Connect with us

News

Secret Service target of misogynistic backlash after Donald Trump assassination attempt

Published

on

Secret Service target of misogynistic backlash after Donald Trump assassination attempt

Mere hours after a cadre of Secret Service agents risked their lives to shield Donald Trump from a would-be assassin’s fire, members of the former president’s security detail were themselves coming under attack.

“There should not be any women in the Secret Service,” rightwing commentator Matt Walsh wrote on X, posting a video showing three female agents ushering Trump into an SUV. “These are supposed to be the very best, and none of the very best at this job are women.”

Amid the intense scrutiny of the agency’s alleged failings in preventing Saturday’s assassination attempt in Pennsylvania, misogynist views like Walsh’s have been endorsed by several influential voices on the right. 

X owner Elon Musk posted that he believed the women in the detail were too “small” to cover Trump and had not been selected on merit, while hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman suggested that so-called diversity, equity and inclusion policies contributed to the incident.

The backlash was not confined to the loudest voices on social media. Republican congressman Tim Burchett of Tennessee, who achieved a level of notoriety for saying “we are not going to fix it” following a school shooting in his state, told Fox News that Secret Service director Kimberly Cheatle was a “DEI initiative person” and suggested that “this is what happens when you don’t put the best players in”.

Advertisement

He and other commentators have referred to Cheatle’s pledge to ensure that 30 per cent of the agency’s staff was female by the end of the decade.

Secret Service agents after the attempted assassination of Trump. Kimberly Cheatle, the director of the agency, is set to appear before the House oversight committee on Monday © Evan Vucci/AP

Burchett sits on the Republican-led House oversight committee, which is due to grill Cheatle — who is the second woman to preside over the protection agency and rose through the ranks in a decades-long career — over the Trump assassination attempt at a hearing on Monday.

Advocates for more diversity in national security personnel say they are concerned about the impact of such rhetoric.

“People feel safer in numbers, and so the more people like Tim Burchett say stuff [that is] so obviously misogynist and sexist, the more others who already feel it feel like they’re going to be able to get away with saying it,” said Gina Bennett, who spent 34 years in the CIA and champions the inclusion of women in defence ranks.

“What I think it does is continue to make acceptable sexism, racism, misogyny — because people just get numb to it,” she added.

Advertisement

The Secret Service did not respond to a request for comment, but the agency has previously said that all agents were held to the same standards. A spokesperson for Burchett said “the Congressman has said many times, “put the best player in, coach”.

The attacks on the Secret Service’s so-called DEI agenda, which were also endorsed by former attorney-general William Barr and Republican congressman Cory Mills, who is a former army sniper, are the latest front in a long-running war against diversity and inclusion policies being waged by allies of Trump in Congress, the courts and on college campuses.

Over the protestations of the Biden administration, the last National Defense Authorization Act passed into law with a clause that prohibits the government from establishing new DEI positions within the defence department, and from employing anyone whose primary duty it is to craft diversity and inclusion policies, or measure outcomes of such schemes.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump arrives on the first day of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on July 15 2024
Donald Trump arrives on the first day of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The Security Service agents who flanked him were all male © Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

While the Secret Service has employed female special agents for more than half a century, its recruitment policies have only recently drawn the ire of Republican politicians.

Earlier this year, the Oversight Committee brought up DEI policies in a letter to Cheatle following an incident involving a Secret Service agent on vice-president Kamala Harris’s protective detail who was later removed from duty after an alleged attack on her superior. 

The matter “raised concerns within the agency about the hiring and screening process for this agent: specifically whether previous incidents in her work history were overlooked during the hiring process . . . as part of a diversity, equity and inclusion effort”, committee chair James Comer wrote.

Advertisement

While the Secret Service has been plagued by past scandals involving male colleagues, such as the alleged procurement of prostitutes in Colombia and drunk driving near the White House, the response to the Trump attack has seen some “seizing [on] specific physical features to indict an entire population”, said Lauren Bean Buitta, founder of Girl Security, which campaigns for diversity in the security establishment.

Bennett, who now teaches at Georgetown’s Centre for Security Studies, said: “Somebody is going to have to point to me the medical anatomical proof that being born with a uterus, somehow or another, makes me less capable of identifying a threat and neutralising a threat.”

Despite the attacks on diversity and inclusion, there had been a “huge rise” in the number of young women interested in national security careers, according to Girl Security. Buitta said it would be “extraordinarily impactful” to have leaders of the respective presidential campaigns condemn the sexist comments, which she warned could “stir up additional hate”.

But the vitriol poured over the women in Donald Trump’s detail may already be having an effect. As he walked on to the floor of the Republican convention in Milwaukee on Monday evening, the former president was flanked by a dozen Secret Service agents — all male.

Advertisement

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending