Connect with us

Published

on

Not very long ago, the harshest thing Nikki Haley would say about Donald Trump was that chaos follows hima sort of benign jab that creatively avoids causation and suggests mere correlation, like noting that scorched trees tend to appear after a forest fire.

For most of the Republican-primary campaign to date, Haley adopted a carefully modulated approach toward the former president, and reserved most of her barbs for her other primary rivals. Her motto seemed to be Speak softly about Trump and carry a sharp stick for Vivek Ramaswamy. Recently, though, Haley has made a hard pivot.

Read: What Nikki Haley (maybe) learned in New Hampshire

Just two days after she came in (a distant) second to Trump in the New Hampshire primary, she began fundraising for the first time off his attacks on herselling T-shirts with the slogan BARRED PERMANENTLY after the former president said that anyone who continues to support her will be permanently barred from the MAGA camp, whatever that means.

In the past week, Haley has been on a tear, calling Trump totally unhinged, toxic, self-absorbed, and lacking in moral clarity. Her campaign unleashed a new attack-ad series in which Trump and President Joe Biden are portrayed as two grumpy old men standing in the way of the next generation. And yesterday, Haley posted a gag photo of a Trump Halloween costume labeled Weakest General Election Candidate Ever. To paraphrase the words of the Democratic-primary candidate Marianne Williamson, Girlfriend, this is so on.

Such an aggressive posture is new for Haley, and Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans have applauded her for it. She should have been talking this way all along, some of her supporters argue. If she started it sooner, she wouldve cut the lead in New Hampshire, Chip Felkel, a Republican strategist in South Carolina, told me. In his view, Haley thought she had to play nice to win over Trump voters: But this aint a nice game.

Can Haley still achieve anything by playing hardball at this point? Things dont look promising. Her bid to defeat Trump is already the longest of long shots, based on the polls coming out of virtually every state, including Haleys own South Carolina. So whats the point of changing things up? Why muster the courage to smack-talk Trump now, when the race seems all but over? I asked a number of political strategists and experts for their view, and pieced together a few plausible theories. (Neither the Haley nor the Trump campaign responded to a request for comment.)

1. Attacking Trump is easier now.
The most obvious theory for Haleys more combative rhetoric is that with only one other major candidate still in the primary, the task of drawing a direct contrast with Trump is much simpler. If you have six people in a race and a couple are attacking a couple others, its hard to predict how thats going to work in terms of driving your ballots, David Kochel, a longtime Iowa Republican strategist, told me. When its a multi-candidate field, youve got to tell your own story. After Iowa, thats resolved, he said, and so she has no choice but to turn her attention to Trump.

The jabs are meant to draw Trump outto pressure him to join her on a debate stage or to provoke a tantrum that turns off his potential voters and motivates her own. She needs him to make a mistake, Kochel said. She needs some intervening activity, some dynamic that is not completely in her control.

Maybe this is a good moment for Haley to exploit Trumps weakness with women voters. In a hypothetical head-to-head matchup, Biden beats Trump with the support of women, a new Quinnipiac poll showed, and that gender gap appears to be growing. Last week, Haley dragged Trump over his defamation-case loss to E. Jean Carroll, in which he was ordered to pay $83 million in additional defamation damages to the woman whom he was previously found liable for defaming and sexually abusing. Haley is running the Taylor Swift strategy in the primary, Steve Bannon, Trumps former White House chief strategist, told me. Shes playing to the Trump is toxic womens vote. The pop stars apparent potential to influence Americans, and especially women, to vote Democratic, coupled with the results of the Quinnipiac poll, represent deep, underlying forces that need to be addressed, Bannon saidsomething Haley will continue to seize on.

2. Haleys anti-Trump rhetoric represents the death throes of her campaign.
Haleys campaign has followed the same trajectory as several other Republicans efforts in the Trump era: They might have avoided attacking him directly at first, but when their prospects dimmed, they lashed out. Marco Rubio mocked Trumps small hands just before dropping out of the race; Ted Cruz called Trump a pathological liar at the tail end of his own campaign. It seems like they all have consultants in their ear telling them if they take on Trump directly, they are going to crater support with the base, which is true, Tim Miller, a political consultant and writer at the conservative outlet The Bulwark, told me. Then, finally, when theyre up against the wall and in the final stages, they figure its worth a shot.

Read: What is Nikki Haley even talking about?

Maybe ratcheting up the combativeness is a form of emotional catharsis. When I asked the Democratic strategist James Carville about Haleys change in approach, he texted me that Haley is tired, scared & pissed off. Because shes trailing Trump in her own state, certain doom in SC is eating at her. NEVER discount the human element. Haley now sounds a lot more like she did behind closed doors during the Trump administration, Mike Murphy, a Republican consultant, told me, citing conversations hes had with former Haley staffers. This is Nikki therapy, he said. Shes just having fun poking him in the eye, getting all her ya-yas out. Its the most entertaining dead-cat bounce in history.

3. Haley is giving her donors what they want.
Haleys billionaire supporters adore this new, aggressively anti-Trump candidate, and theyre rewarding her with cash. Nikkis more aggressive posture toward Trump was welcomed as it is communicating the stark choice in front of the party, Bill Berrien, the CEO of the manufacturer Pindel Global Precision, who hosted a fundraiser for Haley in New York, told The Washington Post. Cliff Asness, a co-founder of AQR Capital Management and a Haley donor, wrote on X that, in response to Trumps attacks, he may have to contribute more to her.

At least some of these funders are convinced that Haley still has a shot. Shes got donors saying, You have a credible campaign, and you never know when Trump is going to choke to death on a meatloaf, Murphy said. Whether or not Haley believes that, shes going along with it. The odds that she might become the nominee through an act of God or a brokered convention, after all, are probably better than buying a Power Ball ticket. Its a clutching-at-straws thing, but shes got the best straw in town to clutch on, Murphy said. Why the hell not? Its free and fun.

4. Haley is looking to a post-Trump future.
A few weeks ago, rumors circulated that Haley might be on Trumps shortlist for vice president. If the decision, though unlikely, went her way, that could set her up to be Trumps political heir. But Haleys recent hostility toward Trumpand his splenetic responsehave surely shut the door on that possibility. Instead, Haley is staking out her own territory.

Shes not done. Shes running for 2028, Sarah Isgur, a senior editor at The Dispatch and a former deputy campaign manager for the 2016 Republican presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina, told me. Trump has changed her brand-thinking. Instead of gunning for some sort of role in MAGA world, Haley can portray herself as the last person standing in the war against Trumpisma position that many men before her have fought for and failed to achieve. If she can do that, she can consolidate a leadership future for herself, post-Trump, Isgur said.

Haley will be able to say I told you so if Trump loses to Bidn in Novemberor if he wins but then governs disastrously. Shell be the good conservative who tried to warn you, Murphy said. This also means that after the race is over, shell have to lie low for a while, and not join other Trump rivals turned grovelers, including Ron DeSantis, Tim Scott, and North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum. Shes playing the long-term game, Murphy said.

Continue Reading

UK

Woman’s body found in car boot in east London – as murder investigation launched by two police forces

Published

on

By

Woman's body found in car boot in east London - as murder investigation launched by two police forces

A murder investigation has been launched after a woman’s body was found in the boot of a car in east London.

Detectives said a murder inquiry has been launched into the “suspicious” discovery in Ilford.

The woman, who has not been named but is from Corby in Northamptonshire, may have been the victim of a “targeted incident”, police say.

“Fast track” enquiries were made after the force was contacted by a member of the public with concerns about the welfare of the woman.

This led to the discovery of a body inside a car boot.

Northamptonshire Police said: “The investigation is ongoing and there will be continued police activity over the weekend in various locations, including Corby and Ilford.

“Although we believe that this was a targeted incident and there is no wider risk to members of the public, extra patrols will be taking place in Corby in the coming days for reassurance purposes.”

Detectives from the East Midlands Special Operations Unit major crime team and the Metropolitan Police are working on the case, to try and establish the circumstances that led to the woman’s death.

Continue Reading

UK

Police investigating criminal offence after Daily Telegraph columnist ‘dumbfounded’ by social media post probe

Published

on

By

Police investigating criminal offence after Daily Telegraph columnist 'dumbfounded' by social media post probe

Essex Police say they are investigating an alleged criminal offence of inciting racial hatred, after Daily Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson said she was “dumbfounded and upset” when officers knocked on her door last Sunday.

Ms Pearson revealed she was told she was being investigated over a year-old deleted post online.

She said she wasn’t informed which post had been reported, but suggested it could have been related to the 7 October attacks in Israel or pro-Palestine marches.

She claimed the officers told her she was being investigated for a NCHI (a none crime hate incident) an incident involving an act which is perceived to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards persons with a particular characteristic, but is not illegal.

NCHI reports have long been controversial, with many citing free speech concerns, and Ms Pearson’s account of the police visit has led to widespread support from Conservatives and online commentators, including Tory leader Kemi Badenoch.

But an Essex Police spokesperson has told Sky News its investigation was never for an NCHI, and that the matter was always being treated as an investigation into an alleged criminal offence of inciting racial hatred.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Speaking on her Planet Normal podcast on Wednesday, Ms Pearson said she found the visit “chilling”.

More from Politics

“I was dumbfounded, upset, it’s not very nice,” she said. “I was in my dressing gown on the step of the house, these two coppers were there just outside the door.

“There were people gathering for the Remembrance Day parade so there were people watching from the other side of the road.

“Whatever I did or didn’t tweet, if somebody found it offensive, that to me is still not a reason for two policemen to come to my house on a Sunday morning.

“You know, they don’t do that for burglars, do they? We know policing is under-resourced and they are unable to attend often quite serious crimes.

“This was the most extraordinary overreach and state intrusion into my private life and I don’t think I did anything wrong and I think their response was outrageous.”

Read more:
Ex-Tory MP feels ‘enormous guilt’ over Westminster scandal
Farage issues message to his ‘haters’

In a statement, Essex Police said: “Officers attended an address in Essex and invited a woman to come to a voluntary interview.

“They said it related to an investigation into an alleged offence of inciting racial hatred, linked to a post on social media.

“For clarity: a complaint of a possible criminal offence was made to the police and this is why we called; to arrange an interview.

“Everyone was polite and professional throughout the brief conversation.”

They said an officer told Ms Pearson: “It’s gone down as an incident or offence of potentially inciting racial hatred online. That would be the offence.”

Essex Police say they have complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) over what they call “false reporting” regarding the ongoing investigation.

What is a non-crime hate incident?

Non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) are defined by the government as an incident involving an act which is perceived to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards persons with a particular characteristic.

Those characteristics can include race, religion, disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity.

These incidents do not amount to a criminal offence, but they are reported to police and recorded in case they escalate into more serious harm or indicate heightened community tensions.

It can be reported to police by anyone, whether they are directly affected by the alleged NCHI or not.

Not all incidents reported to police are recorded as NCHIs.

They need to meet this threshold, according to the government: “A single distinct event or occurrence which disturbs an individual’s, group’s or community’s quality of life or causes them concern.”

Furthermore, the personal data of the person reported should only be included in the reports if the incident in question presents a “real risk of significant harm” to individuals or groups with a particular characteristic and/or a real risk that a future criminal offence may take place against them.

The origins of NCHI recordings stem from the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993, who was murdered by a gang of racist attackers in southeast London as he ran to catch a bus.

An inquiry into his death in 1999 called for the creation of “a comprehensive system of reporting and recording of all racist incidents and crimes”.

The first guidance on NCHI was published in 2005, but there have been updates over the years in response to scrutiny over protecting free speech.

The latest guidance was published in June 2023, when an updated code of practice set out a “common sense and proportionate approach that should be adopted by the police”.

The guidance, introduced under the Conservative government, clarified “that debate, humour, satire and personally-held views which are lawfully expressed are not, by themselves, grounds for the recording of an NCHI” and that an NCHI should not be recorded if police deem a report to be “trivial” or “irrational”.

In an interview with The Telegraph published yesterday, Kemi Badenoch said police visiting a journalist over a social media post was “absolutely wrong” and that “we need to look at the laws around non-crime hate incidents”.

“There has been a long-running problem with people not taking free speech seriously,” she said.

She challenged the prime minister to review the laws, saying: “Keir Starmer says he is someone who believes in these things. Now he needs to actually show that he does believe it. All we’ve seen from him is the opposite.”

Ms Badenoch added: “We need to stop this behaviour of people wasting police time on trivial incidents because they don’t like something, as if they’re in a nursery.

“It’s like children reporting each other. And I think that in certain cases, the police do it because they’re afraid that if they don’t do it, they will also be accused of not taking these issues seriously.”

Essex Police said the officers went to the address to invite Ms Pearson to attend a voluntary interview as part of their investigation, which was passed to them by another force.

“The report relates to a social media post which was subsequently removed,” the statement read.

“An investigation is now being carried out under Section 17 of the Public Order Act.”

Essex Police also said they made attempts to contact Ms Pearson before the visit.

Other prominent Conservative voices such as Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Chris Philp have also leapt to Ms Pearson’s defence online, as has X owner Elon Musk, who quoted a post about the incident and said: “This needs to stop.”

Police commentator Graham Wettone told Sky News the police are “duty bound to investigate allegations of crime”.

“They’ve had an allegation of crime made there,” he said. “They will investigate it. If at the end of this they decide that no criminal offence has been committed – and we’re not at that stage yet – then it can still be recorded as a none crime hate incident.”

The police, he said, are duty bound to keep a record of none crime hate incidents.

“Parliament said they want the police to do this, to investigate and record incidents like this. So they are doing exactly what parliament and society asked them to do, and they are getting criticism for doing what people want.”

Continue Reading

UK

Sir Keir Starmer vows to defend budget decisions ‘all day long’ as farmers slam ‘disrespectful’ PM

Published

on

By

Sir Keir Starmer vows to defend budget decisions 'all day long' as farmers slam 'disrespectful' PM

Sir Keir Starmer has said he will defend the decisions made in the budget “all day long” amid anger from farmers over inheritance tax changes.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced last month in her key speech that from April 2026, farms worth more than £1m will face an inheritance tax rate of 20%, rather than the standard 40% applied to other land and property.

The announcement has sparked anger among farmers who argue this will mean higher food prices, lower food production and having to sell off land to pay for the tax.

Sir Keir Starmer

Sir Keir defended the budget as he gave his first speech as prime minister at the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales, where farmers have been holding a tractor protest outside.

Sir Keir admitted: “We’ve taken some extremely tough decisions on tax.”

He said: “I will defend facing up to the harsh light of fiscal reality. I will defend the tough decisions that were necessary to stabilise our economy.

“And I will defend protecting the payslips of working people, fixing the foundations of our economy, and investing in the future of Britain and the future of Wales. Finally, turning the page on austerity once and for all.”

He also said the budget allocation for Wales was a “record figure” – some £21bn for next year – an extra £1.7bn through the Barnett Formula, as he hailed a “path of change” with Labour governments in Wales and Westminster.

And he confirmed a £160m investment zone in Wrexham and Flintshire will be going live in 2025.

‘PM should have addressed the protesters’

Among the hundreds of farmers demonstrating was Gareth Wyn Jones, who told Sky News it was “disrespectful” that the prime minister did not mention farmers in his speech.

He said “so many people have come here to air their frustrations. He (Starmer) had an opportunity to address the crowd. Even if he was booed he should have been man enough to come out and talk to the people”.

He said farmers planned to deliver Sir Keir a letter which begins with “don’t bite the hand that feeds you”.

Farmers' tractor protest outside the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales
Image:
Farmers’ tractor protest outside the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales

Mr Wyn Jones told Sky News the government was “destroying” an industry that was already struggling.

“They’re destroying an industry that’s already on its knees and struggling, absolutely struggling, mentally, emotionally and physically. We need government support not more hindrance so we can produce food to feed the nation.”

He said inheritance tax changes will result in farmers increasing the price of food: “The poorer people in society aren’t going to be able to afford good, healthy, nutritious British food, so we have to push this to government for them to understand that enough is enough, the farmers can’t take any more of what they’re throwing at us.”

Mr Wyn Jones disputed the government’s estimation that only 500 farming estates in the UK will be affected by the inheritance tax changes.

“Look, a lot of farmers in this country are in their 70s and 80s, they haven’t handed their farms down because that’s the way it’s always been, they’ve always known there was never going to be inheritance tax.”

On Friday, Sir Keir addressed farmers’ concerns, saying: “I know some farmers are anxious about the inheritance tax rules that we brought in two weeks ago.

“What I would say about that is, once you add the £1m for the farmland to the £1m that is exempt for your spouse, for most couples with a farm wanting to hand on to their children, it’s £3m before anybody pays a penny in inheritance tax.”

Read more:
Ex-Labour adviser suggests doing to farms ‘what Thatcher did to coal mines’
Farmers ‘could block ports and disrupt food supply’

Welsh farmer Gareth Wyn Jones
Image:
Welsh farmer Gareth Wyn Jones

Ministers said the move will not affect small farms and is aimed at targeting wealthy landowners who buy up farmland to avoid paying inheritance tax.

But analysis this week said a typical family farm would have to put 159% of annual profits into paying the new inheritance tax every year for a decade and could have to sell 20% of their land.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

The Country and Land Business Association (CLA), which represents owners of rural land, property and businesses in England and Wales, found a typical 200-acre farm owned by one person with an expected profit of £27,300 would face a £435,000 inheritance tax bill.

The plan says families can spread the inheritance tax payments over 10 years, but the CLA found this would require an average farm to allocate 159% of its profits each year for a decade.

To pay that, successors could be forced to sell 20% of their land, the analysis found.

Continue Reading

Trending