A man found guilty of assaulting the organizer of the deadly Aug. 2017 alt-right Unite the Right rally was fined $1 for the crime, according to local media reports.

Jeffrey Winder was accused of punching organizer Jason Kessler in the back of the head during a press conference, local NBC affiliate WVIR-TV reports. He was found guilty in February, but Winder appealed.

He was again found guilty of misdemeanor assault and battery Tuesday by a jury and given a $1 fine with no jail time, The Daily Progress reports. Some jurors were tearful as the verdict was delivered.

Winder could have faced up to a year in jail and a fine of $2,500, The Washington Post reports.

Widner is one of several people who were charged with assault after a crowd surrounded Kessler, overrunning a press conference held after the rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.

“I was attacked in front of the whole world, and then people made fun of me for it,” Kessler said, according to The Daily Progress.

Veteran: Unite the Right violates every principle I defended in uniform

‘Old Jim Crow, new Jim Crow!’: Charlottesville confronts racism in rally

‘Not in my town’: Counterprotesters outnumber Unite the Right 2 white nationalists

Winder has never admitted to being the person captured on video punching Kessler, the publication says. He could still appeal this latest conviction, according to WVIR-TV.

Last August’s demonstrations shook Charlottesville for two days. On the evening of Aug. 11, hundreds of torch-bearing protesters marched through the University of Virginia campus, chanting white supremacist slogans. 

 

The next day, the group swamped downtown Charlottesville and rioting broke out when they were met by counterprotesters. Several people were injured, and one woman, Heather Heyer, 32, died when she was struck by a car.

Kessler’s press conference was held a day after Heyer’s death. 

Kessler is a leader in the alt-right movement — a collection of far-right groups and people dedicated to “white ethnonationalism” in Western civilization.

In addition to organizing the Unite the Right rally, he has been active on Twitter and on his website since 2015, where he describes the ideals of the alt-right as “protecting the west.”

He’s accused the city of Charlottesville of failing to protect him at the press conference and says he’s planning to sue the police department, The Daily Progress reports. 

Contributing: Christal Hayes and Marina Pitofsky, USA TODAY

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2PLen9V

Six-time world surfing champion Stephanie Gilmore hopes the World Surf League’s decision to give equal prize money to male and female athletes will lead to other sports following suit.

The changes will start from next year onwards.

The WSL becomes the first US-based global sports league to achieve prize money equality.

“I hope this serves as a model for other sports, global organisations and society as a whole,” said Gilmore.

“The prize money is fantastic, but the message means even more.

“From the moment current ownership became involved, the situation for the women surfers has been transformed for the better in every way. We have been so appreciative, but this takes it to another level.”

In 2017, a BBC study found 35 out of 55 sports whose governing bodies responded, paid equal amounts to men and women.

Surfing, which is one of the world’s fastest-growing sports, will be part of the Olympic programme for the first time in Tokyo in 2020.

WSL chief executive Sophie Goldschmidt, who was formerly the chief commercial and marketing director with the Rugby Football Union, said she wants the sport to lead the way in pushing for equality.

“We feel very lucky to have women on our tour who are highly talented, iconic role models, and more than deserve this recognition as they stand alongside our extraordinary male athletes,” she said.

“This is the latest in a series of actions the WSL has undertaken to showcase our female athletes, from competing on the same quality waves as the men, to better locations, and increased investment and support.”

The move was also backed by 11-time world champion Kelly Slater.

“The women on the tour deserve this change,” said the 46-year-old American.

“The female WSL athletes are equally committed to their craft as the male athletes and should be paid the same.

“Hopefully it gets some traction with the world at large, the larger sporting world, and people start to realise the precedent being set here, the message being sent out and challenging other people to do the same thing,” he told BBC World Service Sport.

Earlier this year the WSL was criticised over the disparity in prize money between the male and female winners of a junior surfing tournament in South Africa.

WASHINGTON –  Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was back before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday for the second day of hearings that are continuing well into the night.

This time, though, Kavanaugh was able to respond to questions and the public was able to hear directly from him on several key topics.

Kavanaugh, an appeals court judge nominated for the Supreme Court by President Donald Trump, answered senators’ questions on high-profile issues ranging from abortion to gun control to presidential power.

Here’s a look at what the judge had to say on some of the most controversial issues as the day went on.

First, the protests

A coalition of groups opposing Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination urged activists across America to travel to Washington to disrupt his Senate confirmation hearings this week, and many answered the call. 

Capitol police arrested 70 people for outbursts and disruptions during Kavanaugh’s hearing Tuesday – and the protests continued during his testimony Wednesday.

The protests were so constant that Wednesday’s hearing assumed a decidedly halting cadence, and senators expressed frustration at the interruptions. Police temporarily closed off the hearing from additional spectators at one point, leaving some seats empty.  

Roe vs. Wade is ‘important precedent’

Kavanaugh is a devout Catholic and some abortion rights advocates fear he could become the deciding vote that overturns Roe vs. Wade – the landmark 1973 case that decided women have a constitutional right to an abortion.

“It has been reported that you have said that Roe is now settled law,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said to the judge. “What do you mean by settled law? Do you believe it is correct law?”

More: Brett Kavanaugh: His views on key issues he could face as a Supreme Court justice

More: Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh highlights independence in hearing: ‘No one is above the law’

Kavanaugh said the case “is an important precedent of the Supreme Court that has been reaffirmed many times.”

He said the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey had created “precedent upon precedent” by clearly reaffirming Roe in ruling that “matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime … are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Kavanaugh also told Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, that “my personal beliefs are not relevant to how I decide cases.” 

Won’t say if a president can pardon himself

Democrats tried to get Kavanaugh’s to say how he might rule if matters relating to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation implicate the president. 

He would not say if he believes a sitting president has the right to refuse to answer a subpoena or to pardon himself, as Trump has said he has the right to do. Kavanaugh called it a “hypothetical question. 

When asked if he would owe loyalty to President Donald Trump, Kavanaugh said his loyalty would be to the Constitution. 

“No one is above the law in our constitutional system,” he said.

And he praised the landmark Supreme Court ruling that President Richard Nixon was required to turn over White House tape recordings and other evidence related to the Watergate scandal.

Explains his dissent in gun control case

Kavanaugh defended his dissent in a key 2011 gun control case before the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The majority of judges upheld Washington, D.C.’s, gun registration law and its ban on semi-automatic weapons, which the city classified as assault weapons.

Kavanaugh said he based his dissent on a Supreme Court ruling that “dangerous and unusual weapons” – such as machine guns – could be banned. But he said he didn’t see semi-automatic rifles as “unusual.”

“Handguns and semi-automatic rifles are weapons used for hunting and self-defense,” he said. “That’s what makes this issue difficult.” 

What about Trump tweets? 

Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona tried not once, but twice, to engage Kavanaugh in questions arising from one of President Donald Trump’s tweets, but the Supreme Court nominee declined to respond.

Flake said he was concerned about the executive branch and asked whether a president should be able to use his authority to carry out directives for political gain. He specifically referred to Trump’s tweet against Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday, where he complained that criminal charges against two Republican congressmen could hurt the party in the midterm election.

Kavanaugh said maintaining judicial independence “requires me to avoid commenting on current events.”

Flake then took Trump out of the question. Kavanaugh still declined to engage in a hypothetical he said closely resembled the earlier one.

Contributing: Nathan Bomey, Associated Press

 

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2M7tkko

SAN FRANCISCO — Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has stayed remarkably under the radar, giving rare public appearances and mostly avoided social media. That may be changing, at a time when politicians from both ends of the spectrum, from President Trump to Sen. Bernie Sanders, are also calling him out.

Bezos and his wife MacKenzie have donated $10 million to the With Honor Fund, a super PAC that works to get military veterans elected to Congress. The donation was confirmed by the fund’s political director Ellen Zeng and was first reported by the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday.

The non-partisan PAC offers support to both Democratic and Republican veterans, with a focus on bridging the divide in Congress. It requires that veterans who receive its funding take a pledge that they put principles before politics.

This includes that they will prioritize public interest above self-interest, not engage in attack campaigning and “work to bring civility to politics” and finally to collaborate across the aisle.

This appears to be the Bezos’ first major donation to a national political group, though in 2012 they donated $2.5 million to Washington United for Marriage, a group that supported a referendum in Washington state that worked to uphold a same-sex marriage law. Referendum 74 passed with an approval vote of 53.7 percent in November of that year.

Bezos, whose wealth is estimated at $168 billion, is also getting press for other reasons. On Tuesday Amazon’s stock value made it only the second company to be worth $1 trillion.

More: Amazon’s $1 trillion market cap is the kind of attention it may not want

And on Wednesday Sanders (I-Vt.) introduced legislation that would tax corporations for the money their workers receive in government health care benefits or food support through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (previously known as food stamps.)

The Sanders bill is very much aimed at Amazon and Bezos, which Sanders has been criticizing for not paying warehouse and fulfillment center employees a fair wage. It is titled the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies, or BEZOS Act.

Sanders and Representative Ro Khanna (D.-Calif.) introduced the legislation, which Sanders said “gives large, profitable employers a choice: Pay workers a living wage or pay for the public assistance programs their low-wage employees are forced to depend upon.” 

Bezos has also been attacked by President Donald Trump, who on Twitter has accused it of not paying enough taxes and underpaying the U.S. Postal Service for delivering its packages. Trump has also attacked CEO Jeff Bezos over his separate ownership of The Washington Post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2NhP9Ce

England head coach Eddie Jones tells BBC rugby union reporter Chris Jones that coaches “aren’t being treated like professionals” and says they “need time to do their work”.

Jones was speaking after Matt O’Connor left Leicester Tigers after just one game of the new season.

READ MORE: Leicester boss O’Connor leaves club

Listen to the latest Rugby Union Weekly podcast.

The fate of Kevin Spacey’s character on Netflix’s “House of Cards” is sealed. 

During a new teaser released Wednesday, Robin Wright’s Claire Underwood stands over the grave of her husband, Frank Underwood, and she appears to be anything but grief-stricken.  

“I’ll tell you this though, Francis,” Claire says to the tombstone that reveals the former president died in 2017. “When they bury me, it won’t be in my backyard. And when they pay their respects, they’ll have to wait in line.”

It’s not clear how Spacey’s character died. 

Underwood’s death should come as no shock to “House of Cards” fans. Netflix announced they were cutting ties with Spacey in November 2017, days after he was accused of sexual misconduct.

More: Kevin Spacey scandal: A complete list of the 15 accusers

The 59-year-old actor was accused by more than a dozen people last October, including “Star Trek: Discovery” actor Anthony Rapp (who was 14 during an alleged sexual advance) and a former “House of Cards” crew member (who said Spacey groped him on the way to the series’ Baltimore set early in the show’s run).

“Netflix will not be involved with any further production of ‘House of Cards’ that includes Kevin Spacey,” the streaming service said in a statement Nov. 3. 

The White House drama will now focus on Claire Underwood, who ascended to the presidency in Season 5 after previously being the first lady and vice president.

The cast and crew resumed production of the sixth and final season of “House of Cards” in February (sans it’s former star) after the show went on a hiatus following the Spacey scandal. 

The shortened season, which has eight episodes rather than the usual 13, is scheduled to hit the streaming service Nov. 2. 

More: Spacey, Seagal, Anderson won’t face charges in select sex-crime cases, Los Angeles DA says

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2M0elsm

WASHINGTON — It’s a true whodunit case and it seems like the entire nation is hot on the trail. 

Social media has awoken and is after the identity of the “senior official in the Trump administration” who authored a scathing and anonymous rebuke of the president in The New York Times. 

Online sleuths are pointing to phrases and particular words in the essay, hoping to narrow down who the author could be, while some former Trump officials are offering clues. 

“All of official Washington has become a giant game of Clue: ‘Colonel Mustard, in the Cabinet Room …’” wrote Eamon Javers, a reporter for CNBC.

Indeed, social media was filled with people across the nation casting names into the deep-dark web, hoping one could be a winner.

The New York Times, 25th Amendment and Anonymous were the top trends on Twitter because of the unprecedented essay. Names such as James Mattis, secretary of defense, John Kelly, chief of staff, and Jeff Sessions, attorney general, were cast out as possibilities but of course — no one has claimed the words as their own. 

More: Anonymous senior Trump official blasts president as erratic and amoral

More: Eight things to know about the 25th Amendment

The piece described President Donald Trump as erratic and amoral and said his aides were actively working to thwart him on decisions that are detrimental to the nation. The person claimed they were part of a “quiet resistance” to the president to “frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.”

“It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t,” the unnamed official wrote.

Omarosa Manigault-Newman, the former reality star who served as a top White House aide, claimed she knew who authored the piece and offered tiny clues to her followers on social media. She offered no proof to her clues. 

More: Treason may have a narrow legal definition

More: Trump’s remarks after anonymous op-ed: ‘We’re doing a great job’

At first, Manigault-Newman pointed to her book, which she is currently on a quest to sell copies of, and included an excerpt that seemed to point that it could have been authored by a member of Trump’s family. 

“Rest assured that there is an army of people who oppose him and his policies,” she writes in her book, “Unhinged: An insider’s account of the Trump White House.”

“They are working silently and tirelessly to make sure he does not cause harm to the republic. Many in this silent army are in his part, his administration, and even in his own family.” 

Later, she posted a poll on Twitter with four names on it. “The Author of the @nytimes OP-Ed about Trump? Hint: Chose the one who is looking to exit the WH soon,” she wrote. 

The names John DeStefano, an assistant to the president, Bill Stepien, White House political director, Nick Ayers, chief of staff to vice president Mike Pence, and Andrew Bremberg, another assistant to the president, were listed. 

As of 7 p.m. Wednesday, Ayers was winning the poll after getting 37 percent of votes. 

Ayers was likely the primary suspect just because of his ties to Pence. Social media was quick to pick up on the word “lodestar,” which means an inspiration, model or guide. 

The word is used once in the piece and sleuths found that Pence had used it multiple times over the years in speeches and in general remarks. 

It all seems to have started with @danbl00m, a Twitter user who lists he lives in Washington. He wrote that the word stuck out to him and noticed it was included in a graph talking about the late Sen. John McCain. 

“‘Lodestar just seems like an unusual word to use in general, not to mention in an op-ed that’s going to be widely read,” he wrote. “It has this whiff of sanctimony. So I search for John Kelly and James Mattis ever having used the word ‘lodestar’. Nothing.” 

Then he searched Pence and found a treasure trove of speeches of him using the word. 

Of course, there have been pieces detailing White House officials changing their verbiage and grammar to disguise their comments when giving quotes to the media. Sometimes, officials even use words of their colleagues to make it sound like someone else, thus putting the blame on a coworker. 

A story in Axios went into detail about the practice of leaking in the White House. 

But that didn’t stop people like David Mack, a deputy director for breaking news at Buzzfeed, from compiling a nice montage of all the times Pence has used the word. 

Some, including the president, have pondered whether the unnamed official even exists. 

Trump, in a tweet Wednesday evening, questioned whether the official was just another “phony source” by the “Failing New York Times.”

“If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!” the president posted. 

It looks like for now, social media users — and the president — will be stuck with pondering who the unnamed Trump official could be and why he or she decided to publicize their views now. 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2MPKXKp

Image copyright
Getty Images

Premier League football clubs should do more to help tackle gambling addiction, the head of NHS England has said.

Simon Stevens described gambling addiction as one of the “new threats” facing the NHS and said reports that foreign betting companies weren’t “co-funding help” for addicts were “deeply concerning”.

Independent charity, Gamble Aware, said the relationship between sport and gambling had “reached a tipping point”.

The Premier League declined to comment.

Mr Stevens said the NHS would be contacting the Premier League to ensure companies that sponsor top clubs “do the right thing”.

Nine Premier League teams are sponsored by betting companies.

‘Failing to play their part’

An estimated 430,000 people in the UK have a gambling problem.

Betting companies who profit from the industry in Britain have been encouraged to donate money to the charity Gamble Aware, with a total target of £10m a year to help to treat addicts.

However, a number of foreign gambling companies that sponsor Premier League clubs have not donated this financial year, The Sunday Times reported in July.

These included Fun88 (Newcastle) and SportPesa (Everton).

• Gambling ‘rife in football’

Speaking at the Health and Care Innovation Expo in Manchester, Mr Stevens said: “There is an increasing link between problem gambling and stress, depression and other mental health problems.

“Doctors report that two thirds of problem gamblers get worse without help and the NHS does offer specialist treatment.

“But reports that foreign gambling companies are failing to play their part in co-funding help for addicts are deeply concerning.

“Taxpayers and the NHS should not be left to pick up the pieces – the health of the nation is everyone’s responsibility.

“The NHS will now work with the Premier League on how we persuade these foreign gambling companies to do the right thing.”

This season, ManBetX – an online betting site in Malta – is the official shirt sponsor of Crystal Palace, while Phillipines-based Dafabet is Fulham’s official team sponsor.

Mr Stevens said the NHS needs to get “more serious about aspects of prevention in public health, including what you might call ‘the new public health”‘.

Around 370,000 11 to 16-year-olds spent money on gambling in the course of one week in England, Scotland and Wales, according to a report published by the Gambling Commission last year.

The regulator estimated that 25,000 of them were problem gamblers.

A spokeswoman for Gamble Aware said it welcomed the speech by Mr Stevens.

“With nearly half the clubs in the Premier League, and over two thirds of the Championship League sponsored by gambling companies, we are seriously concerned the relationship between sport and gambling has reached a tipping point.

“We would like to see all clubs, leagues, and broadcasters who profit from gambling work with us to help fund treatment for this hidden addiction.”