American slavery wasn’t just a white man’s business − new research shows how white women profited, too

Trevon Logan, The Ohio State University
Mon, June 10, 2024 

As the United States continues to confront the realities and legacy of slavery, Americans continue to challenge myths about the country’s history. One enduring myth is that slavery was a largely male endeavor — that, for the most part, the buying, selling, trading and profiting from enslavement were carried out by white men alone.

While white women certainly interacted with enslaved people in household management and day-to-day tasks, historians once argued that they weren’t active owners and had very limited involvement in transactions. This was once widely believed to be a reason why Southern white women supported the institution – they were assumed to be blind to its darker side.

As an expert in the economic history of slavery, I know the story is far more complex. In fact, slavery was unique in economically empowering women. It was, in essence, an early feminist institution – but exclusively for white women.

A lasting myth


The myth that women didn’t profit from slavery has endured for several reasons. First, before the American Civil War, married women generally owned nothing of their own. The legal institution of coverture made the property a woman brought into her marriage into the property of her husband. This also meant that if a husband was in debt, a creditor could claim the wife’s property for payment.

In addition, there are very few surviving records that show Southern white women discussing the business of slavery. And finally, in cases where women were owners of enslaved people – say, through the death of a husband – they often used agents or male relatives to handle their affairs. Added together, there’s very little to suggest that white women were deeply involved in the slavery business.

Researchers have started to challenge this view by moving beyond the traditional archival sources. The innovative historian Stephanie Jones-Rogers has documented how regularly white women were seen in all aspects of American enslavement. Her most compelling evidence comes from interviews with the formerly enslaved people themselves, who noted who they were owned by and explained how belonging to the “misses” affected every aspect of their life.

The ‘white feminism’ of American slavery

Historians have also started grappling with the ways American slavery was uniquely gender-egalitarian – at least for white women. While Northern women were trapped in coverture, Southern states were bypassing coverture specifically for the purpose of giving married women rights to own enslaved people.

The earliest such act passed in the United States was the Mississippi Married Women’s Property Law of 1839. This law explicitly awarded married white women ownership status over enslaved individuals. Slavery was the driver of this change: Four of the five sections of the act refer only to property in enslaved people.

Similar acts were passed by other Southern states in the antebellum era to shield married women from responsibility of their husband’s debts and also to allow women to independently accumulate wealth during marriage.

Of course, laws on the books may not reflect how people actually behaved. But new research shows that white women were very involved in the business of slavery. In states where enslaved people were titled property – like a house or car today – sales were recorded with names of buyers, sellers and the names of the enslaved people in the transaction. White women in states where legislation formally protected their property rights to enslaved property were much more likely to be active in the market.

An antebellum print advertisement announces the sale of ‘valuable slaves.’ Kean Collection/Archive Photos/Getty Images

Further analysis of these records shows that white women were involved in nearly a third of all transactions, buying and selling in equal proportion. White women were especially likely to buy and sell enslaved women, making up nearly 40% of the people doing the buying and selling.

Enslaved women were especially economically valuable because if someone owned an enslaved women, they automatically became the owner of all of her children. For slave owners, owning an enslaved woman was an intergenerational wealth-building activity.

A historical irony

We are left to confront a deep irony in American history. Slavery gave white women in the South significantly more economic independence than those in the North, and they used this freedom with remarkable regularity. Women in slave states had legal rights to property that was half of the wealth in the southern United States at the time. Women in the North could only dream of such economic independence.

While historians once claimed that white women supported the Confederacy because they were blind to the reality of slavery, researchers now know that they could have been motivated by the same economic impulses as their husbands. Slavery was actually a more gender-egalitarian institution than other forms of property or wealth accumulation, so it’s not surprising that white women would have a vested interest in it.

Slavery was white men’s and women’s business.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Trevon Logan, The Ohio State University

Read more:

The warming ocean is leaving coastal economies in hot water

What a bath, taken 1,000 years ago, can tell us about the conflicted English kingdom of the 11th century

Records of Pompeii’s survivors have been found – and archaeologists are starting to understand how they rebuilt their lives

Trevon Logan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

 

Harvard Scientists Say There May Be an Unknown, Technologically Advanced Civilization Hiding on Earth

Victor Tangermann
Tue, June 11, 2024 



What if — stick with us here — an unknown technological civilization is hiding right here on Earth, sheltering in bases deep underground and possibly even emerging with UFOs or disguised as everyday humans?

In a new paper that's bound to raise eyebrows in the scientific community, a team of researchers from Harvard and Montana Technological University speculates that sightings of "Unidentified Anomalous Phemonemona" (UAP) — bureaucracy-speak for UFOs, basically — "may reflect activities of intelligent beings concealed in stealth here on Earth (e.g., underground), and/or its near environs (e.g., the Moon), and/or even 'walking among us' (e.g., passing as humans)."

Yes, that's a direct quote from the paper. Needless to say, the researchers admit, this idea of hidden "crypoterrestrials" is a highly exotic hypothesis that's "likely to be regarded skeptically by most scientists." Nonetheless, they argue, the theory "deserves genuine consideration in a spirit of epistemic humility and openness."

The interest in unexplained sightings of UFOs by military personnel has grown considerably over the past decade or so. This attention grew to a peak last summer, when former Air Force intelligence officer and whistleblower David Grusch testified in front of Congress, claiming that the US had already recovered alien spacecraft as part of a decades-long UFO retrieval program.

Even NASA has opened its doors for researchers to explore mysterious, high-speed objects that have been spotted by military pilots over the years.

But several Pentagon reports later, we have yet to find any evidence of extraterrestrial life.

That hasn't dissuaded these Harvard researchers, though. In the paper, they suggest a range of possibilities, each more outlandish than the next.

First is that a "remnant form" of an ancient, highly advanced human civilization is still hanging around, observing us. Second is that an intelligent species evolved independently of humans in the distant past, possibly from "intelligent dinosaurs," and is now hiding their presence from us. Third is that these hidden occupants of Earth traveled here from another planet or time period. And fourth — please keep a straight face, everybody — is that these unknown inhabitants of Earth are "less technological than magical," which the researchers liken to "earthbound angels."

UFO sightings of "craft and other phenomena (e.g., 'orbs') appearing to enter/exit potential underground access points, like volcanoes," they write, could be evidence that these cryptoterrestrials may not be drawn to these spots, but actually reside in underground or underwater bases.

The paper quotes former House Representative Mike Gallagher, who suggested last year that one explanation for the UFO sightings might be "an ancient civilization that’s just been hiding here, for all this time, and is suddenly showing itself right now," following Grusch's testimony.

The researchers didn't stop there, even suggesting that these cryptoterrestrials may take on different, non-human primate or even reptile forms.

Beyond residing deep underground, they even speculate that this mysterious species could even be concealing themselves on the Moon or have mastered the art of blending in as human beings, a folk theory that has inspired countless works of science fiction.

Another explanation, as put forward by controversial Harvard astrophysicist Avi Loeb, suggests that other ancient civilizations may have lived on "planets like Mars or Earth" but a "billion years apart and hence were not aware of each other."

Of course, these are all "far-fetched" hypotheses, as the scientists admit, and deserve to be regarded with plenty of skepticism.

"We entertain them here because some aspects of UAP are strange enough that they seem to call for unconventional explanations," the paper reads.

"It may be exceedingly improbable, but hopefully this paper has shown it should nevertheless be kept on the table as we seek to understand the ongoing empirical mystery of UAP," the researchers conclude.

More on UFOs: New Law Would Force Government to Declassify Every UFO Document
View comments (1.3k)

THE RIGHT WING WAR ON PROGRESS

Alito doubts US right and left can co-exist and wife criticizes Pride flag in secret recording

Robert Tait in Washington

THE GUARDIAN
Tue, June 11, 2024

Samuel Alito and his wife Martha at the capitol in Washington DC 

Photograph: Alex Edelman/AFP via Getty Images

Samuel Alito, the US supreme justice at the center of a flag controversy that has called his impartiality into question, has said one side of the US’s bitter left v right ideological conflicts has to prevail, in secretly recorded remarks that are likely to exacerbate concerns about judicial neutrality.

In unguarded comments made to a film-maker posing as a conservative, Alito – one of the court’s most conservative justices – also agreed with the assertion that the US had to be “returned to a place of godliness”.

His wife, Martha-Ann Alito, was also recorded making critical comments about the gay pride flag.

The Alitos were recently revealed to have flown an upside-down US flag, symbolizing the “Stop the Steal” movement that attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 election in favor of Donald Trump, outside their home only weeks after the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol.

The couple shared their sentiments with Lauren Windsor, a liberal film-maker who attended the court’s Historical Society black-tie annual dinner this month, using her real name but posing as a Catholic conservative. She engaged Alito in a conversation about the prospects for a compromise resolution to America’s polarised political landscape.

Appearing to rule out such a compromise, Alito said: “One side or the other is going to win”, before adding:

“There can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised.”

Windsor said: “People in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.”

The justice replied: “I agree with you. I agree with you.”

The exchange will further intensify the scrutiny on Alito after the flag controversy has called his impartiality into question, particularly after additional revelations that the Alitos flew another flag favoured by the January 6 protesters, bearing the slogan Appeal To Heaven, at their New Jersey holiday home.

The disclosures have sparked calls from Democrats for Alito to recuse himself from forthcoming supreme court rulings on the January 6 events.

The justice has declined to do so, saying it was his wife who chose to fly the flags outside his house, and claiming he had no say.

Martha-Ann Alito waded further into the flag controversy at the Historical Society dinner as well, criticising the flag being flown for Gay Pride month.

EXCLUSIVE UNDERCOVER AUDIO:
Martha-Ann Alito Unfurled
"I want a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag because I have to look across the lagoon at the Pride flag for the next month." pic.twitter.com/okNsW7SPlu

— Lauren Windsor (@lawindsor) June 10, 2024

“You know what I want?” she said in Windsor’s recording. “I want a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag, because I have to look across the lagoon at the Pride flag for the next month.”

She then ruminated on other flags she might hoist to taunt her ideological adversaries – including one bearing the Italian word for shame.

“‘He’s like, ‘Oh, please don’t put up a flag,’” she said, in apparent reference to her husband. “I won’t do it because I am deferring to you. But when you are free of this nonsense, I’m putting it up and I’m gonna send them a message every day, maybe every week, I’ll be changing the flags.

“They’ll be all kinds. I made a flag in my head. This is how I satisfy myself. I made a flag. It’s white and has yellow and orange flames around it. And in the middle is the word ‘vergogna’. Vergogna in Italian means shame – vergogna. V-E-R-G-O-G-N-A. Vergogna.”

In a further and notably snide exchange that included critical comments about a female journalist, Martha-Ann Alito appeared to be won over by Windsor, agreeing it was impossible to negotiate with “the radical left” and expressing no objection to the journalist’s repeated expletives.

Windsor had less success in eliciting unmoderated opinions from the supreme court’s chief justice, John Roberts, who balked at her suggestion that the country’s polarised split was irreparable.

Pushed by Windsor on whether the court should have a role in leading the nation to a “more moral path”, Roberts said: “No, I think the role for the court is deciding the cases.”

Windsor’s tactics were criticised by the Historical Society. In a statement, the organisation’s president, James Duff, said: “We condemn the surreptitious recording of justices at the event, which is inconsistent with the entire spirit of the evening.”

She defended herself by saying the court’s lack of openness meant there was no other way. “They are shrouded in secrecy and we have seen them be willing to overturn long-standing precedent in ways that are really extraordinary,” Windsor told the Washington Post. “Americans are really at this crossroads of do we continue with a secular democracy or do we let a conservative majority take us down a path of Christian theocracy.”

Alito’s Wife Shocked Even the Activist Who Secretly Recorded Her

Ian Ward

POLITICO
Tue, June 11, 2024 


Lauren Windsor is not apologizing for recording her undercover conversations with Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, his wife Martha-Ann Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.

In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, the progressive activist and documentarian discussed how and why she posed as a sympathetic anti-abortion activist to secure candid — and pugnacious — comments from Alito and his wife, including on the controversy surrounding the Alitos’ decision to fly politically-coded flags at their properties.

She said it was “shocking” to hear Martha-Ann Alito say she fantasized about designing a flag featuring the word “vergogna” — the Italian word for “shame” — to fly in response to LGBTQ+ pride flags. “I definitely did not see that coming,” she said.

Alito, meanwhile, raised eyebrows for his response to Windor’s question about the polarized state of American politics. “One side or the other is going to win,” Alito said on the recording. “There are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised.”

Windsor also dismissed criticism from media ethicists who argue that she should have identified herself as a journalist and shouldn’t have secretly recorded the justices in 2023 and 2024.

“The Supreme Court is shrouded in secrecy, and they’ve really been dodging any accountability to the American public,” Windsor said. “Is it a bigger ethics problem for me to pretend like I’m a fangirl, or is it a bigger ethics problem for them to accept millions of dollars of undisclosed gifts from GOP donors?”

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Were you surprised by Justice Alito’s response to your question about our polarized politics?

I was surprised that it was a departure from his response he gave to me in 2023. He was more forthcoming. Particularly at the Supreme Court level, judges exercise a very high degree of discretion, so I suspected that it would be very difficult to be able to get him to say anything newsworthy. I was really just trying to delve into whether he might give a different answer or if his thinking had evolved on it, given the level of media scrutiny he’s been under.

Why do you think he was more candid now? What could account for that change, in your mind?

It could very well be that he had the same belief when I talked to him in 2023 but he was just more guarded about it. That’s one option. It could be that he’s more aggrieved or has a bigger sense of grievance with the media, given everything over the past year. Maybe he felt like there’s a little bit greater trust since he had talked to me that one time before. It’s hard for me to say — I can’t see inside his mind.

Were you planning on going back to him to talk before the flag episode, or did you decide to do it after all the attention on the flags?

I had planned on going back regardless of the flag, but it certainly made it more interesting when the flags incident happened.

What are the logistics of these interviews? How do you get into the events, and then how do you actually get the recordings? Are you wearing a wire or something?

I’m not going to discuss methodology on any of this, but you buy a ticket. I registered, and I was a dues-paying member.

I think many of Alito’s critics have suspected for a while that his political biases are influencing his work on the court. Do you think your conversation with him revealed something about his thinking that his critics didn’t already suspect?

I think [some] people dismiss the story as, “Well, we already thought that this was happening — we already thought that his religious or political beliefs were influencing his decision, and this just confirmed that.”

It is something new, though, because it is a verbal confirmation of his lack of impartiality when deciding these cases. If you say there’s fundamental things that can’t be compromised, what are those things?

What did you make of that comment, as well as his comment that “one side is going to win”? It’s a little bit ambiguous what he’s saying, so I wonder how you understood it.

The reason that I chose to ask about polarization is that judges are very discreet, and if I had approached him asking about Democrats and Republicans, he probably would have shut down pretty quickly, right? But talking about polarization is really shorthand for political polarization, and that’s really bound up in the political conversation about religion. I feel like it’s kind of hard to separate out the religious from the political when talking about achieving “godliness” or “godly ends.”

He said at one point, “There are differences on fundamental things that can’t be compromised.” Do you agree with him that there are genuinely irreconciled views in the country, or do you think there is a path toward pluralism and peaceful coexistence at this point?

I believe in secular democracy. I don’t think that we should be legislating morality, and in order for that to happen, there has to be a separation of church and state. I think that is a fundamental value that we should not compromise. That’s a value that is bedrock to the founding of our nation.

Do you think that the type of reporting you do strengthens that barrier? Is it putting us on a path toward some sort of reconciliation, or is it just highlighting the contradictions that are already inherent in our political system?

I fear here that we are at a crossroads in this country of whether or not we want to remain a secular democracy or whether or not we want to become a Christian theocracy. And my reporting and my role is to expose public servants who will lead us down that path so that Americans are armed with the information they need to know to make decisions to hold those folks accountable.

Your conversation with Martha-Ann Alito was the most unusual of all your conversations. At one point in the conversation, Alito repeatedly meows at a woman named “Cat.” Were you expecting what you got from her?

In the audio, you can hear that I bring up my conversation with her husband, and I was definitely trying to get further evidence of bias in [his] decision making. Was this really her flag?

Let’s be honest here: He clearly knows that she has this affinity for these flags, and he let it go and let her do it anyway, even though it’s important to have an appearance of impartiality. I’m not going to let him off the hook as, “Oh, well, those are my wife’s flags. I had nothing to do with it.” He was clearly enabling that.

I didn’t expect a lot of the other color at all. I didn’t expect the story about Robin Givhan at the Washington Post [in which Alito tangled with the Pulitzer-winning fashion critic]. I didn’t expect her to meow several times.

The thing that was most shocking was probably the thing about the “vergogna” flag and how she said that fantasizing about making flags satisfies her. I definitely did not see that coming.

What did you make of that? What do you think she is trying to signal by saying she fantasizes about flying a flag that says “shame”?

I don’t understand what is so abhorrent to her — I mean, I do understand what’s abhorrent to her about the pride flag, but it’s other people expressing who they are, and it’s their First Amendment right. But it clearly deeply affects her, because she spends a lot of time thinking about it.

Justice Roberts pushed back against some of your provocations. Were you heartened by his response?

I was heartened by his response because I was like, “OK, you know, this is great — this is someone who is an old-school, rational jurist.” But as the chief justice and someone who’s widely regarded as an institutionalist, he’s going to have much more discretion. So given that he says these things but then he allows Justices Alito and [Clarence] Thomas to act in a more brazen manner without really enforcing the appearances of propriety on the court — he’s enabling that behavior, so I have to question his sincerity.

You also brought up the leak of the Dobbs decision with Justice Alito. Why did you want to ask him about that in particular?

It’s widely suspected that he’s the person who leaked the opinion, so I was trying to gauge his reaction. And he seemed uncomfortable. That could be for any variety of reasons, but I’m not sure exactly what he was going to tell me. It was more of trying to gauge his reaction.

He looked uncomfortable? What gave you that sense?

You can tell when someone’s not comfortable talking about a subject. You know — a little fidgety and kind of looking the other way. That was over a year ago, so it’s not crystal clear, but my impression was that he wasn’t comfortable with it. But that may have also been an aggressive line of questioning. I don’t want to impute things on him that I don’t have evidence for, but it was my impression was that he was not comfortable.

In the recordings, you kept swearing and dropping F-bombs and then apologizing profusely for them. Was that a tactic?

I was only doing that with Martha-Ann. Obviously it would have been very inappropriate with the justices, and it was borderline inappropriate with her, but it was a way to show that I really care about this and am very passionate about it and I’m just so angry about what they’re doing to [her]. I felt it was a way to commiserate with her that would be a little bit more believable.

I mean, it seemed to work.

You did get some meowing out of her.

You’ve got to realize, too, that it’s at the end of a dinner, and we’ve had a couple glasses of wine.

That gets the conversation flowing.

You know…

You’ve gotten some pushback for conducting these interviews undercover, without identifying yourself as a journalist. Why do you think it’s justified to take that approach?

The Supreme Court is shrouded in secrecy, and they’ve really been dodging any accountability to the American public. They’re not going to go out and talk about what they’re doing or why, so we can’t get the answers to anything.

Is it a bigger ethics problem for me to pretend like I’m a fangirl, or is it a bigger ethics problem for them to accept millions of dollars of undisclosed gifts from GOP donors? Obviously this is what I believe, but maybe the media and others — instead of pearl-clutching — should be trying to get more answers from the court and more accountability.

Is it sort of an eye-for-an-eye equivalency in your mind? Like if they’re lying to us, it’s OK for us to deceive them?

I am not a fan of an eye-for-an-eye on things. I am a fan of accountability. I think that people who are in positions of power — if they’re going to refuse to be held accountable, then it warrants taking measures that you might not otherwise take.

Do you worry that the justices will become even more reclusive and more unwilling to answer any sort of questions now that something like this has happened? Or do you think we’re past the point where those considerations matter?

I don’t know what the marginal difference there is. They’re already not answering anything.

Was it all worth it in your mind?

Yeah. I think we have got to force a conversation about what’s at stake on the Supreme Court. We have a court that is now made up of five religious extremists and jurists, and I don’t think the average American is quite aware of the impact that’s having on the court’s decisions and how that trickles down into their everyday lives. But they’re becoming more and more aware of it as rights are being stripped away and as women are losing reproductive rights. And it’s not just abortion. Is birth control on the table?

There are many, many ways in which the Supreme Court’s decisions impact Americans’ lives, and I think the more that journalists can expose the decision-making process that goes into that, the better.

What kind of political response would you like to see?

The appropriate political response is holding congressional investigations. Let’s get the evidence, and let’s hear what they have to say about these various breaches, and then take appropriate remedies as need be. I’m not going to say that so-and-so will be impeached, but there have to be consequences. I don’t think the founders ever intended for us to just have a rogue court that’s not accountable to the American public.

Do you think your reporting will persuade anyone who’s on the fence about the court’s impartiality? Or have people just made up their minds, and this just confirms one side’s view and entrenches the other?

The country is polarized, but people can change their mind with new information. I feel like I do my part when I give people more information. That’s really all I can do, is make sure that the information gets out in the world and then people can do what they want with it. But beyond that, I can only do what I can do.


Supreme Court Justice Alito talks polarization, his wife talks revenge in secret recordings

Dan Morrison and Sudiksha Kochi, USA TODAY
Updated Tue, June 11, 2024 

WASHINGTON – Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and his wife were captured in secret recordings that featured the justice discussing the country’s left-right divide, while Martha-Ann Alito implied she would take revenge on media outlets that reported on controversial flags flown at Alito family homes.

“Look at me, look at me,” Martha-Ann Alito said. “I’m German, from Germany. My heritage is German. You come after me, I’m going to give it back to you.”

The recordings were made at a June 3 gala for the Supreme Court Historical Society by liberal activist Lauren Windsor and released Monday night.

“One side or the other is going to win,” Justice Alito said in one recording after Windsor, posing as a Catholic conservative, asked him leading questions about political polarization in America. “There can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised.”

More: Chief Justice Roberts says he'll stay clear of Alito's Trump recusal refusal

Windsor also recorded Chief Justice John Roberts, who declined to take her bait.

“Would you want me to be in charge of putting the nation on a more moral path?” Roberts asked her at the $500-a-head gala. “That’s for people we elect. That’s not for lawyers.”

When Windsor replied that she believed “we live in a Christian nation and that our Supreme Court should be guiding us in that path,” Roberts quickly shot her down, saying, “I don’t know if that’s true.”

“I don’t know that we live in a Christian nation,” the chief justice said. “I know a lot of Jewish and Muslim friends who would say maybe not, and it’s not our job to do that.”

WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 05: A flag is waved an event at the Supreme Court of the United States with MoveOn and progressive organizations whose members are demanding an investigation into Justice Alito on June 05, 2024 in Washington, DC.

Windsor defended secretly taping the justices.

"You know, the Supreme Court has been shrouded in secrecy, and they've dodged any accountability for what are − any reasonable person would consider − serious ethics violations or serious ethics problems, and I think that the American people deserve to have more information about that,” she told USA TODAY.

“Justice Alito is very ideological and that influences his opinions, right?" Windsor said. "But it takes on a different − you have a different understanding of things when you hear it from someone's own mouth that there's fundamental things that they can't compromise."

More: Amid blowback over Clarence Thomas travel, Supreme Court says it will adopt first-ever code of conduct

Windsor released the recordings at a fraught moment for the high court, after Alito and his wife were criticized for flying flags from their homes in Virginia and New Jersey that experts say are closely linked to the Stop the Steal election denial movement and the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

Critics including Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called on Alito to recuse himself from Supreme Court cases involving former President Donald Trump’s broad claims of immunity in his federal election interference indictment and separate case over a law used to charge Trump and scores of Jan. 6 defendants.

Alito refused and said in a letter to the committee that his wife had raised the flags without his knowledge.

More: Mike Pence was a Jan. 6 target. He says criticizing Alito's flag is 'absurd'

Approaching Martha-Ann Alito at the June 3 benefit, Windsor expressed sympathy for the criticism she and her husband had been experiencing. Martha-Ann Alito broke in: “It’s OK! It’s OK!”

“It’s OK because if they come back to me, I’ll get them ... The media.”

Last month it was reported that an upside-down American flag had flown outside the Alitos' Virginia home after Trump's defeat in the 2020 election. The inverted flag has become a symbol for some Trump supporters who, like the former president, continue to claim the election was stolen.

Last summer, an "Appeal to Heaven" flag was raised outside the couple's New Jersey beach house. The Revolutionary War-era flag has become a potent symbol for "Stop the Steal" activists and Christian identity movement.

“You know what I want?” Martha-Ann Alito told Windsor. “I want a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag because I have to look across the lagoon at the Pride flag for the next month.”

A spokesperson for the court didn't immediately return a call for comment.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Alito, wife caught talking about political compromise on secret audio

Secret recordings of Justice Alito and wife Martha-Ann come on heels of flag controversy. A look at the recent Supreme Court issues.

Kate Murphy
·Producer
Tue, June 11, 2024 

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, at the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington on Feb. 28, 2018. (Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is facing renewed scrutiny after a secret recording captured him speaking candidly about how compromise between the political left and right might be impossible. Alito was also heard agreeing with the woman who surreptitiously recorded him that America should return “to a place of godliness.”

In another secret recording, Alito’s wife, Martha-Ann, can be heard complaining about having to look at a Pride flag being flown in her neighborhood. It’s the latest bout of controversy surrounding the Alitos after they came under fire recently for flying flags associated with efforts to overturn the 2020 election at their homes.

The secret recordings of the Alitos are the latest in a series of recent incidents involving Supreme Court justices and their families.

Here’s what happened with the recordings and why it matters:

🎙️ The secret recordings

The secretly taped audio of the Alitos released on Monday was recorded by an advocacy filmmaker, Lauren Windsor, who said she posed as a religious conservative ally when speaking with them at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual dinner last week. (The Alitos were unaware they were being recorded, though Windsor was legally allowed to do so in Washington, D.C., as long as one party consented to the recording.)

• Read more: Justice Alito Caught on Tape Discussing How Battle for America ‘Can’t Be Compromised’

Windsor asked Alito his thoughts on whether the polarization of the left and right will end, or if it boils down to one side winning. Alito can be heard saying to Windsor, “One side or the other is going to win. [...] There can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised.”

Windsor then spoke to Alito about matters of morality, saying, “I think that the solution really is like winning the moral argument. Like, people in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.”

“I agree with you,” Alito responded.

🏳️‍🌈 Another Alito flag controversy

Windsor also posed as a conservative supporter when she secretly recorded Alito’s wife at the same event.

“You know what I want?” Martha-Ann can be heard asking Windsor. “I want a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag because I have to look across the lagoon at the Pride flag for the next month.” Martha-Ann then described her husband’s reaction: “He’s like: ‘Oh, please, don’t put up a flag.’”

Martha-Ann agreed that she wouldn’t put up the flag for now, but vowed that when her husband was “free of this nonsense” that she would put it up “to send them a message every day, maybe every week. I’ll be changing the flags.”

Martha-Ann’s secretly recorded comments to Windsor come after two different reports that controversial flags were flown at two of the Alitos’ homes in recent years.

One instance was in the weeks following the 2020 presidential election when an upside-down American flag was flown outside their Virginia home. The upside-down flag is a longtime symbol used in dire distress and was adopted by supporters of former President Donald Trump when he challenged President Biden’s victory in 2020.

Another instance was last summer, when an “Appeal to Heaven” flag appeared outside the Alitos’ New Jersey summer home, another flag that has become associated with Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Alito insisted he was not familiar with the flag connotations, saying in a May 2024 letter to Congress, “My wife is fond of flying flags. I am not.” Alito added that he didn’t have anything to do with either of the flag incidents and said Martha-Ann “makes her own decisions, and I have always respected her right to do so."

🏛️ Other recent SCOTUS controversies

The incident marked the latest public controversy involving a Supreme Court justice or family member. Some other recent events include:

• Last week Justice Clarence Thomas disclosed free luxury trips he had not previously reported; an advocacy group estimates he has received nearly $4.2 million in gifts over the course of 20 years.

• Alito also faced scrutiny in 2023 for accepting gifts, including a fishing trip with a person who later had business before the Supreme Court, according to ProPublica.

• Thomas’s wife, Ginni Thomas, sent texts to Donald Trump’s White House chief of staff Mark Meadows as Trump contested the 2020 election. It came as her husband was also hearing SCOTUS cases related to the 2020 election.

⚖️ Why it matters

The Supreme Court justices determine some of the most consequential cases that affect the laws and policies of the entire nation. Under the Supreme Court’s non-enforceable 2023 code of conduct: “A Justice should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence official conduct or judgment.” It also says: “A justice should perform the duties of office fairly, impartially, and diligently” and “refrain from political activity.”

The Supreme Court justices aren’t held accountable by any methods, other than impeachment, and they can decide which cases to recuse themselves from.

The secret recordings of Alito matter because Democrats have previously questioned the justice’s political impartiality, calling on him to recuse himself from two high-profile SCOTUS cases related to Jan. 6: One that will affect former President Trump’s Jan. 6 criminal case, and one regarding charges against Jan. 6 defendants. Despite the controversies coming to light, Alito has declined to recuse himself from both of these cases.

UKRAINIAN FASCISTS

The US lifts a ban on sending weapons to a controversial Ukrainian military unit

Associated Press
Updated Tue, June 11, 2024









 - Soldiers of 12th Special Forces Brigade Azov of the National Guard pose for a photo at the 155mm self-propelled gun M109 Paladin at the front line, near Kreminna, Luhansk region, Ukraine, Sunday, Jan. 28, 2024. The U.S. has removed restrictions on the transfer of American weapons and training to a high-profile Ukrainian military unit with a checkered past, the State Department said on Tuesday, June 11, 2024.

 (AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky, File)

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — The U.S. has lifted a ban on providing American weapons and training to a controversial Ukrainian military unit that was key to the defense of the major port city of Mariupol, the State Department said on Tuesday.

The Azov Brigade is among Ukraine’s most effective and popular fighting units but it has been dogged by its origins as a volunteer battalion that drew fighters from far-right circles and criticism for some of its tactics. The U.S. had banned the regiment from using American weapons, citing the neo-Nazi ideology of some of its founders.

The current members of the Azov Brigade, which has been absorbed into Ukraine’s National Guard as the 12th Special Forces Brigade, reject accusations of extremism and any ties with far-right movements. But the Kremlin has seized on the regiment’s origins in its efforts to cast Russia’s invasion as a battle against Nazi influence in Ukraine.


Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Moscow took an “extremely negative” view of Washington’s decision. He described Azov as an “ultranationalist armed formation” and accused U.S. authorities of being “ready to flirt with neo-Nazis.”

U.S. law prohibits providing equipment and training to foreign military units or individuals suspected of committing gross human rights violations. The State Department said in a statement that it found “no evidence" of such violations.

“This is a new page in our unit's history,” the Azov Brigade wrote in a statement on Instagram. “Azov is becoming even more powerful, even more professional and even more dangerous for occupiers.”

“Obtaining Western weapons and training from the United States will not only increase the combat ability of Azov, but most importantly, contribute to the preservation of the lives and the health of personnel,” the statement said.

Up until the State Department’s decision, Azov was prohibited from sending fighters to Western military exercises or accessing weapons bought with American funds. Lifting the ban will likely bolster the brigade's fighting capacity at a difficult time during the war against Russia's invasion. Ukraine suffers from persistent ammunition and personnel shortages.

Years before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Human Rights Watch raised concerns about Azov, writing that credible allegations of egregious abuses had been made against its fighters.

Moscow has repeatedly portrayed the Azov as a Nazi group and accused it of atrocities, but has publicly given little evidence of the allegations. In 2022, Russia’s top court officially designated Azov a terrorist group.

The brigade grew out of a group called the Azov Battalion, formed in 2014 as one of many volunteer regiments created to fight Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine. It quickly became a separate official unit under the Ministry of Internal Affairs and later a unit of the National Guard.

Since its first commander left in October 2014, the brigade says on its website, it has been “cleansing itself” of undesirable elements. It wasn't possible to ascertain whether the brigade has accomplished that. It has, however, tried to recast its public image away from the controversy surrounding its ultranationalist origins to that of an effective and skillful fighting force, and has shunned connections with controversial figures.

Azov soldiers played a key part in the defense of Mariupol, holding out in a siege and low on ammunition for weeks at the southern port city’s steel mill, despite devastating attacks from Russian forces in 2022.

They are hailed as heroes in Ukraine, remembered for defense of the sprawling plant that became a symbol of Ukrainian tenacity in the war against Russia, and people take to the streets for weekly rallies calling for the release of hundreds of Azov POWs who remain in Russian captivity.

___

Find more of AP’s coverage at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine


U.S. lifts weapons and training ban on Ukraine's Azov Brigade

Guest Author, Anhelina Shamli
Tue, June 11, 2024 

The United States has lifted restrictions on providing weapons and training for the high-profile Ukrainian military unit the Azov Brigade. The U.S. State Department confirmed Monday that the unit, which has played a significant role in Ukraine's effort to repel the ongoing invasion launched by Russia in February 2022, could now be trained by U.S. military personnel and use U.S.-provided weapons.

The State Department's move reversed a decade-old prohibition imposed on the Azov forces under the Leahy Law, which prohibits the U.S. from supplying weapons or financial assistance "to units of foreign security forces where there is credible information implicating that unit in the commission of gross violations of human rights."

The State Department said it had concluded there was "no evidence of Gross Violation of Human Rights committed by the 12th Azov Brigade."

The Azov Brigade was initially a volunteer force that rose to prominence in 2014, when Russian forces first crossed Ukraine's eastern border and started seizing land. The following year, it was integrated into Ukraine's National Guard. It will now have access to the same U.S. military assistance as any other unit in the National Guard.

According to The Washington Post, U.S. assistance to the Azov unit was barred under the Leahy Law about a decade ago, over concerns about its founder, the ultra-nationalist Andriy Biletsky, and other members having Nazi sympathies. Some members of what was then known as the Azov Battalion were described as being far-right and xenophobic — a narrative that has been repeatedly promoted by Russian propaganda campaigns to justify the invasion of Ukraine.

The State Department did not say when the ban was lifted, but a spokesperson said Monday that the original unit had been disbanded years ago and that vetting of the current brigade had found no evidence of gross human rights violations, leading to the restrictions being dropped.

Members of the Azov Brigade attend the funeral of a member who was killed in battle, in Vinnytsia, Ukraine, May 10, 2024. / Credit: ROMAN PILIPEY/AFP via Getty Images

The Azov Brigade posted a statement on social media welcoming a "new page in the history" for the unit, saying that "obtaining Western weapons and training from the United States will not only increase the combat ability of Azov, but most importantly, contribute to the preservation of the lives and the health of personnel."

In 2022, Russia's top court officially designated the Azov unit a terrorist group, and speaking Tuesday in Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that "such a sudden change in Washington's position shows that it will do anything to suppress Russia… even flirting with neo-Nazis."

Azov forces played a key role in defending the southern city of Mariupol, refusing to surrender for 80 days as they were holed–up in a sprawling steel mill with little ammunition and under blistering Russian artillery fire, before eventually laying down their weapons.

In Ukraine, the Azov troops have become a potent symbol of Ukrainian resistance in the war against Russia, and many remain in Russian captivity.

Activists and relatives of Ukrainian POWs hold up banners calling for the return of Ukrainian soldiers from Russian captivity during a rally on May 19, 2024 in Kyiv, Ukraine. / Credit: Oleksii Samsonov/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images

–Camilla Schick contributed reporting.

US lifts weapons ban on Ukraine's Azov brigade

Jaroslav Lukiv - BBC News
Tue, June 11, 2024 



The US has lifted its long-standing ban on weapons supplies and training to Ukraine's Azov brigade, whose origins were mired in controversy over alleged links to far-right groups.

A state department spokesman told the BBC a vetting process "found no evidence of gross violations of human rights" by the brigade.

The Azov brigade, now a unit within Ukraine's National Guard, hailed the move, saying Russia's "lies... received a devastating blow".

Moscow condemned the decision, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying the US was "even prepared to flirt with neo-Nazis" to suppress Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly made false claims about a "neo-Nazi regime" in Kyiv to try to justify first the annexation of Ukraine's southern Crimea peninsula and backing of pro-Moscow fighters in the east in 2014, and then his full-scale invasion launched in 2022.

Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the state department spokesman told the BBC that Washington applied a vetting process to the National Guard of Ukraine's 12th Special Forces Azov Brigade and "found no evidence of gross violations of human rights committed".

"Russian disinformation attempts to conflate Ukraine's National Guard Unit of 12th Special Forces Brigade Azov with a militia formed to defend Ukraine against Russia's invasion in 2014, called the 'Azov Battalion'," the spokesman added.

Under America's "Leahy Law", sponsored in 1997 by then-Senator Patrick Leahy, a finding that a foreign military unit has committed gross violations of human rights means it can be cut off from US military assistance.

The US government says it considers torture, extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance and rape as such types of violations when implementing the law.

Reacting to the US decision, the Azov brigade said in a statement: "The lies about Azov, which the Kremlin regime have been spreading in the West for years, received a devastating blow today.

"Receiving Western weapons and training from the US will not only increase the combat capability of Azov, but most importantly, will contribute to the preservation of the lives and health of the personnel of the brigade."

A volunteer militia battalion called Azov was originally set up in May 2014 to fight Russian-backed forces in Ukraine's eastern Donbas region. Later that year it was briefly incorporated as a separate regiment in Ukraine's interior ministry before being transferred to the National Guard.

Some members of the original battalion were reported to have had links to far-right and ultra-nationalist groups at the time - but a number of them, including the first commander, later left the unit.

The US banned the regiment from receiving US weapons for the alleged links to the far right.

In 2016, a UN report accused the Azov regiment of "looting of civilian property, leading to displacement" in eastern Ukraine.

The current leadership of the Azov brigade says its members have no ties to far-right organisations or any other extremist groups - a claim that has not been independently verified.

Azov fighters are seen by many in Ukraine as national heroes for defending for months the southern city of Mariupol from a brutal Russian assault.

The port on the Sea of Azov was eventually taken by Moscow in May 2022.

Many Azov soldiers are still being held by Russia as prisoners of war, amid accusations that the Ukrainians have been subjected to torture in captivity.

Singer sues hospital, says staff thought he was mentally ill and wasn't member of Four Tops

Associated Press
Tue, June 11, 2024 


- Roquel Payton, from left, Alexander Morris, Ronnie McNeir, and Duke Fakir of the Four Tops perform at the All In Music & Arts Festival in Indianapolis on Sept. 3, 2022. Morris filed a lawsuit Monday against Ascension Macomb-Oakland Hospital in Warren, Mich. He is claiming racial discrimination and other misconduct during a 2023 visit for chest pain and breathing problems. 

(Photo by Amy Harris/Invision/AP, File)

WARREN, Mich. (AP) — The lead singer of the Four Tops said a Detroit-area hospital restrained him and ordered a psychological exam after refusing to believe that he was part of the Motown music group.

Alexander Morris, who is Black, filed a lawsuit Monday against Ascension Macomb-Oakland Hospital in Warren, alleging racial discrimination and other misconduct during an April 2023 visit for chest pain and breathing problems.

Hospital staff “wrongfully assumed he was mentally ill when he revealed his identity as a celebrity figure,” the lawsuit says.

The Four Tops started in the 1950s and had hits such as "I Can’t Help Myself (Sugar Pie, Honey Bunch)″ and “It's The Same Old Song.” The group was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 1990.

Morris is not an original member, but he joined the group in 2019.

The lawsuit says a nurse finally believed Morris was in the Four Tops and the psychological exam was canceled.

The hospital offered a $25 gift card as an apology, but Morris refused to accept it, the lawsuit says.

“We remain committed to honoring human dignity and acting with integrity and compassion for all persons and the community," the hospital said in response to the lawsuit. "We do not condone racial discrimination of any kind. We will not comment on pending litigation.”

Morris talked publicly about the incident last year, saying he had returned to Detroit, his hometown, and was "being told that I’m insane or schizophrenic.”

US bars imports from China footwear, seafood, aluminum firms over Uyghur labor


Containerships are shown at the Port of Los Angeles

Updated Tue, Jun 11, 2024

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. has added three more companies to a list that bars imports from firms allegedly involved with Uyghur forced labor in China, according to a U.S. government notice posted online on Tuesday.

The latest targets include shoe manufacturer Dongguan Oasis Shoes Co, electrolytic aluminum maker Xinjiang Shenhuo Coal and Electricity Co and food processor Shandong Meijia Group Co, also known as Rizhao Meijia Group, the notice from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said.

"Through these actions, DHS is increasing its focus on seafood, aluminum, and shoes - sectors that play an important role in Xinjiang's economy - and ensuring goods made with forced labor are kept out of the U.S. market," the department said in a separate statement.

Scores of companies have been added to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, which restricts the import of goods tied to what the U.S. government has characterized as an ongoing genocide of minorities in China's western Xinjiang region.

U.S. officials say Chinese authorities have established labor camps for Uyghurs and other Muslim minority groups in Xinjiang. Beijing denies any abuses.

Asked to comment on the latest U.S. move, Chinese embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu called allegations of forced labor in Xinjiang "nothing but an egregious lie propagated by anti-China forces and a tool for U.S. politicians to destabilize Xinjiang and contain China’s development."

Referring to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, he added: "It not only severely infringes on the human rights of people in Xinjiang but also destabilizes global industrial and supply chains and sabotages international trade rules."

(Reporting by Susan Heavey, Karen Freifeld and David Brunnstrom; Editing by Paul Simao and Rod Nickel)

4,000-year-old Greek hilltop site mystifies archaeologists. It could spell trouble for new airport

NICHOLAS PAPHITIS
Updated Tue, June 11, 2024 


Greece Archaeology
In this undated photo provided by the Greek Culture Ministry on Tuesday, June 11, 2024, the ruins of a 4,000-year-old hilltop building newly discovered on the island of Crete are seen from above. The wheel-shaped structure is puzzling archaeologists and threatening to disrupt a major airport project on the tourism-reliant island. Greece's Culture Ministry said Tuesday that it's a "unique and extremely interesting find" from Crete's Minoan civilization, famous for its sumptuous palaces, flamboyant art and enigmatic writing system.

 (Greek Culture Ministry via AP)

ATHENS, Greece (AP) — A big, round, 4,000-year-old stone building discovered on a Cretan hilltop is puzzling archaeologists and threatening to disrupt a major airport project on the Greek tourist island.

Greece's Culture Ministry said Tuesday that the structure is a “unique and extremely interesting find” from Crete's Minoan civilization, famous for its sumptuous palaces, flamboyant art and enigmatic writing system. Resembling a huge car wheel from above, the ruins of the labyrinthine, 1,800-square-meter (19,000-square-foot) building came to light during a recent dig by archaeologists.

The site was earmarked for a radar station to serve a new airport under construction near the town of Kastelli. Set to open in 2027, it's projected to replace Greece's second-biggest airport at Heraklion, and designed to handle up to 18 million travelers annually.


Archaeologists don't yet know what the hilltop structure was for. It's still under excavation and has no known Minoan parallels. So for the time being, experts speculate it could have been used for a ritual or religious function.

Ringed by eight stepped stone walls up to 1.7 meters (5.6 feet) high, the inner structure was split into smaller, interconnecting spaces and may have had a shallow conical roof.

The ministry's statement said it didn't appear to have been a dwelling, and the finds from inside it included a large quantity of animal bones.

“It may have been periodically used for possibly ritual ceremonies involving consumption of food, wine, and perhaps offerings,” the statement said.

“Its size, architectural layout and careful construction required considerable labor, specialized know-how and a robust central administration,” it said, adding it was certainly some kind of communal building that stood out in the entire area.

Culture Minister Lina Mendoni, an archaeologist, pledged that the find would be preserved while a different location would be sought for the radar station.

“We all understand the value and importance of cultural heritage ... as well as the growth potential” of the new airport project, she said. “It's possible to go ahead with the airport while granting the antiquities the protection they merit.”

The ministry said the building was mainly used between 2000-1700 B.C, and was founded around the time Crete's first palaces were being built — including at Knossos and Phaistos.

It said some of its features were comparable with early Minoan beehive tombs that were surmounted by stepped conical roofs and burial mounds in other parts of Greece.

Greece's rich cultural heritage often results in conflicts of interest during construction projects.

At the end of the last century, an entire hilltop fortified settlement from the 3rd millennium B.C. was excavated and then destroyed during construction work for Athens International Airport.

So far, at least another 35 archaeological sites have been uncovered during work on the new Kastelli airport and its road connections, the ministry said.