World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reveals why she was talking to far-right Republicans

      by

      Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reveals why she was talking to far-right RepublicansNew York Democrat was seen speaking with rightwingers, one of whom once tweeted an anime-style video depicting him killing her During a succession of votes for House speaker on Tuesday, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was seen talking on the House floor with the far-right Republicans Matt Gaetz and Paul Gosar, the latter who once tweeted video depicting him slashing her in the neck with a sword.McCarthy faces long battle for House speaker after he falls short on third vote Read moreThe New York Democrat, a progressive star, told MSNBC: “In chaos, anything is possible, especially in this era.”The chaos in Congress on Tuesday concerned the California representative Kevin McCarthy’s attempt to become House speaker, against opposition from the right of his party.Gosar, from Arizona, was censured in November 2021 for tweeting an anime-style video of violence done to Ocasio-Cortez and Joe Biden.On Tuesday, he was among 20 Republicans opposing McCarthy by the third ballot. So was Gaetz of Florida, a ringleader who nominated Jim Jordan of Ohio, a rightwinger loyal to McCarthy, to give the rebels someone to vote for.Ocasio-Cortez, popularly known as AOC, was seen talking to Gosar and Gaetz. She told the Intercept her conversation with Gaetz was a “factcheck”.“McCarthy was suggesting he could get Dems to walk away to lower his threshold,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “And I factchecked and said absolutely not.”00:28To be speaker, any candidate must reach a majority of representatives present. At one point on Tuesday, Ocasio-Cortez was absent when her name was called. She voted, for Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the House, when those absent were called on again.Votes for speaker go on until they are resolved. The last multi-ballot process, in 1923, lasted three days. In 1855-56, it took months to resolve the issue.Ocasio-Cortez said she discussed adjournment strategy with Gosar.“Some of us in the House of Representatives are independent in certain ways from our party,” she told MSNBC. “And … these machinations are happening on the floor.“And sometimes the leadership of your party, in this case, the Republican party, will be making claims in order to try to twist arms and get people in line. And a lot of times, information and truth is currency.“So sometimes to be able to factcheck some of the claims that McCarthy is making, whether Democrats are going to defect or not, etc, is important in order to keep him honest and to keep people honest in general.”On Tuesday, the House adjourned after three ballots. It was scheduled to reconvene at noon on Wednesday.“I was honestly surprised,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “I did not think that Kevin McCarthy was going to have the votes in the first round, but I didn’t think that it was going to be as catastrophic for him as it actually was …“For him to have several months since the November elections and still not be able to clinch it, I think, is very much a testament to a lack of leadership.”McCarthy, she said, “failed as a coalition-builder, not once, not twice, but three times … And I’m not quite sure what he could or would do that would change the calculus between today and tomorrow.”TopicsAlexandria Ocasio-CortezHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressDemocratsRepublicansThe far rightUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Kevin McCarthy fails to become speaker of the House after three rounds of voting – video

      by

      Republican Kevin McCarthy faces a humiliating series of setbacks after rightwing members of his party refuse to back his bid for speaker. McCarthy fails to gain the necessary support after three rounds of voting, becoming the first nominee for speaker in 100 years who has not won the first vote for the gavel. The House will reconvene tomorrow

      McCarthy faces long battle for House speaker after he falls short on third vote More

    • 213 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Kevin McCarthy fails to become speaker of the House after three rounds of voting – video report

      by

      In a historic delay, the House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, was on Tuesday facing a protracted battle to secure the speaker’s gavel after failing to win the first three votes on the opening day of the new Congress. McCarthy is the first nominee for speaker in 100 years to fail to win the first vote for the gavel. The House will reconvene tomorrow for a fourth vote – and perhaps more

      McCarthy faces long battle for House speaker after he falls short on third vote More

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      George Santos: Brazil reactivates fraud case against fabulist congressman-elect

      by

      George Santos: Brazil reactivates fraud case against fabulist congressman-electRepublican is accused of using stolen checkbook and fake name at shop outside Rio de Janeiro in 2008 As the fabulist New York Republican representative-elect George Santos prepares to be sworn in on Tuesday, Brazilian prosecutors say they are reopening a criminal fraud case against him.Santos, who faces federal and state investigations involving possible criminal activity related to his two congressional campaigns, is accused of using a stolen checkbook and fake name at a clothing shop outside Rio de Janeiro in 2008, the New York Times reported on Monday citing court documents.House of lies: outrage as Republicans prepare to swear in fantasist SantosRead moreThe case languished for more than a decade, however, as Brazilian authorities did not know where Santos was.Santos reportedly told police in 2010 that he and his mother stole the checkbook from a man that she had once worked for, and then used it to make illicit purchases, per the Times.He seemed to come clean about the purported fraud to the store’s proprietor the next year on a Brazilian social media website, allegedly writing: “I know I screwed up, but I want to pay.”While a judge in Brazil greenlit a charge against Santos in 2011, he had already gone to the US. Because Brazilian authorities needed to officially notify him to the charges before the case could proceed, the case ground to a halt. Brazilian prosecutors will now file a petition in court asking that Santos respond to the charges, after which Brazil’s justice ministry will send it to the US justice department.If convicted, the maximum penalty is five years imprisonment as well as a fine, the New York Times said.Santos has insisted on his innocence. “I am not a criminal here – not here or in Brazil or any jurisdiction in the world,” he told the New York Post after the story was first revealed. “Absolutely not. That didn’t happen.”Santos has admitted to lying about integral parts of his biography, such as claims that he worked for Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, as well as completing college. “My sins here are embellishing my résumé. I’m sorry,” Santos said.He also tried to dispel criticism that he misrepresented having Jewish heritage. On Santos’s campaign website, he claimed that his mother was Jewish and that his grandparents fled the Nazi regime in the second world war.Santos is now claiming that he is “clearly Catholic”, but that his grandmother recounted being Jewish and later becoming Catholic. “I never claimed to be Jewish,” he told the newspaper. “Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background I said I was ‘Jew-ish’.”Santos has since faced calls to step down by some members of his own party. The Texas Republican representative Kevin Brady, formerly the ranking member of the House ways and means committee, said on Fox News that Santos “is certainly going to have to consider resigning”, while the outgoing Arkansas governor, Asa Hutchinson, recently said that Santos’s falsehoods were “unacceptable” and needed to be investigated by the ethics committee.TopicsRepublicansHouse of RepresentativesBrazilUS politicsAmericasnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      John Kerry: rich countries must respond to developing world anger over climate

      by

      John Kerry: rich countries must respond to developing world anger over climateUS climate envoy says there needs to be work on details of ‘loss and damage’ fund in 2023 People in developing countries are feeling increasingly angry and “victimised” by the climate crisis, the US climate envoy John Kerry has warned, and rich countries must respond urgently.“I’ve been chronicling the increased frustration and anger of island states and vulnerable countries and small African nations and others around the world that feel victimised by the fact that they are a minuscule component of emissions,” he said. “And yet [they are] paying a very high price. Seventeen of the 20 most affected countries in the world, by the climate crisis, are in Africa, and yet 48 sub-Saharan countries total 0.55% of all emissions.”The Cop27 UN climate summit in Egypt in November was nearly derailed by a bitter row between rich and poor nations over “loss and damage”, the term for the most severe impacts of climate disaster, and the means of rescuing and rebuilding poor nations afflicted by them.The US, the EU, the UK and other rich nations eventually agreed to a new fund for loss and damage, without saying how much money would be in the fund or where the finance would come from.Kerry said the US was committed to helping the developing world with loss and damage, but that the details of the fund would need more work in 2023.“How can you look somebody in the eye, with a straight face, and not accept the notion that there are damages, there are losses?” he asked. “We see them all around the world. You see them in heightened sea levels, we see them in fires, we see them in floods, in Pakistan and elsewhere. We see them in the higher intensity of storms.”But he added: “How you manage [loss and damage] is still at issue: how do you approach this challenge of the financial arrangements. But it was important to acknowledge that they’re there and we have to work at this in good faith.”Kerry was speaking to the Guardian in London in December. The White House faces severe problems in raising climate finance through Congress, with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives likely to prove unwilling to disburse funds. The likely difficulties were presaged in a finance bill passed just before Christmas, which contained less than $1bn in climate funds.At Cop27, Kerry suggested international markets for carbon offsets and the private sector might provide additional sources of funding. However, those discussions are at an early stage, and likely to be fraught.Next year’s Cop28 talks will be held in the United Arab Emirates, a major oil producer. Some have raised concerns that this could open up opportunities for oil lobbyists to slow progress. There were more than 630 fossil fuel lobbyists at Cop27 in Sharm el-Sheikh, and pushback from oil-producing countries prevented stronger resolutions from being passed on the phase-down of fossil fuels and on reaffirming the global target of limiting temperature rises to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.Kerry rebuffed such concerns. “I think it’s ideal that UAE, which is an oil- and gas-producing nation, has had the courage to stand up and say, ‘We’re going to lead a Cop that’s going to address this challenge,’” he said. “They’re on the cutting edge of a lot of [low-carbon technology], they’ve invested vast sums in renewable energy, they’re on the cutting edge of research into nuclear, green hydrogen, batteries,” he said. “I think it’s a really great statement that a country that has had great wealth produced as a result of the old energy economy is now looking to the new energy economy. And is going to be the site of an honest discussion about it.”While discussions on climate finance are urgently needed, cutting emissions must also be a key focus, Kerry insisted. “We can’t walk away from [that],” he said. “You can’t take a holiday [from cutting emissions] because if you do, you’re simply contributing much greater levels of loss and damage and making it harder for the planet as a whole to meet this crisis.”Kerry said he “regretted” that there “was not an adequate collective focus” on cutting emissions at Cop27. But he said that if countries met their commitments on emissions, the target of limiting temperature rises to 1.5C could still be met.‘Extreme event’: warm January weather breaks records across EuropeRead moreSome scientists and observers of the climate talks warned after Cop27 that the 1.5C target was being lost. Kerry rejected that view, but agreed that it would require far greater efforts.“[The 1.5C target] is on life support – it’s still feasible, but only if we make better choices,” he said. Not all of the G20 group of the world’s biggest economies, which are also responsible for about 80% of global emissions, were coming up with the necessary targets and measures to meet them, he said. Limiting heating to 1.5C was, he said, “within the realm of possibility, but only if we get countries to step up across the board”.US cooperation with China, the world’s biggest emitter, would be key to that, he added. “China presents a real challenge because of the levels of their overall emissions and their use of coal. We’ve got to find a way to work with China cooperatively.”TopicsClimate crisisJohn KerryCop27US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in World Politics

      Exploring Poland’s Refugee Crisis: Uncovering the Reasons for Neglect

      by

      The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Why did the US just ban TikTok from government-issued cellphones?

      by

      ExplainerWhy did the US just ban TikTok from government-issued cellphones?Trump tried to impose a total ban on the China-based app and some states have already prohibited its use on official devices The US government has approved an unprecedented ban on the use of TikTok on federal government devices. The restrictions – tucked into a spending bill just days before it was passed by Congress, and signed by Joe Biden on Thursday – add to growing uncertainty about the app’s future in the US amid a crackdown from state and federal lawmakers.Officials say the ban is necessary due to national security concerns about the China-based owner of the app, ByteDance. But it also leaves many questions unanswered. Here’s what you need to know.TikTok admits using its app to spy on reporters in effort to track leaksRead moreWhy did the ban happen?The US government has banned TikTok on federal government-issued devices due to national security concerns over its China-based parent company, ByteDance. The US fears that the Chinese government may leverage TikTok to access those devices and US user data. TikTok spokesperson Brooke Oberwetter said the company was “disappointed” that Congress moved forward with the proposal and that it was “a political gesture that will do nothing to advance national security interests”.The ban means that, in about two months, federal government employees will be required to remove TikTok from their government-issued devices unless they are using the app for national security or law enforcement activities.The director of the US Office of Management and Budget and other offices have 60 days to come up with standards and processes for all government employees to remove the app from their phones. Several federal agencies such as the White House and the defense, homeland security and state departments have already banned TikTok, so it won’t change anything for those employees. And earlier this week, Catherine Szpindor, the chief administrator of the House of Representatives, also instructed all staff and lawmakers to delete the app from their devices.How did we get here?US security concerns about TikTok have existed for years. Donald Trump first attempted, unsuccessfully, to ban TikTok in 2020, but bipartisan efforts to regulate and rein in use of the app reached a fever pitch in 2022 after news outlets reported ByteDance employees were accessing US TikTok user information.National security concerns were reinforced by warnings from the FBI director, Christopher Wray, that the Chinese government could use the app to gain access to US users’ devices. Several, predominantly Republican-led states – including Texas, South Dakota and Virginia – have also recently banned the use of TikTok on state government-issued devices.In April, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri introduced a similar ban to the one now taking effect, calling TikTok a “Trojan horse for the Chinese Communist party”. The measure, the contours of which were largely replicated in the ban that was passed on Friday, was unanimously approved by the Senate earlier in December.Have other countries taken similar actions against TikTok?While other countries such as Indonesia have imposed temporary bans on TikTok, the biggest country that continues to prohibit the use of the app is India. India permanently banned TikTok along with more than 50 other Chinese apps after a deadly border dispute with China, citing national security concerns. National bans in other countries have not lasted more than, at most, a few months.Should we be more worried about TikTok than other apps?It depends on whom you ask. Several digital privacy and civil advocacy groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Fight for the Future say while the potential for China to exploit access to TikTok is indeed concerning, other apps and services offer government entities, including in the US, similar access to user data.“Unless we’re also [going to] ban Twitter and Facebook and YouTube and Uber and Grubhub, this is pointless,” said the Fight for the Future director, Evan Greer. “Yes, it’s possibly a bit easier for the Chinese government to gain access to data through TikTok than other apps, but there’s just so many ways governments can get data from apps.”But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have introduced bills and applauded efforts to limit the use of TikTok. In addition to Hawley’s bill, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida introduced a bill to ban the company from operating in the US entirely. “This isn’t about creative videos – this is about an app that is collecting data on tens of millions of American children and adults every day,” Rubio said in a press release announcing the bipartisan bill.The Democratic senator Mark Warner of Virginia has also encouraged efforts to ban TikTok on government devices and called for more states to “take action to keep our government technology out of the CCP’s [Chinese Communist party’s] reach”.What are the geopolitical implications of this ban?The US has ramped up its efforts to address potential national security concerns from China over the last few years, including adding more China-based companies and entities to a commerce department blacklist limiting exports to those firms. The focus on TikTok is part of this larger campaign, but some groups warn that a ban on TikTok would lead to similar moves from China.“Blanket bans on apps based on a company’s foreign ownership will only hurt US businesses in the long run because countries could seek to block US online services over similar national security concerns,” said Gillian Diebold, a policy analyst at the Center for Data Innovation.Like other privacy advocates, Diebold said that “policymakers should pursue more promising solutions that address the underlying risks.“For example, to address data concerns, lawmakers should prioritize passing federal privacy legislation to protect consumer data that would explicitly require companies to disclose who they share data with and hold them accountable for those statements,” Diebold said.Could the US ever ban TikTok outright?There have been several attempts at banning TikTok from operating in the US entirely. Rubio’s bill, for instance, would block all of the company’s commercial operations in the US.But the viability of such bans have yet to be proved. Trump’s previous attempt to ban new users from downloading TikTok was blocked in court in part due to free speech concerns. The EFF general counsel, Kurt Opsahl, said a total ban is a violation of free speech and while Rubio’s bill and similar proposed laws to ban TikTok purportedly “protect America from China’s authoritarian government”, they actually adopt “one of the hallmarks of the Chinese internet strategy”.“A government is within its rights to set rules and restrictions on use of official devices it owns, but trying to ban TikTok from public use is something else entirely,” Opsahl said.“TikTok’s security, privacy and its relationship with the Chinese government is indeed concerning, but a total ban is not the answer,” he continued. “A total ban is not narrowly tailored to the least restrictive means to address the security and privacy concerns, and instead lays a censorial blow against the speech of millions of ordinary Americans.”TopicsTikTokUS CongressChinaInternetAppsAsia PacificUS politicsexplainersReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump tax returns: key takeaways from the records release

      by

      AnalysisTrump tax returns: key takeaways from the records releaseAssociated Press in WashingtonThe former president had a bank account in China, failed to donate in 2020 and claims Democrats ‘weaponized’ his taxes In one of its last acts under Democratic control, the House of Representatives on Friday released six years of Donald Trump’s tax returns, dating to 2015, the year he announced his presidential bid.Trump tax returns show China bank account as six years of records releasedRead moreThe thousands of pages of returns were the subject of a prolonged legal battle after Trump broke precedent by not releasing his tax returns while running for, and then occupying, the White House.Here are some key takeaways from a review of the documents:Trump had a bank account in ChinaDuring a 2020 presidential debate, Trump was asked about having a bank account in China. He said he closed it before he began his campaign for the White House four years earlier.“The bank account was in 2013. It was closed in 2015, I believe,” Trump said. “I was thinking about doing a deal in China. Like millions of other people, I was thinking about it. I decided not to do it.”The tax returns contradict that account. Trump reported a bank account in China in his returns for 2015, 2016 and 2017.The returns show accounts in other foreign countries including the UK, Ireland and St Martin in the Caribbean. By 2018, Trump had apparently closed all his overseas accounts other than the one in the UK, home to one of his flagship golf properties.The returns do not detail the amount of money held in those accounts.No reported charitable giving in 2020In the final year of his presidency, Trump reported making no charitable donations. That was in contrast to the prior two years, when Trump reported about $500,000 (£414,060) worth of donations. It is unclear if any of the figures include his pledge to donate his $400,000 presidential salary back to the US government. He reported donating $1.1m in 2016 and $1.8m in 2017.Money from the arts worldTrump collected a $77,808 annual pension from the Screen Actors Guild and a $6,543 pension in 2017 from another film and TV union, and reported acting residuals as high as $14,141 in 2015, according to the tax returns.Trump has made cameo appearances in various movies, notably Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, but his biggest on-screen success came with his reality TV shows The Apprentice and The Celebrity Apprentice.Trump reported paying a little more than $400,000 from 2015 to 2017 in “book writer” fees. In 2015, Trump published the book, Crippled America: How to Make America Great Again, with a ghostwriter. The same year, Trump reporting receiving $750,000 in fees for speaking engagements.Trump vows paybackTrump broke political tradition by not releasing his tax returns as a candidate or as president. Now Republicans warn that Democrats will pay a political price by releasing what is normally confidential information.Trump underscored that in a statement on Friday morning, after his returns were made public.Kayleigh McEnany a ‘liar and opportunist’, says former Trump aide Read more“The great USA divide will now grow far worse,” he said. “The Radical Left Democrats have weaponized everything, but remember, that is a dangerous two-way street!”Republicans on the House ways and means committee, which has jurisdiction over tax matters and released the Trump documents, warned that in the future the committee could release the returns of labor leaders or supreme court justices. Democrats countered with a proposal to require the release of tax returns by any presidential candidate – legislation that is unlikely to pass, given that Republicans take control of the House next week.Republicans cannot disclose Joe Biden’s tax returns – because they are already public. Biden resumed the longstanding bipartisan tradition of releasing his tax records, disclosing 22 years’ worth of filings during his 2020 campaign.TopicsDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS politicsUS taxationUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesDemocratsanalysisReuse this content More