Adam Boulton: Are we in for one of the ‘dirtiest’ election campaigns ever?

Published

1 year ago

January 28, 2024

admin

There was general agreement at the Institute for Government’s Annual conference last week that it would be a good thing for Britain if this year’s election campaign is not “dirty”.

This highfalutin notion was shot down in seconds with equally universal assumption by the assembled politicians and policy wonks that “that is not going to happen”.

A clean campaign would concentrate on policies and competence.

A dirty campaign is built around slurs, distortions and untruths, with those competing for votes slinging mud at each other.

A lot of factors, headed by booming social media, are coming together to suggest that this year we may see one of the dirtiest election campaigns ever.

The IFG delegates had to wait less than a day for their forebodings to come true. There might have been a lot to talk about at Prime Minister’s Questions.

The Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) bill struggling through parliament. The world order threatened by ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, Israel and the Red Sea.

Record NHS waiting lists are the public’s number one concern. The chancellor is contemplating two rounds of tax cuts.

But no, the leader of the opposition chose to exchange personal insults, much of it based on dubious content circulating on smartphones.

Fair’s fair, Sir Keir Starmer started it this time, but Rishi Sunak had a well-stocked pile to fling back.

Starmer opened up referring to a couple of brief unofficial clips posted online. One showing the prime minister “collapsing in laughter when he was asked by a member of the public about the NHS waiting lists”.

The other “accidentally record[ing] a candid video for Nigel Farage“.

Sunak, who seldom passes up a chance to brand Starmer as a lefty London lawyer, shot back that he is “the man who takes the knee, who wanted to abolish the monarchy, and who still does not know what a woman is”.

Previously Starmer “chose to represent a now-proscribed terrorist group” Hizb ut-Tahrir, and “served” Jeremy Corbyn.

Both men knew that the insults they were sticking on each other were essentially unjustified distortions of the other, but that was what they chose to put on the national agenda at the most scrutinized moment of the political week.

Starmer has explicitly changed his party and his previous positions.

Under scrutiny, he has clarified and explained each of the specific acts detailed. It is a core principle of British justice that advocates are not surrogates for their clients.

Sunak was not laughing at the people he was talking to and spoke to them properly after the end of the clip.

The alleged greeting to Farage was repurposing an online meme which allows any name, in this case “Nigel”, to be put into the prime minister’s mouth.

Neither Sunak nor Starmer are classic alpha males.

Sunak comes across as a whiny or petulant geek, Starmer seems hesitant, overcautious and inclined to blame others.

Perhaps this is why they feel the need to overcompensate by acting rough and tough. Sir Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, also has his moments of fabricated machismo.

The leaders set the tone and their petulance has been picked up in the campaigning efforts of their underlings and supporters.

Prime minister Boris Johnson took up an online distortion that Starmer had failed, when he was director of public prosecutions, to take action against Jimmy Savile.

This prompted the senior Downing Street aide Munira Mirza to resign protesting that this was “not the normal cut and thrust of politics”.

It soon would be. Labour cited Johnson’s attack as justification for their later personalised digital poster attacks on Rishi Sunak including the smear that he “doesn’t think adults convicted of sexually abusing children should go to prison”.

Since then Keir Starmer has gone out of his way not to back down or apologise; following the code of the playground he promises to punch back hard against any attacks.

At the start of election year he rejected an invitation from Beth Rigby to take up Michelle Obama’s famous recommendation: “When they go low, we go high”.

Instead, he told Sky News’ political editor: “If they want to go with fire, we will meet their fire with fire”.

Donald Trump crafts insults – Lyin’ Ted, Sleepy Joe, Ron DeSanctimonious – with cruel genius and gets away with fabulations.

There is only one Trump; honest political strivers should not try to copy him.

Opinion polls after personalised attacks usually show that support for both sides goes down, though more for the target than the attacker.

This should give all the party leaders something to think about, especially since public respect for politicians is at a record low and a low or differential turnout could be a major factor.

Starmer needs to mobilise enthusiasm for his leadership, not dent it. Sunak’s standing is already low and doesn’t want to drop further.

This government raised spending limits for the election campaign to £35m. Much of it will go on direct messaging to voters – which is harder to police than election broadcasts and billboards.

During the 2019 campaign, the Conservatives spent over a million on Facebook, much of it on messages disparaging Jeremy Corbyn.

Both Labour and Conservatives are already spending over a million a month on Facebook advertising.

Then there is what partisan supporters choose to put up on social media independently.

Labour has already advised its supporters to use humour.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Even without explicitly taking sides humourists such as Coldwar Steve and Trumpton, liked and retweeted, can make some political weather, often by lowering the tone.

Political propagandising is much more equal opportunity than it used to be. Anyone can post.

On the other hand, the newspapers and other mainstream media no longer have a near monopoly.

In 1997 when The Sun ran its famous “Nightmare on Kinnock Street” and “Will the Last Person to Leave Britain Please Turn Off the Lights” attacks on Labour, the paper’s circulation was 3.9 million.

The last official figures released were 1.2 million in 2020.

Poster launches used to be major events in political campaigning, but who would bother with them today?

There are some worthwhile lessons to be learned from the classics.

The Saatchi brothers are celebrated for their attacking of billboards: Labour isn’t working, Labour’s tax bombshell and Labour’s Policy on Arms (showing a combat soldier surrendering hands up).

Each of these were masterpieces of wit and effort compared to the Conservatives’ adoption of the BBC newsreader caught giving the finger for “Labour when you ask for their plans to tackle immigration”.

The Saatchis’ best work riffed with precision on policy rather than personal insults.

When the Conservatives tried that with their “New Labour, New Danger” demon eyes poster it misfired; it was difficult to convincingly portray Blair as a devil when other Conservative sources were attacking him as an inexperienced Bambi.

Labour boobed depicting Cameron as a cute bicycling chameleon.

The most effective attacks at PMQs cut directly to the political issues facing the voters, rather than scuffling around in their past record for something compromising.

Mrs Thatcher struck directly and seemingly spontaneously at Michael Foot: “Afraid of an election is he? Afraid? Frightened? Frit?”.

“Weak, weak, weak,” Tony Blair gutted John Major. “You were the future once.”

Sunak, Starmer and their teams of advisors have yet to produce anything as authentic.

Something which would crystallise the political moment.

Instead, they and we can look forward to a year in the dirt as they scrabble around trying to find it.

Politics

Who attended Trump’s controversial memecoin dinner?

Published

3 hours ago

May 23, 2025

admin

Who attended Trump’s controversial memecoin dinner?

The top 220 holders of US President Donald Trump’s memecoin met yesterday at the president’s golf course in Virginia for an exclusive dinner and purported meet-and-greet.

Attendees spent a grand total of $148 million for an “ultra-exclusive VIP reception with the president,” which crypto industry advocates and critics alike saw as a potential opportunity to discuss crypto policy with the president.

The crowd contained a number of foreign crypto executives and influencers who otherwise would not have access to the US president, raising questions around corruption and foreign influence.

Concerns were further augmented when White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt declined to release a list of attendees, stating that the event was a private affair outside of Trump’s presidential duties.

However, some attendees spoke to the press or took to social media to talk about the dinner. Here are just a few:

Justin Sun

Tron founder Justin Sun was the largest TRUMP tokenholder at the gala, which was reportedly enough to earn him a special watch, presented in a special ceremony.

Sun’s presence at the event was particularly controversial. Last year, he faced a lawsuit brought by the US Securities and Exchange Commission over the alleged “orchestration of the unregistered offer and sale, manipulative trading, and unlawful touting of crypto asset securities.”

The SEC asked for a reprieve in late February, just over a month since Trump’s inauguration and the subsequent 180 in federal agencies’ approach toward regulating crypto.

Outside the crypto dinner, Sun posted on May 21 that he would be spending a week in Washington, DC to have “meaningful conversations that will help shape the next chapter of blockchain’s future” in the United States.

Kain Warwick

Kain Warwick, founder of crypto exchange operator iFinex, told The New York Times on May 12 that he was attending the event after stocking up on enough TRUMP to break the top 25 investors on the leaderboard.

Warwick said he wanted to have a shot at meeting the president, or someone on his team, to talk crypto — specifically decentralized finance (DeFi), which is getting less attention in the current crop of crypto bills circulating the US Congress.

“If you assume Trump and 10 people within the Trump team are there, now you’ve got a one in 15 shot of having a conversation with one of them,” he said.

Vincent Liu

Vincent Liu, chief investment officer of crypto trading, VC and market-making firm Kronos Research, attended the event, posting pictures of the menu and Trump’s brief speech.

Liu wrote, “Simply by holding the Trump token, individuals have an unprecedented opportunity to meet the President of the United States.”

He had previously told Cointelegraph, “The decision to acquire the [TRUMP] token was not political. It was based on identifying early momentum, cultural relevance and potential market catalysts.”

His firm stated that “alpha” — i.e., exclusive or difficult-to-obtain information that could move markets — was “on the menu.”

Lamar Odom

Also in attendance was two-time National Basketball Association champion Lamar Odom. While many other crypto entrepreneurs in the audience were focused on policy, Odom used news of his attendance to plug his own memecoin, ODOM.

Odom launched his memecoin less than a week before the dinner on May 14. The anti-addiction-themed memecoin (Odom had a public battle with substance addiction) is issued on the Solana blockchain.

The coin itself had a 20% “Trump Dinner Program” staking scheme, where TRUMP holders could stake their coins with Odom’s project, ostensibly to enable him to attend the dinner event, and receive ODOM airdrops in return. Odom himself will hold 5% of all ODOM.

Sangrok Oh

CEO of Seoul- and Tokyo-based cryptocurrency management firm Hyperithm, Sangrok Oh was the 13th-largest TRUMP holder with a wallet containing over $3 million worth of the token, according to the Straits Times.

Oh told The New York Times that he had arrived with a batch of red “Make Crypto Great Again” hats to give away at the dinner and expected to speak directly with the president. “It’s kind of a fund-raiser […] And he’ll always be good to his sponsors.”

Oh has been critical of the slow regulatory progress for crypto in the countries where his company operates.

Anonymous attendees

In addition to crypto execs and sports stars, the event also noted a few anonymous or pseudonymous crypto traders and entrepreneurs in attendance.

Among them was “Ice,” co-founder of the Singaporean crypto company MemeCore. Their company’s chief business development officer, Cherry Hsu, told Sherwood News that Trump’s rise “represents the power of memes to influence culture, perception, and movements — principles that align with MemeCore’s vision of a decentralized, community-driven future.”

“Ogle,” a cybersecurity adviser to Trump’s own World Liberty Financial crypto enterprise, as well as the pseudonymous co-founder of blockchain ecosystem Glue, also attended. Ogle said they were going out of curiosity, more than anything, and did not endorse Trump personally. “I’m hoping it’ll be fun — and hoping they’ll serve McDonald’s.”

Another anonymous attendee was “Cryptoo Bear,” a crypto trader and occasional news reporter who posts primarily in Japanese. Cryptoo Bear made no political statements about the event, mainly posting about the swag and the food. They did say they were promised a photo op with the president, but it didn’t pan out.

Dinner “guests” across the picket line

Outside the country club, US senators and former staffers attended the event as part of a protest.

Bloomberg reported that protestors shouted “Shame!” and “I hope you choke on your dinner!” at attendees. Critics of the event widely consider it to be a glaring example of corruption in Washington and within the Trump administration.

Senator Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon, joined the protest. “The spirit of the Constitution was that no one elected would be selling influence to anyone,” he said, “because it’s to be government by and for the people.”

Ken Papaj, a former Treasury Department official, said, “Every time there’s a transaction, he gets a transaction fee? Just unconscionable what he’s doing.”

The dinner comes at a pivotal time for the crypto industry in the US, where the industry is pushing hard for Congress to pass friendly regulations. Trump’s ties may complicate matters, however, as lawmakers have introduced anti-corruption bills targeting crypto and politicians.

Senate Democrats are also taking aim at the stablecoin-focused GENIUS Act, introducing a slew of amendments addressing Trump’s crypto businesses.

Magazine: AI cures blindness, ‘good’ propaganda bots, OpenAI doomsday bunker: AI Eye

Politics

US DOJ seizes $24M in crypto from accused Qakbot malware developer

Published

3 hours ago

May 23, 2025

admin

US DOJ seizes M in crypto from accused Qakbot malware developer

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a civil forfeiture complaint to seize more than $24 million in cryptocurrency from Rustam Rafailevich Gallyamov, a Russian national accused of developing the Qakbot malware.

According to a May 22 announcement, the DOJ unsealed charges against the 48-year-old Moscovite with a federal indictment. Gallyamov is allegedly the malware developer behind the Qakbot botnet.

“Today’s announcement of the Justice Department’s latest actions to counter the Qakbot malware scheme sends a clear message to the cybercrime community,” said Matthew Galeotti, head of the DOJ’s criminal division.

US DOJ seizes $24M in crypto from accused Qakbot malware developer — *Screenshot of the indictment. Source:* *US Department of Justice*

Galeotti highlighted that the DOJ is “determined to hold cybercriminals accountable.” He added that the department will “use every legal tool” to “identify you, charge you, forfeit your ill-gotten gains, and disrupt your criminal activity.”

Over $24 million forfeited

US Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California explained that “the criminal charges and forfeiture case announced today are part of an ongoing effort” to “identify, disrupt, and hold accountable cybercriminals.” He added:

“The forfeiture action against more than $24 million in virtual assets also demonstrates the Justice Department’s commitment to seizing ill-gotten assets from criminals in order to ultimately compensate victims.”

Assistant Director in Charge Akil Davis of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office said that Qakbot was crippled by the agency and its partners in 2023. Still, Gallyamov allegedly continued deploying alternative methods to offer his malware to potential partners.

Qakbot used in global ransomware attacks

Gallyamov allegedly operated the Qakbot malware as far back as 2008. In 2019, he allegedly used it to infect thousands of victim computers to establish a so-called botnet.

Access to computers that were part of the botnet was sold to others who infected them with ransomware, including Prolock, Dopplepaymer, Egregor, REvil, Conti, Name Locker, Black Bast and Cactus. In 2023, a US-led international operation disrupted the Qakbot botnet and malware.

At the time, over 170 Bitcoin (BTC) and over $4 million in USDt (USDT) and USDC (USDC) stablecoins were seized from Gallyamov. According to the indictment, he and his collaborators continued the activity after it was disrupted, adopting new techniques, including directly deploying Black Basta and Cactus ransomware.

Magazine: Report on Crypto Exchange Hacks

Politics

Washington moves on crypto: Stablecoin and blockchain bills signal regulatory momentum

Published

4 hours ago

May 23, 2025

admin

Washington moves on crypto: Stablecoin and blockchain bills signal regulatory momentum

In this week’s episode of Byte-Sized Insight, on Decentralize with Cointelegraph, we break down a pivotal moment for US crypto legislation.

In a 66–32 procedural vote on May 19, the US Senate advanced the GENIUS Act, a landmark bill aimed at establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework for stablecoins. Meanwhile, across the Capitol, Representative Tom Emmer reintroduced the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, backed by bipartisan support.

Breaking down GENIUS

The GENIUS Act — short for “Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act” — seeks to answer foundational questions around stablecoin issuance and oversight.

“It defines this idea of a payment stablecoin,” explained Rashan Colbert, director of US policy at the Crypto Council for Innovation, in this week’s interview. Colbert emphasized that the bill doesn’t stop at definitions.

“It outlines in a robust way just who’s allowed to do this and what they need to look like.”

By this, he’s referring to guidelines on who can be permitted issuers like bank subsidiaries, credit unions and approved non-bank entities.

This bipartisan momentum seen backing the GENIUS Act is both exciting and significant.

“There has been latent support within Congress, including within the Democratic caucus,” Colbert said. “They just haven’t had the opportunity to take meaningful votes.”

Blockchain dev protection

On the House side, the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, co-sponsored by Representatives Emmer and Ritchie Torres, aims to give legal clarity to developers and service providers who don’t custody customer funds.

“It clarifies that they are not money transmitters,” said Colbert. “That’s the clarity these builders and entrepreneurs need to continue operating successfully.”

With crypto adoption on the rise — particularly among minority communities — Colbert said the pressure is on. “Something like one in five Americans hold crypto. That number is even larger in the Black, Latino and Asian-American communities,” he noted.

Looking ahead, the push toward broader market structure reform will be more complex. Colbert’s advice? Get involved. “It really is, at the end of the day, the people making their voices heard,” he said. “Crypto is a big deal — and Capitol Hill is finally starting to listen.”

Congress, Senate, US Government, Stablecoin

Listen to the full episode of Byte-Sized Insight for the complete interview on Cointelegraph’s Podcasts page, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And don’t forget to check out Cointelegraph’s full lineup of other shows!

Magazine: Legal Panel: Crypto wanted to overthrow banks, now it’s becoming them in stablecoin fight