webodec3ARCHIVEPreview
Open in TheBrain

Guardian UK 1

see TWO

note TYPOS AND GUESSES?

i think this is typo

an 1 23 maya GUK

Former President Donald Trump made a “secret” $1 million donation to the election audit conducted in Arizona following his false claims that the election was stolen from him, the Guardian reports.

The audit was requested by Arizona GOP senators, and doubted by many of their colleagues due to the “wild conspiracy theories” it mirrored. An assertion “that bamboo fibers found in ballot sheets proved they had been printed in Asia” even caused some local GOP members to deem the probe a “grift disguised as an audit.”

But nevertheless, the audit persisted.

READ MORE:Arizona newspaper exposes all the Republicans rushing into the state to learn about bogus election audit

Although eventually proven baseless and unsuccessful, The Guardian reports that “one of the largest benefactors” behind this attempt to counter the 2020 election results remained a secret for nearly two years.

But watchdog group “Documented” was able to track funding for the failed assessment and eventually landed on Trump’s super PAC, Save America.

First, the group discovered that Cyber Ninjas, the Florida company that conducted the audit, was provided $5.7 million by far-right groups, and then given an additional $1 million from former Trump advisor and attorney Cleta Mitchell.

Still, questions around the origin of the $1 million remained unanswered.

READ MORE:Behind the shady Florida consulting firm trying to upend election results in Arizona and Michigan: 'Such a farce'

TheNew York Timesreports that in September of 2021, “unnamed ‘officials,’” as well as Arizona GOP senators who requested the election audit, adamantly denied Trump’s contribution.

However, with its research on many corporate, tax and campaign finance filings, as well as emails and text messages between Trump allies that were obtained by nonpartisan accountability group American Oversight, "Documented" managed to counter those claims.

The Guardian broke down the process of how the watchdog group traced the donation back to Trump.

Like many incidents surrounding Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020, tracing back Trump’s contribution to the audit starts with the Jan. 6 committee.

READ MORE:Arizona secretary of state urges criminal probe of Trump's efforts to overturn 2020 election results

The committee’s final report mentioned that Trump super PAC, Save America, donated $1 million to the Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) — led by former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows — but did not disclose the origin or the reason for the money.

Further research revealed that Trump’s contribution possibly began around June 2021, as accountability group American Oversighttracked text messages between retired Army officer and “arch election denier” Phil Waldron and Doug Logan, CEO of Cyber Ninjas, the Florida-based company that conducted the audit.

Waldron texted Logan, “Kurt is going to talk to 45 today, about $.”

According to the Guardian, “Kurt” likely referred toKurt Olden, an “election denying lawyer.” He continued, “Mike L talking to Corey L,” referring to CEO of MyPillow and devoted Trump supporter Mike Lindelland Trump campaign manager Corey Lewondowski.

READ MORE:How Trump's toxic presence in Republican state party politics is being entirely underestimated

A couple of weeks later, Waldron asked Logan if he had received a $1 million payment from Lewondowski. He texted, “Supposedly Kurt talked to Trump and they got 1 mil for you,” but he noted he “couldn’t verify who sent and received.”

According to The Guardian, the Federal Election Commission reported that less than two weeks later, on July 26, 2021, Save America transferred the $1 million to CPI. Two days later, a new group, American Voting Rights Foundation (AVRF) “registered as a corporation in Delaware.”

CPI donated $1 million to AVRF — the group’s first and only donation — in 2021, and although the date of donation is unknown, the clear relationship between the groups, the “timing and amounts” of the transfers, as well as the revealed text messages between Trump allies all leads to one culprit: Trump.

Furthermore, on the day AVRF registered as a corporation, Trump attorney Mitchell emailed Cyber Ninjas CEo Loganand put him in touch with the audit spokesperson, Randy Pullen as well as AVRF treasurer Tom Datwyler.

READ MORE: GOP lawmaker facing allegations of 'massive violations' after FEC audit reveals he lent money to his own campaign

The Arizona Republic recently confirmed that Trump was notified of the process the whole time

GOP vice-chair of Maricopa County board of supervisors Bill Gates told The Guardian he is “disappointed, but not surprised” by the revelation.

“At the very least, it is highly hypocritical for the Arizona state senate to have allowed the audit to be funded in this fashion,” Gates said.

Ultimately, even after the great lengths Trump and his cohort of election deniers went to assist in the audit, the goal to overturn Arizona's election was never met. The Guardian reports that in 2020, President Joe Biden won Maricopa County, the most populated in Arizona and where the audit took place, by 45,109 votes.

Regarding the morality of the audit, Gates added that Arizona law states, “electoral candidates are not allowed to fund vote recounts which have to be financed with taxpayer dollars.” And although the audit was “technically not a recount,” it’s clear the intent was the same.

READ MORE: Arizona newspaper exposes all the Republicans rushing into the state to learn about bogus election audit

---

an 11 25

President Donald Trump was recently handed another loss in court, after failing to convince a Florida judge that he was owed money by the Guardian newspaper for reporting on a federal investigation involving his company.

Guardian reporter Hugo Lowell reported Monday on the ruling by Judge Hunter W. Carroll of Florida's Twelfth Judicial Circuit, who is an appointee of then-Gov. Rick Scott (R). Carroll granted an anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) motion the Guardian filed, which defendants often file when alleging a lawsuit has been filed with the intent of intruding on First Amendment rights.

Additionally, Lowell reported that Judge Carroll found that reporting critical of Trump and his businesses could not be used by Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), which is the parent company of his Truth Social platform, to demonstrate actual malice in litigation.

TMTG sued over a 2023 article in the Guardian, in which the paper reported on a federal investigation into the company by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY). TMTG had accepted $8 million in emergency loans from shadowy entities it knew little about at the time it accepted the money. One loan for $2 million came from Paxum Bank, which is headquartered in the island nation of Dominica. The other $6 million loan came from an entity called E.S. Family Trust.

The Guardian reported at the time that one of the trustees of E.S. Family Trust was a director of Paxum Bank. And one of the bank's part-owners had ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. SDNY prosecutors were probing whether the loans violated federal money laundering laws.

According to that report, one of the executives of TMTG floated the idea of returning the money given the lack of details and transparency about who was providing the loans. TMTG co-founder Will Wilkerson — who eventually became a whistleblower in the federal investigation — told SDNY that Chief Financial Officer Phillip Juhan was uncomfortable about the murky nature of the two entities.

The $2 million from Paxum Bank was sourced in December of 2021 by Patrick Orlando, who was executive at Digital World Acquisition Corporation, which was the entity TMTG merged with when the company went public. Orlando charged a $240,000 finders' fee for the loan, which was sourced through an offshore bank. Donald Trump Jr. ultimately signed off on the loan, per the report.

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian

The Guardian is a British centre-left national daily newspaper. Founded in 1821 as a local paper replacing the radical Manchester Observer, it was known as The Manchester Guardian until 1959.

It has grown into a national paper, and forms part of a media group with international and online offshoots. Its sister papers include The Observer (a British Sunday paper) and The Guardian Weekly (an international roundup of articles from various papers). In addition to its UK online edition theguardian.com, the paper has two international web sites, Guardian Australia and Guardian US. The Guardian is influential in the design and publishing arena, sponsoring many awards in these areas. Other media projects include GuardianFilm. The Guardian was edited by Alan Rusbridger from 1995 to 2015, when Katharine Viner succeeded him.[3][4]

In August 2013 The Guardian in paper form had an average daily circulation of 189,000 copies, behind The Daily Telegraph and The Times, and ahead of The Independent.[5] The newspaper's online edition was the third most widely read in the world as of June 2012.[6] Its combined print and online editions reach nearly 9 million readers.[7]

In the 2015 UK general election, The Guardian endorsed the Labour Party.[8] In the previous general election it supported the Liberal Democrats.[9]

Notable scoops include the newspaper's breaking of the News International phone hacking scandal in 2011, particularly with the revelation of the hacking of murdered teenager Milly Dowler's phone.[10] The investigation brought about the closure of one of the highest circulation newspapers in the world, the News of the World.[11] The newspaper also broke news of the secret collection of Verizon telephone records held by Barack Obama's administration in June 2013,[12] and subsequently revealed the existence of the PRISM surveillance program after it was leaked to the paper by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.[13] The Guardian was named newspaper of the year at the 2014 British Press Awards, for its reporting on government surveillance.[14]

] 

History

1821 to 1972

Early years

The Manchester Guardian was founded in Manchester in 1821 by cotton merchant John Edward Taylor with backing from the Little Circle, a group of non-conformist businessmen.[15] They launched their paper after the police closure of the more radical Manchester Observer, the paper that had championed the cause of the Peterloo Massacre protesters.[16] Taylor had been hostile to the radical reformers, writing: "(T)hey have appealed not to the reason but the passions and the suffering of their abused and credulous fellow-countrymen, from whose ill-requited industry they extort for themselves the means of a plentiful and comfortable existence. 'They do not toil, neither do they spin,' but they live better than those that do.[17] When the government closed down the Manchester Observer, the mill-owners' champions had the upper hand.[18]

The influential journalist Jeremiah Garnett joined Taylor during the establishment of the paper, and all of the Little Circle wrote articles for the new paper.[19]

The prospectus announcing the new publication proclaimed that it would "zealously enforce the principles of civil and religious Liberty ... warmly advocate the cause of Reform ... endeavour to assist in the diffusion of just principles of Political Economy and ... support, without reference to the party from which they emanate, all serviceable measures".[20] In 1825 the paper merged with the British Volunteer and was known as The Manchester Guardian and British Volunteer until 1828.[21]

The working-class Manchester and Salford Advertiser called the Manchester Guardian "the foul prostitute and dirty parasite of the worst portion of the mill-owners".[22] The Manchester Guardian was generally hostile to labour's claims. Of the 1832 Ten Hours Bill the paper doubted whether in view of the foreign competition "the passing of a law positively enacting a gradual destruction of the cotton manufacture in this kingdom would be a much less rational procedure."[23] The Manchester Guardian dismissed strikes as the work of outside agitators – "... if an accommodation can be effected the occupation of the agents of the Union is gone. They live on strife ..."[24]

The Manchester Guardian was highly critical of Abraham Lincoln's conduct during the American Civil War, writing on the news that Abraham Lincoln had been assassinated: "Of his rule, we can never speak except as a series of acts abhorrent to every true notion of constitutional right and human liberty ..."[25]

C. P. Scott

C. P. Scott made the newspaper nationally recognised. He was editor for 57 years from 1872, and became its owner when he bought the paper from the estate of Taylor's son in 1907. Under Scott the paper's moderate editorial line became more radical, supporting Gladstone when the Liberals split in 1886, and opposing the Second Boer War against popular opinion.[26] Scott supported the movement for women's suffrage, but was critical of any tactics by the Suffragettes that involved direct action:[27] "

....

Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq

The paper endorsed the argument that Iraq had to be disarmed of 'Weapons of Mass Destruction': "It is not credible to argue, as Iraq did in its initial reaction to Mr Powell [at the Security Council], that it is simply all lies. ... Iraq must disarm."[65]

Accusations of anti-Semitism and bias in coverage of Israel

In recent decades The Guardian has been accused of biased criticism of Israeli government policy.[66] In December 2003, columnist Julie Burchill cited "striking bias against the state of Israel" as one of the reasons she left the paper for The Times.[67] A leaked report from the European Monitoring Centre on Racism cited The Economist's claim that for "many British Jews," the British media's reporting on Israel "is spiced with a tone of animosity, 'as to smell of anti-Semitism' ... This is above all the case with the Guardian and The Independent". The EU said the report, dated February 2003 was not published because it was insubstantial in its current state and lacking sufficient evidence.[68][69]

Responding to these accusations, a Guardian editorial in 2002 condemned anti-Semitism and defended the paper's right to criticise the policies and actions of the Israeli government, arguing that those who view such criticism as inherently anti-Jewish are mistaken.[70] Harriet Sherwood, then The Guardian's foreign editor, later its Jerusalem correspondent, has also denied The Guardian has an anti-Israel bias, saying that the paper aims to cover all viewpoints in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.[71]

On 6 November 2011, Chris Elliott, the Guardian‍ '​s readers' editor, wrote that "Guardian reporters, writers and editors must be more vigilant about the language they use when writing about Jews or Israel," citing recent cases where The Guardian received complaints regarding language chosen to describe Jews or Israel. Elliott noted that, over nine months, he upheld complaints regarding language in certain articles that were seen as anti-Semitic, revising the language and footnoting this change.[72]

The Guardian‍ '​s style guide section referred to Tel Aviv as the capital of Israel in 2012,[73][74] but this claim was later retracted by The Guardian, saying, "We accept that it is wrong to state that Tel Aviv – the country's financial and diplomatic center – is the capital."[75]

On 11 August 2014 the print edition of The Guardian published an advocacy advert during the 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict featuring Elie Wiesel, headed by the words "Jews rejected child sacrifice 3,500 years ago. Now it's Hamas' turn." The Times of London had decided against running the ad, although it had already appeared in major American newspapers.[76] One week later Chris Elliott expressed the opinion that the newspaper should have rejected the language used in the advert and should have negotiated with the advertiser on this matter.[77]

Clark County

In August 2004, for the US presidential election, the daily G2 supplement launched an experimental letter-writing campaign in Clark County, Ohio, an average-sized county in a swing state. The editor of the G2supplement Ian Katz bought a voter list from the county for $25 and asked readers to write to people listed as undecided in the election, giving them an impression of the international view and the importance of voting against US President George W. Bush. The paper scrapped "Operation Clark County" on 21 October 2004 after first publishing a column of responses — nearly all of them outraged — to the campaign under the headline "Dear Limey assholes".[78] The public's dislike of the campaign likely contributed to Bush's victory in Clark County.[79]

Guardian America

In 2007, the paper launched a website Guardian America, an attempt to capitalise on its large online readership in the United States, which at the time stood at more than 5.9m. The company hired former American Prospect editor, New York magazine columnist and New York Review of Books writer Michael Tomasky to head up the project and hire a staff of American reporters and web editors. The site featured Guardian news relevant to an American audience: coverage of US news and the Middle East, for example.[80]

Tomasky stepped down from his position as Guardian American editor in February 2009, ceding editing and planning duties to other US and London staff. He retained his position as a columnist and blogger, taking the title editor-at-large.[81]

In October 2009, the company abandoned the Guardian America homepage, instead directing users to a US news index page on the main website.[82] The next month, the company laid off six American employees, including a reporter, a multimedia producer and four web editors. The move came as Guardian News and Media opted to reconsider its US strategy amid a massive effort to cut costs across the company.[83] In subsequent years, however, The Guardian has hired various commentators on US affairs including Ana Marie Cox, Michael Wolff, Naomi Wolf, Glenn Greenwald and former George W. Bush speechwriter Josh Treviño.[84] Treviño's first blog post was an apology for a controversial tweet posted in June 2011 over the second Gaza flotilla, the controversy over which had been revived by the appointment.[85]

Guardian US launched in September 2011, led by editor-in-chief Janine Gibson, and replaced the previous Guardian America service.[86] After a period during which Katharine Viner served as the US editor in-chief before taking charge of Guardian News and Media as a whole, Viner's former deputy Lee Glendinning was appointed to succeed her as head of the American operation at the beginning of June 2015.[87]

Gagged from reporting Parliament

In October 2009, The Guardian reported that it was forbidden to report on a parliamentary matter, namely a question recorded in a Commons order paper, to be answered by a minister later that week.[88] The paper noted that it was being "forbidden from telling its readers why the paper is prevented—for the first time in memory—from reporting parliament. Legal obstacles, which cannot be identified, involve proceedings, which cannot be mentioned, on behalf of a client who must remain secret. The only fact the Guardian can report is that the case involves the London solicitors Carter-Ruck." The paper further claimed that this case appears "to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the 1688 Bill of Rights".[89] The only parliamentary question mentioning Carter-Ruck in the relevant period was by Paul FarrellyMP, in reference to legal action by Barclays and Trafigura.[90][91] The part of the question referencing Carter-Ruck relates to the latter company's September 2009 gagging order on the publication of a 2006 internal report[92] into the 2006 Côte d'Ivoire toxic waste dump scandal, which involved a class action case that the company only settled in September 2009 after The Guardian published some of the commodity trader's internal emails.[93] The reporting injunction was lifted the next day, as Carter-Ruck withdrew it before The Guardian could challenge it in the High Court.[94] Alan Rusbridger credited the rapid back-down of Carter-Ruck to Twitter,[95] as did a BBC article.[96]

The Edward Snowden leaks and intervention by the UK government

In June 2013 the newspaper broke news of the secret collection of Verizon telephone records held by Barack Obama's administration in June 2013,[12] and subsequently revealed the existence of the PRISM surveillance program after it was leaked to the paper by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.[13] The newspaper was subsequently contacted by the British government's Cabinet Secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood, under instruction from the Prime Minister David Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who ordered that the hard drives containing the information must be destroyed.[97] The Guardian's offices were then visited in July by agents from the UK's GCHQ, who supervised the destruction of the hard drives containing information acquired from Snowden.[98] In June 2014 The Register reported that the information the government sought to suppress by destroying the hard drives related to the location of a "beyond top secret" internet monitoring base in Seeb, Oman and the close involvement of BT and Cable & Wireless in intercepting internet communications.[99]

Ownership

The Guardian's ownership by the Scott Trust is probably a factor in its being the only British national daily to conduct (since 2003) an annual social, ethical and environmental audit in which it examines, under the scrutiny of an independent external auditor, its own behaviour as a company.[103] It is also the only British daily national newspaper to employ an internal ombudsman (called the "readers' editor") to handle complaints and corrections.

The Guardian and its parent groups participate in Project Syndicate, established by George Soros, and intervened in 1995 to save the Mail & Guardian in South Africa, but Guardian Media Group sold the majority of its shares in the Mail & Guardian in 2002.

 Gates has announced he will invest $2 billion (£1.3 billion) in renewable technologies initiatives, but rejected calls to divest from the fossil fuel companies that are burning carbon at a rate that ignores international agreements to limit global warming.

Speaking to the Financial Times, Gates said that he would double his current investments in renewables over the next five years in a bid to “bend the curve” on tackling climate change.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, lead by Gates and his wife, is the world’s largest charitable foundation. According to the charity’s most recent tax filings in 2013, it currently has $1.4 billion invested in fossil fuel companies, including BP, responsible for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

In March, the Guardian launched a campaign calling on the Gates’ Foundation and the Wellcome Trust to divest from coal, oil and gas companies. More than 223,000 people have since signed up to the campaign. 6/15

==

http://ecowatch.com/2015/04/03/bill-mckibben-guardian-divests-fossil-fuels/

network of Republican lawmakers and their rightwing corporate funders are battling behind closed doors to block minimum wage increases in cities across the US, in a step-by-step counter-attack that could cut back the incomes of millions of Americans despite an economic upswing.

According to strategic details obtained by the Guardian, the American Legislative Exchange Council (Alec) – along with its localised sister organization, ACCE – is trying to prevent elected city representatives from raising the minimum wage to levels above those set by their states. The group has launched an aggressive dual-track mission that combines legislation and litigation in what Alec calls a “new battleground” over worker compensation.

Obama talks up US recovery and urges Republicans to back higher wages

Read more

The anti-wage increase moves come as Walmart, a former corporate member of the Alec network and the largest private employer in the US, responded to a barrage of criticism over the company’s low wages this wee[link]  about 40% of its employees. The hike will marginally improve the earnings of about 500,000 Walmart workers, though it falls far short of the $15 per hour that staff – and labor advocates in cities across the country – have been demanding.

Alec’s plan to oppose minimum wage increases at the local level was set out in a recent meeting in Washington DC that brought together Republican legislators with several large corporate backers. The meeting was closed to journalists, but the Guardian has obtained details of the discussion from participants.

YYY