More stories

  • in

    Top Republicans held ‘atrocious’ Trump responsible for Capitol attack, book says

    Top Republicans held ‘atrocious’ Trump responsible for Capitol attack, book saysNew book reveals post-insurrection anger from Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy, who said of Trump: ‘I’ve had it with this guy’ In the days after the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol, Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell, the two top Republican leaders in Congress, privately told associates that they believed Donald Trump should be held responsible for the attack.A new report from the New York Times, the reporting for which comes from a forthcoming book by reporters Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns called This Will Not Pass: Trump, Biden and the Battle for America’s Future, details private conversations that McCarthy and McConnell had with colleagues revealing the extent of their anger toward Trump.“I’ve had it with this guy,” McCarthy reportedly told a group of Republicans in the immediate aftermath of the attack.The leaders floated the idea of impeachment with their colleagues, though both men ultimately voted to acquit Trump in Democratic-led impeachment proceedings.On a phone call with several top House Republicans, McCarthy allegedly said that Trump had been “atrocious and totally wrong” and blamed him for “inciting people”. He inquired about invoking the 25th amendment, which involves the removal of a president from office.McCarthy, the book reports, went on to tell colleagues that his plan was to tell Trump to resign. “What he did is unacceptable. Nobody can defend it and nobody should defend it,” he said.Other top Republicans chimed in supporting the idea of moving away from Trump, including Steve Scalise of Louisiana, who said that the party should think of a “post-Trump Republican House” and Tom Emmer of Minnesota, who brought up the possibility of censuring the president. Scalise and Emmer voted against Trump’s impeachment.McCarthy also spoke of his wish that the big tech companies would de-platform Republican lawmakers, as Twitter and Facebook did with Trump following the insurrection, who had also played a role in stoking the insurrection.“We can’t put up with that,” McCarthy said. “Can’t they take their Twitter accounts away, too?”A spokesperson for McCarthy told the New York Times that McCarthy “never said that particularly members should be removed from Twitter”.It appears that McCarthy and other top Republicans heeded more to warnings that their Republican base would retaliate if House members publicly denounced Trump. Bill Johnson, a congressman from Ohio, told McCarthy that his voters would “go ballistic” if they criticized Trump.“I’m just telling you that that’s the kind of thing that we’re dealing with, with out base,” Johnson reportedly said.In a statement to the New York Times, a spokesperson for McCarthy said that he “never said he’d call Trump to say he should resign”.Meanwhile, McConnell met with two longtime advisers over lunch in Kentucky on January 11, five days after the insurrection. He spoke to the men about the upcoming impeachment proceedings led by the Democrats.“The Democrats are going to take care of the son of a bitch for us,” McConnell said. “If this isn’t impeachable, I don’t know what is.”Several senior Republican senators believed that McConnell was leaning toward impeachment once the proceedings would get to the Senate. Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer told associates that he believed McConnell’s frustration with Trump could push him toward impeachment, but said “I don’t trust him, and I would not count on it.”While McCarthy and McConnell acknowledged Trump’s responsibility in the immediate aftermath of the insurrection, both men quickly went back to publicly supporting Trump. In April 2021, McCarthy told Fox News that Trump was unaware that the attack was happening until McCarthy broke the news to him.“He didn’t see it, but he ended the call … telling me he’ll put something out to make sure to stop this.”As the special House panel investigating the attack prepares to hold public hearings next month, McCarthy has denounced the committee’s investigation, refusing to cooperate with its inquiry on conversations the leader had with Trump in the days after the attack.McConnell, meanwhile, has taken a more supportive stance of the committee, saying in December that he believes their investigation is “something the public needs to know”. Still, the Senate minority leader said he would “absolutely” support Trump if he was the Republican presidential nominee in 2024.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Joe Biden supports US Rugby World Cup bid in letter to Bill Beaumont

    Joe Biden supports US Rugby World Cup bid in letter to Bill BeaumontPresident says US can deliver ‘most successful’ rugby events in history, for men in 2031 and women in 2033, with decision in May A letter from Joe Biden to Sir Bill Beaumont, chairman of World Rugby, was part of a finalised World Cup package submitted by USA Rugby in its bid to host the men’s event in 2031 and the women two years later.World Rugby is due to announce the success or not of the US bid on 12 May. Alan Gilpin, chief executive of the governing body, has said World Rugby believes it “can deliver the right outcomes with this hosting plan”.Rugby fan Biden wishes Ireland luck against All Blacks – and celebrates winRead moreIn his letter to Beaumont, Biden wrote: “The United States strongly supports the effort to bring the 2031 Menʼs Rugby World Cup Tournament and the 2033 Womenʼs Rugby World Cup Tournament to our country and looks forward to working with Rugby World Cup Limited to help deliver the most successful Rugby World Cups in history”.The president also pledged “to promote the development of rugby in the United States and worldwide in a sustainable and humanitarian manner, without any discrimination whatsoever, regardless of race, nationality or creed”, and says the US government will work to ensure that “any adverse impacts on the environment as a result of the tournaments are minimised”.Biden said governmental guarantees sought by World Rugby would be “executed by officials who have the competence and authority” to do so, or in co-operation with states and private entities. The US will also seek the enactment of any necessary legislation, the letter says.Biden’s Democrats stand to lose control of Congress to Republicans this November. There is however a bipartisan Congressional Rugby Caucus which supports the World Cup bid.In the formal letter, Biden does not mention his own rugby experience as a player at law school and as a fan, notably of Ireland. The president has often expressed his love for the game and recently hosted a White House visit from the former Ireland and Lions full-back Rob Kearney, a cousin.After Kearney’s visit, when Biden’s Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, made his own White House visit, a signed rugby ball was visible in the Oval Office. In a tweet, Kearney shared a picture of himself giving Biden the ball before “kicking practice in the garden”.I spy a rugby ball in the Oval Office 👀 pic.twitter.com/UymjnGnzV9— USA Rugby (@USARugby) April 8, 2022
    In statements accompanying the release of Biden’s letter, Jim Brown, the chair of the USA Rugby World Cup bid, said: “We are honoured and humbled that President Biden shares our optimism not only about hosting upcoming Rugby World Cups in the United States, but also about the vast potential the sport has in this country.“The support of federal, state and local governments is fundamental to the successful planning and execution of a world-class event and this strong endorsement by the president marks a huge step forward in our plans to host incredible Rugby World Cup tournaments in the United States in 2031 and 2033.”Ross Young, the chief executive of USA Rugby, said: “We now optimistically look forward to World Rugbyʼs final decision in less than a month. The potential to grow the sport of rugby in the United States is truly immense, and weʼre all excitedly awaiting next steps should the US be awarded the opportunity to host.”No other host will be announced for the men’s event in 2031, should the US not succeed. Australia is set to be named host for 2027. The next men’s tournament is in France next year. The US have not yet qualified, needing to beat Chile this summer. The next women’s World Cup kicks-off in New Zealand in October.On Wednesday, USA Rugby also released a list of cities pursuing hosting rights for Rugby World Cup games.All Blacks run up three figures but it’s not all doom and gloom for USA | Martin PengellyRead moreOther cities could be used. The cities listed were: Atlanta, Austin, Baltimore, Birmingham, Boston, Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, Nashville, New York/New Jersey, Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, San Diego, San Francisco Bay Area, Seattle and Washington DC.Washington – or in fact Landover, Maryland, home of the Commanders NFL team – hosted the US Eagles men’s team last October. A showpiece game against New Zealand ended in defeat by 104-14 but attracted a crowd of around 40,000.Bid materials sent to World Rugby alongside the Biden letter, the US bid said, include “a preliminary budget structure, comprehensive data on the candidate host cities and stadiums [and] an initial rugby development and legacy proposal to elevate growth across all levels of the game in the United States”.TopicsRugby World CupJoe BidenBiden administrationWorld RugbyRugby unionUSA rugby union teamSport politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    US congressman urges Biden to ban six UK lawyers for ‘enabling’ oligarchs

    US congressman urges Biden to ban six UK lawyers for ‘enabling’ oligarchsSteve Cohen says the US must establish ‘deterrents’ against lawyers accused of carrying out ‘unscrupulous work’ A US congressman has urged the Biden administration to ban six British lawyers from entering the US amid accusations that the lawyers have “enabled” “Putin’s” oligarchs by engaging in “abusive” lawsuits against journalists as part of an alleged effort to silence them.Steve Cohen, a Democratic congressman from Tennessee, said in a letter to the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, that the US needed to begin establishing “deterrents” against lawyers whom he accused of performing “unscrupulous work” that ultimately undermined democratic values.“Despite our close ties with the United Kingdom, the nature of its libel laws and the vast amount of blood money in its financial system make it an ideal place for oligarchs to abuse the law to harass and intimidate,” Cohen wrote. He also cc’ed the US attorney general, Merrick Garland.Most of the six lawyers named by Cohen have represented Russian interests who have pursued legal action against journalists, publishers and authors in the UK in connection to their reporting on Russia-related matters.Four lawyers named in the letter were involved in legal action against Catherine Belton, a former journalist at the Financial Times, and her publisher HarperCollins, who were sued following the publication of her book Putin’s People. The lawyers include: Nigel Tait of Carter-Ruck, John Kelly of Harbottle & Lewis, Hugh Tomlinson, and Geraldine Proudler of CMS.A letter published by 19 free press organisations last November expressed “serious concern” at the legal proceedings, which were brought at the time by the now-sanctioned Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich; Rosneft, the Russian energy company, and three other Russian billionaires. The organisations said they believed the cases against Belton and HarperCollins were so-called Slapps, a “form of legal harassment used by wealthy and powerful entities to silence journalists”.HarperCollins settled the claims, agreeing to make a number of changes to the text.Keith Schilling of Schillings was accused in Cohen’s letter of being “well known for bringing abusive suits against journalists” and working “tirelessly” to protect the Malaysian fugitive Jho Low, who has been accused by US prosecutors of running a money-laundering scheme in connection to the Malaysian state investment fund 1MDB.Another lawyer, Shlomo Rechtschaffen, who is representing Walter Soriano – who was accused by Cohen of being an “enabler” of Oleg Deripaska, Abramovich and Dmitry Rybolovlev – has according to Cohen filed an allegedly “abusive” lawsuit against the American journalist Scott Stedman.Cohen said the visa denials could be implemented under a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act which calls for “anti-kleptocracy and human rights bans”, and that ideally the bans would be made public.All of the lawyers named in Cohen’s letter responded to the Guardian’s request for comment on the allegations set out by the congressman.A spokesperson for Carter-Ruck said the claims by Cohen against the firm were “misconceived and are rejected entirely”.“In addition to other matters, we are not working for any Russian individuals, companies or entities seeking to challenge, overturn, frustrate or minimise sanctions. We have never acted for Russian individuals, companies or entities seeking to challenge sanctions,” the spokesperson said, adding that Carter-Ruck condemned the Russian government’s decision to invade Ukraine and said the firm would not be acting for any individual or company associated with the Putin regime.A spokesperson for Harbottle & Lewis, where Kelly is a litigator specialising in “reputation protection, privacy and defamation”, said in a statement that the firm had acted at all times in accordance with its professional and legal obligations and took these matters very seriously.Harbottle & Lewis added in connection to litigation involving Belton’s Putin’s People: “The firm has not engaged in an abusive lawsuit as alleged, and there was no such suggestion made when the proceedings were considered by a high court judge who reviewed the book and ruled that it contained a number of defamatory allegations. As such there is no basis for any such steps to be taken.”A representative for Tomlinson said: “Regulatory rules for lawyers are very strict and work to ensure equal entitlement to independent legal advice. Mr Tomlinson acted properly and in accordance with those rules throughout and has never acted as Mr Cohen suggests. There is therefore no proper basis for Mr Cohen’s request.”A spokesperson for Proudler’s firm, CMS, said it “strongly rejected” allegations of impropriety against CMS and Proudler. “We have reviewed the steps taken in our media litigation practice and are confident that these were compliant with all professional regulations as well as our wider responsibilities at the time.”The spokesperson added that CMS had, since the invasion of Ukraine, not accepted new instructions from Russia-based entities or individuals with connections to the Russian government.Proudler resigned last month from the board of the Guardian Foundation, the charitable arm of the media group’s parent company, as well as from the Scott Trust review panel, which adjudicates editorial complaints.A spokesperson for Schilling said the firm was not acting for any “sanctioned entities” and that it hoped sanctions would foreshorten the war in Ukraine.“We do not comment on client matters and indeed are not permitted to do so, but we fail to see how any representation of the Malaysian national named by Congressman Cohen could in any circumstances support the (in any event wholly misplaced) allegations that we are acting in the manner alleged in relation to Russian ‘oligarchs’,” the spokesperson said, adding that there was “no basis for any allegations that we have in any way behaved other than in the highest traditions of the legal profession in upholding the rule of law”.Rechtschaffen, who is representing Soriano in a case against Stedman, claimed he did not work for an oligarch or an enabler of an oligarch, and claimed that his case against Stedman was not abusive and not a case of “libel tourism” or any other abuse of process.In an letter published in February 2022, 15 free press organisations, including Index on Censorship, the Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation, English PEN, and Reporters without Borders, argued that the case against Stedman had “many of the hallmarks of a Slapp”.The letter said Stedman’s website, Forensic News, had published six articles and a podcast about Soriano, a British-Israeli security consultant, after he had been summoned by the US Senate intelligence committee. The letter said all the defendants in the case were based in the US, but that the lawsuit had been brought in London. Soriano was born in Argentina, and immigrated to Israel before moving to London.The US letter comes as British MPs are engaged in a similar debate about “intimidation lawsuits”, with some arguing that expunging London’s alleged “dirty money” problem would require that oligarchs of any nation were not allowed to use the English legal system to silence free speech.Last month, MPs in the UK accused three of the lawyers named in Cohen’s letter – Proudler, Tait and Kelly – of deliberately filing oppressive legal actions against an investigative journalist in an attempt to intimidate her. Similar allegations were also made against Tomlinson. They all denied the allegations.Arabella Pike, HarperCollins’ publishing director, said in a tweet that she applauded the Cohen letter.Belton declined to comment on the Cohen letter but in recent testimony before the House of Commons said it was clear that a lot of journalists had faced “a barrage of threats and intimidation, and our democracy has been so much poorer for it” because the public had not been able to learn properly about the background of oligarchs until recently.“The entire population should have known the story about how Roman Abramovich won his fortune, but they had been deprived of that until now,” she said.TopicsUS newsUS politicsJoe BidennewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Oath Keepers and Proud Boys were in touch before US Capitol attack, texts reveal

    Oath Keepers and Proud Boys were in touch before US Capitol attack, texts revealThe messages could strengthen a theory being explored by the House committee that January 6 included a coordinated assault Top leaders in the Oath Keepers militia group indicted on seditious conspiracy charges over the Capitol attack had contacts with the Proud Boys and a figure in the Stop the Steal movement and may also have been in touch with the Republican congressman Ronny Jackson, newly released text messages show.Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge saysRead moreThe texts – which indicate the apparent ease with which Oath Keepers messaged Proud Boys – could strengthen a theory being explored by the House January 6 committee and the US justice department: that the Capitol attack included a coordinated assault.Oath Keepers text messages released in a court filing on Monday night showed members of the group were in direct communication with the Proud Boys leader Enqrique Tarrio in the days before the Capitol attack.In an exchange on 4 January 2021, the Oath Keepers Florida chapter leader, Kelly Meggs, indicates an attempt to call Tarrio after learning of his arrest.“I just called him no answer,” Meggs texted a group chat. “But he will [call if] he’s out.”That close relationship is certain to be of interest to the House committee as it zeroes in on whether the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys coordinated an attack on the Capitol in an attempt to stop certification of Joe Biden’s election win over Donald Trump.As the Guardian first reported, the committee has amassed deep evidence of connections between the far-right groups which could play a role in establishing whether Trump oversaw a criminal conspiracy as part of his attempt to hold on to power.The newly released text messages also show a new link between the Oath Keepers and an unnamed figure from the Stop the Steal movement, which has ties to the pro-Trump operative Roger Stone and to Ali Alexander, a prominent Trump ally and activist.On the evening of 1 January, Stewart Rhodes, the national leader of the Oath Keepers, texted to say he was adding an unidentified person affiliated with Stop the Steal to the group chat, to help them prepare for January 6.The name was redacted in the released texts but Rhodes described an “event producer for Stop the Steal. He requested I add him here. He can sort out who is doing what in the creative chaos that will be Jan 5/6.“He’s a good egg.”It was not clear whether Rhodes misattributed an affiliation to Stop the Steal, given the January 6 rally at the Ellipse was a Save America event. Neither Alexander nor Stone appeared to message the group chat or were otherwise involved.New Republican connectionThe Oath Keepers text messages also show a connection to Ronny Jackson that allowed one of its members to learn that the Texas congressman – Trump’s former White House doctor – needed protection as the Capitol attack unfolded.The potential connection between the Oath Keepers and a Republican member of Congress could mark a new investigatory direction for the committee and the justice department: whether Jackson or others might have had advance knowledge of the Oath Keepers’ plans.In the exchange on January 6, an unidentified Oath Keeper texts the group chat that “Ronnie Jackson (TX) office inside Capitol – he needs OK help. Anyone inside?”The same Oath Keeper provides an update less than 10 minutes later: “Dr Ronnie Jackson – on the move. Needs protection. If anyone inside cover him. He has critical data to protect.”Rhodes quickly responds: “Give him my cell.”In a statement to the Guardian, a spokesperson said Jackson “is frequently talked about by people he does not know. He does not know nor has he ever spoken to the people in question”.Asked if Jackson was never in contact with the Oath Keepers, the spokesperson did not answer.The House committee has not given any indication that Republican members of Congress were connected to a potential conspiracy overseen by Trump that would connect his plan to have then-vice president Mike Pence overturn the election with the Capitol attack.The Oath Keepers texts were included in a motion for release from pre-trial detention by Ed Vallejo, one of 11 group members facing charges of seditious conspiracy. On January 6, prosecutors say, Vallejo was at a Comfort Inn in Virginia with a cache of weapons, meant to act as a quick reaction force.The messages show the Oath Keepers discussed providing security for prominent Trump allies including Stone, Alexander, Alex Jones, Lin Wood and Mike Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser.‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lieRead moreOne week before January 6, Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers, mentioned requests to provide security for Bianca Garcia, president of the group Latinos for Trump, for which Tarrio, the Proud Boys leader, was also chief of staff.The next day, Meggs, the Florida Oath Keepers leader who would ultimately lead Stone’s security detail, boasted that he had spoken to Stone the night before. Jessica Watkins, another member of the Oath Keepers, said she was also in touch with Stone.“Roger Stone just asked for security,” Watkins texted the group chat on 1 January, to which Meggs responded: “Who reached out to you? I [spoke] to him Wednesday.”Meggs – using the alias “OK Gator 1” – added: “I just texted him.”Though the Oath Keepers discussed providing security for other Trump allies, the extent of their voluntary services remains unclear. Alexander said in a recent statement that the Oath Keepers did not perform security duties for him on January 6.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsThe far rightnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge says

    Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge saysFederal judge cites ‘whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests’ in allowing 14th-amendment challenge to far-right Republican An attempt to bar the far-right Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress over her support for the January 6 attack can proceed, a federal judge said.‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lieRead moreCiting “a whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests of public import”, Amy Totenberg of the northern district of Georgia sent the case on to a state hearing on Friday.A coalition of liberal groups is behind the challenge, citing the 14th amendment to the US constitution, passed after the civil war.The amendment says: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”Supporters of Donald Trump attacked the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, seeking to stop certification of his defeat by Joe Biden. A bipartisan Senate committee connected seven deaths to the riot. About 800 people have been charged, some with seditious conspiracy.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection. Acquitted, he is free to run again.Organisers of events in Washington on January 6 have tied Greene to their efforts. Greene has denied such links and said she does not encourage violence.In October, however, she told a radio show: “January 6 was just a riot at the Capitol and if you think about what our Declaration of Independence says, it says to overthrow tyrants.”In the immediate aftermath of the Capitol attack, Greene was one of 147 Republicans in Congress who objected to results in battleground states, an effort inspired by Trump’s lies about electoral fraud.An effort to use the 14th amendment against Madison Cawthorn, an extremist from North Carolina, was unsuccessful, after a judge ruled an 1872 civil war amnesty law was not merely retroactive.In her ruling on Greene’s attempt to dismiss her challenge, on Monday, Totenberg said: “This case involves a whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests of public import. Upon a thorough analysis of each of the claims asserted in this case, the court concludes that [Greene] has not carried her burden of persuasion.”Even if a state judge rules against Greene, she could challenge the ruling. The Georgia primary is on 25 May, cutting time short. Greene seems likely to win re-election.Writing for the Guardian this month, the Georgetown University professor Thomas Zimmer said: “Greene’s position within the Republican party seems secure … in fact, Greene is the poster child of a rising group of rightwing radicals … [not] shy about their intention to purge whatever vestiges of ‘moderate’ conservatism might still exist within the Republican party.”Extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the future of the Republican party | Thomas ZimmerRead moreOne of the groups behind the challenge to Greene is Free Speech for the People. In January, the group’s legal director, Ron Fein, told the Guardian the group aimed to set “a line that says that just as the framers of the 14th amendment wrote and intended, you can’t take an oath to support the constitution and then facilitate an insurrection against the United States while expecting to pursue public office”.On Monday, Fein said: “We look forward to asking Representative Greene about her involvement [in January 6] under oath.”Mike Rasbury, an activist with the Bernie Sanders-affiliated Our Revolution group and a plaintiff in the lawsuit against Greene, said he was “elated” by Totenberg’s ruling.Greene, Rasbury said, “took an oath of office to protect democracy from all enemies foreign and domestic, just as I did when I became a helicopter pilot for the US army in Vietnam. However, she has flippantly ignored this oath and, based on her role in the January 6 insurrection, is disqualified … from holding any future public office”.TopicsRepublicansThe far rightUS Capitol attackUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsUS constitution and civil libertiesnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Jacob Zuma Threatens to Bring South Africa to its Knees If He Is Jailed

    The former President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, is the glowering figure who looms large over the country’s future. The 80-year-old is determined that never again will he suffer the ignominy of being jailed — despite being charged with hundreds of counts of corruption in a case that has dragged on for nearly 17 years. Zuma has pleaded not guilty to corruption, money laundering and racketeering in a 1990s $2 billion arms deal that he promoted.

    To head off any chance of being imprisoned, he has deployed the so-called “Stalingrad defense.” This is a term for a legal strategy of stalling proceedings based on technicalities. Zuma’s lawyers are fighting every attempt to put him before a judge on the basis of arcane technicalities. Finally, this strategy is wearing thin and Zuma’s supporters are now resorting to alternative tactics.

    Past Precedent

    This is not the first time that Zuma faces time in prison. Last year, the Constitutional Court of South Africa found Zuma guilty of contempt of court and sentenced him to jail for 15 months. Zuma’s supporters took to the streets in KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng. They blocked roads, assaulted people, and looted and burned supermarkets.

    Embed from Getty Images

    When Zuma’s legal team were in court on April 11,  they reminded the court of what had happened. They warned the judge that the riots that ensued after his jail sentence last year resulted in the deaths of more than 350 people. Zuma’s lawyers claimed that the riots “were partly motivated or sparked, to whatever extent, by a sense of public outrage at perceived injustice and special treatment of Mr Zuma.” They were making an obvious threat.

    It is important to put Zuma’s July 2021 riots in context. The country’s most notorious mass killing remains the Sharpeville massacre of March 1960. This occurred during the era of apartheid. The massacre cost 69 lives as the police fired into a crowd. The Zuma riots cost many more lives than the Sharpeville massacre.

    To contain these riots, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa had to deploy 25,000 troops. He admitted that he had no prior warning from his intelligence services of the scale of the unrest. This is unsurprising. Zuma was an intelligence agent for the African National Congress (ANC) and has strong links with South Africa’s security services. As the South African media have reported: “Former senior security agency and ANC members aligned with Jacob Zuma have allegedly instigated the unrest in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal. Citing sources in the intelligence community…these former agency members used intelligence networks to spark the riots.”

    The government made promises to bring those who instigated the Zuma riots to justice.  Duduzile Zuma-Sambundla, Zuma’s daughter, was one of those accused of stoking the riots. She and none of the major figures allegedly behind the Zuma riots have been held accountable. Of the 3,000 suspects arrested, all of them have been small-fry.  

    Constitutional Challenge And Risk of Becoming a Failed State

    Like a latter-day Samson, the former president is threatening to bring down the South African constitutional order around him. Those close to Zuma have threatened both the judges and the constitutional order itself. The South African constitution, shaped under Nelson Mandela is today questioned by factions of the ANC who want to make the judiciary and the constitution subservient to the political establishment.

    Many ANC leaders, keen to stave off allegations of wrongdoing, have muttered darkly about the constitution for years. KwaZulu-Natal Premier Sihle Zikalala recently criticized the courts, saying “It is time we should debate whether the country does not need parliamentary democracy where laws enacted by Parliament should be above all and not reviewed by another organ…” Ironically, Zikalala is calling for a return to parliamentary supremacy — the hallmark of the apartheid years.

    Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

    There is a real cost to such maneuvers by ANC politicians. In its December conference,the party will elect a new leadership. If some ANC members have their way, they could even remove Ramaphosa, although this seems unlikely as of now. Nevertheless, the ANC’s branches and its provincial structures are experiencing a bitter battle between the pro- and anti-Zuma factions. These factions are fighting for the support of the ANC’s 1.5 million members in meetings across the country, some of which are turning violent.

    While the ANC is locked in internal battles, there are warnings that South Africa might be turning into a failed state. The government has failed to provide many essential public services already. The railways have been vandalized and looted so severely that no trains have run in the Eastern Cape since January 7. Critical coal and iron ore exports are grinding to a halt because of cable theft  that has gone unchecked for years because of South Africa’s systemic corruption.  As per Bloomberg, “more than $2 billion in potential coal, iron ore and chrome exports were lost” in 2021.

    Embed from Getty Images

    The failure of the electricity supply system is so chronic that it is hardly remarked upon. In the Cape, the opposition Democratic Alliance has plans to dump the state electricity provider — Eskom — and establish its own power supply.

    In a September 2020 report, Eunomix warned that “bar a meaningful change of trajectory, South Africa will be a failed state by 2030.” The remarks were echoed in March this year by the treasury director general Dondo Mogajane. He took the view that, if South Africa continued on its present path, it could indeed become a ‘failed state’ with “no confidence in the government, anarchy and absolutely no control in society.”

    In April, Ramaphosa was forced torespond to Mogajane. The president adamantly declared that South Africa was “not a failed state yet and we will not get there.” Ramaphosa claimed that his government was taking steps to rebuild South Africa’s capacity and fight corruption. This claim remains an admirable but unfulfilled ambition.

    Zuma has not been brought to court and his associates are locked in battle with Ramaphosa’s supporters for control of the ANC and the country. Meanwhile, growth rates slide, unemployment rockets and poverty remains endemic. Even as South Africa is on the slide, the world’s attention is elsewhere. This is a tragedy. Africa could lose one of its few genuine democracies and see the collapse of its largest economy.

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

  • in

    ‘The GOP needs to look like America’: ex-congressman Will Hurd’s manifesto for the right

    ‘The GOP needs to look like America’: ex-congressman Will Hurd’s manifesto for the right In new book, Republican and former undercover CIA officer rejects political extremesIt was a plot twist worthy of Homeland.Will Hurd got home one night and told his fiancee that he was in fact an undercover officer in the CIA. And there was more. They would have to move to Pakistan.Republicans’ ugly attacks on Ketanji Brown Jackson show lurch to far rightRead moreThey never married.“You know, it probably had a chilling effect on our relationship, especially when you confirm, ‘Hey babe, I actually work in the CIA and we’re going to Islamabad. Pack your bags. Great!’” Hurd recalls in a phone interview from Washington.Now 44, the former Republican congressman is still a bachelor. “I dated a woman for a while when I was in Congress but being on the road, putting a hundred and so thousand miles on your car every year and having close to three-quarters of a million airline miles a year, is not conducive to a relationship unless they’re riding with you.”Hurd joined the CIA in 2000. After the September 11 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, he spent eight years on the frontlines of the “war on terror” including Pakistan, India and Afghanistan. He then helped build a cybersecurity firm before entering politics and winning election in the highly competitive 23rd congressional district of Texas.For two terms he was one of two Black Republicans in the US House of Representatives; for his third term, he was the only one. When in 2019 he decided to walk away, it felt to some like a light going out – proof that former president Donald Trump’s regressively nativist version of the Republican party had prevailed.Hurd channeled his energies into technology companies working on national security. He has also just written a book, American Reboot, partly a manifesto for fixing America’s ailing democracy and beating China, partly a memoir delving back into his childhood in San Antonio, Texas.Like former president Barack Obama, Hurd is the son a Black father and white mother. He writes that it was neither fashionable nor widely accepted to be an interracial couple in early 1970s south Texas. He elaborates by phone: “I don’t know of another interracial couple in San Antonio around the time that my parents were married.“I was a mama’s boy growing up in and it was only in later life that my mom would reveal stories to us about how people would look at her weird because she had these dark babies. We never saw that or necessarily understood that when we were growing up so the things that I faced were similar things that my peers and friends faced.”Hurd endured racism as a teenager. He writes how “shopkeepers wouldn’t want a young Black kid in their place of business so they’d call me the N-word and tell me to get out. Non-Black fathers of girls I dated tried to persuade their daughters not to date me because of my race.”Much has been written about Obama’s gift for “code-switching” between Black and white spaces, campaigning in a Black barbershop one moment, appearing with his white great-uncle– a second world war veteran – the next. It was said to have given him an unusual ability to walk in someone else’s shoes.Hurd reflects on being mixed race: “I think it gives me an empathy and compassion for anybody who might be different in a room because I’m used to always being different. It’s to try to understand and appreciate somebody else’s perspective.”“When I was first running for Congress and crisscrossing the district, and going into communities that had never seen a Republican before, it wasn’t daunting for me because being different from the other people in the room was something I always had experience with.”“I’m not equating race and political affiliation; I’m just saying that because of the things that I had to deal with being am interracial kid, I was able to take those lessons and apply them in places. It made me more effective.”But speaking of political affiliation, why did Hurd choose the Republicans, a party associated with racist dog-whistling since before he was born, from Richard Nixon’s 1960s “southern strategy” to Ronald Reagan lauding “states’ rights” in Mississippi in 1980?Hurd’s response: “What I would say is that’s probably the minority of the party. And so why am I a Republican? It starts with my dad. My dad’s been a Republican all his life. He has always said he’s been a Republican since Lincoln freed us.”Then when Hurd went to study at Texas A&M University he befriended former president George HW Bush, was tutored by former defense secretary Robert Gates and got to know former Texas governor Rick Perry. “When I look at what I look at people that were influential and in my life, these were Republicans.”“Then when you start thinking about the principles and theories at the core, it is about freedom leads to opportunity, opportunity leads to growth, growth leads to progress – those foundational things. And when I criss cross the district or the country, that’s where most Republicans are.“Yes, there are some that don’t espouse those things but it is, in my opinion, not the majority of the party. But they’re enough that they color the entire party, which is why we have to be diligent in forcing those kind of voices out of the party.”It could be said the Republicans have just been through a lost decade. After nominee Mitt Romney lost the presidential election to Obama in 2012, an “autopsy report” concluded the party needed to diversify or die and broaden appeal to young voters, women and minorities.Along came Trump, who turned the autopsy upside down and cast aside racist dog whistles in favor of megaphones. He duly lost the national popular vote but got lucky in the electoral college and became president – a sugar high for Republicans in the moment but recipe for long term heart disease.Part one of Hurd’s book is entitled “The GOP needs to look like America”. He writes: “The party can’t have in it assholes, racists, misogynists and homophobes. For our party to more accurately reflect a broader America, we will need to appeal to the middle, not the edges.”He adds by phone: “When you look at some of the original polling after Trump won, people said they didn’t necessarily like his ideas, but they thought he was going to be different. But he ultimately didn’t follow through on some of the things outlined in the autopsy and guess what? We lost all three: the House, Senate and the White House.”In November’s midterm elections, however, polls suggest that Republicans will regain the House and possibly the Senate. Won’t the party feel its embrace of Trump has been vindicated? “I don’t know the answer because I can say that Donald Trump has a very strong, solid base but his influence down the ballot is waning.”Hurd was never on the Trump train. When in October 2016 an Access Hollywood tape revealed the Republican nominee saying “grab ‘em by the pussy”, Hurd denounced the remarks “utterly sickening and repulsive” and urged him to “step aside for a true conservative”. In the election, Hurd voted for independent candidate Evan McMullin, with whom he had served in the CIA.When Trump, early in his presidency, drew moral equivalence between white nationalists and civil rights protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, Hurd called on him to apologize. He comments now: “Has he said racist things? Yes.”Yet despite outrage after outrage, even an insurrection, most Republicans have bowed the knee over the past five years. Some still refuse to acknowledge that Trump lost the 2020 election lest they incur his wrath. Asked if he wishes that more would take a stand, Hurd declines to criticize his old colleagues.“Look, I wish for the Republican party to be successful among communities that we’re not very successful with now,” he says. “In the long term we need to be a party that’s based on values and our audio and video need to match, meaning our words and our actions need to reflect that.”To try again from a more positive welcome, does Hurd welcome the defiance of Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, two Republicans sitting on the House committee investigating January 6? “Liz and Adam are trying to help the party get beyond the 2020 election.Mitt Romney warns of ‘extraordinary challenge’ in preserving democracyRead more“The 2020 election was not stolen. It was lost. We need more people to understand that because if we’re able to get beyond that, then we can start talking about some of these issues that this country needs to deal with.”Hurd could have remained in the trenches with the handful of anti-Trump rebels. But he decided it was time to go. “I always believe that these positions, if you’re doing well, you have a shelf life. I said back in 2009 when I first ran, it was six, seven or eight years. These seats, these positions were not designed to be in for ever.“Being a career politician is not what is going to be helpful for our country. I thought it was the opportunity for me to do other things. I enjoyed talking technology in a policy setting’ now I love talking policy in a technology setting. Your ability to have an impact is not connected with a position that you hold.”For good measure, he insists: “Donald Trump had no influence on what I did or didn’t do in Congress and he doesn’t have any influence on what I do after Congress.”Hurd’s book argues that elected officials appeal to the extremes rather than the middle partly because of the design of congressional districts. He accuses both sides of fear mongering rather than trying to inspire. Joe Biden might have seemed like the right man to deliver bipartisan healing after the trauma of the Trump years. But Hurd has been disappointed.“The promise of that has not unfolded. The Democratic party is so afraid of their far left that it’s influencing their actions. The 2020 election told us: don’t be a jerk and don’t be a socialist. The fact that Joe Biden won and had zero coattails – the Democratic House and Senate lost seats – is a sign to say, ‘Hey, we don’t want that kind of rhetoric [from Trump] but we also don’t want the terrible ideas that the Democratic party is pushing.’“But guess what? Democrats haven’t learned that lesson and so in 2022 you’re going to see Republicans take the House and likely the Senate. It’s not, as the far left likes to say, because they haven’t done a lot. No, it’s because the country doesn’t want to see the things that they’re talking about actually happen.”Hurd even manages to turn Republicans’ disingenuous attacks on Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman nominated to the supreme court, into an excuse to bash Democrats. “It was Democrats who took away the joy because, instead of talking about the historic nature of her nomination – she is the second most popular judicial candidate in history – it was the left that wanted to talk about some senators asking crazy questions. That’s not news.”What does he make of the current political manipulation of the teaching of race in schools? “Slavery happened. Jim Crow happened. These things have impacts; we should be talking about them. But you also shouldn’t be segregating kids based on their eye colour or hair colour to tell that lesson. All those things can be true at the same time.”American Reboot has triggered a wave of media speculation that Hurd is considering a run for president in 2024. He has the electoral pedigree and national security credentials. And as Republicans’ first Black presidential nominee, he would personify a resounding statement that the party had shrugged off Trump and learned from that decade-old autopsy report after all. He does not rule it out.“Look, it’s nice that you write a really good book and everybody thinks you’re running for office,” he says. “For me, if I can serve my country again, I’ll evaluate it but right now the best way to serve my country is to put some of these ideas out there and say, hey, we don’t have to accept the way we’re currently doing things and there’s a better way.”TopicsRepublicansUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

  • in

    Calls for US to issue visa bans for UK lawyers enabling Russian oligarchs

    Calls for US to issue visa bans for UK lawyers enabling Russian oligarchsAnti-corruption campaigner Bill Browder says ‘whole class of British lawyers’ making money out of lawsuits against journalists, dissidents and whistleblowers The anti-corruption campaigner Bill Browder is calling on the US to issue visa bans against British lawyers who he has accused of “enabling” Russian oligarchs.The US-born financier, an outspoken and longtime critic of Russian president Vladimir Putin, has said that installing such a ban would strike at the heart of what he described as a persistent problem of oligarchs using the UK legal system against journalists and whistleblowers, tying them up in expensive lawsuits.Browder suggested sanctions could ultimately be targeted at any legal and financial experts who it could be shown have helped oligarchs hide their assets, but said his initial proposed blacklist was focused on British lawyers involved in libel cases.Russia warns US of repercussions if it sends more arms to Ukraine – reportsRead moreBrowder described “this whole class of British lawyers” instructed by Russians and those with links to Russia to bring “lawsuits against journalists, dissidents and whistleblowers, myself included, and they make money”.“There’s this industry,” Browder said. “It will be pretty hard to legislate away the idea that a plaintiff can hire a lawyer to sue for libel, because how do you define what’s good and what’s bad? But if you identify a lawyer who has been doing this on a regular basis – going after people – the United States does not have to give them a visa to come to this country.”The activist has proven to have influence on Capitol Hill. In a recent statement, US senator Ben Cardin called Browder a “hero” to “many” in the Senate, for his work in passage of the Magnitsky Act, an Obama-era bipartisan bill named after Browder’s former tax lawyer, Sergei Magnitsky, who died in police custody in Russia in 2009.The act was designed to allow the US to punish officials linked to Magnitsky’s death, but also authorises the US to sanction human rights offenders and ban them from entering the country.Browder said he was seeking the support of senators and members of Congress to write a letter to the US Department of State with a list of names of specific lawyers, whose visas he felt ought to be taken away. He did not name the lawyers who might appear on the list.Browder also argued that targeting oligarch-enablers such as lawyers and accountants would be an effective way of finding their money, at least half of which he said ultimately finds its way to Putin’s coffers, as part of the Kremlin’s pact with the oligarchs.“There’s going to be a whole lot of smart law enforcement work looking at sanctions evasion now. These people have been running circles around us in the past,” Browder said. “They have set up the most robust asset protection mechanisms with trustees, holding companies, nominees and proxies offshore.”Finding the oligarchs’ money, he said, would be an “almost impossible task”. He said he would like to add an amendment to sanctions law to hold lawyers, accountants, bankers and other financial advisers liable – including possible prison time – if they are found to have created structures to evade sanctions.“Very quickly the whole system would become very transparent,” he said.Browder’s remarks follow his recent testimony before the Helsinki Commission, an independent body that consists of nine members of the US House, nine senators, and one member of the US state, defence and commerce departments. The commission is meant to help formulate policy in connection to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and the hearing was focused on western “enablers” of Putin’s regime.Among Browder’s recommendations in his testimony was for the US to create a list of law firms, PR firms and investigative firms involved in “enabling dictatorships and oligarchs to persecute journalists” and prohibiting the US government from doing business with those firms; canceling the visas of “foreign enablers”, enforcing rules in which lawyers and public relations firms are meant to disclose their work for foreign governments; and creating new laws to protect journalists from so-called SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) suits that are meant to intimidate the press.TopicsUS newsUS politicsVladimir PutinRussiaUkrainenewsReuse this content More