WASHINGTON – A stunning op-ed describing President Donald Trump as erratic and amoral prompted a vitriolic reaction from many congressional Republicans on Thursday, but lawmakers signaled the White House would be largely on its own to deal with the fallout.

Republicans were quick to try to discredit the anonymous writer of the New York Times essay as disloyal and lacking integrity, but many put a clear line in the sand: The op-ed that Trump called “gutless” is the White House’s problem, not theirs.

“This is something that the White House can clearly look at and sort out,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican. “I don’t know why we’d be using the resources of the Congress to pursue that.”

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said the op-ed was simply “a disgruntled employee” and “there’s really no reason to do something about it at this point.”

The senator chuckled when USA TODAY said that there was talk of investigations and hearings related to the op-ed on the House side of the Capitol.

“If there’s someone that is writing something negative about their employer and being disloyal to their employer it wouldn’t be the first time, it won’t be the last time, and it’s not to me a major incident,” he added.

On the other side of Pennsylvania Avenue, officials at the White House embraced a two-pronged strategy in which aides described the author as a “coward” while ramping up attacks on the media. Trump projected an image of moving on, but some current and former aides described the West Wing as frantic or, at the very least, fatigued.

While officials depicted the day as “business as usual,” but the extraordinary reaction underscored the toll the latest firestorm is taking. Trump laid out his administration’s successes in a series of seething tweets. First lady Melania Trump weighed in, accusing the writer of “sabotaging” the country.

More than a dozen members of Trump’s administration publicly denied writing the piece.

More: Here are the officials who deny writing the anonymous op-ed

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, meanwhile, issued an unusual statement encouraging reporters to call the New York Times, providing the phone number to do so.

“The media’s wild obsession with the identity of the anonymous coward is recklessly tarnishing the reputation of thousands of great Americans who proudly serve our country and work for President Trump. Stop,” Sanders wrote.

“We stand united together and fully support our President Donald J. Trump.”

That assessment wasn’t universally held. One former official said the op-ed was hurting  morale and testing already thin levels of trust between White House aides. The former official said the op-ed had hit aides even harder than the excerpts of journalist Bob Woodward’s new book because the newspaper piece was entirely unexpected.

“I think this op-ed has had a more powerful effect on how the staff interact with each other,” the former aide said. “The staff don’t trust each other.”

Two administration officials said they are aware colleagues are leaking information about each other, but described it as part of the job. They disputed the idea that the staff is in a “frenzy,” and that people are just trying to keep their head low and move forward.

“This has become par for the course,” one official said. “Sadly, we’ve all gotten used to it.”

A more common emotion, some said: Fatigue; the long hours and constant pressure are taking a toll on many officials.

The response to this week’s bombshells – the Woodward book and then the op-ed – followed a familiar pattern: Sanders spoke with aides behind closed doors to formulate some kind of response.

Trump, meanwhile, remained largely out of sight. He appeared briefly on the South Lawn, ignoring shouted questions as he boarded Marine One en route to Montana, where he is set to hold an evening rally.

Talk of a congressional response to the op-ed began Thursday when Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., responding to a question from USA TODAY, said he was looking into it.

He said it was too early to determine what exactly that response might look like, but he did not rule out hearings.

“We’re looking right now at what’s the appropriate action from a legislative standpoint to review what’s happened,” said Meadows, a Trump ally and the leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus. “It is alarming.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., later appeared to throw cold water on the idea.

Asked if Congress should try to identify the essay’s author, Ryan responded simply: “Not that I know of.”

A sarcastic Meadows – who is frequently at odds with Ryan –  fired back with a quip hours later at his own press conference after USA TODAY mentioned Ryan’s comments. Meadows chairs the House oversight subcommittee on government operations.  

“I guess this is a news breaking day, I have a different opinion than the speaker,” he said to laughter. “That has never, ever happened before.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz, who frequently defends the president and is often on Meadows’ side, was blunt when asked if Congress should investigate: “No … I think we’ve got a country to save.” 

Gaetz spokesman Devin Murphy said hearings would give “too much weight to a non-story” and also raise “red flags regarding First Amendment freedoms.”

 

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2MQO2Kq

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, already vehemently opposed by abortion-rights advocates, further alienated that demographic during his Senate testimony Thursday when he referred to some forms of birth control as “abortion-inducing drugs.” 

Kavanaugh made the remark after Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz asked him about his dissent in a 2015 case involving Priests for Life, a Catholic group that Kavanaugh said was being forced to provide health coverage for contraceptives “over their religious objection.” 

He said they would have been required to fill out a form that would “make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs” that they objected to. 

Reproductive rights groups pounced on Kavanaugh’s conflation of birth control with abortion as evidence that his confirmation poses a threat to women’s access to abortion. 

“Kavanaugh referred to birth control – something more than 95 percent of women use in their lifetime – as an ‘abortion-inducing drug,’ which is not just flat-out wrong, but is anti-woman, anti-science propaganda,” Planned Parenthood’s Dawn Laguens told HuffPost. “Women have every reason to believe their health and their lives are at stake.”

NARAL Pro-Choice America said in a tweet that Kavanaugh’s comment was an “anti-science lie” and an “anti-choice extremist phrase that shows that our right to access abortion and contraception would be in SERIOUS danger if he is confirmed.” 

The Center for Reproductive Rights called Kavanaugh’s remark “straight out of the anti-choice, anti-science phrase book used to restrict women’s access to essential health care.” 

A 2014 report from the Guttmacher Institute said groups opposed to abortion rights have long worked to “stigmatize contraception by blurring the lines between contraception and abortion.” 

Democratic senators also went after Kavanaugh for the remark. 

“Newsflash, Brett Kavanaugh: Contraception is NOT abortion,” tweeted Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. “Anyone who says so is peddling extremist ideology – not science –and has no business sitting on the Supreme Court.” 

Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., called it a “red-alarm moment.” 

“If you didn’t believe to before, believe it now – a woman’s constitutional right to abortion AND birth control are both 100% at stake,” he tweeted. 

California Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein called it “further proof of Kavanaugh’s hostility toward women.” 

Kavanaugh has said he considers the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which said women had a constitutional right to abortions, to be settled law.

But Democrats have pointed out that settled law can be overturned by another Supreme Court decision, and they argue that Kavanaugh’s record indicates he would vote for such a change if a case challenging the precedent came before him. 

 

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

Naomi Osaka has become the first Japanese woman to reach a Grand Slam final after beating American Madison Keys to set up a meeting with Serena Williams at the US Open.

Osaka, 20, had never beaten Keys in their previous three meetings, but won 6-2 6-4 in New York.

The 19th seed saw off 13 break points and clinically took those which came her way.

She meets 23-time Grand Slam champion Williams at 21:00 BST on Saturday.

Williams eased past Latvia’s 18th seed Anastasija Sevastova in straight sets earlier on Thursday.

Osaka feeling at home in New York

Osaka’s reputation as one of the most talented younger players on the women’s tour has grown on the back of a superb year which saw her win a first WTA title in Indian Wells and then earn a notable win over 36-year-old Williams in Miami a week later.

Now she has another chance to beat Williams after reaching her first Grand Slam final in New York – a city which has personal significance for the world number 20.

After being born in Japan, Osaka moved to New York aged three and spent her formative years there before her family relocated to Florida.

The dual-citizen says going to Japan feels like a “super-awesome vacation” rather than home, but will have the hopes of a nation behind her when she faces her childhood idol Williams.

And it will be a double celebration in the Asian country this weekend if Kei Nishikori beats 13-time Grand Slam champion Novak Djokovic in the men’s semi-finals on Friday.

Burt Reynolds, who died Thursday at 82, was in legendary movie-star form when he sat down for an extended interview with USA TODAY in March. Showing off a silver-handled cane and a mischievous smile while enjoying a vodka and water, he gave honest answers like only Reynolds could.

Here are some of the high points:

On having charisma (even when it’s difficult to walk)

“I absolutely feel it. I don’t think you outgrow that. If you do, you might as well hang it up. I’m not sure if I can swagger anymore, but I can limp with the best of them.”

“The limp is from all the stunts. When they take an X-ray of me, they start calling people in from other offices. ‘Bill, come down here and look at this.’ They all come down. My body is all chopped, cut and operated on here and there. I walk with a cane because it hurts like hell without it. Would I give any of it up? Not a chance. Nah, I’d do it again. Everything.”

On whether he was drunk while posing naked on a bearskin rug in 1972

“I was totally (drunk). But I mean, how else are going to do that? Unless you are Lauren Hutton. And I don’t think she was ever sloshed. She was just free. I have a problem with flinging all my clothes off. Where is the bearskin? He’s running through the woods. He’s going, ‘You know, I knew him when he was big.’ “

More: Burt Reynolds has regrets, but he’s still smiling as ‘The Last Movie Star’

Also: Burt Reynolds, ‘Deliverance’ star and Hollywood sex symbol, dies at 82

On getting Sally Field to star in the comedy ‘Smokey and the Bandit’

“She first said no. And I called her and I said, ‘I know I know why said no. You think it’s a silly movie with cars chasing each other and all that crap. But I don’t see it as that. I see as a chance to work with the best young actress on the planet. But go ahead if you want to go ahead and say no.’ And she went, ‘How the hell am I going to say no to that?’ “

On losing his love Sally Field

“I don’t know who she is with now. And I don’t want to. It’s a happy hurt. It’s funny how those two words sometimes go together. There’s things I had done, I wish I could do over. That’s true. It was my fault I broke up with Sally. Not hers. And I certainly wouldn’t do that the second time around.”

Burt Reynolds:5 essential roles, from ‘Smokey and the Bandit’ to ‘Boogie Nights’

The man, the myth, the mustache: We GIF thanks for Burt Reynolds’ facial hair

On telling his war hero father he was selling his Golden Globe award

“It was (hard), but it wasn’t. I told my dad, ‘Go ahead and pick up what you want from the auction'(before things sold). And he was not a sentimental man. He said, ‘What about that award? Are you sure about that? Because you might want to feel good about that.’ I said, ‘You’ve won every medal there is to win. And you don’t talk about it, and I’m sure if you wanted to sell them, you could.’ And he said, ‘Yeah, you’re right.’ And I’m right about that.”

On taking a role in Adam Sandler’s remake of ‘The Longest Yard’

“I don’t think Adam ever played college football. But he’s a very good athlete. He had done every sport there was. I remember meeting with all of his minions, like seven people in an office. And they were all talking about how they were going to make the best picture of ‘The Longest Yard.’ And I said, ‘Well, I hope you make a good one. But I don’t think you’re going to make a better one.’ And then they told me who all was going to be in it. And I said, ‘Well, good luck. And how many days am I working? Three days. I said OK. And how much money is it? OK, this is good. OK!’ 

“I didn’t see it. Why? I didn’t want to see it.”

More: Sally Field, Mark Wahlberg, Dolly Parton react to Reynolds’ death

Related: Listen to the emergency 911 call for Burt Reynolds

On finding contentment

“I’m in a very happy place. I still have my best friend from high school and the seventh grade. When the wheels touch in West Palm Beach, my blood pressure and everything else just drops. And I feel great. … He’s lost his wife and I’ve lost my girl (Field). We’re just two old farts at the bar drinking and telling lies. It’s pathetic and it’s also very funny when you look at like that. And that’s how we chose to look at it.”

On his career peaks and valleys

“I’ve been very, very lucky through ups and downs. When you crash and burn, you have to pick yourself up and go on and hope to make up for it. Along the way, I’ve met some wonderful people. And you always run into some jerks. But that would be the same if you were working for the Ford Motor Co. 

“It’s a tough business. Very tough. But I always tried to leave a good impression wherever we shot, and I didn’t leave any buildings burning or anything. And I’ve had a good time through it all.”

 

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

Super Bowl-winning linebacker Mychal Kendricks is facing up to 25 years in prison after pleading guilty to charges of insider trading.

Prosecutors said Kendricks made around $1.2m (£0.92m) over two years working with a former Goldman Sachs analyst.

Kendricks, 27, admitted that he swapped cash, NFL tickets and access to parties for market-shifting information.

He won the Super Bowl with the Philadelphia Eagles last season before joining the Cleveland Brown in June.

Cleveland terminated his one-year, $2.25, (£1.74m) contract on 29 August, hours after the charges were announced.

At the time, Kendricks released a statement in which he said he “deeply regretted” becoming involved with “a former friend of mine who I thought I could trust”.

He added: “Four years ago, I participated in insider trading. While I didn’t fully understand all of the details of the illegal trades, I knew it was wrong, and I wholeheartedly regret my actions.

“To this point, I had worked my tail off since I was five years old to become a football player. I was drawn in by the allure of being more than just a football player.

“Although I did not take any of the profits for myself, I am committed to repaying all of the funds gained illegally. I accept full responsibility for my actions.”

After a bombshell op-ed from an unnamed Trump administration official appeared in The New York Times Wednesday, lawmakers on Capitol Hill were quick to dismiss the author’s claims about President Donald Trump and to focus on what many called the “cowardly” nature of an anonymous attack. 

The man or woman described by the Times as a  “senior official” claimed that a “resistance” within the president’s administration is “working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.” According to the author, Trump is amoral, “anti-Democratic,” “erratic,” and “continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.” 

But, because of the anonymous nature of the messenger, many lawmakers, particularly those from the Republican side of the aisle, said there was no reason to take the message seriously. 

“Despite the media circus around the unique nature of the op-ed, this is not something I am spending time thinking about,” said Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C. “If you aren’t willing to put your name on your work, I find it hard to take your claims as credible – period.”

‘I am part of the resistance’: Anonymous senior Trump official blasts president as erratic and amoral

More: Whodunit? Social media users search for anonymous Trump official who penned scathing NYT essay

Florida Republican Rep. Bill Posey said, “There’s zero credibility in anonymous sources.” 

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., condemned the use of anonymous sources in general when he was asked about the Times column. “Sources should always be identified first,” he said. 

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told The Hill that “there are thousands of people who call themselves senior officials. So, it doesn’t mean anything without context.” 

“At this day in age, for anyone not to put their name on it – they are a coward,” said Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C. “And the op-ed ought to be dismissed.” 

Many agreed with Norman that the author was a coward for keeping his or her identity a secret, including first lady Melania Trump who told the writer, “you are not protecting this country, you are sabotaging it with your cowardly actions.” 

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R- Wisc., said the author was “living in dishonesty.” Ryan indirectly addressed the anonymous author’s concerns when he acknowledged that Trump may use “unconventional tactics,” but he said the president gets “good results.” 

Similarly, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham told Fox News that while Trump “can be a handful,” the author is wrong to say the president is not serving the country well.

“Where I live in South Carolina, people are extremely pleased,” Graham said. “So, this person’s view of the president he’s serving, or she is serving, is out of sync with the people who elected him.” 

Although Democrats were more likely to accept the piece’s damning depiction of Trump, even some of them were critical of the author’s decision to remain anonymous. 

“It comes as no surprise that senior members of President Trump’s own Administration are deeply troubled by his behavior – his conduct concerns the majority of the American people,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. “But anonymous sources alone are not enough.” 

Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, the deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, said, “If we’re really concerned about putting country over party, the best check on the White House is not unelected, anonymous people who chose to work there, but rather putting a Democratic majority in Congress.” 

Contributing: Tim Smith, The Greenville (S.C.) News; Mara Bellaby, Florida Today; Nora Hertel, St. Cloud (Minn.) Times; The Associated Press 

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