What is the government accusing the company of doing?
The government alleges that Live Nation Entertainment’s sprawling business model is choking off competition and that the company is punishing venues that rely on other ticketing services.
Donald Trump's legal team on Monday asked Judge Aileen Cannon, the jurist overseeing the criminal Espionage Act case brought against the former president in Florida, to sanction Special Counsel Jack Smith for the prosecutor's recent attempt to modify the conditions of Trump's release pending trial.
Smith recently moved for what some have compared to a gag order for Trump's recent false claims about the FBI. Specifically, Trump claimed that President Joe Biden and the FBI sought to kill the ex-president, which is why they used a warrant that allowed for "deadly force" when searching his Mar-a-Lago resort for classified records.
In reality, the same language is standard in all similar warrants, and was used in the one employed to search Biden's residence for documents, as well.
ALSO READ: What Trump's weird WWE Hall of Fame speech tells us about his presidential debate strategy
The filing was flagged by several legal experts, including Lawfare's Anna Bower.
"Trump’s team has now asked Judge Cannon to strike the special counsel’s motion to modify Trump’s condition of release—and asks her to impose sanctions on prosecutors who participated in the decision to file the motion," Bower wrote.
MSNBC's Lisa Rubin also chimed in.
"Trump baselessly accused Biden of trying to assassinate him by using standard FBI protocol on a day everyone knew Trump would not be present," Rubin said Monday. "The Special Counsel asked for relief. But now Trump’s team wants sanctions because they got insufficient notice of their client’s highly dangerous statements."
CBS News Congressional Correspondent Scott MacFarlane also highlighted the new court filing.
"Trump defense asks judge to reject Jack Smith request in Florida case that Trump be restricted from statements that 'pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents' & deceptive claims about agents. And Trump seeks sanctions against Smith team," the reporter wrote.
Donald Trump on Monday complained about a procedural detail he says gives prosecutors a major advantage in the criminal hush money cover-up case against him.
Trump, who earlier in the day was said to be dropping hints about not-yet-public jury instruction details, took to Truth Social to address the case in which he's charged with falsifying business records to hide payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels allegedly meant to influence the 2016 presidential election.
Specifically, Trump complained about the order in which the jury will hear the closing arguments from Trump's legal team and the New York prosecution's attorneys.
ALSO READ: What Trump's weird WWE Hall of Fame speech tells us about his presidential debate strategy
"Can you imagine, a President of the United States, who got more votes than any sitting President in the history of our Country, and who is also the Republican Nominee for President in the upcoming 2024 Election, and leading in all polls against the Democrat Nominee, Joe Biden, is tomorrow going before a Corrupt and Conflicted Democrat Appointed, Acting New York Judge, on a FAKE & MADE UP CASE by a Soros backed failed D.A., and the Judge himself, to see whether or not he will become a common criminal?" the ex-president asked. "According to virtually all Legal Scholars and Experts, THERE IS NO CRIME OR CASE against President Trump, and if there was it should have been brought seven years ago, not in the middle of his Campaign for President. Prosecutorial Misconduct. Election Interference!"
Trump then raised the issue of the closing argument order.
"WHY IS THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT ALLOWED TO MAKE THE FINAL ARGUMENT IN THE CASE AGAINST ME?" Trump complained on Monday. "WHY CAN’T THE DEFENSE GO LAST? BIG ADVANTAGE, VERY UNFAIR. WITCH HUNT! DJT"
The post was one of Trump's many Memorial Day statements.
Former President Donald Trump has been subjected to limited gag orders in a variety of criminal and civil cases, from Justice Juan Merchan in the hush money trial to Judge Tanya Chutkan in special counsel Jack Smith's election interference case and Justice Arthur Engoron in New York Attorney General Letitia James' civil fraud lawsuit.
However, there is no formal gag order in Smith's Mar-a-Lago documents case, which has been delayed indefinitely by Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee.
Smith last week requested from Cannon a partial gag order in that case, inspiring an angry rant from Trump on his Truth Social platform.
In his Friday request, Smith told Cannon that a limited gag order is needed in order to discourage Trump from making statements "that pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents."
READ MORE: What to watch for in Trump trial's closing arguments
Smith's motion argues, "The Government's request is necessary because of several intentionally false and inflammatory statements recently made by Trump that distort the circumstances under which the Federal Bureau of Investigation planned and executed the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. Those statements create a grossly misleading impression about the intentions and conduct of federal law enforcement agents — falsely suggesting that they were complicit in a plot to assassinate him — and expose those agents, some of whom will be witnesses at trial, to the risk of threats, violence, and harassment."
Attorney George Conway, a Never Trump conservative who is fundraising for President Joe Biden's reelection campaign, applauded Smith's gag order request during a CNN appearance — while Trump railed against the special counsel on Truth Social.
Trump posted, "I guess they're hoping they can silence me from telling the TRUTH like the Corrupt and Highly Conflicted Judge in New York City has done. Gag Orders have a very strong tendency to BACKFIRE, and if anybody should be GAGGED, it should be Deranged Jack, who was recently caught doing very bad things."
It remains to be seen what Cannon will decide in response to Smith's request.
READ MORE: 'Is this a violation?' Internet accuses Trump team of flouting gag order again
Law & Crime's Colin Kalmbacher notes, "Smith's effort to double up on his success with gag orders, if successful, would exact a hat trick of speech concessions on the ex-president at the height of the 2020 campaign season. Trump has, for his part, consistently sought to make political hay out of the four different indictments he faces in four different jurisdictions. Friday night's post on his homegrown social media website keeps up a theme of characterizing those criminal prosecutions as rogue actions of corrupt and partisan prosecutors."
READ MORE:Trump suffered a 'stunning rebuke' in disastrous Saturday night speech: analystInsiders in Donald Trump’s campaign are increasingly worried that an ally’s extremist past could hand a key swing state to Joe Biden in November.
The Daily Beast reported concerns that the former president’s aligning himself with North Carolina’s far-right candidate for governor, Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, is damaging his chances of taking the state.
“He’s an opposition researcher’s dream,” Democratic strategist Morgan Jackson told the Beast.
“Mark Robinson is the most extreme candidate for public office, period, in North Carolina, much less the race for governor.”
He added, “If you're a CEO and you're thinking of moving your business to North Carolina, and Mark Robinson is the governor, I think your employees are going to tell you they want to go somewhere else."
Among the extremist opinions Robinson has voiced are denial of the Holocaust and a desire to roll back feminism. “I absolutely want to go back to the America where women couldn’t vote,” he said in 2020.
But a Trump strategist told the Beast, “DJT likes him a lot."
"Clearly, it's not great," he added.
ALSO READ: Inside Donald Trump’s billion-dollar Big Oil heist
North Carolina-based GOP strategist Paul Shumaker said Robinson's campaign could have a "reverse coattails" effect on Trump — meaning Republicans who vote against Robinson might also vote against Trump rather than split their tickets.
"The Biden campaign will attempt to tie the two together,” Shumaker said.
“Trump will distance himself and withdraw his endorsement if Robinson becomes too much of a liability. [I] can't underscore Ds' turnout problems enough."
Former President Donald Trump told a roomful of donors that he has plans to expel student demonstrators from the United States, insiders at the meeting told the Washington Post.
Talking to a roomful of wealthy supporters — that he joked contained “98 percent of my Jewish friends” — he promised to deport anybody taking part in what he called a “radical revolution.”
The promise would be a fundamental disregard for the right to freedom of speech.
“One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country,” he told the group at the meeting on May 14, according to the Post.
“You know, there are a lot of foreign students. As soon as they hear that, they’re going to behave.”
He also praised the NYPD’s crackdown on Columbia University protesters, and urged police forces elsewhere to take similar action.
“Well, if you get me elected, and you should really be doing this, if you get me reelected, we’re going to set that movement back 25 or 30 years,” he said, according to the Post’s insiders.
“The private New York meeting offers new insight into his current thinking,” the Post reported.
ALSO READ: 'Oh, come on!' Tommy Tuberville dismisses Trump connection to 'unified Reich' video
“Speaking to wealthy donors behind closed doors, Trump said that he supports Israel’s right to continue “its war on terror” and boasted of his White House policies toward Israel."
“The former president didn’t mention Netanyahu, whom he resents for acknowledging Joe Biden’s victory in 2020 and hasn’t spoken to in years.”
Trump also told donors he supported Israel’s right to attack Gaza.
“But I’m one of the only people that says that now. And a lot of people don’t even know what October 7th is,” he said.
Trump has stated he wants to deport "anti-American" protesters at rally speeches.
The lawsuit alleges that Live Nation “engaged in a variety of tactics to eliminate competition and monopolize markets,” which, according to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, has allowed the entertainment giant to “suffocate the competition” through its control of ticket prices, venues and concert promotion.
The government alleges that Live Nation Entertainment’s sprawling business model is choking off competition and that the company is punishing venues that rely on other ticketing services.
Live Nation, the country’s largest concert promoter, and Ticketmaster, the nation’s biggest ticket seller, had long been major players in the music industry. After the Justice Department approved a merger in 2010 between the two enterprises, the new company, Live Nation Entertainment, became far more powerful.
Live Nation Entertainment now controls many of the functions associated with putting on a concert: It owns venues, promotes concerts, books acts, produces shows, manages artists, sells tickets, and more.
After winning the 2020 presidential election, President Joe Biden promised to use the Justice Department’s antitrust division to break up monopolies, and that’s exactly what the government is trying to do with Live Nation Entertainment.
The government has been investigating Live Nation Entertainment for decades. But after a botched Ticketmaster presale for Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour in late 2022 – which made it nearly impossible for fans to buy tickets at face value – government scrutiny intensified.
After that fiasco, fans started contacting their lawmakers, and the U.S. Senate even held a hearing on the issue. In May 2024, the governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, signed a bill into law that will require all ticket sellers in the state to disclose their fees up front.
For much of the 20th century, buying tickets to a show or sporting event required traveling to the venue’s box office.
In 1976, Albert Leffler, who worked at Arizona State University’s performing arts center, and Peter Gadwa, an IT staffer on the same campus, founded Ticketmaster with businessman Gordon Gunn III. The enterprise began to sell tickets a year later. As the company developed, it incorporated new technology to facilitate ticket sales at a growing list of locations outside of the venue where a show would be performed.
Ticketmaster ultimately acquired Ticketron, its predecessor and rival.
As a teen in the 1990s, I remember waiting in line at a local grocery store in Williamsburg, Virginia, to buy tickets to a Dave Matthews Band show at the Virginia Beach Amphitheater. I had to be at the grocery store at 9 a.m. to purchase the tickets, but because it was a local Ticketmaster vendor, it saved me an hourlong trip to the venue.
A couple of years later, Ticketmaster introduced the technology required to give concertgoers the opportunity to purchase tickets online. In 2008, the company permitted paperless entry.
However, that convenience comes with hidden fees. Suddenly, the cost of your US$25 ticket can balloon to $40, with that extra $15 relatively opaque until checkout. These fees used to be a matter of convenience; there wasn’t a fee when you went to the venue to buy a ticket.
Now, the fees are unavoidable and multiplying: There can be a service fee, an order processing charge, a facility charge and a delivery fee.
In my research and my personal experience, I’ve observed a sea change in the roles that live music and recorded music are playing.
From the 1970s to the 1990s, recording artists with medium-sized and large fan bases toured to promote their albums. During that time, these musicians assumed that they would take a loss on their tours; the payoff would come from their ability to sell more albums. Less prominent musicians, meanwhile, have always relied on playing at small venues to earn any income at all.
With the advent of file-sharing services, which later gave way to streaming, recording artists began to rely more on touring revenue to supplement their income, as money earned from album sales fell.
With even the most popular musicians increasingly relying on income from touring, they count more on making sure they earn what is owed to them. Fans feel like they have a close relationship with their favorite musicians and are willing to support them financially.
But when Live Nation Entertainment adds fees or pressures musicians to take a smaller cut of concert revenue, it becomes apparent to fans that they and their favorite musicians are getting a raw deal.
The government will seek a jury trial to determine if Live Nation Entertainment is a monopoly. If the company is found to be violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, Live Nation Entertainment would be forced to restructure, or even split into two or more separate companies.
Of course, lawsuits take time to resolve, even if the parties settle before entering a courtroom. And any potential ruling could have to go through an appeals process. I believe it’s likely that this dispute won’t be resolved for several years.
Aside from the lawsuit, the Biden administration is working on banning so-called “ junk fees.” Eliminating exorbitant or hidden fees on concert tickets would address some of these problems.
Unfortunately, no matter what happens to Live Nation Entertainment, the music industry as a whole – whether it’s the record labels, streaming services, music publishers or music venues –
is trending toward more consolidation and monopolistic behavior.
David Arditi, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Texas at Arlington
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Port Moresby (AFP) – More than 2,000 people are feared buried in a Papua New Guinea landslide that destroyed a remote highland village, the government said Monday, as it pleaded for international help in the rescue effort.
The once-bustling hillside community in Enga province was almost wiped out when a chunk of Mount Mungalo collapsed in the early hours of Friday morning, smothering scores of homes and the people sleeping inside them.
"The landslide buried more than 2,000 people alive and caused major destruction to buildings, food gardens and caused major impact on the economic lifeline of the country," Papua New Guinea's national disaster centre said in a letter to the UN obtained by AFP.
The main highway to the large Porgera gold mine was "completely blocked", it told the UN resident coordinator's office in the capital Port Moresby.
The landslip was continuing to "shift slowly, posing ongoing danger to both the rescue teams and survivors alike", the disaster centre said.
The scale of the catastrophe required "immediate and collaborative actions from all players", it added, including the army, and national and provincial responders.
The centre also called on the United Nations to inform Papua New Guinea's development partners "and other international friends" of the crisis.
The UN is scheduled to hold an online emergency meeting with foreign governments early Tuesday.
They will try to coordinate a relief effort that has been complicated by the remoteness of the site -- which is situated in Papua New Guinea's rugged highlands -- as well as the severed road link and ongoing tribal fighting nearby.
Locals and rescue teams have been using shovels and pieces of wood to find bodies under the landslide -- a mix of car-sized boulders, uprooted trees and churned-up earth that is thought to be up to eight metres (26 feet) deep.
"Nobody escaped. We don't know who died because records are buried," a schoolteacher from a neighbouring village, Jacob Sowai, told AFP.
UN migration agency official Serhan Aktoprak told AFP that the danger was ongoing: "The landmass is still sliding, rocks are falling from the mountain."
Streams of water were flowing between the soil and debris, while cracks were appearing in land adjacent to the landslip, he added.
"This might trigger a further sliding," the UN official warned, posing a "serious risk" both to rescuers and people living in the area.
Close ally Australia said Monday that it would provide emergency relief supplies, such as shelters, hygiene kits, and specific support for women and children.
China's President Xi Jinping sent a message of condolences saying he was "deeply sorry" to learn of the disaster and offering assistance.
US President Joe Biden, French President Emmanuel Macron, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and the World Health Organisation have also offered support.
Locals said the landslip may have been triggered by heavy rains in recent weeks.
Papua New Guinea has one of the wettest climates in the world, and research has found shifting rainfall patterns linked to climate change could exacerbate the risk of landslides.
The death toll has been climbing since the disaster struck as officials reassess the size of the population lying beneath mud and rubble spanning almost four football fields in length, officials say.
Estimating the toll is difficult because many people fleeing tribal violence have moved into the area in the past few years, said UN Development Programme official Nicholas Booth.
Five bodies and the leg of a sixth had been pulled from the debris by Saturday night.
More than 1,000 people have been displaced by the catastrophe, aid agencies have estimated.
An outbreak of tribal fighting unrelated to the disaster was blocking attempts to bring in humanitarian aid from the provincial capital Wabag, the UN official Aktoprak said.
"Many houses are burning with others emitting smoke. Women and children have been displaced while all the youth and men in the area were carrying bush knives," he said, quoting from a report from an aid convoy attempting to reach the disaster site.
The tribal battles had also delayed the delivery of heavy machinery and diggers.
The area is located about 600 kilometres (370 miles) from Port Moresby.
People from adjoining villages were helping to unearth bodies, said Nickson Pakea, president of the nearby Porgera Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
"Because of the hard rock and the clay, the stone, and the rocks that came in, it is quite messy. It needs excavators to remove the debris," Pakea told AFP.
A nearby mining joint venture, New Porgera Limited, had agreed to provide mechanical diggers to help the rescuers and clear roads, he said.
Located on the side of densely forested Mount Mungalo, the village was home to a transient population that could swell to more than 4,000 people.
It served as a trading post for miners who panned for gold in the highlands.
Since the start of the year, the country has experienced multiple earthquakes, floods and landslides, stretching the resources of emergency services.
© 2024 AFP
As a young GI at Fort Ord in Monterey County, California, Dean Osborn spent much of his time in the oceanside woodlands, training on soil and guzzling water from streams and aquifers now known to be contaminated with cancer-causing pollutants.
“They were marching the snot out of us,” he said, recalling his year and a half stationed on the base, from 1979 to 1980. He also remembers, not so fondly, the poison oak pervasive across the 28,000-acre installation that closed in 1994. He went on sick call at least three times because of the overwhelmingly itchy rash.
Mounting evidence shows that as far back as the 1950s, in an effort to kill the ubiquitous poison oak and other weeds at the Army base, the military experimented with and sprayed the powerful herbicide combination known colloquially as Agent Orange.
While the U.S. military used the herbicide to defoliate the dense jungles of Vietnam and adjoining countries, it was contaminating the land and waters of coastal California with the same chemicals, according to documents.
The Defense Department has publicly acknowledged that during the Vietnam War era it stored Agent Orange at the Naval Construction Battalion Center in Gulfport, Mississippi, and the former Kelly Air Force Base in Texas, and tested it at Florida’s Eglin Air Force Base.
According to the Government Accountability Office, however, the Pentagon’s list of sites where herbicides were tested went more than a decade without being updated and lacked specificity. GAO analysts described the list in 2018 as “inaccurate and incomplete.”
Fort Ord was not included. It is among about four dozen bases that the government has excluded but where Pat Elder, an environmental activist, said he has documented the use or storage of Agent Orange.
According to a 1956 article in the journal The Military Engineer, the use of Agent Orange herbicides at Fort Ord led to a “drastic reduction in trainee dermatitis casualties.”
“In training areas, such as Fort Ord, where poison oak has been extremely troublesome to military personnel, a well-organized chemical war has been waged against this woody plant pest,” the article noted.
Other documents, including a report by an Army agronomist as well as documents related to hazardous material cleanups, point to the use of Agent Orange at the sprawling base that 1.5 million service members cycled through from 1917 to 1994.
Agent Orange is a 50-50 mixture of two ingredients, known as 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Herbicides with the same chemical structure slightly modified were available off the shelf, sold commercially in massive amounts, and used at practically every base in the U.S., said Gerson Smoger, a lawyer who argued before the Supreme Court for Vietnam veterans to have the right to sue Agent Orange manufacturers. The combo was also used by farmers, forest workers, and other civilians across the country.
The chemical 2,4,5-T contains the dioxin 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin or TCDD, a known carcinogen linked to several cancers, chronic conditions, and birth defects. A recent Brown University study tied Agent Orange exposure to brain tissue damage similar to that caused by Alzheimer’s. Acknowledging its harm to human health, the Environmental Protection Agency banned the use of 2,4,5-T in the U.S. in 1979. Still, the other weed killer, 2,4-D is sold off-the-shelf today.
“The bottom line is TCDD is the most toxic chemical that man has ever made,” Smoger said.
For years, the Department of Veteran Affairs has provided vets who served in Vietnam disability compensation for diseases considered to be connected to exposure to Agent Orange for military use from 1962 to 1975.
Decades after Osborn’s military service, the 68-year-old veteran, who never served in Vietnam, has battled one health crisis after another: a spot on his left lung and kidney, hypothyroidism, and prostate cancer, an illness that has been tied to Agent Orange exposure.
He says many of his old buddies from Fort Ord are sick as well.
“Now we have cancers that we didn’t deserve,” Osborn said.
The VA considers prostate cancer a “ presumptive condition” for Agent Orange disability compensation, acknowledging that those who served in specific locations were likely exposed and that their illnesses are tied to their military service. The designation expedites affected veterans’ claims.
But when Osborn requested his benefits, he was denied. The letter said the cancer was “more likely due to your age,” not military service.
“This didn’t happen because of my age. This is happening because we were stationed in the places that were being sprayed and contaminated,” he said.
Studies show that diseases caused by environmental factors can take years to emerge. And to make things more perplexing for veterans stationed at Fort Ord, contamination from other harmful chemicals, like the industrial cleaner trichloroethylene, have been well documented on the former base, landing it on the EPA’s Superfund site list in 1990.
“We typically expect to see the effect years down the line,” said Lawrence Liu, a doctor at City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center who has studied Agent Orange. “Carcinogens have additive effects.”
In February, the VA proposed a rule that for the first time would allow compensation to veterans for Agent Orange exposure at 17 U.S. bases in a dozen states where the herbicide was tested, used, or stored.
Fort Ord is not on that list either, because the VA’s list is based on the Defense Department’s 2019 update.
“It’s a very tricky question,” Smoger said, emphasizing how widely the herbicides were used both at military bases and by civilians for similar purposes. “On one hand, we were service. We were exposed. On the other hand, why are you different from the people across the road that are privately using it?”
The VA says that it based its proposed rule on information provided by the Defense Department.
“DoD’s review found no documentation of herbicide use, testing or storage at Fort Ord. Therefore, VA does not have sufficient evidence to extend a presumption of exposure to herbicides based on service at Fort Ord at this time,” VA press secretary Terrence Hayes said in an email.
Yet environmental activist Elder, with help from toxic and remediation specialist Denise Trabbic-Pointer and former VA physician Kyle Horton, compiled seven documents showing otherwise. They include a journal article, the agronomist report, and cleanup-related documents as recent as 1995 — all pointing to widespread herbicide use and experimentation as well as lasting contamination at the base.
Though the documents do not call the herbicide by its colorful nickname, they routinely cite the combination of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. A “ hazardous waste minimization assessment” dated 1991 reported 80,000 pounds of herbicides used annually at Fort Ord. It separately lists 2,4,5-T as a product for which “substitutions are necessary to minimize the environmental impacts.”
The poison oak “control program” started in 1951, according to a report by Army agronomist Floyd Otter, four years before the U.S. deepened its involvement in Vietnam. Otter detailed the use of these chemicals alone and in combination with diesel oil or other compounds, at rates generally between “one to two gallons of liquid herbicide” per acre.
“In conclusion, we are fairly well satisfied with the methods,” Otter wrote, noting he was interested in “any way in which costs can be lowered or quicker kill obtained.”
An article published in California Agriculture more than a decade later includes before and after photos showing the effectiveness of chemical brush control used in a live-oak woodland at Fort Ord, again citing both chemicals in Agent Orange. The Defense Department did not respond to questions sent April 10 about the contamination or say when the Army stopped using 2,4,5-T at Fort Ord.
“What’s most compelling about Fort Ord is it was actually used for the same purpose it was used for in Vietnam — to kill plants — not just storing it,” said Julie Akey, a former Army linguist who worked at the base in the 1990s and later developed the rare blood cancer multiple myeloma.
Akey, who also worked with Elder, runs a Facebook group and keeps a list of people stationed on the base who later were diagnosed with cancer and other illnesses. So far, she has tallied more than 1,400 former Fort Ord residents who became sick.
Elder’s findings have galvanized the group to speak up during a public comment period for the VA’s proposed rule. Of 546 comments, 67 are from veterans and others urging the inclusion of Fort Ord. Hundreds of others have written in regarding the use of Agent Orange and other chemicals at their bases.
While the herbicide itself sticks around for only a short time, the contaminant TCDD can linger in sediment for decades, said Kenneth Olson, a professor emeritus of soil science at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
A 1995 report from the Army’s Sacramento Corps of Engineers, which documented chemicals detected in the soil at Fort Ord, found levels of TCDD at 3.5 parts per trillion, more than double the remediation goal at the time of 1.2 ppt. Olson calls the evidence convincing.
“It clearly supports the fact that 2,4,5-T with unknown amounts of dioxin TCDD was applied on the Fort Ord grounds and border fences,” Olson said. “Some military and civilian personnel would have been exposed.”
The Department of Defense has described the Agent Orange used in Vietnam as a “tactical herbicide,” more concentrated than what was commercially available in the U.S. But Olson said his research suggests that even if the grounds maintenance crew used commercial versions of 2,4,5-T, which was available in the federal supply catalog, the soldiers would have been exposed to the dioxin TCDD.
The half dozen veterans who spoke with KFF Health News said they want the military to take responsibility.
The Pentagon did not respond to questions regarding the upkeep of the list or the process for adding locations.
In the meantime, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry is studying potential chemical exposure among people who worked and lived on Fort Ord between 1985 and 1994. However, the agency is evaluating drinking water for contaminants such as trichloroethylene and not contamination or pollution from other chemicals such as Agent Orange or those found in firefighting foams.
Other veterans are frustrated by the VA’s long process to recognize their illnesses and believe they were sickened by exposure at Fort Ord.
“Until Fort Ord is recognized by the VA as a presumptive site, it’s probably going to be a long, difficult struggle to get some kind of compensation,” said Mike Duris, a 72-year-old veteran diagnosed with prostate cancer four years ago who ultimately underwent surgery.
Like so many others, he wonders about the connection to his training at Fort Ord in the early ’70s — drinking the contaminated water and marching, crawling, and digging holes in the dirt.
“Often, where there is smoke, there’s fire,” Duris said.
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF. Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com. Follow Louisiana Illuminator on Facebook and Twitter.
NEW YORK — The historic trial of Donald Trump enters its final act Tuesday, with closing arguments to the jury who must then decide whether to hand down the first ever criminal conviction of a former U.S. president.
Less than six months before American voters choose whether to return Trump to the White House, the stakes riding on the verdict are hard to overstate — for the 77-year-old personally, but also for the country as a whole.
Trump is accused of falsifying business records to buy the silence of porn star Stormy Daniels about a 2006 sexual encounter between them that could have damaged his 2016 presidential bid.
If convicted, he faces up to four years in prison on each of 34 counts, but legal experts say that as a first-time offender he is unlikely to get jail time.
Crucially, a conviction would not bar Trump from appearing on the ballot in November as the Republican presidential challenger to Democrat Joe Biden.
It has taken nearly five weeks, the testimony of more than 20 witnesses and a few courtroom fireworks to reach closing arguments — the last chance for the prosecution and defense to impress their case on the anonymous, 12-member jury.
As expected, Trump chose not to testify in his defense — a move that would have exposed him to unnecessary legal jeopardy and forensic cross-examination.
For a man who has always prided himself on being in charge and in control, the role of silent, passive defendant did not come easily.
At times it has been downright excruciating, especially when Trump was forced to sit and listen while Daniels recounted their alleged encounter in sometimes graphic detail.
Speaking to reporters before and after each day in court, Trump launched regular tirades against Judge Juan Merchan — calling him "corrupt" and a "tyrant"— and condemned the whole trial as "election interference" by Democrats intent on keeping him off the campaign trail.
The politics of the case were in full view in the final days when a coterie of leading Republicans — including several vice-presidential hopefuls — came to the court and stood behind Trump in a gesture of support as he spoke to the press.
In all, he was cited 10 times for contempt of court and fined $10,000 by Merchan for failing to heed a gag order prohibiting him from publicly attacking witnesses, the jury, court staff or their relatives.
The judge has said he expects closing arguments to take up all of Tuesday.
He will then give his final instructions to the jury, who will likely begin their deliberations on Wednesday.
To return a guilty or not guilty verdict requires unanimity. Just one holdout means a hung jury and a mistrial.
Aside from Daniels, the key prosecution witness was Michael Cohen, Trump's former "fixer" turned bitter foe who arranged the $130,000 hush money payment.
Walking jurors through the reasoning behind the payments, Cohen said they were made "to ensure that the story would not come out, would not affect Mr Trump's chances of becoming president of the United States."
Trump's defense team devoted most of their questioning trying to discredit Cohen, recalling that he had admitted lying to Congress and spent time in prison for tax fraud.
The defense called only two witnesses of their own before resting.
In addition to the New York case, Trump has been indicted in Washington and Georgia on charges of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
He also faces charges in Florida of allegedly mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House.
None of those trials are expected to take place before the November election.
Oddball presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was eliminated from contention for the oddball Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination during the party’s national convention Sunday afternoon in Washington. Kennedy was eliminated in the first round of voting after receiving support from 19 delegates, or just 2.07% of delegates.
Earlier, Libertarian Party Chair Angela McArdle had ruled that former president Donald J. Trump was not even qualified to be considered for nomination because he did not submit the proper nominating papers. Trump, however, received six write-in votes -- defeating Stormy Daniels, Denali the Cat, and Sean Ono Lennon.
Donald Trump was booed loudly and repeatedly during his speech to the Libertarians Saturday night as he asked for their support.
Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, told the party's delegates to unite with him to beat Democrat Joe Biden.
"We must work together," he said. "Combine with us. You have to combine with us."
The crowd responded to Trump's plea with shouts of “Bullsh---” and “F--- you!"
This story was originally published by The 19th, a nonprofit news organization.
Democratic efforts to protect contraception access — and Republican opposition — were thrust into the 2024 spotlight last week when Donald Trump told a Pittsburgh CBS affiliate that his GOP White House campaign was “looking at” restrictions on contraception, and that he ultimately expected “some states are going to have very different policies than others.”
Trump was correct — states are taking very different approaches to contraception access, depending on which party is in control. On the federal level, there is also a partisan divide, but Republicans in Congress lack the votes to restrict access, and Democrats lack the votes to protect it.
Democratic lawmakers across the country have pushed to preserve access to any type of reproductive care they can, including contraception, since the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2022 overturned the federal right to abortion in the case Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. But in the current state legislative sessions alone, Republicans in 12 states have blocked Democratic bills aimed at shoring up contraception access, with Republican governors vetoing measures in the swing states of Nevada and Virginia, according to the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.
“The policy agenda of the Republican Party is being accomplished in the states and it looks like abortion bans, it looks like bans on contraception, it looks like bans or challenges to IVF and personhood — this is what they’re about,” DLCC President Heather Williams told The 19th.
Also this week, in the U.S. Senate, Democratic Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced after Trump’s interview that he will tee up a vote on a bill called the Right to Contraception Act to coincide with the June 7 anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1965 ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, which found that state contraception bans violated married Americans’ constitutional right to privacy.
In 2022, shortly after Dobbs, the then-Democratic-controlled U.S. House approved the Right to Contraception Act — but the effort failed in the Senate. Now, the House is controlled by Republicans and the Senate still by Democrats, but the measure is still expected to lack the votes it needs to clear the 60-vote threshold required in the upper chamber. One of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, told The 19th that it was nevertheless important to hold another vote because it “will put every member on the record on where they stand, and it will show the American people whether they are willing to protect Americans’ health, freedom and equality.”
The Right to Contraception Act would establish a statutory right to contraception that no other law could impede, including a 1993 religious freedom law — an aspect that conservatives find problematic. It requires no new funding. Some Republicans also believe that it would protect access to mifepristone, which is typically used for medication abortion but can be used as contraception, though it is uncommon. The bill does not mention the drug by name. A group of anti-abortion doctors challenged the Food and Drug Administration’s 2000 approval of mifepristone and the case is currently before the Supreme Court.
Trump’s interview — and the fracas that followed — highlighted the dilemma facing Republican candidates in competitive states and districts in November. The anti-abortion groups with whom their right wing has become aligned are pushing policies that are unpopular with voters, including Republicans. Poll after poll shows that a majority of Americans want access to legal abortion, and an even greater percentage support access to contraception.
After a series of questions about abortion, Trump was asked: “Do you support any restrictions on a person’s right to contraception?” He answered: “Well, we’re looking at that and I’m going to have a policy on that very shortly. And I think it’s something you’ll find interesting.”
The news anchor followed up with: “Well, that suggests that you may want to support some restrictions like the morning after pill or something?” Trump responded: “We are also, you know, things really have a lot to do with the states. And some states are going to have different policies than others.”
Within hours, Democratic President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign blasted out a press release with the subject line: “Trump on Restricting Contraceptives: ‘We’re Looking at That.’” Trump volleyed back on his social media platform that it was a “Democrat fabricated lie” that he might impose “RESTRICTIONS ON BIRTH CONTROL” and “I DO NOT SUPPORT A BAN ON BIRTH CONTROL, AND NEITHER WILL THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!”
Trump’s campaign suggested he had conflated contraception with abortion medication by pointing reporters to a recent interview with Time magazine, in which he teased an announcement on mifepristone. His campaign did not respond to The 19th’s request to discuss his reproductive health care policies in more detail.
The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision was made possible by a Trump-cemented conservative majority. Its unpopularity with voters was one reason why Democrats fared better than history predicted in the 2022 midterms — and its fallout is continuing to create headaches for Republicans in moderate areas.
The Right to Contraception Act, meanwhile, is popular with voters. When the advocacy group Americans for Contraception conducted a recent national poll on the legislation, it showed that 81 percent of voters supported it, including 94 percent of Democrats and 68 percent of Republicans. But GOP lawmakers across the country, including in political swing states, have blocked state-level versions from becoming law — including with gubernatorial vetoes in Nevada and, just last week, in Virginia.
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin speaks after the end of the Virginia legislative session, addressing the media at Eggs Up Grill in Richmond, Virginia, on March 14, 2024. Minh Connors for The Washington Post via Getty Images.
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed a version of the Right to Contraception Act that was passed by the only state legislature in the South controlled by Democrats. Youngkin, a Republican, said he supported contraception access but wanted a more “robust conscience clause for providers” who object to prescribing it. Plus, he added, “the Code of Virginia already protects access to contraception through health insurance plans.”
Democrats in Virginia and elsewhere say it isn’t that simple.
Democratic lawmakers interviewed by The 19th pointed to the same thing when asked why they felt legislation was needed: Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion in the Dobbs case. In it, Thomas wrote that now that Roe v. Wade was gone, “we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents,” including Griswold; Lawrence v. Texas, on adult non-procreative sex; and Obergefell v. Hodges, on marriage equality.
“There have been mumblings about contraception for a few years, but it’s just so widely popular that we weren’t really paying attention until the Dobbs decision came down and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas mentioned the Griswold case and that it needed to be looked back into,” said Virginia Del. Marcia Price, a primary cosponsor of the Right to Contraception Act in that chamber.
Ofirah Yheskel with the Democratic Governors Association said that GOP opposition to protecting contraception “goes to show that Republicans were never going to stop at Dobbs. When Glenn Youngkin had the chance to protect reproductive rights, he put this veto forward — I think there’s a clear contrast here” between the two parties.
The Right to Contraception Act has also failed in other states key to both parties’ chances in November.
In Wisconsin, abortion has been legal since September 2023 after a court put a 1849 ban on hold and abortion rights figured prominently in a 2023 state Supreme Court race. But the Republican-controlled state legislature refused to hold a vote on the Right to Contraception Act before their session ended in March.
In Arizona, backlash over a series of competing abortion bans dating back to before the Civil War played a role in electing a Democratic governor and attorney general in 2022. Yet the Right to Contraception Act did not make it to Gov. Katie Hobbs’ desk because Republicans still have slim majorities in both legislative chambers and united against it.
One reason that Republican lawmakers are increasingly unwilling to codify the right to contraception is because the anti-abortion groups that wield immense power with the party’s right wing are lobbying against the bills — in part because for more than a decade now they have been trying to redefine some forms of contraception as abortion, abortion law historian Mary Ziegler said.
“One of the fronts in the war on contraception is ‘What is contraception?’ We’re already seeing the meaning of abortion contested in medical emergencies. … There are parallel moves to say ‘Well, actually an IUD is an abortion, it turns out this isn’t contraception at all,” Ziegler said.
Intrauterine devices, or IUDs, are small, T-shaped devices that a health care provider inserts into the uterus to prevent pregnancy — some use hormones, some don’t. They are one of the most effective forms of reversible, long-term contraception. Emergency contraception is often called the morning-after pill, and is a hormonal medication you take within several days of having intercourse. Neither are forms of abortion.
Redefining them as methods of abortion also supports the anti-abortion movement’s end goal of establishing fetal personhood, which would extend the rights of already born babies to fetuses, or even fertilized eggs. A Republican bill introduced last year in the U.S. House, for example, would establish personhood rights for even fertilized eggs that have not implanted in the uterine wall — the stage at which most medical professionals say a pregnancy begins.
Prominent anti-abortion group SBA Pro-Life America opposed the Right to Contraception Act when the House voted on it in July 2022, as well as when it came up in Virginia. The group said in a statement provided to The 19th that it “is a single-issue organization focused on abortion. We do not take a stance on contraception.” They have, in the past, promoted the idea that IUDs and emergency contraception can be abortion.
The leader of Alliance Defending Freedom, which helps lawmakers write anti-abortion legislation and is representing the group of anti-abortion doctors challenging mifepristone, told Politico in March that “ADF has never advocated for limitations on access to contraception.” But ADF has in recent years represented a nurse practitioner and a pharmacist who refused to dispense emergency contraceptives, arguing they were “abortion-causing drugs.” “No one should be forced to violate his conscience in the workplace, and that includes dispensing drugs that can cause an abortion,” an ADF attorney wrote on behalf of the pharmacist who refused to dispense the morning-after pill ella.
The Heritage Foundation has crafted a blueprint for Trump’s potential transition period before a second term called Project 2025. In it, they encourage him to remove emergency contraception from the coverage mandate contained in the Affordable Care Act, saying it is a “potential abortifacient” and “close cousin” to mifepristone. Heritage Foundation alumni also hold key posts in Youngkin’s administration and at state entities.
Price, the Virginia delegate, said that it is clear to Democrats there that anti-abortion groups are aiming to “redefine and also to shift public opinion” on what is and isn’t contraception. In her private conversations with Republican women lawmakers, she said, they acknowledged that contraception is widely popular with voters and can also be used to manage conditions such as heavy menstruation, endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrome. When it came time to vote, though, all Republican senators voted against the Right to Contraception Act; only a few Republican delegates from the most competitive districts joined Democrats.
When the Virginian-Pilot asked Republican state Sen. Emily Jordan why she voted against protecting contraception she gave them a two-word answer: “Ask caucus,” she said, in a reference to party leadership.
Price said that “contraception helps us leave the house, whether it’s birth control or IUDs, so our quality of life is wrapped up in these conversations.” She and other Virginia Democrats plan to reintroduce legislation to protect contraception next year, when Youngkin will be in his final year.
“There is no way we will stop having these conversations,” she added.
Donald Trump Sunday evening complained about his criminal defense in the hush money cover-up case in New York, as closing arguments loom and the trial nears its conclusion.
Trump has pleaded not guilty in the case, where he stands accused of falsifying business records in order to hide payments to an adult film star. The payments were allegedly made to quiet Stormy Daniels about a brief affair between the two as a means to impact the 2016 election.
As closing arguments get closer, Trump took to Truth Social to lash out at the prosecution and Judge Juan Merchan.
ALSO READ: What Trump's weird WWE Hall of Fame speech tells us about his presidential debate strategy
"In addition to the fact that I did nothing wrong, NDA’s are totally legal and commonly used, and that virtually every legal Scholar and Expert says, in written form, that this is a case which has NO MERIT and should not have been brought, my lawyers have informed me that the highly Conflicted and Corrupt Judge, Juan Merchan, will not allow RELIANCE ON COUNSEL, which virtually everyone is allowed to use, as an additional, though not needed because I did NOTHING WRONG, Defense," Trump wrote. "This 'Case,' which could have been brought seven years ago but wasn’t because it has no merit, is a disgrace."
He added, "It was only begun to interfere with Crooked Joe Biden’s Political Opponent, ME. RELIANCE ON COUNSEL. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
Trump continued in a separate post, mentioning the prosecutor.
"Can anyone believe that Soros backed D.A., Alvin Bragg, was able to get a DELAY of 7 days to his Corrupt and Unconstitutional Case against me, with no sequester? Legal Expense = Legal Expense!" Trump said Sunday. "The only thing Bragg has going for him is the Corrupt and highly Conflicted Judge - Which is a lot!!!"
Donald Trump's most loyal supporters aren't happy with the ex-president's latest endorsements for 2024.
Trump is known for the near-unbreakable hold he has on some of his fans, but his latest endorsements are ringing alarms for them, and they are making their voices heard.
Trump on Sunday, for instance, endorsed Congressman Anthony D’Esposito, who the former president called "a fantastic and highly effective representative for the people of New York’s 4th Congressional District."
ALSO READ: What Trump's weird WWE Hall of Fame speech tells us about his presidential debate strategy
"A retired NYPD police detective, Anthony is working hard to Uphold the Rule of Law, Create Jobs and Lower Inflation, Secure the Border, and Support our Incredible Military and Police Officers," Trump wrote. "Anthony D’Esposito has my Complete and Total Endorsement!"
One Trump superfan was outraged.
@DougRambo80 wrote, "You're seriously endorsing this RINO POS? He does everything behind your back to screw you over. Just look at his voting record."
"I'll be voting for you in November, but the people you have been endorsing this time around are some of the worst people who pretend to represent we the people," the user added on Sunday. "They don't represent AMERICA FIRST. They represent AMERICA LAST."
Another user, @MAGA47, added, "F--- ALL POLITICIANS I WILL ONLY VOTE FOR YOU SIR!"
Trump also endorsed Congressman Nick LaLota over the weekend, saying he "is doing an incredible job representing the people of New York’s 1st Congressional District."
"Nick is fighting hard to Grow the Economy and Lower Inflation, Defend our Great Military and Police, Secure our Border, Uphold the Rule of Law, and Protect our Constitutional Rights," Trump wrote Sunday. "Nick LaLota has my Complete and Total Endorsement!"
In response to that, @ISeeTheBiggestPicture chimed in:
"Why on earth would you endorse a complete and total RINO [Republican in Name Only]?"
Trump also endorsed Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, saying he "is a tremendous champion for Louisiana’s 4th Congressional District!"
"Mike is not only our Speaker but is also a Patriot. We get along very well and continue to work closely together," Trump wrote on Sunday. "He has done a very good job advancing our America First Agenda, Supporting our Military, Growing our Economy, holding Joe Biden’s Crooked Administration Accountable, and Fighting for Free and Fair Elections. Mike Johnson has my Complete and Total Endorsement!"
@Rick4patriots didn't agree.
"Sorry, I don't see it, I do not get how you can possibly stand by this man after what he has allowed," he wrote. "Unless you have other unseen motives, which you may well have, people are not going to understand your support for him right now."
Another user, @Independent_Patriot, said Johnson isn't "a champion for conservative Americans."
"Personally, I think the House needs to find a new Speaker following the election. Someone that can represent and champion MAGA."
@Suzywong said, "No Mr. President."
"Mike Johnson is a traitor," she added. "Whoever is writing your posts, well, they are traitors too. You President 45 have my vote to be 47, but I'm not going to look the other way when you endorse people who vote like democrats. Stop it already!!!"
Trump got similar reactions a week ago when he endorsed Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Copyright © 2022 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com, for support contact support@rawstory.com.
Don't Sit on the Sidelines of History. Join Raw Story Investigates and Go Ad-Free. Support Honest Journalism.
Subscribe Annually
$95 / year — Just $7.91/month
Subscribe Monthly
$1 trial
I want to Support More
$14.99 per month