World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      UN security council backs resolution calling for humanitarian pause in Gaza

      by

      Six weeks after the start of the war in Gaza, the UN security council has come together to back a resolution calling for “urgent extended humanitarian pauses for [a] sufficient number of days to allow aid access” to the embattled territory.The vote late on Wednesday overcame an impasse which saw four unsuccessful attempts to adopt a resolution.Malta drafted the resolution, which calls for humanitarian corridors across the Gaza Strip and urges the release of all hostages held by Hamas.The US and the UK, two potentially veto-wielding powers, abstained on the resolution on the grounds that although they supported the emphasis on humanitarian relief, they could not give their full support because it contained no explicit criticism of Hamas. Russia also abstained on the grounds that it made no mention of an immediate ceasefire, its top imperative.The resolution was passed with 12 votes in favour, and is the first UN resolution on the Israel-Palestine conflict since 2016.The Israeli foreign ministry said it rejected the resolution, prompting the Palestinian representative, Riyad Mansour, to ask the UN security council members what they intended to do in the face of that defiance.The US had last month blocked a similar if broader resolution, but appears to have been persuaded to shift to abstention by Arab states in the face of the scale of the civilian deaths and destruction in Gaza.UN resolutions are in theory legally binding, but are widely ignored, and the political significance lies in the US willingness to back a call for an extended humanitarian ceasefire, putting some pressure on its close ally Israel. The American decision may reflect its frustration with Israel’s campaign, including the attack on al-Shifa hospital, the largest medical facility in Gaza.Human Rights Watch claimed: “That the US finally stopped paralysing the security council on Israel and Palestine so this resolution on the plight of children in Gaza could move forward should be a wake-up call to Israeli authorities that global concern even amongst allies is strong.”The passage of the resolution is a relief for the UN since the security council’s collective failure to reach a consensus since 7 October has been a severe blow to multilateralism and diplomacy.The resolution calls for the UN secretary general, António Guterres, to monitor any ceasefire that is implemented.The final draft watered down language from a “demand” to a “call” for humanitarian pauses, prompting Russia to claim the mountain has laboured and brought forward a mouse. Russia said it feared the absence of an explicit call for a ceasefire will make it less likely that even humanitarian pauses will be implemented.The resolution also made a call, as opposed to a demand, for “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages held by Hamas and other groups”. The draft asks that “all parties comply with their obligations under international law, notably with regard to the protection of civilians, especially children”.In the four previous tries for security council approval, a Brazil-drafted resolution was vetoed by the United States, a US-drafted resolution was vetoed by Russia and China, and two Russian-drafted resolutions failed to get the minimum “yes” votes.The US envoy, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, justified its refusal to back the latest resolution saying: “There’s no excuse for failing to condemn these acts of terror. Let’s be crystal clear … Hamas set this conflict in motion.”The UK envoy to the UN, Dame Barbara Woodward, said: “It is impossible to comprehend the pain and the loss Palestinians civilians are enduring. Too many civilians including children are losing their lives.”She called for “a collective effort to get aid in as quickly as possible through as many routes as possible including food, water, medical supplies and fuel”. More

    • 213 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Xi Jinping: ‘not an option’ for US and China to turn backs on each other – live

      by

      “The China-US relationship, which is the most important bilateral relationship in the world, should be perceived and envisioned in a broad context of the accelerating global transformations,” Xi Jinping told Joe Biden.“China-US relationship has never been smooth sailing over the past 50 years or more and it always faces problems of one kind or another. Yet it has kept moving forward amid twists and turns.“For two large countries like China and the United States, turning their back on each other is not an option …“Planet earth is big enough for the two countries to succeed and one country’s success is an opportunity for the other,” Xi added.Singer Gwen Stefani is slated to be the headline performer at Joe Biden’s APEC reception this evening, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. In January, the pop songstress fell into hot water in January she told an Allure editor, ‘My God, I’m Japanese and I didn’t know it,’” in an interview.Paul Osaki, executive director of the Japanese Cultural and Community Center of Northern California, told the Chronicle:
      I hope her appearance at APEC is not related to her Harujuku Girls era or feelings about being Japanese. If they want representation of the Japanese culture at the reception, there are several Japanese cultural performing arts groups that are more authentic, not stereotypical and of actual Japanese ancestry.”
      Read the rest of the Chronicle’s coverage here.The lead-up to Xi Jinping’s first visit to the US since 2017 has been filled with meticulous planning including San Francisco encampment cleanups and pre-determined camera angles to capture the meeting of the two heads of state and specific seating arrangements, NBC News reports.
      “There is no detail too small,” Kurt Campbell, the White House coordinator for the Indo-Pacific, told the outlet.
      Any meeting between two heads of state involves a degree of pomp and circumstance, but President Joe Biden’s long-awaited sit-down with Xi on Wednesday is the product of a painstaking process to accommodate China’s many requests. The behind-the-scenes effort is a sign of Beijing’s anxiety over the optics that could result from Xi’s first visit to the U.S. in six years.
      Overall, China is looking for Xi’s trip to California to be seen as a “grand visit,” officials said.
      Read more about the visit preparation here:ABC’s senior White House correspondent Selina Wang reports that following Joe Biden and Xi Jinping’s opening remarks, she asked Xi in Mandarin: “Do you trust Biden?”
      He took out his translation earpiece to hear my question, looked at me, but didn’t respond,” Wang tweeted.
      Here is some color from the New York Times on the lush Filoli estate where Joe Biden and Xi Jinping are meeting (the location was largely kept a secret until a day before the bilateral):The Filoli estate, a grand house and garden on 654 acres of rolling green grounds along the California coast, has been a supporting character in the 1980s television drama “Dynasty” and the 2001 romantic comedy “The Wedding Planner.” It has been the venue for top-dollar nuptials of Facebook executives, and the public can tour the gardens.Just not on Wednesday.Top aides to President Biden have worked with Chinese officials for weeks to ensure that this manicured setting would be the perfect backdrop to host a diplomatic summit between Mr. Biden and President Xi Jinping of China — two men who share a deep skepticism of each other, but also a mutual belief that their countries must avoid allowing their diplomatic and military interactions to deteriorate from fierce competition into outright conflict…The site was appealing for a few reasons. It is set among the hills, one of the more isolated spots in a densely populated corner of California. The White House kept the location of the meeting secret until a day before, presumably to keep protesters from surrounding the venue. None were visible at the gates on Wednesday morning as Mr. Biden’s motorcade approached the locale, but some could be seen along the route from San Francisco.Filoli is a giant estate amid some of the most expensive real estate in the country, built in the early 20th century by a family that made its fortune in the California gold boom and wanted a retreat not far from San Francisco. William Bowers Bourn II, the original owner of the home, decided on the name “Filoli” by mixing together the first few letters of his personal motto: “Fight for a just cause. Love your Fellow Man. Live a Good Life.”Here are images coming through the newswires of Joe Biden greeting Xi Jinping in San Francisco in their first face-to-face meeting in a year: Joe Biden has welcomed Xi Jinping to San Francisco where the two leaders are meeting face-to-face for the first time in a year.As Xi stepped out of his bulletproof Hongqi sedan, Biden greeted the smiling Chinese president with a handshake and said: “Welcome.”The two then proceeded to pose briefly for photos before heading into their meeting hall where they were greeted by US officials including the secretary of state, Antony Blinken, the treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, the US’s special climate envoy, John Kerry, and the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan.Addressing Xi, Biden said:
      Mr President, we’ve known each other for a long time. We haven’t always agreed which [does] not surprise anyone but our meetings have always been candid, straightforward and useful … I value our conversation because I think it’s paramount that you and I understand each other clearly, leader to leader with no misconceptions or miscommunication …
      We have to ensure that competition does not veer into conflict. And we also have to manage it responsibly … That’s what the United States wants and what we intend to do … I also believe it’s what the world wants for both of us …
      We also have the responsibility to our people and the world to work together when we see it in our interest to do so. Critical global challenges we face from climate change to counter narcotics to artificial intelligence demand our joint efforts.”
      Addressing Biden, Xi said:
      The China-US relationship, which is the most important bilateral relationship in the world, should be perceived and envisioned in a broad context of the accelerating global transformations … It should develop in a way that benefits our two peoples and fulfils our responsibility for human progress.
      The China-US relationship has never been smooth sailing over the past 50 years or more and it always faces problems of one kind or another. Yet it has kept moving forward amid twists and turns. For two large countries like China and the United States, turning their back on each other is not an option …
      Planet Earth is big enough for the two countries to succeed … As long as [China and the US] respect each other, coexist in peace and pursue win-win cooperation, they will be fully capable of rising above differences and find the right way for the two major countries to get along with each other.”
      “The China-US relationship, which is the most important bilateral relationship in the world, should be perceived and envisioned in a broad context of the accelerating global transformations,” Xi Jinping told Joe Biden.“China-US relationship has never been smooth sailing over the past 50 years or more and it always faces problems of one kind or another. Yet it has kept moving forward amid twists and turns.“For two large countries like China and the United States, turning their back on each other is not an option …“Planet earth is big enough for the two countries to succeed and one country’s success is an opportunity for the other,” Xi added.“There’s no substitute to face-to-face discussions,” Joe Biden told Xi Jinping.“Mr. President, we have known each other for a long time. We haven’t always agreed … but our meetings have always been candid, straightforward and useful,” Biden said.“We have to ensure that competition does not veer into conflict. And we also have to manage it responsibly … and work together when we see it in our interest to do so,” he continued.He went on to mention “critical global challenges” including climate change. narcotics and artificial intelligence that the US seeks to address with China.Here is video of the moment Joe Biden greeted Xi Jinping in their first face-to-face meeting in a year: Joe Biden and Xi Jinping have made their way into the meeting hall.They were greeted by officials including the secretary of state, Antony Blinken, the treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, the US special climate envoy, John Kerry, as well as the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan.Xi Jinping has arrived ahead of his bilateral meeting with Joe Biden.He stepped out of his car and shook hands briefly with Biden before posing for photos.Joe Biden and Xi Jinping are expected to meet shortly.Stay tuned as we bring you a live feed of their official greeting.The San Francisco mayor, London Breed, shared her support for Joe Biden’s initiative to commit more federal funding to curtailing drug trafficking and supporting treatment, in light of the agreement between Biden and Xi aimed at the importation of fentanyl into the US.From London Breed’s X account:Delegates from multiple countries were blocked by protesters from entering Wednesday’s summit, the San Francisco Chronicle reported, citing protesters.Delegates from Thailand, China, and the Philippines were reportedly prevented from accessing the APEC conference, with protesters preventing attendees by forming a blockade.Protesters also blocked a motorcade of 10 vehicles, with police officers in riot gear standing by.Protesters tried to block people from entering the Apec summit in downtown San Francisco on Wednesday morning, with demonstrators heckling participants and blocking traffic near the gathering.The protest was organized by the No to Apec Coalition, which is made up of more than a hundred grassroot groups and says it “opposes Apec as a forum for corporations and institutions to push so-called ‘free trade’ to exploit their workers and put the benefits of corporations over the rights of nations and peoples.”Demonstrators numbered in the hundreds, CBS Bay Area reported.“Biden, Biden telling lies, you don’t care if the planet dies, some demonstrators chanted, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.The San Francisco city blocks where the summit is being held have seen multiple protests ahead of the meeting.On Tuesday, thousands gathered in the same area to demand a ceasefire in Gaza, denounce Israel’s invasion, and deplore the rising death toll.And on Sunday, thousands of demonstrators protesting various causes, including corporate profits, environmental abuses, poor working conditions and the Israel-Hamas war, joined forces in a march.Ahead of the meeting between Joe Biden and Xi Jinping today in San Francisco, the European Council on Foreign Relations has released the following results from a new global opinion poll conducted in 21 countries:
      There is widespread pessimism among citizens of the west. 47% of respondents in the United States are pessimistic about the future of their country.
      In contrast, in emerging and rising powers (including China) optimism prevails. Sixty-nine per cent of Chinese respondents are optimistic about their country, and this feeling was also evidenced among 86% of those surveyed in India, 74% in Indonesia and 54% in Russia.
      Chinese strength, globally, is most evidenced on economic matters. When asked if they feel closer to the US or China on trade, majorities in Russia (74%), Saudi Arabia (60%), South Africa (60%), Indonesia (53%) and Turkey (50%) selected China. Majorities in Saudi Arabia (64%), South Africa (58%), Brazil (52%), and Turkey (52%) also expressed acceptance for five types of Chinese economic presence in their countries, including ownership of sports teams, newspapers, tech companies and infrastructure.
      US leadership on the global stage is still important. If forced to choose, respondents almost everywhere in ECFR’s survey stated that they would prefer to be part of an American bloc rather than cooperating with China and its partners. This was the majority view in South Korea (82%), India (80%), Brazil (66%), South Africa (54%), Turkey (51%) and Saudi Arabia (50%).
      Texas’s Republican representative Troy Nehls has made a comment about the Chinese flags lining the streets of San Francisco ahead of Joe Biden and Xi Jinping’s meeting today, saying:
      “Chinese flags line the streets of Beijing to welcome President Xi Jinping.
      Just kidding. This is San Francisco.”
      The GOP has tweeted the following ahead of Joe Biden’s meeting with Xi Jinping later today, citing the suspected Chinese spy balloon that was shot down over the Atlantic in February:
      “Just this year, China was caught floating a spy balloon across the continental United States. Now Biden is welcoming Xi Jinping, President of China, to California with open arms.” More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Marjorie Taylor Greene claims Democrats failed to defend House from Capitol rioters

      by

      In a new book, the extremist Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene claims no Democrats stayed in the House chamber on January 6 to help defend it against rioters sent by Donald Trump to block the certification of Joe Biden’s election win – a claim one Democrat who did stay labeled “patently false”.Greene’s book, MTG, will be published next week. The Guardian obtained a copy.Describing January 6, Greene writes: “Several of the Republican congressmen said, ‘We’re going to stay right here and defend the House chamber.’ As they began barricading the door with furniture, I noticed not one Democrat was willing to stay to defend the chamber.”But that version of events sits in stark contrast to others prominently including that of Jason Crow of Colorado, a Democratic congressman and former US army ranger who worked to help fellow representatives before being, by his own description, the last politician to leave.Speaking to the Denver Post after the riot, Crow said: “They evacuated the folks on the floor but those of us in the gallery actually got trapped for like 20 minutes as the rioters stormed the stairwells and the doors.“So, Capitol police actually locked the doors of the chamber and started piling furniture up on the doors to barricade them, while holding their guns out.“I got into ranger mode a little bit. Most of the members didn’t know how to use the emergency masks, so I was helping them get their emergency masks out of the bags and helped instruct a bunch of folks on how to put it on and how to use it. I wasn’t going to leave the House floor until every member was gone, so I waited until we were able to get everybody out.”On Wednesday, Crow told the Guardian: “Marjorie Taylor Greene doesn’t exist in the same reality as the rest of us. For those of us who were there on January 6 and actually defended the chamber from violent insurrectionists, her view is patently false. She doesn’t know what she’s talking about.”Other Democrats have described how they tried to help.In an oral history of January 6 by Business Insider, Raúl Grijalva, of Arizona, said: “You also saw members doing their part to facilitate our evacuation – Seth Moulton [of Massachusetts, a marines veteran], Ruben Gallego, and four or five others … who assumed a role of helping us to get out of there and working with the Capitol police to make sure that we were all safe.”Gallego, also of Arizona and a former marine, told the same site: “Eventually what I did was I jumped up on a table and started giving instructions to people about how to open up the gas mask. We start seeing the doors being barricaded with furniture. We start hearing the noise of people – the insurrectionists – pounding on doors. Especially in the gallery.”Greene’s book pursues her familiar conspiracy theory-laced invective, taking shots at targets including Democrats, the media and Lauren Boebert, another Republican extremist with whom Greene has fallen out.Discussing January 6, three days after her swearing-in, Greene claims to have worked “tirelessly” on objections to key state results but to have been “utterly shocked” when rioters breached the Capitol.Some Republicans, she says “carried concealed weapons and were ready to be good guys with guns, defending themselves and others if need be” – despite guns being banned in the House chamber. Greene says she tried to stay close to Clay Higgins of Louisiana, a former law enforcement officer who was “one of the armed Republican members of Congress exercising his second amendment rights that day”.Describing instructions to put on hoods against possible exposure to teargas, Greene says she did not do so as she would not have been able to clearly hear or see.“Many of the Democrats obligingly put theirs on and some were lying on the floor, hysterical,” she writes, describing a chamber “in complete and utter disarray”.Pictures of the House on January 6 show Crow comforting Susan Wild of Pennsylvania, a Republican lying on the gallery floor. Other pictures show Republicans including Troy Nehls of Texas and Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma helping to barricade doors.According to the House January 6 committee, evacuation happened in stages. Democratic leaders including the speaker, Nancy Pelosi, were removed at the same time as Mike Pence, the vice-president. Kevin McCarthy, then Republican minority leader, soon followed. Evacuation of the rest of the House began at 2.38pm, members escaping as a rioter, Ashli Babbitt, was fatally shot by police.“Members in the House gallery were evacuated after the members on the House floor,” the report says. “Congressional members in the gallery had to wait to be evacuated because rioters were still roaming the hallways right outside the chamber.“At 2.49pm, as members were trying to evacuate the House gallery, the [Capitol police] … cleared the hallways with long rifles so that the members could be escorted to safety … surveillance footage shows several rioters lying on the ground, with long rifles pointed at them, as members evacuate. By 3pm, the area had been cleared and members were evacuated … to a secure location.”Greene claims rioters have since been mistreated. But she is not finished. A noted fitness enthusiast, she chooses to mock another Democrat, Jerry Nadler of New York, then the 73-year-old chair of the House judiciary committee.“I saw that it was a problem that so many of our representatives were older and physically unable to run,” Greene writes. “How do you get them to safety when they cannot move quickly because of age, physical ailments or lack of physical fitness?“Oh, and many were hysterical, with the plastic bags over their heads in fear of teargas and the little electric fans running so they couldn’t hear, either. Just imagine Jerry Nadler trying to run for safety!” More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas legislators pass hardline immigration bill denounced as racist

      by

      The Texas governor, Greg Abbott, is expected to sign a bill that would make crossing into the state without documentation a crime, one of the harshest immigration policies in the US to date.The bill, SB 4, was passed by the Texas house and is awaiting final approval from Abbott.On Wednesday, Abbott said that he looked forward to signing the bill, in a post to X, formally known as Twitter.“I look forward to signing Senate Bill 4, which creates penalties for illegal entry into Texas & authorizes the removal of illegal immigrants apprehended at the border,” Abbott said.In recent months, Abbott, a Republican, has launched a series of controversial programs targeting migrants, including bussing migrants to Democratic-led cities without proper coordination and Operation Lone Star, a multimillion-dollar initiative that has placed razor wire and thousands of troops at the Texas-Mexico border.SB 4 makes it unlawful for anyone to cross into Texas from another country without papers a state misdemeanor that is punishable by up to two years in prison.The law also requires a state judge to order a person to return to the country they crossed from in lieu of prosecution.If a person refuses to return, they could face a felony charge and up to 20 years in prison.The bill also gives Texas officers the ability to arrest anyone who they believe has crossed into the state illegally, a fact that advocates and Democrats have decried as racist.Legal advocates have questioned the bill’s legality, as removing noncitizens from the US falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Experts have also warned that the new bill could cause a dispute with Mexico, as the country and others could choose not to cooperate with state officials.Democratic Texas representatives and advocates soundly denounced the bill as problematic and a waste of state funds.The Texas representative Jolanda Jones called SB 4 and its supporters “racist”.“It’s not all right to be racist. I will stop pulling the race card when you stop being racist,” she said.The Texas representative Ramón Romero Jr posted a video on social media denouncing the passing of SB 4 and emphasizing the importance of winning elections.“We fought really hard but sadly on issues like this, their ears are closed on the other side,” Romero said in a video posted to X, referring to Republicans. “We can say anything and they’re just not listening.”In a statement to X, the Texas Civil Rights Project, a social justice non-profit, said the bill was “creating an entirely new, separate, unequal immigration system in the US” and allowing police to “be both judge and jury to determine a person’s right to stay in the US”.Immigrant rights organizations also rallied outside of the Texas House on Tuesday to protest the vote on SB 4.SB 4 was considered as apart of a separate legislative session requested by Abbott for several anti-immigration bills. More

    • 238 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is facing multiple charges – but there is one that could seriously harm his reputation | Emma Brockes

      by

      We have been here before countless times: prematurely anticipating the end of Donald Trump on the basis of actions or implications that, for anyone else, would have proven fatal long ago. Quick recap: the former president is facing four separate criminal cases, involving 91 felony counts, in four separate states; plus a civil fraud case currently being heard in Manhattan; plus a second defamation suit brought by the writer E Jean Carroll, whom earlier this year Trump was found guilty of sexually assaulting and defaming and ordered to pay $5m. Plus a clutch of broken gag orders and the resultant fines.The question in all of these cases is less whether Trump will be found guilty than whether there is any outcome whatsoever that would be capable of preventing him from standing for president next year, or – the more depressing calculation, in some ways – of damaging his chances, if not. Trump voters have, historically, proven even more resistant than the rest of us to changing their minds when the evidence changes. And Trump himself has an almost preternatural gift for turning the most unpromising situations to his advantage. Even so, there may, within the detail of these extremely wide-ranging cases, be some aspects that are more harmful to Trump than others.For the former president, the most straightforwardly dangerous criminal trial – that is the one that is, simultaneously, the most serious and also appears to involve the most clear-cut evidence against him – is the so-called classified documents case, brought in Florida by special counsel Jack Smith. This case, which is due to be heard next May, ranges across 40 felony charges, the most serious of which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, which perhaps explains why Trump has described Smith variously as “deranged”, a “thug” and a “Trump hater”. Trump’s defence – that he “un-classified” the documents before removing them from the White House – is seemingly contradicted by, for example, audio evidence of Trump saying he could have declassified “secret” documents, but didn’t.And, yet, as a possible end to Trump’s political hopes the case isn’t as open and shut as it seems. For a start, it is slated to come before Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, and to be heard by a jury that will be selected from Florida districts that voted heavily for Trump. It is also a federal prosecution, meaning that should Trump’s lawyers manage to push the start date beyond the November election, and should Trump be returned to office, he could conceivably instruct the justice department to shut the whole thing down until his tenure expires.That principle applies similarly to two of the other criminal cases: the hush money trial brought by Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, which is scheduled for March next year and is in some ways the flimsiest of the four criminal trials, resting as it does on fiddly definitions around improper campaign donations. (Briefly: if Trump paid hush money to Stormy Daniels via his fixer, Michael Cohen, then lied about it, the DA’s office will try to contend that this constitutes not only a misdemeanour crime of cover-up, but a more serious felony entailing “intent to defraud” in the interests of furthering Trump’s election prospects. The $130,000 paid to Daniels may then be framed as an improper campaign donation.)Much more serious for Trump is the four-count indictment for election interference, also being brought by Smith, in relation to Trump’s actions in the run-up to the storming of the Capitol on 6 January 2021. The most damning of those charges – that Trump tried to subvert democracy and disenfranchise voters – is much harder to prove than anything he will face in the documents case. But, unlike Smith’s Florida case, this one will be heard in the District of Columbia, where the jury will be pulled from a population heaving with Democrats. It is also set for March, presenting the Republican frontrunner with mind-boggling logistical and psychological (where even to begin with this) issues.That leaves what, on the surface, looks like the most local and least impressive case against Trump, which is the Georgia election interference case, alleging a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election result in Georgia via a pressure campaign and for which no date has yet been set. Oddly, of the four criminal cases, it is this case that is the most promising in terms of its potential to scupper Trump, purely because it has been brought under state not federal law, and as such lies beyond the reach of a sitting president.Those are the criminal trials. On the evidence of Trump’s polling numbers, which over the past year have risen undisturbed as the 91 indictments rolled in, there is nothing much on paper to indicate that Trump is in trouble. Indeed, if being described by a judge, as Trump was earlier this year, as guilty of rape isn’t a dealbreaker for his supporters, then the small matter of alleged treason isn’t likely to move the needle either.For my money, it is the current civil trial in New York, brought by the New York state attorney general, Letitia James, that threatens Trump’s reputation most acutely and right where it hurts. The suit carries no threat of prison or disruption to Trump’s presidential bid. But in the short term it does threaten to unseat his reputation as a businessman of any standing and strip him of his licence to operate a business in New York.A judge has already found him guilty of fraud and this hearing is purely to assess the level of damages. Unlike all the other legal actions against Trump, which he has apparently successfully been able to pass off as part of some vast conspiracy against him, the fraud case, in which it is alleged that he inflated the value of his businesses to secure better loan rates, lands differently. It makes Trump look shabby, small-time, crooked and crucially, given the nature of his appeal, not nearly as wealthy as he says he is.
      Emma Brockes is a Guardian columnist
      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      The shadow of Trump: inside the 17 November Guardian Weekly

      by

      It couldn’t happen again … could it? With less than a year to the next US presidential election, polls suggest the presumed Republican nominee Donald Trump would beat the Democratic incumbent Joe Biden in a clutch of key swing states. David Smith weighs up how a Trump return to the White House might look. Lloyd Green considers how a strong pro-abortion rights vote in state elections last week could yet signal a significant twist. And, amid growing Democratic party jitters over Biden’s low ratings, Richard Luscombe asks if the California governor Gavin Newsom is running a shadow campaign.British politics was stunned this week by the return of former prime minister David Cameron, parachuted back into government as the new foreign secretary. Pippa Crerar and Patrick Wintour weigh up what it says about the direction of the Tory government, home and abroad. And in Opinion, Polly Toynbee bids a not-so fond farewell to Suella Braverman, the deeply divisive home secretary who was sacked by Rishi Sunak on the same day.As fierce fighting between Hamas militants and the Israeli army encroached on Gaza hospitals this week, Ruth Michaelson reports on the dire situation at Dar al-Shifa hospital, where patients are dying due to energy shortages and dwindling supplies. And as Benjamin Netanyahu’s reputation plummets in Israel, Peter Beaumont asks who – or what – might succeed the controversial prime minister.Sweden has some of the world’s most progressive policies around work and wellbeing, with generous parental leave and bonuses for taking breaks the norm. Leah Harper settles down for a spot of fika and asks what the rest of us could learn from such practices.Features include an extract from Barbra Streisand’s new memoir where, among other things, the American singer and actor recounts meeting the then Prince Charles and what happened when she cloned her pet dog.In Culture, our man Rhik Samadder tries staying alive in the new reality version of the hit Netflix show Squid Game. And, from Eddie Izzard to Volodymyr Zelenskiy, there’s a look at the comedians who’ve moved from the world of standup to politics.Get the Guardian Weekly magazine delivered to your home address More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Ukraine MP linked to Rudy Giuliani charged with colluding with Russia

      by

      Ukrainian authorities have arrested a controversial MP who was at the heart of efforts by Rudy Giuliani to dig up compromising material about Joe Biden, and placed him in pre-trial detention.Oleksandr Dubinsky, 42, is accused of collusion with Russia and of spreading “fake” information about Ukraine’s political and military leadership, in particular related to his claims about supposed Ukrainian interference in US political processes.Ukrainian authorities announced the charges on Monday, and on Tuesday Dubinsky appeared in court in Kyiv, in a closed session.Later, the politician himself published a video on his Telegram account saying he had been sent to pre-trial detention for 60 days. He faces up to 15 years in jail if found guilty.Dubinsky was elected as an MP from president Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s Servant of the People party in 2019, but he was later kicked out of the party, accused of insubordination.Ukraine’s SBU intelligence service said on Monday it had arrested an MP on suspicion of treason, and said the suspect had allegedly been “conducting information and subversive activities in favour of Russia”.Former MP Andriy Derkach, and former prosecutor Kostiantyn Kulych, are also accused of being part of the network. Both are believed to be in hiding outside Ukraine.“The main task of this organisation was to take advantage of the tense political situation in Ukraine and discredit our state in the international arena,” the SBU statement said.“For this, the group received money from Russian military intelligence. This financing amounted to more than $10m [£8m].”.In late 2019, as impeachment charges against Donald Trump were being drafted, Dubinsky and Derkach held a series of press conferences in Kyiv, claiming they had uncovered corruption at a Ukrainian company where Biden’s son Hunter had previously sat on the board of directors.Giuliani, who was then the president’s personal lawyer, travelled to Ukraine and met Dubinsky and Derkach. Giuliani was looking for material that would exonerate Trump over allegations he had pressed Zelenskiy to launch an investigation into the Bidens and Ukraine. Giuliani also hoped to uncover evidence of corruption by the Bidens.In 2020, US authorities claimed Derkach had been an “active Russian agent” for more than a decade.In 2021, the US placed Dubinsky on a sanctions list, accusing him of working as part of a “Russia-linked foreign influence network” and of trying to undermine Biden’s 2020 election campaign. After the US designation, Dubinsky was kicked out of Zelenskiy’s party but continued to work as an MP.Dubinsky has long been considered a close ally of Ihor Kolomoisky, a billionaire oligarch who was a strong backer of Zelenskiy before his run for the presidency. Kolomoisky was arrested earlier this year on suspicion of fraud and money laundering.Dubinsky has denied all the charges and said evidence presented in the prosecution’s case was either falsified or obtained under pressure.“What is happening now is a simple matter. Political persecution for criticising the authorities, which I have been doing throughout my parliamentary career,” Dubinsky said in another video. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump can appear on Republican primary ballot in Michigan, judge rules

      by

      Donald Trump can appear on the ballot for the Republican primary in Michigan, a state judge ruled on Tuesday, a setback to challengers who argue he is constitutionally disqualified from being president because of his actions on 6 January 2021.The lawsuit is one of several that left-leaning groups have filed across the country arguing that section 3 of the 14th amendment bars Trump from holding office. The provision says anyone who takes an oath to the United States and then engages in “insurrection” or “rebellion” against the nation cannot hold office unless Congress votes by two-thirds majority to allow them. The measure was adopted after the civil war and has not been tested.In Michigan, that language does not prevent a candidate from appearing on the ballot for a party primary for the purposes of selecting a nominee, Judge James Robert Redford, of the Michigan court of claims, ruled on Tuesday. While he left the door open to a challenge should Trump become the nominee, he suggested courts could not prevent Trump from appearing on the ballot because the core question in the matter was one for Congress, not judges.“The questions involved are by their nature political,” Redford wrote in his opinion. “It takes the decision of whether there was a rebellion of insurrection and whether or not someone participated in it from the Congress, a body made up of elected representatives of the people of every state in the nation, and gives it to but one single judicial officer.”Ron Fein, the legal director for Free Speech for People, who represented the challengers in the case, said the court “adopted a discredited theory that claims that only Congress can decide whether a presidential candidate fails to meet constitutional qualifications for office”.Fein said his group would appeal the case to the Michigan supreme court and seek to bypass the Michigan court of appeals. Democrats have a 4-3 majority on the bench there. The Michigan case is being closely watched because it is one of several battleground states critical for a presidential candidate to win next year.“The Michigan supreme court should reverse this badly reasoned lower-court decision. While our appeal is pending, the trial court’s decision isn’t binding on any other court, and we continue our current and planned legal actions in other states to enforce section 3 of the 14th amendment against Donald Trump,” Fein said in a statement.Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, praised the ruling.“Each and every one of these ridiculous cases have LOST because they are all un-constitutional leftwing fantasies orchestrated by monied allies of the Biden campaign seeking to turn the election over to the courts and deny the American people the right to choose their next president,” he said in a statement.The Michigan secretary of state, Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat who was once an election law professor, tweeted she was “gratified that today’s court ruling affirms my position that under Michigan law anyone generally advocated by the news media to be a candidate for the Republican and Democratic nomination for president must be listed on the February 2024 primary ballot”.She added: “As the court notes, any consideration of a candidate’s eligibility to serve under the 14th amendment of the constitution should occur after they are nominated or elected.”Last week, the Minnesota supreme court also dismissed a 14th-amendment challenge, saying the constitutional provision could not block Trump from appearing on a primary ballot. A trial court in Colorado also oversaw a five-day evidentiary hearing on a challenge there and is expected to issue a ruling soon.Legal experts widely expect the ruling to be decided by the US supreme court, to which Trump appointed three of the six conservative justices that comprise a supermajority. More