A very strange disjuncture has opened up in Washington between the serene mood and the alarming developments that are under way. The surface is calm because the Republican presidential candidate won the election, and Democrats, the only one of the two major parties committed on principle to upholding the legitimacy of election results, conceded defeat and are cooperating in the peaceful transition of power. Whatever energy the chastened Democrats can muster at the moment is aimed inward, at factional struggles over their future direction.
Meanwhile, what is actually happening in the capital is, by any rational standard, disturbing. Donald Trump is filling his administration with loyalists, a prerogative that his opponents have grudgingly accepted as his due. Yet he is defining loyalist in maximal terms, including the belief that Trump legitimately won the 2020 election and was justified in his attempt to seize power. The winners are rewriting the history of the insurrection, and their version of history is about to acquire the force of law.
Consider three developments just from the past weekend.
On Saturday, The New York Times reported that the Trump transition team is asking applicants for high-level positions in the Defense Department and intelligence agencies three questions: which candidate they supported in the past three elections, what they thought about January 6, and whether they believed the 2020 election was stolen. Among the wrong answers, applicants say, are conceding that Trump lost the election or that his supporters should not have tried to overturn the result.
Franklin Foer: How the Trump resistance gave up
The purpose of these issue screens is not merely to ensure that Trump benefits from advisers who are committed to his success and wished for it all along. After all, plenty of Republicans voted for Trump multiple times without endorsing his attempted autogolpe. The purpose, rather, is to weed out anybody who dissents from Trumps conviction that he is entitled to rule regardless of what the Constitution says. Trump believes, not without reason, that his first term was undermined by the insufficient devotion of his underlings, most famously Mike Pence (of Hang Mike Pence! fame).
Then, yesterday, in an interview with NBC, Trump reiterated his promise to free the January 6 insurrectionists. He justified this promise on the supposed grounds that the J6 criminals are being confined in a hellhole (better known as the D.C. jail) and that their guilty pleas were coerced with the threat of even longer prison sentences had they gone to trial. (These are, of course, routine features of a criminal-justice system Trump normally depicts as too soft.) He denied the well-documented fact that some rioters assaulted police officers, even claiming that the cops invited the rioters into the Capitol before unfairly arresting them. And he proceeded to say that members of the congressional committee investigating January 6 were themselves criminals who should be in prison, alleging without any basis that the committee deleted and destroyed evidence that Nancy Pelosi was responsible for the insurrection.
It remains exceedingly unlikely that this rhetoric will lead to any members of the January 6 committee facing prison time. What Trumps comments signify is the complete political turnabout that he has wrought since January 2021. In the aftermath of the insurrection, Trump was disgraced, the insurrectionists faced legal accountability for their attempt to seize power, andthis is a measure of how distant that period of post-J6 recriminations now feelsAmerican corporations were withholding financial contributions from any Republicans who had endorsed it.
By next month, the insurrectionists may be free, and the opponents of the insurrection will be the hunted ones. Whether their punishment amounts to facing bogus criminal charges or mere political banishment (a price most that pro-democracy Republicans have already paid) remains to be seen.
David A. Graham: The Trump believability gap
Finally, last night, Trump announced that he will appoint Michael Anton as director of policy planning at the State Department. This announcement attracted little attention, and given that Anton already served during the first Trump term (in a communications role), it hardly moves the needle. But Antons appointment does highlight the banal ubiquity of authoritarian thinking in the Trumpified Republican Party.
Anton is best known for an essay published eight years ago called The Flight 93 Election. In it, he argued that conservatives should support Trump, despite their serious reservations about his character, because another Democratic term in office would amount to the death of the republic. (Hillary Clinton, like the 9/11 hijackers, would steer the country toward the equivalent of a fiery demise.) At the time, Antons argument stood out for its existential tone and hysterical life-and-death metaphor. Now his logicthat permitting Democrats to win a single national election is tantamount to national suicide, the prevention of which justifies any measures, legal or otherwiseis a required belief for service in the power ministries. Once an oddball, Anton is just another Trump bureaucrat who subscribes to the partys rule-or-perish ideology.
Exactly how this belief system will play out over the next four years is a wide-open question, one that those of us who dont subscribe to it would prefer not to contemplate. In the meantime, we are in the midst of an uneasy transfer of legitimate democratic power to a party whose leader, at least for the moment, does not need to seize it by force.
On the wall of her family’s living room, there is a large framed photograph of Alice Williams on the day of her first communion.
It’s a short walk from that family home to Alice’s grave.
“On her headstone, we’ve put ‘joyful, creative, gentle, kind, bright, loving’ because those are the things that we want the world to know about Alice,” her mother Clare tells Sky News.
“We don’t want them to look at that headstone and think, ‘Oh, she only got to nine, I wonder why’, because then her killer has overwritten everything she was. And it’s not fair.”
Image: Alice Williams
Image: Dashcam footage shows Alice, her mother and brother crossing before she was struck
Alice’s killer was 55-year-old Qadeer Hussain who, on a Saturday morning, failed to stop at a red light in Halifax, West Yorkshire, as she was crossing with her mother and brother.
“In front of our eyes he ploughed into her, massively fast, and he carried her off on his wing mirror,” she recalls.
“I’ve just got this very clear image of her being swept off her feet and then she tumbled off and, by the time I got to her, it was almost like she was gone.”
In May, Hussain was jailed for eight years for causing Alice’s death by dangerous driving.
Image: Qadeer Hussain, 55, was jailed for eight years
Her parents have chosen to speak publicly to highlight the deadly consequences of drivers running red lights.
Her dad Chris says: “It seems bizarre that you would take any risks at all in breaking the law in order to get somewhere slightly faster.”
“The real risk isn’t being caught. It’s actually killing somebody,” Clare adds.
“He’s quite gratuitously killed my child. He slaughtered her in the street for nothing, for no reason at all.
“He battered her to death and any adult should know that when you speed through a pedestrian crossing, there is a risk that you could do that.”
Image: Alice Williams’s parents Clare and Chris
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:29
The real cost of running a red traffic light
A lack of red light cameras
A Sky News investigation has found that fewer than 1.5% of traffic lights in the UK have red light cameras monitoring them.
Of the 157 local authorities who responded to our request for data or who directed us to their local police forces, many reported no working red light cameras at all.
There are only five in all of Scotland. In West Northamptonshire, the cameras were switched off in 2011 and, in London and Greater Manchester, fewer than 4% of traffic lights have a red light camera.
Image: Only 1.5% of red lights have cameras attached to them across the UK
In Greater Manchester, we also witnessed drivers routinely running red lights at a number of junctions.
Police increasingly rely on dash cam footage submitted by other motorists to take action against drivers who run red lights. The initiative, called Operation Snap, operates nationwide.
Inspector Bradley Ormesher, of Greater Manchester Police, says: “Everyone knows police can’t be everywhere, but a lot of motorists now have dash cams, so effectively they are assisting us in delivering road safety messages. We’ve seen a big increase in submissions.
“There is a bigger picture to everything and just saving a couple seconds by jumping a red light, you’re not thinking about wider society, are you?”
Pat Grace was on her way to clean her local church in Oxfordshire when she was struck and killed by a heavy goods vehicle that failed to stop at a red light on a pedestrian crossing.
Image: Pat Grace
Image: Dariusz Meczynski who was jailed for three years
The driver Dariusz Meczynski fled the country. He was extradited back to the UK and jailed for three years for causing the 74-year-old’s death by dangerous driving.
Pat’s son Oliver says: “The driver wasn’t distracted just for a second, it was a substantial period of time while he was driving a heavy goods vehicle through a village at 9am. It couldn’t be much worse.
“It could have been a crocodile of schoolchildren crossing the road and he wouldn’t have seen them because he wasn’t looking.
“The chances of being caught are so few and far between. I think there should be cameras on all red lights so there is less chance of getting away with it.”
Image: Pat Grace
Dash cams could help
Oliver and Alice’s family are encouraging all drivers to install dash cams.
“We bought a dash cam after this happened,” says Clare. “And we’ve reported four people who went through red lights, and three of them got warnings.
“That is essential because they’re going about thinking they’re invisible and they’re not accountable but actually when they get a warning, hopefully they’ll think again.
“It’s really opened my eyes to how unprotected we are.”
She adds: “We were doing everything we could have done to stay safe. But the only thing that was keeping us safe was a red light bulb and the presumption of goodwill from drivers.
“And I feel like this is being treated dismissively as if it’s an accident when actually it was it was a pure atrocity.”
Red light cameras have since been installed at the crossing where Alice died.
“I’m glad they’re there,” Clare says. “Now they’ve got the cameras and it’s cost whatever they would have cost – plus her life, a lifetime of grief, and all the ripple effects that come from a life without Alice in it.
“She filled our lives with light. She was innocent. She was happy. She loved dancing. She loved singing. She loved us. We just can’t live without her.”
The officer who confronted Marcus Monzo during his deadly rampage in Hainault has described how his hand was sliced open by the killer’s samurai sword, saying: “The blade went very, very deep, cutting through all the tendons, all the muscles and all the nerves.”
Inspector Moloy Campbell was among the first responders on 30 April 2024, when Monzo killed 14-year-old Daniel Anjorin, almost decapitating him, and seriously injured police constable Yasmin Mechem-Whitfield during a frenzied attack in east London.
PC Cameron King who had been with Yasmin when she was stabbed had radioed for help.
Image: Daniel Anjorin. Pic: Metropolitan Police
“What I remember about that transmission was, that was not PC Cameron King, that was Cam.
“That was not police talk, that was his emotion, he was upset and he was panicking,” said Inspector Campbell.
“The lives of the police officers I was in charge of were at imminent risk… I made the decision, that he needed to be confronted.
“I was confident going in that I would make the arrest. I was wrong.
“But that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be tried, because that’s the job of a police officer, to try and preserve life and effect the arrest, and so it had to be done.”
Speaking for the first time in detail about his injuries, he described the moment Monzo slashed at him as he attempted to bring the attacker down, armed only with a baton and pepper spray (Pava).
“I sprayed him with Pava. He did a triangle block which told me that this is an actual fighter.
“And then he started closing down the distance and slashing at me with the sword.
“The blade went down my arm slicing through my fleece and then nicking my hand on the way out.
“Nicking is the right term but due to the sharpness of it, it split my hand wide open so my thumb was hanging down and I could see inside of my hand.
“So at that point I was simply going to lose too much blood and so I had to withdraw and colleagues put a tourniquet on my arm, at which point I re-engaged and tried to coordinate officers. But I was going into shock.”
Despite his injury, Inspector Campbell turned his attention to the overall policing picture, as nearby officers brought Monzo down using tasers.
He believes more lives could have been lost that day had it not been for the brave policing operation carried out.
“The actions of Cameron King, the actions of Yaz, and most certainly all of the officers who confronted him at the end and tasered him, undoubtedly saved lives.
“I’ve never been more sure of anything.”
The officers who responded that morning, he said, embodied the reality of policing.
“While I’m proud of what they did, I’m in no way surprised. They do it every single day. There is now, as I speak, a police officer somewhere in this country chasing someone with a knife.”
Three days after the the Hainault sword attack, some of the same officers who had confronted Monzo were back on duty.
They responded again to a report of a man with a Samurai sword, showing what Campbell described as remarkable resilience.
Monzo, whose attack was fuelled by cannabis use, had bought the handmade Katana sword legally online.
While police found evidence of exposure to extremist content, there was no proof he had acted on any ideology.
The chief of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has called figures by the United Nations on people killed at aid hubs “disinformation”.
The UN said at least 410 Palestinians have been killed seeking food since Israel lifted an 11-week aid blockade on 19 May, while the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry said at least 549 people have been killed.
Johnnie Moore, executive director of GHF, told Sky News that there is a “disinformation campaign” that is “meant to shut down our efforts” in the Gaza Strip, fuelled by “some figures” coming out every day.
Mr Moore, an evangelical preacher who served as a White House adviser in the first Trump administration, said his aid group has delivered more than 44 million meals to Gazans since it began operations in May.
Image: Palestinians carry humanitarian aid packages distributed by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation in Khan Younis.
Pic: AP
The controversial group, backed by Israel and the United States, has been rejected by the UN and other aid groups, which have refused to cooperate with the GHF.
The aid agencies claim Israel is weaponising food, and the new distribution system using the GHF will be ineffective and lead to further displacement of Palestinians.
They also argue the GHF will fail to meet local needs and violate humanitarian principles that prohibit a warring party from controlling humanitarian assistance.
The GHF is distributing food packages, which they say can feed 5.5 people for 3.5 days, in four locations, with the majority in the far south of Gaza.
GHF chief was ‘really political, really punchy’ in Sky News interview
It was really political, really punchy, and I think the heart of the matter here is that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is too political.
The principle of aid, when applied traditionally, is that it has to be applied neutrally and that is what used to happen.
Trucks would go into Gaza, and the UN would distribute that food. Israel, for a long time, said that’s not working and they blame Hamas for that.
At a briefing by the Israeli prime minister’s office yesterday, they were saying that Hamas was still looting those aid vehicles, and it was coming out with a plan to stop that. It didn’t provide evidence for that.
When we asked for evidence, they said we shouldn’t swallow Hamas disinformation. That’s a word that’s been used. That’s very, very political.
This is a different model of doing things. And that is the concern: that rather than just handing it over to a neutral body, this is too close to Israel, it’s too close to the US, and is backed financially by the US.
What does that actually imply? Well, if you’re choosing where those sites are, it means people are going to move down there if you’re not putting them in certain places.
The number of distribution sites has dwindled. It’s attenuated. And so, actually, if there are only a few and if there are any in the south of Gaza, that encourages people to move there, that might fit a political goal as well as a humanitarian one.
Thousands of Palestinians walk for hours to reach the aid hubs and have to move through Israeli military zones, where witnesses say the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) regularly open fire with heavy barrages to control the crowds.
Both figures from the UN and the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry say hundreds of people have been killed or wounded.
In response to Mr Moore’s comments, Rachael Cummings, Save the Children’s team leader in Gaza, told Sky News that people in Gaza “are being forced into the decision to go to retrieve food from the American- and Israeli-backed, militarised, food distribution point”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
27:55
Doctors on the frontline
“We’re not contesting at all that there have been casualties in the Gaza Strip. I mean, there’s no ceasefire. This is an active conflict,” Mr Moore said.
“I think people may not understand as clearly what it means to operate a humanitarian operation on this scale, in an environment this complex, in a piece of land as small as the Gaza Strip, and may not appreciate that almost anything that happens in the Gaza Strip is going to take place in proximity to something.”
Mr Moore said that the GHF was not denying that there had been “those incidents”, but said the GHF was able to talk to the IDF, which would conduct an investigation, while Hamas was “intentionally harming people for he purpose of defaming what we’re doing”.
Image: Palestinians carry humanitarian aid packages near the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation distribution centre in Khan Younis.
Pic: AP
He said the GHF, “an independent organisation operating with the blessing of the US government”, was “achieving its aims” by feeding Gazans.
It comes after the US State Department announced on Thursday that it had approved $30m in funding for the GHF as it called on other countries to also support the controversial group delivering aid in Gaza.
A spokesperson from the UN office for the coordination of humanitarian affairs told Sky News that they are “open to any practical solutions that address the crisis on the ground” and are “happy” to talk to the GHF.
The spokeswoman added that the aid distribution in Gaza was not “currently a dignified process and that the format doesn’t follow humanitarian principles”.
She said that people have to walk for miles, and that there is no scalability, with aid not reaching everyone in need.