Latest news with #RighttoTry
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Texans Gain the Right To Try Individualized Medical Treatments
If you're so sick that you have nothing to lose and you're looking the Grim Reaper in the face, why shouldn't you be able to try experimental and officially unapproved treatments? While libertarians recognize individuals' right to take their own risks, even those of a more nanny-ish disposition have a hard time coming up with answers to that question. That's why the Right to Try movement has taken off across the country, marking its latest victory in Texas. "In a major win for rare disease patients, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed Goldwater's Right to Try for Individualized Treatments Act," Brian Norman of the Goldwater Institute, which champions right-to-try legislation, wrote last week. "Championed by Senator Paul Bettencourt and Representative Ken King, SB 984 expands Goldwater's original Right to Try law to potentially lifesaving treatments that are designed specifically for individual patients." Right-to-try laws have been passed in at least 41 states, largely based on model legislation crafted by the Goldwater Institute that allows those with terminal illnesses access to experimental treatments. Colorado was the first to adopt right-to-try, though Texas wasn't far behind, passing such a law in 2015. Counterpart federal legislation passed in 2018. At the time, President Donald Trump, then in his first term, commented, "With the Right to Try law I'm signing today, patients with life-threatening illnesses will finally have access to experimental treatments that could improve or even cure their conditions." In 2023, the Lone Star State expanded right-to-try to patients with chronic ailments. That law specified that "it is the intent of the legislature to allow patients with a severe chronic disease to use potentially life-altering investigational drugs, biological products, and devices." By that time, some states, including Arizona, had already passed laws expanding right-to-try to include individualized treatments that hadn't been contemplated in the original legislation—or even by most physicians, not long in the past. "Rapid medical innovations have made it possible to take an individual's genetic information and create a treatment for that individual person," notes the Goldwater-sponsored Right to Try website. "More patients, especially those with rare and ultra-rare illnesses, will pursue these treatments when they have exhausted other options. Unfortunately, the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration]'s current regulatory scheme is not designed to handle these kinds of individual treatments, and that will keep life-saving medication out of the hands of patients unless reforms are adopted." Just days ago, Cincinnati's WKRC marked National Cancer Survivor's Month by highlighting patients who benefited from radiation and chemotherapy treatments that were tailored to their bodies. "Precision medicine is finding mutations or proteins in an individual's body that suggests that certain drugs can be used to treat that patient not only most effectively but with the least side effects," Michael Gieske, director of the Lung Cancer Screening Program at St. Elizabeth Healthcare, told WKRC. In Texas, legislation to clear the way for patients to try such treatments before they've been formally approved came in the form of SB 984, which "establishes a pathway by which patients with rare or ultra-rare diseases may seek, under their doctor's care, personalized treatments developed in federally approved facilities." The bill's sponsor in the Texas Senate, Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R–Houston), boasted, "Texas is again leading the nation in fighting for the most vulnerable patients, whose only hope lies in cutting-edge, individualized treatments not traditional clinical trials, and for me, the coolest thing you can do as a legislator is pass a bill that saves lives." None of these laws can guarantee that an experimental treatment will actually improve a terminal or chronic patient's condition, of course. But there's no good reason for blocking access to promising or even long-shot treatments when patients have run out of other options. Through the various incarnations of proposed legislation, the Right to Try movement has sought to expand patients' choices and reduce bureaucratic barriers to treatment. But it's not perfect. Right-to-try laws create exceptions to red tape that stands between patients and potentially life-saving treatments, but they don't fully empower people to make their own decisions, nor do they eliminate the bureaucratic hurdles that slow the approval of medicines and medical devices. "Drug lag costs lives because people suffer and die from disease that might be treatable, if only there were more investment in finding a cure," argued Jessica Flanigan, an associate professor at the University of Richmond, in her 2017 book, Pharmaceutical Freedom: Why Patients Have a Right to Self-Medicate. "Requirements that raise the cost of development make it less likely that they will succeed. Premarket testing conditions also cost lives because patients with conditions that could be treated or cured by unapproved drugs suffer and die while they are waiting for approval." Flanigan recommends a fully libertarian approach that would remove the restraints from people's freedom to try medications and medical treatments based on their own judgment and the advice of whatever sources and experts they choose to consult. It's a morally good and consistent take that would eliminate the barriers to medicines and medical devices while also lowering the costs of developing new ones. People would be expected to shoulder the burdens of any risks they take. But liberating though Flanigan's approach would be, it's far more difficult to get through legislatures than are a series of incremental right-to-try laws that erode bureaucratic hurdles a little at a time. Montana took the next step last month when Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte signed a bill allowing for centers where patients can receive experimental treatments that have completed phase 1 clinical trials but not yet been approved. Everybody is eligible, subject to recommendations from physicians and the requirements of informed consent. To escape federal regulation, experimental meds administered in the centers will have to be produced in Montana—but the state has an active pharmaceutical sector. Texas took an important step last week toward expanding the right to try experimental medical treatments to a broader sector of the population. But the Right to Try movement isn't nearly done. The post Texans Gain the Right To Try Individualized Medical Treatments appeared first on
The Independent
19-03-2025
- Health
- The Independent
Readers clash over Labour's benefit reforms – from ‘Right to Try' scheme to making work pay
Sir Keir Starmer's proposed benefit cuts have sparked a heated debate among Independent readers, with opinions deeply divided over the government's approach to welfare reform. A recent poll revealed that 68 per cent of readers do not support the proposed changes, fearing they will disproportionately harm disabled and chronically ill individuals. When we asked for your views, readers feared the reforms ignore the realities of long-term illness, with fluctuating conditions making rigid assessments unfair. A minority of readers supported the reforms, agreeing that the welfare system needs change and that too many people are claiming benefits unnecessarily. While some welcomed the 'Right to Try' scheme, they stressed the need for long-term support. Others agreed with the government's position that work provides purpose and identity and that more should be done to support people in returning to employment. Here's what you had to say: Right to Try scheme a very welcome addition I have been supported by both ESA and PIP for the last five years due to multiple long-term physical, mental, and neurodivergent conditions that affect everything from my joints, immune system, executive function, and social interaction. These benefits have allowed me to keep living independently – something that, being in my 40s, has been essential to my well-being – and has also meant I've not needed to access social housing or other support services. I would love to be able to do something constructive with the little energy and ability I have left after doing essential life chores, but I would need assurances that I would be able to access suitable long-term support to do so — and that, I think, is my number one concern with any change in the benefit process. The Right to Try scheme is a very welcome addition, and I think it will encourage more people to re-enter the workforce. Many long-term health conditions can fluctuate in their symptoms and can also be affected by stress and anxiety, which can bring on 'flare-ups' — a worsening of these symptoms. Where you're unlucky enough to have multiple conditions, these flare-ups can cause a domino effect, each one affecting the other, leaving you unable to even fulfil self-care needs. The process of claiming benefits is arduous and stressful, sometimes taking up to six months, and I can speak from experience that the prospect of going through it all again if it turns out that the role you choose is causing you harm is so distressing that it makes you avoid thinking about it. I also think JSA and ESA should be merged to allow for cross-channel support and function, with the added benefit of likely cutting a lot of unnecessary red tape on all sides. immiscibility I have real concerns about the changes that may be coming. I know from experience of helping and supporting a family member who has been sick since childhood with physical disabilities. The stress and fear every time reassessment takes place is overwhelming. Physical abilities decrease, but we have to fight all the time. Assessments should be videoed. No account is taken of good and bad days and extra costs, e.g. buying pre-grated cheese because you can't grate it, or ready-chopped veg because you can't cut. Again, it seems to be demonising and punitive to everyone. Gillywicks Cancer treatment I watched Streeting on Sunday tell a story of a friend with cancer who was offered sick leave, but felt well enough to work, and did. Streeting concluded that many should be working instead of going on leave. I too have cancer and currently have radiation treatment, and I am working. But I would never suggest others do so. For a start, it is job dependent, as in many jobs it is not acceptable to be sleepy or fatigued. For others, psychological factors will come into play. Streeting should rely on doctors to decide and busy himself with developing plans, which he will need more than ever after deleting NHS England. Mp Work gives purpose and identity The government is right in that work gives us purpose, identity, and often somewhere to make social connections. Children and young people are our future, so while reform is needed it should not be about cost-cutting but about those investments that are required for people to have jobs that will give them a rich and fulfilling life. Ithinkweknowtheanswertothat Not a lifestyle choice I am in disbelief that I am reading these headlines under a Labour government. I worked from the age of 13, I worked through college and university, I worked whilst pregnant and returned to work when both babies were 10 months old. I am now 40. My eldest son has ASD and ADHD; he has an ECP (Education, Health and Care Plan) which I fought tooth and nail for. He requires medication and a different type of support and parenting than a neurotypical child of the same age. He is doing well, but it has taken a lot of work, balance, and proactive advocacy from me to safeguard his care and well-being. A tip in that balance means a spiral into crisis, non-verbalism, school refusal, self-harm, and food rejection. I get CA and DLA for him. A few years before he was diagnosed, I too was diagnosed with an inherited cancer called Lynch Syndrome, which led to me having a total hysterectomy at 32. Within seven months, I was in excruciating muscular and joint pain, I was regularly falling, I was forgetting information and struggling to recall simple details like my own name, I was fatigued to the point of collapse, I started experiencing tremors, spasms, and intense migraines. I became hypersensitive to sound and smell and my mental health plummeted. I was diagnosed with fibromyalgia, a much-maligned and misunderstood illness. My life completely changed. At work, I was unreliable, making mistakes; I couldn't concentrate, and I was often too weak to move. When I could work, I would be getting calls from the school. I lost my job. I fought for PIP. My husband works over 50 hours a week. I am not lazy, I am not a scrounger; I am a woman with an illness trying to keep my head above water and keep my son healthy at the same time. I feel sick with nerves. I'd be £25k better off in work. This isn't a lifestyle choice. Sarahintheshire Cutting the number of claimants There is a need to cut the cost of the welfare budget. That can be achieved in two ways: either by cutting the individual benefits or by cutting the number of claimants. I favour the latter; far too many claimants are fiddles and need to be weeded out. MORDEY Failure to understand cause and effect There seems to be a real failure to understand cause and effect, both from Starmer's Labour and the Conservatives before them. If they are genuinely concerned about increasing numbers of people needing to claim disability benefits, they ought to be looking at the reasons why — Long COVID, mental ill health exacerbated by current affairs, lack of access to physical and mental health care, and the general inaccessibility of workplaces of all kinds for disabled people. If they're concerned about financial deficits, they ought to be ensuring that major corporations like Google and Amazon contribute their fair share in tax to pay for the public infrastructure they depend on to operate in the UK. Treating disabled people as costs to be managed is callous. Expecting disabled people to work themselves into an early grave just to be less of an economic 'burden' is reprehensible. 'Evil begins when you begin to treat people as things.' Juno Tax the wealthiest properly Why on earth can't this government tax the wealthiest properly so that they spend the same amount in GDP terms as the poorest do? I understand that the benefits bill is ballooning out of control and, yes, target benefit fraud, but I think it's an utter disgrace that they're planning on targeting the most vulnerable in society under the guise of 'extra support.' The Treasury would earn far more if they also targeted the tax evaders and avoiders. A crying shame that just when we need this Labour government to succeed, they're alienating the very people who voted for them. Don't get me wrong, I would NEVER vote Reform or Tory within my lifetime, but Labour really need to become the socialist government that we elected them to be and stop pandering to the RW media. Amy Where in the debate about disability benefits are the substantive questions? Questions like: why is being disabled more expensive than being able-bodied, and on average by how much? How is cutting a non-out-of-work benefit — PIP — going to increase the number of people employed when it will most likely lead to disabled employees losing their jobs? Why are workplaces so significantly stressful, and why aren't more employers doing more to create less stressful and healthier workplaces? Given that the very richest have seen their already immense wealth soar over the past several years, why are they allowed to escape paying their fair share towards repairing the nation's economy and public finances? What kind of moral arguments can legitimately be claimed by privileged, often well-off or very well-off politicians who decide to implement policies that attack the most vulnerable and poorest in society? DisgustedOfMiddleEngland It's a cut, not reform It's not "reform" if you start from a pre-decided amount of money you want to save. It's a cut. More sympathetic assistance to help those who can and want to get back into work is fine (and should, of course, have been happening already), but that needs to be in place and bedded in before any "reform" to payments is even considered. Otherwise, it's a cut. Maxcastle No balancing the books There's no "balancing the books" as, despite what Thatcher claimed, managing an economy is nothing like managing a household budget. All Starmer, Reeves, and Kendall are doing is implementing unfinished Tory policy on welfare. And these red Tories are reigniting the tradition of demonising the disabled. So many people with disabilities want to work. You'd be hard-pressed to know this the way Starmer et al. are talking. Apparently, it's moral to cut benefits for the disabled, but not moral to fail to follow through with the promise while in opposition to impose a wealth tax. And Labour are pretty much denying the existence of disability. That's going too far. Benitas Who is going to employ these people? People who have gone through the most invasive work capability tests, and who are found totally unfit for any work, are really ill people. Now, all of a sudden, they are to have monies taken from them and be forced to look for work — just who is going to employ these ill people? Many people are on prescription drugs that don't allow them to operate mechanical things or drive; they leave people feeling drowsy, i.e., painkillers — again, who is going to employ these people? Ramned Make work pay What's the truth? Just how much do the sick and disabled get paid? What sanctions, tests, and exams do they have to face? I think most of those on the sick are in, or are very close to, poverty — but give me facts! And maybe, with the soaring cost of living, the government should have a good look at making work pay again — that might help get people back to work! Headsgone Cost of living and workers' wages Average workers do not get a decent wage; food, fuel, goods prices, and energy prices are gigantically high. These are the factors that the government should be looking at to tackle and balance the scale, so people can afford to spend more. Worker Labour has turned its back Looks to me that the Labour Party has turned its back on those who support them. I already rescinded my party membership when Corbyn was kicked out. They are going to be clobbered in the next GE. Perhaps for the first time ever I will vote Green. AlexBR The conversation isn't over. To join in, all you need to do is register your details, then you can take part in the discussion. You can also sign up by clicking 'log in' on the top right-hand corner of the screen.
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
How ‘Nutter Conduit' Feared by Secret Service Hooked Trump Up With Laura Loomer
A female campaign aide was the 'reliable nutter conduit' to Donald Trump—who introduced him to conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer, according to a new book. Former One America News Network anchor Natalie Harp, 34, invited Loomer into the campaign's inner circle to 'pal around with Trump,' writes author Michael Wolff in in his upcoming book, All or Nothing: How Trump Recaptured America. The Daily Beast has obtained a copy of the book ahead of publication on Tuesday Feb. 25. It is certain to create shockwaves inside Trump's White House with its unsparing description of a chaotic and fissiparous campaign, a candidate at times untethered from reality, and a supporting dramatis personae of oddballs and opportunists. One of the most vivid characters is Harp, 34, who had first come into Trump's orbit in 2019, when she credited his 'Right to Try' law with saving her from cancer, an account which Wolff describes as 'having holes.' She became part of his campaign in three years later. Wolff writes that Harp became 'the keeper of the 'Truth' phone' and claims she sent out as many as 100 posts a day on Donald Trump's Truth Social account during the election campaign. 'Anyone who wanted to get to Trump could just text her,' writes the best-selling author. In the late summer of 2023, he writes, Harp invited Loomer to meet Trump at a tournament at his Bedminster golf course in New Jersey. Loomer was 'dismissed as a hopeless liar and fabulist by even Marjorie Taylor Greene and a subject of constant effort by the Trump political team to keep her as far away as possible,' adds Wolff, who said that she was given access to Trump by Harp, nevertheless. The conspiracy theorist accompanied Trump on his 9/11 trips to New York and Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where one of the hijacked planes crashed, despite being a 9/11 'truther.' She was also on Trump Force One on the way to his debate with Kamala Harris the previous day. But Wolff writes that Loomer was 'entertaining to Trump and an adept flatterer.' 'There was almost no furthest extreme, straining-the-bounds-of-all-credulity, right-wing conspiracy theory she had not adopted and aggressively promoted,' writes Wolff. Trump liked to have her around 'for reasons psycho-sexual or as a reliable source of flattery,' Wolff writes. Wolff writes that Loomer was 'thrown under the bus' when the media drew attention to her presence on the campaign. But Harp's status was never in doubt. The aide, reportedly dubbed the 'human printer' by her colleagues because she often carried around a portable printer to give printouts to Trump, was 'wholly in charge of the Trump posts–that is, they were her posts,' reports Wolff. She delivered Trump a daily collection of 'out-of-date articles and printouts from obscure websites and fan artwork downloaded from strange Trump-adoring places on the Internet.' The author described Harp's role as 'both rogue and yet official–with constant confusion over whether it was her voice or his; more and more, it was one voice.' Since joining Trump's campaign in 2022, Wolf says Harp grew in influence to become 'likely the greatest single influence on the candidate, his muse, his whisperer, his security blanket.' Trump would defend her to other staffers, saying, 'Natalie's so quick, she's great, you guys don't like her because she's so fast and so good,' writes Wolff. Wolff writes that Trump used the presence of 'wackos' around him as a way to demonstrate to more rational aides that he was the 'absolute boss.' But Harp's presence took a darker twist, Wolff writes: the Secret Service became concerned about Harp to the point where they considered her a 'potential danger to herself as well as to the president.' According to Wolff, Harp's 'fixation' was an 'open secret' among Trump's staff, who found it 'discomfiting,' and the alleged 'aggressiveness of her attention' also became a security concern. Wolff reveals an astonishing note she sent to Trump, which said, 'I want things always to be right between us.' It went on, 'I never want to bring you anything but joy. I'm sorry I lost my focus. You are all that matters to me. I don't want to ever let you down. Thank you for being my Guardian and Protector in this life . . .With all my heart, Natalie.' It was one of a series of notes, Wolff reveals. The White House has yet to offer any reaction to the forthcoming book. The Daily Beast has requested comment. But fears that it would be bad news for those around Trump had already prompted a statement from some of his closest aides in November, when it was first rumored that Wolff was writing a book on the campaign. The statement from senior staff of the 2024 Trump campaign, including co-chairs Susie Wiles—now the president's chief-of-staff—and Chris LaCivita, read: 'A number of us have received inquiries from the disgraced author Michael Wolff, whose previous work can only be described as fiction. 'He is a known peddler of fake news who routinely concocts situations, conversations, and conclusions that never happened. As a group, we have decided not to respond to his bad faith inquiries, and we encourage others to completely disregard whatever nonsense he eventually publishes. Consider this our blanket response to whatever he writes.'
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The aide so obsessed with Trump, she sparked security concerns
Donald Trump's devoted aide Natalie Harp sparked Secret Service security concerns over her intense behaviour towards the Republican leader, it has been claimed. Ms Harp, 33, was one Mr Trump's 'Charlie's Angels', a group of female staffers with whom he had an 'avuncular and flirtatious' relationship, according to an upcoming book. The former Right-wing broadcaster would write letters of adoration to Mr Trump, 78, that were obtained by his security detail, who noted 'the strangeness of her behaviour'. In one letter, Ms Harp reportedly told Mr Trump 'you are all that matters to me', and on the first day of his New York criminal trial she slipped him a letter quoting Bible verses and explaining she would be by his side. The revelations about Ms Harp are disclosed in Michael Wolff's latest book, All or Nothing: How Trump Recaptured America, which looks at Mr Trump's political comeback from 2023 to his election victory. In the account, Wolff writes: 'The aggressiveness of her attention, and her fury when she was denied bestowing attention on Trump, was also of increasing concern to the security team.' Brushing aside concerns that Ms Harp, who was reportedly due to be given a desk outside the Oval Office in the White House, was a security concern, Mr Trump said: 'Nonsense... She just loves her president'. Eric Trump, Mr Trump's son, also questioned Ms Harp's closeness to his father and reportedly 'took a turn at trying to solve the situation in a set of annoyed queries to the legal team'. Describing her as a 'time bomb', Wolff writes: 'Even the Secret Service had now weighed in: Natalie was a security consideration. But no one was going to tell Trump that.' Ms Harp sat behind Mr Trump in court every day during his criminal trial and became known as the 'human printer' because she would carry a portable device to hand Mr Trump a steady stream of flattering stories held together by gold paper clips. So devoted was Ms Harp – who credits Mr Trump with saving her life through his Right to Try law, which she says allowed her to access experiential treatment for a rare bone cancer – Wolff claims that she offered to go to prison for the US president in a bid to circumvent the gag order imposed by a the judge. 'In the third week of the trial, lawyers were stunned to hear Natalie – whose provocations were largely responsible for the gag order in the first place – offer a solution: She would post his attacks under her own name,' Wolff writes. ''I'll go to prison,' she announced. A bewildered legal team stared at her as though she had three eyes in her forehead.' The loyal aide is also understood to have put through an 'eye-popping' expense bill for a new wardrobe, insisting Mr Trump had told her to go shopping in preparation for being on camera more frequently. Ms Harp would help Mr Trump write his posts for Truth Social to the point that aides became confused over whether comments were 'her voice or his' and 'more and more, it was one voice'. Wolff's upcoming publication comes seven years after Fire and Fury, his controversial book about life inside the White House during the first Trump administration, which was denounced by the US president as being based on 'lies, misrepresentations and sources that don't exist'. Here are some other revelations set out in Wolff's latest book. The US president is said to have 'reluctantly' given up his second day of testimony at his civil fraud trial amid concerns he could be asked 'potentially embarrassing' questions about where Melania Trump actually lived. 'That profound question at the heart of Trumpworld, the answer to which no one quite knew, could get asked under oath: 'Where exactly does your wife live?'' Wolff writes. There has been speculation Mrs Trump resides in a separate flat in Trump Tower and Mr Trump could be pressed on how much time each of them spend in their multiple residences. 'To say the least, that arrangement, an American marriage on a coolly transactional basis, might be difficult to explain in open court and to 'family values' America,' Mr Wolff added. Mr Trump's relationship, or lack thereof, with his wife and her unwillingness to be part of his presidential run is a constant theme throughout the book. 'She f---ing hates him,' said one Mar-a-Lago source of Mrs Trump's feelings towards her husband and his family. The first lady was notably absent from the campaign trail, only making brief appearances at Mr Trump's Madison Square Garden rally in New York and at the Republican National Convention (RNC). After Mr Trump's first indictment, Jason Miller, Mr Trump's campaign advisor at the time, was reportedly sent to talk with Mrs Trump to make a 'pitch' about the importance of her standing by her husband. She is said to have replied: 'Nice try'. When the issue of Jill Biden's planned appearance at the end of the first presidential debate was raised, 'no one had even proposed' the idea of Mrs Trump being there. Her appearance at the RNC had also seemed 'iffy', according to Wolff, who alleges she finally agreed to attend but would only arrive in the VIP box only after Mr Trump had left. On the night of the election, she would not appear on stage with her husband 'unless it was an outright win', Wolff writes. Mr Trump spent days practicing his pose for his now-infamous mug shot photo for his arraignment in the Georgia election subversion case, according to the book. 'He'd been practicing it for days – on the golf course, in the mirror, in front of the legal team, and among Bedminster [the Trump golf course in New Jersey] members', Wolff writes. 'It was a detail that had been left hanging, whether there would be or wouldn't be one... But Trump had been toying with the idea: A mug shot would make this indictment different from the others.' Wolff adds: 'He was in and out in no time – with the mug shot taken in an instant. But he was over the moon: he loved the picture. 'This looks so cool, this is a classic, this is iconic,' he kept pronouncing.' After Mr Trump's second Butler rally, during which Elon Musk stole the limelight with his eccentric on-stage leaps, Mr Trump said: 'what the f--- is wrong with this guy?' He also reportedly asked: 'And why doesn't his shirt fit?' Wolff describes Mr Musk as having inserted himself into the campaign with 'an ever-rising tide of bewildering, if not opaque, requests, orders, and recommendations from him or his people'. He says Mr Musk elevated the campaign 'in his own mind to a personal mission and a religious cause, with the Trump circle already anticipating the earth shaking when he and Trump invariably fall out'. Credit: Fox News Channel's Hannity In one moment recounted in the book, Mr Musk declines to speak to JD Vance, who he pushed as Mr Trump's vice-president pick, saying: 'I've really no interest in speaking to a vice-president'. The jurors serving on Mr Trump's 'hush money' criminal trial were put off by the US president's 'bully boys' of Maga loyalists who would attend court to 'intimidate the jury'. In his book, Wolff identifies one of the jurors from the trial as Patrick Robson, a lawyer in Manhattan, who recounted the jury's sentiments to friends at a party. 'Matt Gaetz, glaring and smirking during his appearance behind Trump, had particularly seemed to try and stare them down', Wolff writes. He added that the 'lookalike' women on the stand and in Mr Trump's entourage had also been picked up. 'The impossible-to-miss Stepford Wife-ism and physical requirements, a creepy detail that, in a case fundamentally about sexual proclivities, supported the ick factor,' Wolff adds. The US president also reportedly asked whether the judge in his 'hush money' criminal case would take back his permission for Mr Trump to attend his son Barron's graduation. Mr Trump, who saw his legal strategy as his media strategy, thought his son's offer to skip his high school graduation and attend court was 'sheer brilliance' and asked his lawyer Todd Blanche 'ruefully asked if they could get the judge to take back his permission'. Joe Biden performed so badly in the presidential debate Mr Trump thought it was a Democrat 'set-up' and was contemplating ways to 'help save' him. Mr Trump sensed his opponent was not 'right' while he was on the debate stage, but did not know if it was obvious to everyone else. 'He would later tell people he thought the media was again going to cover up for Joe. And then he started to think he was going to look bad for pounding him too hard. 'Do I let up?', he wondered,' Wolff writes. Thinking Mr Biden's car-crash performance was a ploy to get rid of him as the Democratic nominee, Mr Trump 'was grasping for a strategy to help save Joe. But there wasn't one.' Coming off stage, Mr Trump reportedly said: 'That's it. They're going to swap him out.' Mr Trump believed he could win the presidency without picking a vice-president and would have preferred to run alone, according to the book. 'I could win without a VP, and you know, honestly, I'd kind of prefer not to have one,' Mr Trump reportedly said as he mulled over his decision. The Republican leader had initially considered making Robert F Kennedy Jr his vice-president, and would ask people what they thought of a 'Trump-Kennedy ticket'. According to Wolff, he said: 'Just tell me how that sounds. Can you do better than that?' But Mr Trump's 'unofficial' feelers to the former Democrat were 'unofficially turned down', Wolff writes, a story the Trump campaign previously denied. Mr Trump was so unimpressed with the candidates to be his second in command that he did not make a decision until his plane touched down in Milwaukee before the RNC. He had wanted a woman for the role but had been disappointed there were no suitable contenders to pick from, after he ruled out Nikki Haley when she refused to drop out of the presidential race. Rupert Murdoch had wanted Mr Trump to pick Mike Pompeo and later backed Doug Burgum, but Donald Trump Jr and Mr Musk had pushed for Mr Vance, with the latter reportedly telling Mr Trump his support was contingent on it. Vivek Ramaswamy made a 'formal presentation' for Mr Trump on why he should pick him, and was 'crushed' when Mr Trump suggested he appoint him secretary of homeland security, reportedly saying: 'You're a brown guy, so when you're tough on immigration, no one is going to get mad.' In response to Wolff's upcoming book, the Trump campaign collectively issued a statement last year. 'A number of us have received inquiries from the disgraced author Michael Wolff, whose previous work can only be described as fiction,' they said. 'He is a known peddler of fake news who routinely concocts situations, conversations, and conclusions that never happened. As a group, we have decided not to respond to his bad faith inquiries, and we encourage others to completely disregard whatever nonsense he eventually publishes. Consider this our blanket response to whatever he writes.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
The aide so obsessed with Trump, she sparked security concerns
Donald Trump's devoted aide Natalie Harp sparked Secret Service security concerns over her intense behaviour towards the Republican leader, it has been claimed. Ms Harp, 33, was one Mr Trump 's 'Charlie's Angels', a group of female staffers with whom he had an 'avuncular and flirtatious' relationship, according to an upcoming book. The former Right-wing broadcaster would write letters of adoration to Mr Trump, 78, that were obtained by his security detail, who noted 'the strangeness of her behaviour'. In one letter, Ms Harp reportedly told Mr Trump 'you are all that matters to me', and on the first day of his New York criminal trial she slipped him a letter quoting Bible verses and explaining she would be by his side. The revelations about Ms Harp are disclosed in Michael Wolff 's latest book, All or Nothing: How Trump Recaptured America, which looks at Mr Trump's political comeback from 2023 to his election victory. In the account, Wolff writes: 'The aggressiveness of her attention, and her fury when she was denied bestowing attention on Trump, was also of increasing concern to the security team.' Brushing aside concerns that Ms Harp, who was reportedly due to be given a desk outside the Oval Office in the White House, was a security concern, Mr Trump said: 'Nonsense... She just loves her president'. Eric Trump, Mr Trump's son, also questioned Ms Harp's closeness to his father and reportedly 'took a turn at trying to solve the situation in a set of annoyed queries to the legal team'. Describing her as a 'time bomb', Wolff writes: 'Even the Secret Service had now weighed in: Natalie was a security consideration. But no one was going to tell Trump that.' Ms Harp sat behind Mr Trump in court every day during his criminal trial and became known as the 'human printer' because she would carry a portable device to hand Mr Trump a steady stream of flattering stories held together by gold paper clips. So devoted was Ms Harp – who credits Mr Trump with saving her life through his Right to Try law, which she says allowed her to access experiential treatment for a rare bone cancer – Wolff claims that she offered to go to prison for the US president in a bid to circumvent the gag order imposed by a the judge. 'In the third week of the trial, lawyers were stunned to hear Natalie – whose provocations were largely responsible for the gag order in the first place – offer a solution: She would post his attacks under her own name,' Wolff writes. ''I'll go to prison,' she announced. A bewildered legal team stared at her as though she had three eyes in her forehead.' The loyal aide is also understood to have put through an 'eye-popping' expense bill for a new wardrobe, insisting Mr Trump had told her to go shopping in preparation for being on camera more frequently. Ms Harp would help Mr Trump write his posts for Truth Social to the point that aides became confused over whether comments were 'her voice or his' and 'more and more, it was one voice'. Wolff's upcoming publication comes seven years after Fire and Fury, his controversial book about life inside the White House during the first Trump administration, which was denounced by the US president as being based on 'lies, misrepresentations and sources that don't exist'. Here are some other revelations set out in Wolff's latest book. Melania Trump The US president is said to have 'reluctantly' given up his second day of testimony at his civil fraud trial amid concerns he could be asked 'potentially embarrassing' questions about where Melania Trump actually lived. 'That profound question at the heart of Trumpworld, the answer to which no one quite knew, could get asked under oath: 'Where exactly does your wife live?'' Wolff writes. There has been speculation Mrs Trump resides in a separate flat in Trump Tower and Mr Trump could be pressed on how much time each of them spend in their multiple residences. 'To say the least, that arrangement, an American marriage on a coolly transactional basis, might be difficult to explain in open court and to 'family values' America,' Mr Wolff added. Mr Trump's relationship, or lack thereof, with his wife and her unwillingness to be part of his presidential run is a constant theme throughout the book. 'She f---ing hates him,' said one Mar-a-Lago source of Mrs Trump's feelings towards her husband and his family. The first lady was notably absent from the campaign trail, only making brief appearances at Mr Trump's Madison Square Garden rally in New York and at the Republican National Convention (RNC). After Mr Trump's first indictment, Jason Miller, Mr Trump's campaign advisor at the time, was reportedly sent to talk with Mrs Trump to make a 'pitch' about the importance of her standing by her husband. She is said to have replied: 'Nice try'. When the issue of Jill Biden 's planned appearance at the end of the first presidential debate was raised, 'no one had even proposed' the idea of Mrs Trump being there. Her appearance at the RNC had also seemed 'iffy', according to Wolff, who alleges she finally agreed to attend but would only arrive in the VIP box only after Mr Trump had left. On the night of the election, she would not appear on stage with her husband 'unless it was an outright win', Wolff writes. Trump's mugshot Mr Trump spent days practicing his pose for his now-infamous mug shot photo for his arraignment in the Georgia election subversion case, according to the book. 'He'd been practicing it for days – on the golf course, in the mirror, in front of the legal team, and among Bedminster [the Trump golf course in New Jersey] members', Wolff writes. 'It was a detail that had been left hanging, whether there would be or wouldn't be one... But Trump had been toying with the idea: A mug shot would make this indictment different from the others.' Wolff adds: 'He was in and out in no time – with the mug shot taken in an instant. But he was over the moon: he loved the picture. 'This looks so cool, this is a classic, this is iconic,' he kept pronouncing.' Elon Musk After Mr Trump's second Butler rally, during which Elon Musk stole the limelight with his eccentric on-stage leaps, Mr Trump said: 'what the f--- is wrong with this guy?' He also reportedly asked: 'And why doesn't his shirt fit?' Wolff describes Mr Musk as having inserted himself into the campaign with 'an ever-rising tide of bewildering, if not opaque, requests, orders, and recommendations from him or his people'. He says Mr Musk elevated the campaign 'in his own mind to a personal mission and a religious cause, with the Trump circle already anticipating the earth shaking when he and Trump invariably fall out'. In one moment recounted in the book, Mr Musk declines to speak to JD Vance, who he pushed as Mr Trump's vice-president pick, saying: 'I've really no interest in speaking to a vice-president'. Legal woes The jurors serving on Mr Trump's 'hush money' criminal trial were put off by the US president's 'bully boys' of Maga loyalists who would attend court to 'intimidate the jury'. In his book, Wolff identifies one of the jurors from the trial as Patrick Robson, a lawyer in Manhattan, who recounted the jury's sentiments to friends at a party. ' Matt Gaetz, glaring and smirking during his appearance behind Trump, had particularly seemed to try and stare them down', Wolff writes. He added that the 'lookalike' women on the stand and in Mr Trump's entourage had also been picked up. 'The impossible-to-miss Stepford Wife-ism and physical requirements, a creepy detail that, in a case fundamentally about sexual proclivities, supported the ick factor,' Wolff adds. The US president also reportedly asked whether the judge in his 'hush money' criminal case would take back his permission for Mr Trump to attend his son Barron 's graduation. Mr Trump, who saw his legal strategy as his media strategy, thought his son's offer to skip his high school graduation and attend court was 'sheer brilliance' and asked his lawyer Todd Blanche 'ruefully asked if they could get the judge to take back his permission'. First debate Joe Biden performed so badly in the presidential debate Mr Trump thought it was a Democrat 'set-up' and was contemplating ways to 'help save' him. Mr Trump sensed his opponent was not 'right' while he was on the debate stage, but did not know if it was obvious to everyone else. 'He would later tell people he thought the media was again going to cover up for Joe. And then he started to think he was going to look bad for pounding him too hard. 'Do I let up?', he wondered,' Wolff writes. Thinking Mr Biden's car-crash performance was a ploy to get rid of him as the Democratic nominee, Mr Trump 'was grasping for a strategy to help save Joe. But there wasn't one.' Coming off stage, Mr Trump reportedly said: 'That's it. They're going to swap him out.' Choosing his vice-president Mr Trump believed he could win the presidency without picking a vice-president and would have preferred to run alone, according to the book. 'I could win without a VP, and you know, honestly, I'd kind of prefer not to have one,' Mr Trump reportedly said as he mulled over his decision. The Republican leader had initially considered making Robert F Kennedy Jr his vice-president, and would ask people what they thought of a 'Trump-Kennedy ticket'. According to Wolff, he said: 'Just tell me how that sounds. Can you do better than that?' But Mr Trump's 'unofficial' feelers to the former Democrat were 'unofficially turned down', Wolff writes, a story the Trump campaign previously denied. Mr Trump was so unimpressed with the candidates to be his second in command that he did not make a decision until his plane touched down in Milwaukee before the RNC. He had wanted a woman for the role but had been disappointed there were no suitable contenders to pick from, after he ruled out Nikki Haley when she refused to drop out of the presidential race. Rupert Murdoch had wanted Mr Trump to pick Mike Pompeo and later backed Doug Burgum, but Donald Trump Jr and Mr Musk had pushed for Mr Vance, with the latter reportedly telling Mr Trump his support was contingent on it. Vivek Ramaswamy made a 'formal presentation' for Mr Trump on why he should pick him, and was 'crushed' when Mr Trump suggested he appoint him secretary of homeland security, reportedly saying: 'You're a brown guy, so when you're tough on immigration, no one is going to get mad.' 'Can only be described as fiction' In response to Wolff's upcoming book, the Trump campaign collectively issued a statement last year. 'A number of us have received inquiries from the disgraced author Michael Wolff, whose previous work can only be described as fiction,' they said. 'He is a known peddler of fake news who routinely concocts situations, conversations, and conclusions that never happened. As a group, we have decided not to respond to his bad faith inquiries, and we encourage others to completely disregard whatever nonsense he eventually publishes. Consider this our blanket response to whatever he writes.'
