made Bayraktar drones, which have been wreaking havoc on Russia’s troops and equipment. “They tell us from the frontlines: ‘Give us drones!’ People are crowdfunding crazy amounts of money. They bought up everything that was available in stores. Why can’t that junk be mass-produced in Russia?,” Solovyov fumed.

State Duma member Semyon Bagdasarov chimed in: “Everyone is ashamed to talk about this topic. Volunteers, like our mutual acquaintances... are buying it all and transporting it over there. It’s a crying shame!” Solovyov proceeded to angrily complain about the restrictions that complicate the delivery of such items to Russian troops in Ukraine, adding: “It’s easier to bring it in through the Ukrainian Customs in Lviv. They let in any weapons.”

Bagdasarov then resorted to blaming the West for the Kremlin’s humiliations, claiming that recent sanctions were designed to provoke a popular uprising, akin to the October revolution of 1917 or the 1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt, also known as the August Coup. To prevent the potential riots, Bagdasarov suggested the need for “purges” of current “management officials.” He claimed that Russia is in sore need for a figure like Lavrentiy Beria—chief of the Soviet secret police who was notorious for his serial rapes and bloody mass executions.

This attempts to whitewash odious figures of the past on Russian airwaves if nothing new., Shortly before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February, host of Vesti Nedeli Dmitry Kiselyov praised the likes of Joseph Stalin, Lavrentiy Beria, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, among others for Russia’s nuclear capabilities.

During Friday’s live broadcast of 60 Minutes, retired Colonel Mikhail Khodaryonok made the stunning confession that even mass mobilization in Russia wouldn’t help alter the course of Putin’s stalled invasion of Ukraine. He admitted that Russia would be hard-pressed to replenish its mounting losses in Ukraine, and that sending masses to fight with outdated weapons would be counterproductive because Russia’s arsenal does not measure up to NATO’s top-notch weaponry.

“Let's imagine the drumroll, the sound of fanfare, and the mobilization is declared. How soon under this mobilization will we get the first fighter aviation regiment? We would get it by New Year's. We don't have the reserves, the pilots, or the planes so the mobilization would be of little help,” Khodaryonok said. “If tonight, we order new ships to be built, how soon will we get the first one? In two years! That's the deal with mobilization. If we set a goal of forming a new tank division, when would it be ready? I would say in at least 90 days. And it wouldn't be equipped with modern weaponry because we don't have modern weapons and equipment in our reserves.”

Russians Caught in Bitchfest Over Putin’s ‘Bullshit’ Victory Day

The retired colonel continued: “Sending people armed with weapons of yesteryear into a war of the 21st century to fight against global standard NATO weapons would not be the right thing to do. We need to replenish our losses, of course, but this should be done through industrial enterprises. Mobilization would not solve these issues."

In December of 2021, appearing on 60 Minutes, Khodaryonok flippantly said that Russia could destroy Ukraine in 11 minutes, but in the beginning of February—when Putin’s invasion seemed all but imminent—the colonel was much more clear-eyed. His sobering predictions, published in the newspaper Independent Military Observer, were remarkably accurate.

Khodaryonok contradicted many popular analysts, stating in part that “To assert that no one in Ukraine will defend the regime means, in practice, complete ignorance of the military-political situation and the mood of the broad masses of people in the neighboring state. Moreover, the degree of hatred (which, as you know, is the most effective fuel for armed struggle) in the neighboring republic in relation to Moscow is frankly underestimated. No one will meet the Russian army with bread, salt and flowers in Ukraine.”

Khodaryonok correctly predicted long and difficult battles, in addition to the extensive assistance the West would provide to Ukraine, writing in part: “There is no doubt that the United States and the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance will begin a kind of reincarnation of Lend-Lease, modeled after the Second World War.”

Putin’s Stooges: He May Nuke Us All but We Are Ready to Die

While open opposition to Putin’s war against Ukraine is outlawed, it’s clear that the Russian people are resisting in various unconventional ways. A series of fires have erupted at several military enlistment offices in recent days, as rumors of the impending mobilization unsettle potential conscripts.

Putin’s propagandists have apparently been enlisted to convince the public that the outcome of Russia’s invasion is a matter of life and death for all of its citizens. State TV pundit Karen Shakhnazarov, who previously pleaded with Putin to end the war as soon as possible, returned to national broadcasts after a temporary absence with a drastically different narrative last week.

During three separate broadcasts of The Evening With Vladimir Solovyov, Shakhnazarov claimed that Russians would find “no mercy” from their adversaries should the country lose the war. He threatened opponents of Putin’s invasion, predicting they would face a future of “concentration camps, re-education and mandatory sterilization” imposed as a “final solution” for the Russian people sought by Moscow’s enemies. While some Kremlin propagandists begrudgingly admit that Russia can’t afford to fight this war, the prevailing narrative force-fed by the state media is that Russia can’t afford to lose.

Russia admits it faces economic collapse over Putin’s war

Louis Ashworth
Mon, May 9, 2022

Russia economy war Ukraine sanctions oil energy Kremlin Putin - REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov

Russia's economy has plunged into its worst crisis for almost three decades as the country is battered by Western sanctions, a leaked copy of the Kremlin's own forecasts shows.

The Russian finance ministry is predicting a 12pc collapse in GDP this year, the biggest contraction since 1994 when it was shifting towards capitalism under Boris Yeltsin, the first post-Soviet president.

A collapse would wipe out around a decade of economic growth.

The leak will pile pressure on Vladimir Putin, who on Monday presided over a scaled-down version of Russia's annual Victory Day parade marking the end of the Second World War in Europe.


Russia has been hammered by heavy sanctions following the invasion of Ukraine, which are about to be ratcheted up further as Brussels discusses a ban on oil from the country.

It has left the Kremlin teetering on the edge of a default after it last week narrowly avoided a failure to pay foreign debts for the first time since the Bolshevik revolution a century ago.

The Kremlin has yet to issue a public economic outlook, but the finance ministry’s figures – seen by Bloomberg – are more pessimistic than the central bank’s forecasts of a contraction between 8pc and 10pc this year.

The International Monetary Fund expects an 8.5pc decline. The dire figures emerged as Mr Putin appeared at a Victory Day parade in Moscow.

The president did not use a speech to formally declare war against Ukraine or announce a larger-scale mobilisation, continuing to refer to the conflict as a “special operation”.

Krishna Guha, an analyst at Evercore, said Mr Putin “is wary of risking domestic support for the war through mass conscription”.

Meanwhile, European officials are locked in talks over how to press ahead with a mooted buying ban on Russian oil and gas.

The European Commission is reportedly mulling offering more money to landlocked eastern European countries to build support for a ban, which is facing stiff opposition from Hungary.

Britain and the UShave already vowed to ditch Russian oil, and European countries are also seeking to wean themselves off gas supplies from Moscow. Russia’s central bank has repeatedly slashed interest rates in recent weeks after raising them at the onset of conflict.

The cuts, aimed at driving spending, came despite a surge in inflation to 17.7pc.

Speaking in late April, governor Elvira Nabiullina warned of a severe recession, soaring prices and severe disruption to Russia’s labour market. She said the Russian economy would likely then remain stagnant in 2023.

Official figures showed Russia’s economy grew by 3.7pc in the first quarter, but Ms Nabiullina said this was a temporary boost driven by people stocking up on the goods.

Russia’s economy shrank by 3pc during 2020, the first year of the pandemic, and 7.8pc in 2009 amid the global financial crisis. Business surveys suggest activity is continuing to contract as sanctions cause demand to dry up.

Bosses are increasingly pessimistic about the conditions they face as they whittle down work backlogs amid falling orders.

Companies are firing staff and trying to cut costs as they grapple with soaring cost inflation, according to the latest purchasing managers’ index data from S&P Global.

Several of the world’s biggest shipping companies are boycotting Russia, piling further inflationary and supply pressure on the country.

Survey data tracked by Goldman Sachs suggests Russian economic activity is stabilising at about 10pc below pre-invasion levels.

“Overall, mid-term developments will depend on how effectively Russia can substitute imports and redirect (energy) exports,” said analyst Clemens Grafe

Hackers replaced Russian TV schedules during Putin's 'Victory Day' parade with an anti-war message saying the blood of Ukrainians is on Russians' hands

Mia Jankowicz
Mon, May 9, 2022,

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday during Victory Day 

celebrations in Moscow's Red Square.

Mikhail Metzel/Sputnik/Kremlin Pool Photo via AP Photo

Russian smart-TV schedules were hacked on Monday with an anti-war message, the BBC reported.

The message highlighted Russian aggression against Ukraine, countering Kremlin propaganda.

The hack came the day Putin spoke at his country's Victory Day military celebrations.

Russian television schedules were hacked to display an anti-war message as the country celebrated a national military festival on Monday, BBC Monitoring reported.

On-screen program descriptions were replaced with the hackers' text when viewed on smart TVs, the outlet reported.

According to the BBC's translation, the message read: "On your hands is the blood of thousands of Ukrainians and their hundreds of murdered children. TV and the authorities are lying. No to war."

Major channels such as Russia-1, Channel One, and NTV-Plus were changed, the BBC reported.

Francis Scarr of BBC Monitoring — the branch of the BBC that follows mass media worldwide — tweeted a short video of a screen showing the TV schedules, on which every program showed the same description.

The hack came during Russia's Victory Day celebrations, a national holiday and military parade overseen by President Vladimir Putin, which was being televised in Russia. The annual event celebrates the Soviet Union's victory alongside Allied forces over Nazi Germany in 1945.

International observers previously speculated that Putin would use the event to further propagandize or toughen his stance around his invasion of Ukraine. But his Monday speech ended without the expected declaration of mass mobilization or war against Ukraine.

Putin's justification at the outset of the February 24 invasion was that he was launching a "special operation" to "denazify" the country. His aggression is viewed by NATO and other Western countries as a war.

But under a near blackout of independent media and social-media platforms, most Russian viewers can access only Kremlin-controlled messaging about the conflict, Insider's Connor Perrett reported.

The message in Monday's hack runs deeply counter to Putin's claims that his forces are in Ukraine to "liberate" Russian-speaking Ukrainians.

It is unclear who was behind the alteration of the schedules on Monday, but the hacker group Anonymous retweeted Scarr's tweet with the message "Good morning Moscow" within hours of the hack.

In early March, Anonymous claimed responsibility in a tweet for the hacking of several state-controlled TV channels, whose programming was replaced with footage from independent networks, Radio Free Europe reported.

ABOLISH THE PRAYER 

MPs debate Bloc motion to scrap reading of daily prayer before House of Commons sits

YOU CANNOT PETITION THE LORD WITH PRAYER

Tue, May 10, 2022

MPs debate Bloc motion to scrap reading of daily prayer before House of Commons sits

MPs are today debating a motion calling for an immediate end to the prayer reading that begins each sitting day in the House of Commons.

Bloc Québécois MP Martin Champoux sponsored the binding motion in the House. A vote on the motion will be held Wednesday, said a spokesperson for the government House leader's office.

The motion, if it passes, would replace the prayer with a moment of reflection before the start of each day's business. Other parties in the House have opposed the motion in debate, saying there are more pressing issues facing MPs.

The motion says that the prayer should be scrapped because the House "respects the beliefs and non-beliefs of all parliamentarians and of the general public and it is committed to the principle of the separation of religion and the state, the diversity of views and freedom of conscience while upholding the secularism and religious neutrality of the state and out of a desire for inclusiveness."

The Speaker of the House of Commons reads the prayer every morning before the cameras in the chamber have been turned on, and before members of the public and media are allowed inside.

Parliament's website says that the Speaker, MPs and table officers must stand during the prayer, which is followed by a moment of silence.

Though usually a closed-door affair, the prayer was televised on Oct. 23, 2014 — the day after the shooting at the National War Memorial and inside Parliament's Centre Block.

The prayer reads:

"Almighty God, we give thanks for the great blessings which have been bestowed on Canada and its citizens, including the gifts of freedom, opportunity and peace that we enjoy. We pray for our sovereign, Queen Elizabeth, and the Governor General. Guide us in our deliberations as members of Parliament, and strengthen us in our awareness of our duties and responsibilities as members. Grant us wisdom, knowledge, and understanding to preserve the blessings of this country for the benefit of all and to make good laws and wise decisions. Amen.

The prayer has been part of the daily House proceedings since 1877 and was codified in standing orders in 1927.

In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a municipal council in the Quebec town of Saguenay could not continue to open its meetings with a prayer. The unanimous decision said reciting a Catholic prayer at council meetings infringed on freedom of conscience and religion.

Following the decision, Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson replaced the prayer at the beginning of city council meetings with a moment of reflection. Parliament is protected by parliamentary privilege and is able to set its own rules.

MPs have more pressing matters to think about: Holland

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau seemed cool to the idea as he went into a cabinet meeting in Ottawa on Tuesday morning.

"As I've spoken with Quebecers and people across the country, they're focused on mobility, they're focused on housing, they're focused on the war in Ukraine," Trudeau said. "That's what we're going to stay focused on and that's what, frankly, most of the conversations in the House are all about."

Government House leader Mark Holland said the House of Commons has a debate every June about the standing orders in the House and that would have been a better time for the Bloc to have raised the issue.

"I think it's strange that the Bloc would choose one of their three opposition days — they only get three a year — to deal with this when we already have a day set aside to deal with standing orders," he said.

Holland said the House should be dealing with more pressing issues, such as the pandemic, housing and the war in Ukraine.


New Democrat MP Daniel Blaikie told reporters an opposition day motion that provides just 24 hours' notice isn't the best way to "foster the right dialogue" about ending the prayer, which he said should be broader in scope.

"I know New Democrats have often felt, if we're going to talk about changing the opening ceremony for Parliament, that we ought to have a land acknowledgement as part of that opening ceremony," he said.

Blaikie said that while the motion is a worthwhile effort, there other ways to have that discussion.

"They've proposed one, they've proposed it with very little short notice and not a lot of consultation in advance, and I do question, personally, whether that's the right way to go about it," he said.

NDP caucus chair Jenny Kwan said her caucus would discuss the motion and she did not want to prejudice their decision by suggesting how they might vote.

Conservatives say prayer not a pressing issue

Conservative MP Cathy Wagantall told the House earlier today that while she appreciates the opportunity to discuss vital issues that spark disagreement among MPs, the prayer isn't one of them.

"To me and my constituents, it is offensive that the Bloc does not enter the House until after the national anthem ... is sung, because they openly indicate that their purpose is to separate from Canada," she said. "And yet, I and all members respect the reality that this is their choice in this place."

Gérard Deltell, the Conservative MP representing Louis-Saint-Laurent in Quebec, told the House that the job of MPs is to address critical issues facing Canadians.

"Maybe I'm wrong, but I think in my riding people are more concerned about inflation, about housing, about affordability. Those are issues that are very concerning to all Canadians," he said.

"I'm not quite sure that the prayer that we have to say here in the House of Commons off-camera is very important for our people that we represent."

CONSERVATIVE TOADY COURT
Alberta court rules Canada's environmental impact law is unconstitutional

Canadian Natural Resources Limited's Primrose Lake oil sands project is seen near Cold Lake, Alberta

Nia Williams
Tue, May 10, 2022

(Reuters) - Alberta's highest court ruled on Tuesday that a Canadian law assessing how major infrastructure projects like pipelines impact the environment is unconstitutional because it interferes with the power of the provinces.

The Alberta Court of Appeal said the Impact Assessment Act (IAA), passed in 2019, was a "classic example of legislative creep" and intrudes on provincial jurisdiction.

The decision is a win for Alberta Premier Jason Kenney and his United Conservative Party government, which brought the legal challenge against the act.

However, the federal government plans to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court of Canada.

"Our view is the legislation is constitutional and we will be appealing," Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson told reporters.

Kristen van de Biezenbos, associate professor of law at the University of Calgary, said she expected the Supreme Court to reverse the Alberta Court of Appeal's decision, much like it upheld the legality of the federal carbon-pricing act last year.

"There's nothing different enough about what's in this law to justify finding it unconstitutional," she said.

The IAA, formerly known as Bill C-69, was passed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberal Government in a bid to streamline and restore trust in the environmental approval process for major projects.

But it stirred fierce opposition in Canada's main crude-producing province Alberta, where critics said it would deter investment by giving the federal government too much power to kill projects.

Kenney, who has long argued that Alberta is treated unfairly by Ottawa, welcomed the court decision on Twitter.

"An historic victory, and central part of our strategy to fight for a fair deal!" he wrote.

(Additional reporting by Steve Scherer in Ottawa; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

'Rich also cry': Russia's sanctioned oligarchs lose luxuries

The 'Amadea' superyacht was seized in Fiji at the request of the United States (AFP/-)

Anna MALPAS
Tue, May 10, 2022,

From superyachts and mansions to private jets and works of art, mega-rich Russians are being deprived of their expensive playthings, under swingeing sanctions that implicate them in Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine.

The seizing and freezing of assets is proving the toughest trial yet for the Kremlin-favoured "oligarchs", many of whom got rich on the back of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

In Britain, more than 100 oligarchs and their families have been slapped with restrictions. The United States has sanctioned 140 and the European Union more than 30.

UK Transport Secretary Grant Shapps has said the move was designed to hit them where it hurts -- denying them "access to their luxury toys".

The British capital has for years been dubbed "Londongrad" after becoming a haven for Russians to keep their money, educate their children and pursue litigation.

"The welcome mat is now being taken away from Russian oligarchs," The Economist wrote.

Even the high-profile Roman Abramovich has been targeted, forcing him to put Chelsea Football Club, which he bought in 2003, up for sale.

But acting against so many in a highly globalised major economy is "totally uncharted territory", said researcher Alex Nice, from the Institute for Government think-tank.

Whenever the war ends, a deep rift between the West and Russia will remain, even if the assets are just frozen, rather than expropriated, he added.

"There doesn't seem to be any prospect that these sanctions will be lifted any time soon," said Nice.

In Moscow, the independent Russian political analyst Konstantin Kalachev said Putin's "special operation" in Ukraine could last "for years" -- and even be widened to fulfil his dream of recreating the Russian empire.

If the decision is down to Ukraine, "they will never lift them (sanctions)", he told AFP.

- Avalanche -

There's no question that the sanctions have hit home.

Forbes magazine last month removed 34 Russians from its annual billionaire list citing the "avalanche of sanctions".

"The war is an absolute disaster for them," said Elisabeth Schimpfoessl, a lecturer in sociology at Aston University in Birmingham, central England, and author of a book called "Rich Russians".

Petr Aven, known for his extensive collection of Russian art, told The Financial Times newspaper he was unsure if he was "allowed to have a cleaner or a driver" and faced expulsion from the UK.

His long-term business partner, Mikhail Fridman, told Bloomberg news agency he was "in shock" and also struggling to pay a cleaner.

Many oligarchs have multiple citizenships and are not rushing back to Russia.

The West has been a "base that they can go to at any moment when they fear prosecution in Russia", said Schimpfoessl.

"Oligarchs never bothered developing Russia's rule of law."

- Soap opera -

The scale of assets targeted is staggering.

The UK government estimates that Abramovich alone is worth over £9 billion ($11 billion, 10.5 billion euros).

It has also targeted two of his associates worth up to £10 billion.

Abramovich is rumoured to own half a dozen luxury superyachts, two of which docked in Turkey in March, thereby avoiding sanctions.

EU members have reported freezing nearly $30 billion in Russian assets, including almost $7 billion in yachts, helicopters, property and works of art.

Washington has said it has sanctioned or blocked boats and aircraft worth over $1 billion.

US President Joe Biden has proposed permanent sanctions, saying oligarchs should not be allowed to enjoy luxuries while Ukrainian children die.

In Fiji last week, police seized a 348-foot (106-metre) yacht called "Amadea" worth some $300 million and linked to Suleiman Kerimov, a reticent billionaire senator, on Washington's request.

Images of impounded yachts and shuttered mansions of Putin cronies prompt Schadenfreude in Russia, too.

"Ordinary Russians like to see 'the rich also cry'," said Kalachev, citing a Mexican soap opera Russians watched in the early 1990s.

What is not clear is whether sanctions affect Moscow's decisions.

They cannot influence Putin, because he meets such business figures "only to tell them things -- it's not a dialogue", argued Kalachev.

"The record of using economic coercion to try to force change in foreign policy is not a good one," said Nice.

But sanctions "are undoubtedly going to weaken Russia's capacity to fight", he added.

- Opposition -

Abramovich has been involved in talks aimed at ending the war, with consent of both sides. Other oligarchs have criticised the conflict.

On Instagram the UK-sanctioned entrepreneur and banker Oleg Tinkov slammed "this crazy war" and Russia's "shitty army".

Fridman urged an end to the bloodshed and Oleg Deripaska, sanctioned by the UK, the EU and the US, said continuing fighting was "madness".

But experts questioned the likelihood of them allying against Putin.

"It's hard to see that happening," said Nice.

"It would not be in their interests ever to speak out against Putin prematurely," said Schimpfoessl.

am/phz/gil

CENSORSHIP AT NYT

NY Times Wordle solution 'fetus' causes kerfuffle


The initial 'Wordle' solution for May 9, 2022 was 'fetus' before being removed (AFP/Michael Draper) (Michael Draper)

Mon, May 9, 2022

The New York Times, owner of the hit game Wordle, hastily changed the solution Monday from "fetus," a term recently catapulted into the news as US abortion rights face possible restrictions by the Supreme Court.

Some of the game's millions of players "may see an outdated answer that seems closely connected to a major recent news event," the editorial director of the paper's game section, Everdeen Mason, said in a statement.

Without mentioning the actual word, she said the choice was "entirely unintentional and a coincidence -- today's original answer was loaded into Wordle last year."

That, of course, was long before a leaked Supreme Court draft decision last week revealed that if adopted, the majority of justices would overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision which enshrined a woman's right to an abortion nationwide.

Wordle, a daily game which consists of guessing one five-letter word in just six tries, was bought by the Times in January after it skyrocketed in worldwide popularity.

"We take our role seriously as a place to entertain and escape, and we want Wordle to remain distinct from the news," Mason said.

"When we discovered last week that this particular word would be featured today, we switched it for as many solvers as possible," although it was too late to change it for all.

Already in February, the paper announced that it had scrubbed Wordle of many obscure as well as "insensitive or offensive words."

On social media, some users shared the day's two solutions, mocking the center-left paper for being overly delicate.

The NYT editorial board last week took a formal stand in favor of the right to abortion, with an op-ed titled "America Is Not Ready for the End of Roe v. Wade."

arb/bfm/mlm

Pulitzer Prizes Announced: Special Citation Goes To Journalists Of Ukraine; Washington Post Wins For January 6 Attack Coverage


Ted Johnson
Mon, May 9, 2022,


UPDATED: Journalists from Ukraine were recognized with a 2022 Pulitzer Prize special citation, while jurors of journalism’s top honors also recognized coverage of the January 6th attacks on the Capitol, the withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Surfside condominium collapse in Florida.

The Washington Post won a public service award for The Attack, its in-depth look at the siege of the Capitol, which the jurors said was “a thorough and unflinching understanding of one of the nation’s darkest days.”

The New York Times won three prizes in national reporting, international reporting and criticism. Marcus Yam, photographer at the Los Angeles Times, won for breaking news photography of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. There were actually two winners in the breaking news photography category, as photographers from Getty Images also won for their photos of the attack on the Capitol.

The Miami Herald was recognized in the breaking news reporting category for coverage of the Champlain Towers South building collapse, as jurors said that the stories merged “clear and compassionate writing with comprehensive news and accountability reporting.” The Tampa Bay Times won for investigative reporting on the toxic hazards in a battery recycling plant.

Jennifer Senior of The Atlantic won for feature writing for her cover story on a family’s grappling with loss in the 20 years since 9/11.

Reuters photographer Danish Siddiqui was posthumously awarded a Pulitzer along with Adnan Abidi, Sanna Irshad Mattoo, and Amit Dave for their images of Covid’s toll on India. Siddiqui was killed last year while covering a clash between Afghan special forces and Taliban insurgents.

The special citation to Ukrainian journalists was given “for their courage, endurance and commitment to truthful reporting during Vladimir Putin’s ruthless invasion of their country and his propaganda war in Russia.”

Other recognitions of note: The Los Angeles Times’ coverage of the deadly shooting on the set of the movie Rust was a finalist in the breaking news category. NBC News’ Mike Hixenbaugh, Antonia Hylton, Reid Cherlin, Julie Shapiro and Frannie Kelley were finalists in the audio reporting category for Southlake, an account of an anti-critical race theory movement in a Texas community.

The complete journalism winners below:

Public service: The Washington Post

Breaking news reporting: Staff of the Miami Herald

Investigative reporting: Corey G. Johnson, Rebecca Woolington and Eli Murray of the Tampa Bay Times

Explanatory reporting: Staff of Quanta Magazine, notably Natalie Wolchover

Local reporting: Madison Hopkins of the Better Government Association and Cecila Reyes of the Chicago Tribune

National reporting: Staff of The New York Times

International reporting: Staff of The New York Times

Feature writing: Jennifer Senior of The Atlantic

Commentary: Melinda Henneberger of The Kansas City Star

Criticism: Salamishah Tillet, contributing critic at large, The New York Times

Editorial writing: Lisa Falkenberg, Michael Lindenberger, Joe Holley and Luis Carrasco, the Houston Chronicle

Illustrated reporting and commentary: Fahmida Azim, Anthony Del Col, Josh Adams and Walt Hickey, Insider

Breaking news photography: Marcus Yam, the Los Angeles Times; Win McNamee, Drew Angerer, Spencer Platt, Samuel Corum, Jon Cherry, Getty Images

Feature photography: Adnan Abidi, Sanna Irshad Mattoo, Amit Dave and Danish Siddiqui, Reuters

Audio reporting: Staffs of Futuro Media and PRX

More from Deadline
James Ijames' 'Fat Ham' Awarded Pulitzer Prize For Drama Just Days Before New York Debut

Joe Kahn Named Next Executive Editor Of The New York Times