Tag Archives : Build House

Zelensky urges Donbas residents to evacuate, calls on US to legally recognize Russia as terrorist state

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky urged civilians remaining in the easternmost Donbas region of the country to leave as the most intense fighting with Russian forces continues there. 

Zelensky said in a statement on Saturday that hundreds of thousands of people remain in the area and refuse to leave but must for their own safety. He said people specifically leaving Donetsk, the province in the Donbas that Russia has focused on capturing since taking the other province of Luhansk earlier this month, will reduce the number of people that the Russian army can kill. 

“Therefore, if you have the opportunity, please talk to those who still remain in the combat zones in Donbas,” the statement reads. “Please convince them that it is necessary to leave, especially if they are families with children. If you have the opportunity to help displaced people, do it.” 

Zelensky said the government is organizing for a mandatory evacuation from Donetsk, but people need to decide to leave. He said the Ukrainian government will provide full logistical and financial assistance. 

“We are not Russia. That is why every life is important for us. And we will use all available opportunities to save as many lives as possible and to limit Russian terror as much as possible,” he said. 

Zelensky also called on the world, and specifically the U.S. State Department, to recognize Russia as a terrorist state. He said it would not be just a political gesture but an “effective defense of the free world.” 

He said the recognition will cut various political and business ties that Russia has, making it difficult for the state to exist. He said the sooner the recognition is issued, the less evil Russia will be able to inflict. 

The Senate unanimously passed a resolution on Wednesday urging Secretary of State Antony Blinken to designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. 

Zelensky said terror is Russia’s main weapon at this point in the war, and the main task for every Ukrainian and “defender of freedom and humanity in the world” is to isolate Russia and protect as many as possible from its attacks. 

Ukrainian officials warned earlier this month that Russia is preparing for another offensive, with the next target likely the city of Sloviansk, in the Donetsk province.

Source: TEST FEED1

Netflix sues alleged knockoff 'Bridgerton' musical creators for infringement

Netflix filed a lawsuit Friday against the creators of a stage musical production version of the streaming platform’s hit show “Bridgerton,” alleging that they infringed on the platform’s copyright. 

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, states that Abigail Barlow and Emily Bear stole intellectual property from Netflix to build an international brand. Barlow and Bear created “The Unofficial Bridgerton Musical,” a musical version of the show, after beginning to post about the series on TikTok soon after it was released in December 2020. 

The pair have received accolades for the musical, winning a Grammy award this year for best musical theater album. 

They began creating musical compositions based on characters, scenes, dialogue and plot points, as others did. Netflix directly told Barlow and Bear when asked that the compositions were not authorized, according to the lawsuit. 

The complaint states that they still moved forward to create their album. 

“At each step of the way, Barlow & Bear’s representatives repeatedly assured Netflix that they understood Netflix’s position and led Netflix to believe that Netflix would be consulted before Barlow & Bear took steps beyond streaming their album online in audio-only format,” the lawsuit reads. 

Netflix is arguing that their representations were false and the two are now profiting from its intellectual property. 

The complaint states that Barlow and Bear held a “massive, for-profit stage show” called “The Unofficial Bridgerton Musical Album Live in Concert” in front of a sold-out audience at the Kennedy Center despite repeated objections from Netflix. 

It states the show featured more than a dozen songs that copied dialogue, character traits, expression and other elements verbatim from the series. Barlow and Bear misrepresented that they were using Netflix’s “BRIDGERTON” trademark with permission, according to the lawsuit. 

The lawsuit states that the pair plan to stage another performance of their musical in London, making it a world tour and promoted their own Bridgerton-themed merchandise. 

Netflix and Barlow and Bear did not immediately return requests from The Hill for comment.

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden promotes health care proposals in reconciliation package on Medicare, Medicaid anniversaries

President Biden emphasized the provisions on health care in the health, climate and tax package that is set for a Senate vote in a statement recognizing the 57^th anniversaries of the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. 

Biden said in the statement that the legislation, called the Inflation Reduction Act, will maintain the eligibility improvements to the Affordable Care Act that were included in the American Rescue Plan, which saved 13 million Americans an average of $800 per year on health insurance premiums, according to the statement. He said the act will also protect 3 million Americans from becoming uninsured. 

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) reached an agreement Wednesday on a bill that would allow Medicare to directly negotiate drug prices and cap out-of-pocket prescription drug costs at $2,000 per year. It would also invest $369 billion in climate programs over 10 years and $300 billion in deficit reduction. 

Biden said allowing Medicare to negotiate will lower costs for potentially millions of senior citizens and capping drug costs at $2,000 will save Medicare beneficiaries with cancer and other chronic illnesses thousands of dollars per year. 

“For decades, Congressional Democrats have been fighting for this – and we are poised to come together and get it done,” he said. 

Biden said he and congressional Democrats are fighting to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid, which provide health insurance to senior citizens and low-income Americans, respectively. 

According to Biden, nearly 140 million Americans benefit from the programs. 

President Lyndon Johnson created Medicare and Medicaid as part of the Social Security Amendments of 1965. Almost 20 million Americans enrolled in the programs in their first three years, according to the National Archives.

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden gives video update after testing positive for COVID again

President Biden offered a video update on his health after his physician said he had tested positive again for COVID-19.

“Hey folks, Joe Biden here. Tested positive this morning. Going to be working from home for the next couple days,” Biden said in the video, next to his dog, Commander. 

“And I’m feeling fine, everything’s good. But Commander and I got a little work to do.”

Biden’s physician, Kevin O’Connor, said in a letter to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre earlier on Saturday that the president had tested positive for COVID-19 again after testing negative several times since Tuesday.

He noted that some patients treated with the antiviral COVID-19 treatment Paxlovid sometimes experience a COVID-19 “rebound.” Biden is fully vaccinated and has received two boosters. 

O’Connor said that the president, who is 79, would be returning to “strict isolation procedures” but said he did not see the need for Biden to receive treatment again given that the president was feeling well. 

In recent days, a number of senators have also tested positive for COVID-19 as the upper chamber prepares to vote on a reconciliation package that includes priorities like health, taxes and climate. But the passage of it before August recess could be complicated given all 50 Senate Democrats need to be present in order to pass it. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Congressman’s office says tweet using ‘profanities and offensive language’ posted by staffer

Rep. Chuy García’s (D-Ill.) office said in a statement on Saturday that a staffer in his office had posted an “unauthorized tweet” that used “profanities and offensive language,” adding that action would be taken against the individual.

“Last night a member of Congressman García’s staff posted an unauthorized tweet from the Congressman’s account using profanities and offensive language to individuals living with disabilities,” García spokesperson Fabiola Rodríguez-Ciampoli said in a statement.

“The language used was absolutely inappropriate and inconsistent with Congressman García’s history, values, and character. The individual responsible will be held accountable and appropriate disciplinary action will be taken,” Rodríguez-Ciampoli added.

A Fox News reporter tweeted a screenshot of a Twitter user account named “Anarcho3D” early Saturday, who quote-tweeted a statement from the Illinois Democrat.

“I just voted to reinstate the assault weapons ban. Now it’s the Senate’s turn to pass it and send it to President Biden’s desk. Weapons of war have no place in our communities…” García’s tweet partially reads.

The screenshot showed the Twitter user quote-tweeting it, saying “Never even heard of this guy and I won’t comply even if his silly law passes.”

García’s account replied, saying “You are borderline retarded, ya f–king dipshit.”

The tweet reply from García’s account was issued right after midnight on Saturday, according to the reporter’s screenshot. The reporter also noted that the tweet was removed two hours afterward. 

The Hill has reached out to García’s office for further comment. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden expedites aid to Kentucky flooding survivors as search and rescue continues in state

President Biden announced on Saturday that he is expediting support to the survivors of deadly flooding in Kentucky as search-and-rescue operations continue. 

Biden said in a tweet that he added individual assistance to his major disaster declaration for the state Friday, which made emergency federal funds available to help recovery efforts. 

Biden said in a comment to his original tweet that residents of five counties in Kentucky who have been affected by the flooding — Breathitt, Clay, Knott, Letcher, and Perry — should contact the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) confirmed at a press conference on Saturday that at least 25 people have died from the flooding so far. He said he is worried that officials will find bodies “for weeks to come.” 

He said at an earlier press conference that six of the dead had been confirmed children, but he said Saturday that officials believe that four were children and 21 were adults. 

Beshear said search-and-rescue operations are continuing, and days or weeks could go by before the state can start rebuilding. 

Eastern Kentucky is reeling after record amounts of rainfall, as much as 8 to 10 inches in some areas, fell on Thursday, causing a 1,000-year-flood. The magnitude of the flood only has a 1 in 1,000 chance of happening in any given year. 

The flooding comes less than a year after another natural disaster in December, when tornadoes ripped across the state and killed approximately 80 people.

Source: TEST FEED1

Democrats hope DOJ holds Trump accountable after Mueller disappointment

For the first two years of Donald Trump’s presidency, liberals and Trump critics who wanted to see him punished for criminal acts or substantial wrongdoing poured their hopes into then-special counsel Robert Mueller.

Now, watchdogs, Democratic lawmakers and Trump opponents all have their eyes on Attorney General Merrick Garland as his Justice Department ramps up its investigation into the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol.

“I think all eyes are on Garland in the same way as they were on Mueller, with the major difference, of course, that Mueller had no power to criminally prosecute,” said Eli Merritt, an author and political historian at Vanderbilt University.

Another key difference between the Mueller special counsel probe and the ongoing Justice Department investigation, experts said, is how public the evidence in the Jan. 6 probe is compared to the 2016 Russia investigation.

Mueller’s investigation was conducted largely out of public view. The voters’ knowledge of his findings was largely limited to news reports and a drip-drip of guilty pleas and indictments involving Trump associates.

The public ultimately learned of key details of the investigation in 2019, when Mueller issued his final report laying out instances where Trump may have obstructed justice, though he ultimately did not definitively say the president committed a crime.

Meanwhile, the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 riots recently wrapped up its first round of public hearings, during which it methodically illustrated how Trump spread falsehoods about the 2020 election, encouraged his supporters to come to Washington and then refused to call them off as they descended on the Capitol.

“I think there’s no doubt that the evidence and testimony that’s been presented by the committee has increased the appetite for the public for accountability and for prosecutions. We’ve seen a steady increase in interest,” said Brad Woodhouse, president of the Defend Democracy Project.

Mueller’s final report, which did find evidence of collaboration between the Trump campaign and Russia but did not spell out that Trump should be charged with obstruction of justice, was ultimately deflating for many liberals who had spent months building up the special counsel’s investigation as one that could bring down the president.

Now, despite the risk of another disappointment, some liberals are again publicly suggesting there is enough evidence for Garland to target Trump in his investigation.

“Now that the summer season of the January 6 Committee’s hearings is over, it’s time to tell AG Garland he has NO CHOICE but to INDICT the former president,” tweeted Laurence Tribe, a left-leaning legal scholar and frequent Trump critic.

“NOT indicting Trump amounts to giving him an unearned PARDON,” Tribe added. “Handing out pardons isn’t within any AG’s job description.”

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a member of the Jan. 6 committee, said on CBS last week, “Attorney General Garland has committed to following the facts and evidence wherever they lead. They’ve led to Donald J. Trump.”

A coalition of progressive groups earlier this month asked Justice Department to explain its internal policies on the question of whether presidents can be charged with a crime, worrying that the agency would limit itself from directly charging Trump if they found he acted illegally around Jan. 6.

“The Attorney General’s role is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, which speaks to setting long-term politics aside,” Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president at Public Citizen, one of the groups that signed onto the letter, said in a statement.

“We know Attorney General Garland is dedicated to that task, and we have confidence in the Justice Department to move appropriately as the avalanche of evidence surrounding the January 6th perpetrators continues to grow.”

In recent days, the attorney general has become more outspoken to make clear the investigation will proceed free of politics, even giving a rare interview to NBC News.

“We intend to hold everyone, anyone who was criminally responsible for the events surrounding Jan. 6, for any attempt to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another, accountable,” Garland said this week. “That’s what we do. We don’t pay any attention to other issues with respect to that.”

The Washington Post reported earlier this week that the department is investigating Trump’s action as part of its criminal probe, subpoenaing phone records of those across the country who aided in his false elector scheme, as well as other efforts to stay in power.

While the Justice Department investigation plays out, some watchdog groups and Trump critics remain optimistic that the former president will be held accountable regardless of how Garland decides to proceed.

They point to an ongoing probe in Georgia, where investigators are focusing on efforts to pressure state officials to change the outcome of the 2020 election there, as another area where Trump could face legal jeopardy.

The New York attorney general is also investigating Trump’s business dealings, and the D.C. attorney general is still looking into Trump’s inaugural committee’s finances.

Woodhouse, the head of the Defend Democracy Project who has led other Democratic groups, also argued that the Jan. 6 committee has already done significant work to hold Trump accountable by presenting evidence into the court of public opinion.

A survey released last week from PBS NewsHour-NPR-Marist poll found that 50 percent of respondents believed Trump should be charged with crimes, though just 28 percent believe he ultimately will be.

No former U.S. president has ever been criminally charged.

The poll also found 58 percent of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Trump, including 63 percent of independents.

“These hearings, this investigation, the testimony and evidence that’s been presented in public has been wildly successful. It has exceeded everyone’s expectations,” Woodhouse said.

“In my view, Donald Trump has been tried and convicted in the court of public opinion regardless of whether he’s tried and convicted in a criminal court,” he added.

Source: TEST FEED1

Real vs. imposter: manipulation of election integrity

A group in Colorado conducted a so-called “audit” of voters for the purpose of proving fraud in the election process there. Volunteers signed up to ask voters a series of questions to verify their existence and compare with official public records. According to reporting, these canvassers could be aggressive and unprofessional. Though the organization claims to have an “objective” survey script, its aims certainly appear otherwise — examining the quality of elections after having already come to a conclusion. The group’s mission statement states it was “established in response to overwhelming evidence of election irregularities and fraud in 2020.”

Like many efforts we have seen in the U.S. lately, the initiative purports the laudable and popular mission of transparency and of defending democracy through election integrity tools, like audits. Adopting the veneer of professionalism, the website is peppered with scientific language — praising the value of statistical samples and using terms like “forensic research.” Similar groups are forming to conduct independent election observation, a tried-and-true method used worldwide, but now coopted and misused.

This detracts from, and muddies the water for, needed and legitimate election oversight by civic actors.

For 25 years, I lived overseas working for organizations promoting democracy, a key component of which was organizing election monitoring, audits, and watchdog programs. These activities can expose shortcomings in order to develop ways to mitigate against them. Equally importantly, however, they build public trust in the election process and the legitimacy of the result, and thereby build trust in democratic governance.

We must distinguish between the legitimate and the imposter.

Legitimate election integrity efforts follow basic principles. Does the organization declare its financial supporters and possible conflicts of interest? For example, partisan observation is a legitimate and important part of election exercises around the world, but they need to be clearly labeled as such. Similarly, non-partisan observation must disclose their team, donors, methodology, and data.

Legitimate election monitors follow codes of conduct, such as the Declaration of Principles in Observation, that emphasize non-interference and do’s and don’ts. This is in sharp contrast, for example, with Republican state legislation to eliminate restrictions on observers’ actions in polling stations, allowing observers to record individual’s data and authenticate voters’ signatures. Those restrictions on observation were in line with best practice to prevent interference and harassment — and even conflict — at the polls.

Audits based on citizen surveys to verify election records, as the Colorado group claims to do, can be a valid exercise and serve as a critical check on the election process, particularly in places with low trust or problematic election administration. I conducted a months-long Voter Registry Audit in Cambodia in 2013, which is a systematic, scientific, and independent assessment of the quality of the voter registry. We used two statistical tests: one to ensure that every name on the voter list belongs to an actual person who is eligible to vote and the other to determine what proportion of people eligible to vote is listed on the voter registry.

This program differed from the Colorado effort in several important ways. First, it was not a partisan effort with the explicit aim to prove the election was stollen under the guise of “objectivity.” I was leading an international organization and working with non-partisan civic groups with the mission to strengthen and build trust in elections. Second, all our funding, methodology (including our survey sample and locations, selection process and training for surveyors, questionnaires, etc.), and data was publicly available and verifiable. Third, we engaged regularly with the election management body to ensure we were working off accurate election records.

Civic election oversight, such as the tools used around the world for decades, would be valuable in the United States — if done right.

No election is flawless, and oversight can help identify and correct mistakes. For example, to ensure public trust in the election process and the legitimacy of the result, the U.S. should welcome domestic and international nonpartisan election monitoring. Nonpartisan observers can serve as needed referees by rebutting false claims and neutrally presenting the facts.

An independent voter list audit also could be a useful exercise in the United States. It could test the accusation by many politicians that there are dead people or “ghost voters” on the list. Such names are not problematic, of course, unless they are used for voting — but it could help identify the need for safeguards and procedures for removal. It could also identify the percentage of people wrongfully removed from the voter list. The aim of this exercise would be to remedy problems — if any — identified, ground the public with the facts in a hailstorm of rumors, and support and build trust in the work of our election administrators.

We cannot let election oversight be captured by partisan-driven, disingenuous actors.

We need more legitimate, independent civic engagement — following international standards and best practice — to both build trust in our elections and expose and drum out the frauds.

Laura L. Thornton is director and senior fellow at the Alliance for Securing Democracy at the German Marshall Fund. Prior to joining ASD, she worked for 25 years in Asia and the former Soviet Union for democracy-promotion organizations.

Source: TEST FEED1

Sunday shows preview: Manchin and Schumer strike deal, GOP senators block burn pits bill

The deal between Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on a climate, health care and tax package and Senate Republicans blocking a bill to expand care for veterans suffering from burn pit injuries are expected to dominate this week’s Sunday shows circuit. 

After months of private negotiations, Manchin and Schumer announced Wednesday that they reached an agreement on a bill that will be part of a budget reconciliation package that Senate Democrats plan to bring to the floor this coming week. In a 50-50 Senate, reconciliation would allow Democrats to pass the bill along a party-line vote and avoid a Republican filibuster. 

The bill is significantly smaller than President Biden’s original Build Back Better proposal, a more than $3 trillion climate and social spending bill that Manchin announced his opposition to in December and effectively sank its chances of advancing. 

Manchin, a centrist who is widely considered the most moderate member of the Democratic caucus, had been negotiating with the White House and Democratic leaders leading up to his announcement. He had expressed doubts in the months that followed about reviving the legislation based on concerns about increasing prices further as inflation reached its highest level in four decades. 

Manchin will be appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” NBC’s “Meet the Press,” CBS’ “Face the Nation,” CNN’s “State of the Union” and “Fox News Sunday,” completing what has become known as a “full Ginsburg.” 

The term is named for Bill Ginsburg, the attorney for former White House intern Monica Lewinsky during President Clinton’s Lewinsky scandal. Ginsburg appeared on all five major Sunday morning talk shows in one day, the first person to do so. 

About 30 people have completed the feat since Ginsburg did in 1998, most of them top political leaders during major national news events. Politico reported that the last person to complete a full Ginsburg was Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. 

Other political leaders who have completed the feat include Michael Chertoff, who served as secretary of homeland security when Hurricane Katrina hit the southeastern United States in 2005, and Raj Shah, who served as the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development when an earthquake struck Haiti in 2010. 

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is the only person who has completed three full Ginsburgs, according to Politico. 

Although the bill has been trimmed down from Biden’s original proposal, its provisions still include major investment in climate and social spending and could be seen as a big win for the White House and Democrats. 

The legislation would invest $369 billion in energy-focused climate programs in the next decade while devoting $300 billion to deficit reduction. 

Climate activists have generally praised the proposal. Leah Stokes, an environmental politics professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, told The Hill that it will be “the largest climate investment in American history by far.” 

Schumer and Manchin said in a joint statement on the deal that the investment will lower emissions by about 40 percent by 2030. 

The legislation also includes a series of proposals to raise $739 billion in revenue, including a 15-percent corporate minimum tax, strong IRS enforcement of tax law and closing the carried interest loophole for money managers. 

It would also allow Medicare to negotiate directly to lower drug prices. 

Democrats are eagerly awaiting a decision from Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), another moderate member of the caucus, on if she will support the deal. Gaining Sinema’s support would be a large boost to the bill’s chances of passing the Senate. 

Senate Republicans have meanwhile faced intense criticism this week for overwhelmingly opposing a bill that would expand health care coverage to military veterans who were exposed to burn pits and toxins while serving. Eight Republicans joined all Democrats in voting for the bill, but it fell five votes short of the 60 needed to defeat a filibuster. 

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who opposed the bill, said his opposition is not related to the focus of the bill itself but $400 billion in unrelated spending that he said was a “budgetary gimmick.” 

“My concern about this bill has nothing to do with the purpose of the bill,” said Toomey, who will appear on “Face the Nation” and “State of the Union.” 

Schumer said in comments after the bill failed that he offered Toomey the ability to propose an amendment to the bill after it received the 60 votes needed to advance, but Toomey insisted on passing the amendment in advance. 

The legislation would add 23 toxic and burn pit exposure conditions to a Department of Veterans Affairs database and expand care for Vietnam War-era veterans exposed to Agent Orange and post-9/11 veterans exposed to burn pits. 

The bill previously passed both houses of Congress overwhelmingly but needed to be passed in the Senate a second time because the House made minor changes in its version. 

Schumer said he will bring the bill up again on Monday to try to pass it. 

Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) were two Senate Republicans who originally supported the bill before voting against it. Cassidy was one of the senators who originally introduced the bill in the body earlier this year. 

Cassidy will appear on “This Week,” while Barrasso will appear on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures.” 

Below is the full list of guests scheduled to appear on this week’s Sunday talk shows: 

ABC’s “This Week” — Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.); Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers (R) 

NBC’s “Meet the Press” — Manchin 

CBS’ “Face the Nation” — Manchin; Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.); Neel Kashkari, the president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis 

CNN’s “State of the Union” — Manchin; Toomey; Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese 

“Fox News Sunday” — Manchin; Tudor Dixon, a Republican candidate for governor of Michigan 

Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures” — Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.); Charlie Kirk, president and founder of Turning Point USA; Miranda Devine, FOX News contributor and New York Post columnist; John Ratcliffe, former director of national intelligence; Harriet Hageman, Republican candidate for the House in Wyoming

Source: TEST FEED1

Kushner says Bannon told him ‘I will break you in half’ if Kushner crossed him: memoir

Jared Kushner, former President Trump’s son-in-law and ex-senior adviser, claims in a forthcoming memoir that former Trump adviser Stephen Bannon told him “I will break you in half” if Kushner crossed him, according to CNN, which obtained an early copy of the book.

“Steve, you gotta stop leaking on Gary,” Kushner says he told Bannon in his forthcoming book, “Breaking History: A White House Memoir,” referring to senior economic adviser Gary Cohn, who he says had told him that Bannon was leaking about him.

“We’re trying to build a team here,” he added.

Kushner says Bannon in response said, “Cohn’s the one leaking on me” and claimed Kushner was “undermining” the agenda of the then-president, according to CNN.

“And if you go against me, I will break you in half. Don’t f— with me,'” Kushner describes Bannon saying. 

Kushner also wrote in the book that White House officials joked about Bannon’s duties being leaking to media outlets.

“Stephen Miller joked to Hope and me, ‘I have a plan to split up Steve Bannon’s extensive workload. Hope, you leak to Jonathan Swan at Axios. Jared, you call Mike Bender from the Wall Street Journal. I’ll call Jeremy Peters from the New York Times, and … we’re done,'” Kushner wrote, according to the network. 

Bannon exited the White House in August 2017 during a year that saw several major personnel shake-ups and as the West Wing grappled with leaking and infighting among staff.

The former chief strategist was later charged in August 2020 with defrauding thousands of donors in connection with a fundraising campaign for a private border wall but received a pardon from Trump shortly before the former president left office.

Kushner wrote in his book that he surprised Trump by saying he supported Bannon’s pardon.

“Bannon single-handedly caused more problems for me than anyone else in my time in Washington. He probably leaked and lied about me more than everyone else combined. He played dirty and dragged me into the mud of the Russia investigation. But now that he was in trouble, I felt like helping him was the right thing to do,” Kushner says he told Trump, according to CNN. 

Earlier this month, Bannon was convicted of contempt of Congress by a federal jury after refusing to comply with a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. 

The Hill has reached out to a Bannon spokesperson for comment. 

Source: TEST FEED1