World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Sotomayor accuses supreme court conservatives of dismantling church-state separation

      by

      Sotomayor accuses supreme court conservatives of dismantling church-state separationLiberal justice delivers warning after ruling that state of Maine cannot exclude religious schools from tuition programme The liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor has warned that the US supreme court is dismantling the wall between church and state, after the conservative majority ruled that the state of Maine cannot exclude religious schools from a tuition programme.‘I got in the car and he blindfolded me. I was willing to risk death’: five women on abortions before RoeRead moreIn a dissent to the ruling in Carson v Makin, released on Tuesday, Sotomayor wrote: “This court continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the framers fought to build.“… In just a few years, the court has upended constitutional doctrine, shifting from a rule that permits states to decline to fund religious organisations to one that requires states in many circumstances to subsidise religious indoctrination with taxpayer dollars.”Progressives fear other rulings due this month, among them a case set to bring down Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling which established the right to abortion, and a ruling on a New York law set to loosen gun regulations even after several horrific mass shootings.Supreme court justices often claim not to rule according to political beliefs but few serious observers give such claims any credence.In the Maine case, John Roberts, the chief justice, wrote for the conservative majority. In Roberts’ view, the tuition programme violated the free exercise clause of the first amendment to the US constitution, because it said private schools were “eligible to receive the payments, so long as they [we]re ‘nonsectarian’”.Roberts wrote: “Regardless of how the benefit and restriction are described, the programme operates to identify and exclude otherwise eligible schools on the basis of their religious exercise.”A conservative, Roberts was appointed by George W Bush. Since Republicans rammed three new justices on to the court under Donald Trump, the chief justice has become in some cases a voice for moderation. Not this time.Sotomayor wrote: “While purporting to protect against discrimination of one kind, the court requires Maine to fund what many of its citizens believe to be discrimination of other kinds.”The main dissent was written by Stephen Breyer, at 83 the oldest of three liberals on the nine-judge panel. Breyer will soon retire, to be replaced by Ketanji Brown Jackson, Joe Biden’s first pick and the first Black woman confirmed to the court.Like her fellow liberal Elena Kagan, Sotomayor was nominated by Barack Obama.Concluding her dissent, Sotomayor wrote: “What a difference five years makes. In 2017, I feared that the court was ‘lead[ing] us … to a place where separation of church and state is a constitutional slogan, not a constitutional commitment’.“Today, the court leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation. If a state cannot offer subsidies to its citizens without being required to fund religious exercise, any state that values its historic antiestablishment interests more than this court does will have to curtail the support it offers to its citizens.“With growing concern for where this court will lead us next, I respectfully dissent.”Sonia Sotomayor says supreme court’s ‘mistakes’ can be corrected over timeRead moreHer words caused a stir. Antony Michael Kreis, a law professor and political scientist at Georgia State University, wrote: “Sotomayor is not having it today.”Nonetheless, Roberts’ ruling was further evidence of a court in conservatives’ grip.Last week, addressing progressive lawyers in Washington, Sotomayor said: “There are days I get discouraged. There are moments where I am deeply, deeply disappointed. And yes, there have been moments when I’ve stopped and said, ‘Is this worth it any more?’“And every time when I do that, I lick my wounds for a while, sometimes I cry, and then I say, ‘OK, let’s fight.’”TopicsUS supreme courtLaw (US)MaineUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      January 6 committee to investigate Trump’s pressure campaign on election officials – live

      by

      In its hearings thus far, the January 6 committee has focused on the circumstances leading up to the attack in Washington, particularly Trump’s baseless claims that the election was stolen.Viewers will be taken farther afield in today’s hearing, which will feature testimony from state officials about how Trump pushed them to interfere with their election results for his benefit.Among its guests will be Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who last month fended off a Trump-backed attempt to oust him from office. He will be joined by Arizona House speaker Rusty Bowers and Gabriel Sterling, a top official in the Georgia secretary of state’s office.The hearing will also feature an appearance by Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, a Georgia poll worker who, along with her mother, was accused of rigging the vote in a number of conspiracies promoted by Trump supporters. She is now suing Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani, rightwing One America News Network and several of its senior executives for defamation, saying the claims put them in physical danger.Expect to hear more about just what she endured at the hearing today.There’s been another alarming revelation about the botched police response to the Uvalde school shooting last month.The director of Texas’s Department of Public Safety told a state Senate committee that police officers could have stopped the shooting three minutes after it began, and called their response an “abject failure,” according to the Associated Press:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} Police officers with rifles instead stood and waited in a school hallway for nearly an hour while the gunman carried out the May 24 attack that left 19 children and two teachers dead.
      Col. Steve McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, testified at a state Senate hearing on the police handling of the tragedy.
      Delays in the law enforcement response have been the focus of federal, state and local investigations of the mass shooting.
      McCraw told the Senate committee that Pete Arredondo, the Uvalde school district police chief, decided to put the lives of officers ahead of the lives of children.
      The public safety chief began outlining for the committee a series of missed opportunities.Breaking along ideological lines, the supreme court has struck down a state-funded program in Maine that covers the costs of some private schools — but only those that are nonsectarian.The decision will allow people in the state to use public money to pay for religious schooling, as Reuter’s Lawrence Hurley explains:BREAKING: Supreme Court backs public money for religious schools in Maine case— Lawrence Hurley (@lawrencehurley) June 21, 2022
      Chief Justice Roberts: “… a neutral benefit program in which public funds flow to religious organizationsthrough the independent choices of private benefit recipients does not offend the Establishment Clause”— Lawrence Hurley (@lawrencehurley) June 21, 2022
      Case is on whether people can use public money for religious schools from funding that Maine provides for people to pay for tuition at private high school in some parts of the state that lack public high schools. Court says “yes” on 6-3 vote— Lawrence Hurley (@lawrencehurley) June 21, 2022
      The court’s conservative justices all supported the ruling, while its three liberals Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer dissented.The supreme court has ended its release of decisions today with a ruling on a 233-year old statute regarding federal court orders:In its final opinion of the day, SCOTUS rules on the scope of the All Writs Act, a 233-year-old statute that gives federal courts broad power to issue orders. The case involved an Ohio death-row prisoner trying to develop new evidence to challenge his conviction and sentence.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 21, 2022
      The supreme court has thus far announced three decisions, none of which deal with abortion, gun rights, environmental regulation or the other contentious topics they are expected to rule on before the current term ends.Here’s a rundown of what they’ve done so far, from SCOTUSblog:In a technical dispute about health insurance reimbursements for kidney dialysis, the Supreme Court sides with a health insurer, rejecting a claim from DaVita Inc. (one of the nation’s largest providers of dialysis) that the insurer’s low reimbursement rates violated federal law.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 21, 2022
      In the second (but not final) opinion of the day, the Supreme Court narrows the definition of “crime of violence” in a federal criminal statute. The court agrees with a criminal defendant that the definition excludes attempted robbery under the Hobbs Act.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 21, 2022
      The Supreme Court strikes down a Washington law that made it easier for certain workers to get workers’ comp from the federal government if they became sick while cleaning up a decommissioned nuclear site. SCOTUS says the law violates the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 21, 2022
      Attorney General Merrick Garland has made a surprise visit to Ukraine, expressing support for the country’s effort to prosecute the perpetrators of war crimes following Russia’s invasion.Here he is along with Ukraine’s prosecutor general Iryna Venediktova:In unannounced trip, Attorney General Merrick Garland Visits Ukraine, Reaffirms U.S. Commitment to Help Identify, Apprehend, and Prosecute Individuals Involved in War Crimes and Atrocities pic.twitter.com/GzHPGqOUYV— Anthony Coley (@AnthonyColeyDOJ) June 21, 2022
      The United States has already formally accused Russia of committing war crimes in Ukraine, and the country has started trying Russian soldiers for alleged abuses.Russian soldier pleads guilty in first Ukraine war crimes trial since invasionRead moreWhen it begins announcing decisions in a few minutes, the supreme court could release an opinion that sharply curtails abortion rights nationwide, and Democratic leaders are trying to make the most of what they hope many of their voters would see as a bad situation.As Politico reports, the party is making plans to focus voters’ attention on the ruling’s implications, and away from the issues that have swamped Biden’s approval ratings in recent months, such as gas prices and inflation overall.From their article:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s preparations, previewed by a committee official, are a window into the Democratic Party’s broader efforts to capitalize — in the middle of a brutal-looking midterm election climate — on the Supreme Court’s likely reversal of Roe v. Wade, which would change a half-century of precedent and let states decide the legality of abortion.
      Support for Roe is at an all-time high with voters, and the Democrats’ strategy is aimed at firing up a flagging Democratic base, while also trying to compete for some of the college-educated, female, suburban swing voters who backed them during the Trump era. The question, though, is how to make abortion a top issue for voters in November while facing a range of challenges, especially gas prices averaging $5 a gallon and inflation ticking up.
      “We’re not going to be able to keep it in the national news, but we’re going to put a lot of money on paid advertising — on TV, on digital ads, on mail, on radio — and in key places across the country, and that’s how this issue will matter,” said Stephanie Schriock, former president of EMILY’s List, a Democratic pro-abortion-rights group. “And in some states, it will be in the news every day, because state legislatures are going to push this issue further and further to the right with outright bans.”What else can you expect from the January 6 committee? The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell has taken a closer look at how the House lawmakers will present their witnesses and evidence at today’s hearing:The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack is expected to show at its fourth hearing on Tuesday that Donald Trump and top advisers coordinated the scheme to send fake slates of electors as part of an effort to return him to the White House.The panel is expected to also examine Trump’s campaign to pressure top officials in seven crucial battleground states to corruptly reverse his defeat to Joe Biden in the weeks and months after the 2020 election.At the afternoon hearing, the select committee is expected to focus heavily on the fake electors scheme, which has played a large part in its nearly year-long investigation into Trump’s effort to overturn the results of the election at the state level.Donald Trump plotted fake electors scheme, January 6 panel set to showRead moreIn its hearings thus far, the January 6 committee has focused on the circumstances leading up to the attack in Washington, particularly Trump’s baseless claims that the election was stolen.Viewers will be taken farther afield in today’s hearing, which will feature testimony from state officials about how Trump pushed them to interfere with their election results for his benefit.Among its guests will be Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who last month fended off a Trump-backed attempt to oust him from office. He will be joined by Arizona House speaker Rusty Bowers and Gabriel Sterling, a top official in the Georgia secretary of state’s office.The hearing will also feature an appearance by Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, a Georgia poll worker who, along with her mother, was accused of rigging the vote in a number of conspiracies promoted by Trump supporters. She is now suing Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani, rightwing One America News Network and several of its senior executives for defamation, saying the claims put them in physical danger.Expect to hear more about just what she endured at the hearing today.Good morning, US politics live blog readers. At 1pm eastern time, the January 6 committee will be holding its fourth hearing into last year’s attack on the Capitol, with this session focusing on former president Donald Trump’s pressure campaign on state officials to throw the 2020 election in his direction. The committee is meanwhile continuing its search for evidence. Politico reports that it has subpoenaed a documentary film-maker who had access to Trump’s inner circle around the time of the insurrection.Here’s what else to expect today:
      Democrats and Republicans in Congress are scrambling to find agreement on gun control legislation and an innovation bill as time runs out to pass the legislation before an upcoming two-week recess.
      The supreme court will release another batch of opinions at 10 am eastern time. Among these could be their opinions on closely watched cases dealing with abortion, gun rights, environmental regulation and other controversial issues.
      Voters will head to the polls (or cast mail-in ballots) in Virginia and Washington DC, while run-off elections are being held in Alabama and Georgia.
      President Joe Biden announced he will appoint Marilynn Malerba as treasurer of the United States. She is the chief of the Mohegan Tribe and would be the first Native American in the position that oversees the US Mint, among other responsibilities. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in World Politics

      France and Colombia: The Center Keeps Trying (but Failing) to Hold

      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

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Yellen says US recession not ‘inevitable’ but expects ‘economy to slow’

      by

      Yellen says US recession not ‘inevitable’ but expects ‘economy to slow’ Treasury secretary says ‘inflation unacceptably high’ and it is Biden’s ‘top priority to bring it down’ Joe Biden’s treasury secretary Janet Yellen says she expects “the economy to slow” but continued insisting that a full-blown recession is not “at all inevitable”.Yellen’s remarks on Sunday came days after the US central bank moved to sharply raise interest rates in an effort to contain soaring inflation.She told ABC’s This Week host George Stephanopoulous that her financial outlook results from how the economy has “been growing at a very rapid rate, as the economy, as the labor market, has recovered and we have reached full employment”.“It’s natural now that we expect a transition to steady and stable growth, but I don’t think a recession is at all inevitable,” Yellen added.Pressed on the issue of inflation, which polls indicate is a top priority for US voters as the midterm elections in November approach, Yellen said inflation causes are global, not local, and those factors are unlikely to diminish immediately.Yellen said some trade tariffs on China inherited from the administration of former President Donald Trump made “no strategic sense”. She added that Biden was reviewing them as a way to bring down inflation.“Clearly, inflation is unacceptably high,” Yellen said. “It’s President Biden’s top priority to bring it down.”The US central bank’s chairperson, Jerome Powell, has also said “it’s his goal to bring it down while maintaining a strong labor economy,” according to Yellen.The comments from Biden’s top economist came reflect the administration’s ongoing push to change the national narrative around the economy.Yellen’s comments were more in line with that push than they have been recently.Last month, she broke with the administration’s preferred talking points when she admitted to the American public that she “was wrong” about the path inflation would take.Recent economic confidence polling has shown sharp drops, with Gallup recording the lowest reading during the coronavirus pandemic, and it’s likely the lowest confidence has been since the tail end of the Great Recession in early 2009.Dissatisfaction with Biden’s handling of the economy could ricochet through the midterms elections. Central to those concerns are gasoline prices, which have surged during Biden’s term.On Sunday, Yellen voiced measured support for temporarily pausing gasoline taxes, describing it as an idea “certainly worth considering”.Separately, energy secretary Jennifer Granholm warned drivers against expecting quick relief in prices amid tight oil supplies worldwide.The US energy information administration has projected that prices at the pump will average about $4.27 per gallon in the third quarter – down from the current $4.98 – but that its forecast could be “completely upended” by world events.“We know this is going to be a tough summer because driving season just started,” Granholm said. “And we know that there will be continued upward pull on demand.”Looking ahead to Biden’s scheduled – and highly controversial – visit to Saudi Arabia next month, Granholm said the president “has asked for all suppliers around the globe to increase production”.The planned trip has become a lightning rod for criticism as it appears to be a reversal of the president’s stated intent to make the kingdom a “pariah” over its human-rights record, including the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which the CIA concluded was ordered by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.Granholm said Biden is “very concerned” about human rights in Saudi Arabia and surely will raise the issue, “but he’s also very concerned about what people are experiencing at the pump and Saudi Arabia is head of OPEC”.“We need to have increased production so that everyday citizens in America will not be feeling this pain that they’re feeling right now,” Granholm added.Yellen was not alone Sunday in presenting a more upbeat economic message than the recessionist narrative most US economists are presenting. A survey of economists published Sunday by The Wall Street Journal raised the probability of recession to 44% in the next 12 months – a level of probability that the newspaper wrote is “usually seen only on the brink of or during actual recession.”The director of the National Economic Council, Brian Deese, told Margaret Brennan on CBS’ Face the Nation that the US “is in an uncertain moment and we face real challenges, global challenges.”“We need to navigate through this transition in a way that gets us to stable growth without giving up all of the incredible economic gains that we’ve made,” he said.Pressed on how the administration plans to lower inflation, running at a 40-year high of 8.6% and projected by the congressional budget office to remain high into 2024, Deese said a package of legislative measures was being prepared in congress to lower prescription drug costs, utility costs and enacting tax reforms.“If we can do a package like that we can move forward in the near future,” Deese said. “It will not only help in lowering prices, but it will send a signal to the markets and the global economy that the United States is really deadly serious about taking on this inflation.”In a rare one-on-one interview last week, Biden set out his administration’s public line.“First of all, it’s not inevitable,” he said to the Associated Press. “Secondly, we’re in a stronger position than any nation in the world to overcome this inflation.”As clouds gathered over the US economic position during the past 18 months, administration economic officials and central bankers have reformed their inflation message from “transitory” to an economy, as Deese said, that is “in a transition.”TopicsUS politicsUS economyReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Searing testimony increases odds of charges against Trump, experts say

      by

      Searing testimony increases odds of charges against Trump, experts say Former prosecutors say January 6 hearings have delivered ‘compelling evidence that Trump committed crimes’The searing testimony and growing evidence about Donald Trump’s central role in a multi-pronged conspiracy to overturn Joe Biden’s election in 2020 presented at the House January 6 committee’s first three hearings, has increased the odds that Trump will face criminal charges, say former DoJ prosecutors and officials.The panel’s initial hearings provided a kind of legal roadmap about Trump’s multi-faceted drives – in tandem with some top lawyers and loyalists – to thwart Biden from taking office, that should benefit justice department prosecutors in their sprawling investigations into the January 6 assault on the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters.Ex-justice department lawyers say new revelations at the hearings increase the likelihood that Trump will be charged with crimes involving conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding or defrauding the United States, as he took desperate and seemingly illegal steps to undermine Biden’s election.The January 6 hearings aren’t acknowledging the elephant in the room | Thomas ZimmerRead moreTrump could also potentially face fraud charges over his role in an apparently extraordinary fundraising scam – described by House panel members as the “big rip-off” – that netted some $250m for an “election defense fund” that did not exist but funneled huge sums to Trump’s Save America political action committee and Trump properties.The panel hopes to hold six hearings on different parts of what its vice-chair, Liz Cheney, called Trump’s “sophisticated seven-part plan” to overturn the election.Trump was told repeatedly, for instance, by top aides and cabinet officials – including ex-attorney general Bill Barr – that the election was not stolen, and that his fraud claims were “completely bullshit” and “crazy stuff” as Barr put it in a video of his scathing deposition. But Trump persisted in pushing baseless fraud claims with the backing of key allies including his ex-personal attorney Rudy Giuliani and lawyer John Eastman.“The January 6 committee’s investigation has developed substantial, compelling evidence that Trump committed crimes, including but not limited to conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruct official proceedings,” Michael Bromwich, a former inspector general at the DoJ told the Guardian.Donald Ayer, a former deputy attorney general in the George HW Bush administration, told the Guardian that “the committee hearings have bolstered the need to seriously consider filing criminal charges against Trump”.The crux of any prosecution of Trump would hinge heavily on convincing a jury that Trump knew he lost the election and acted with criminal intent to overturn the valid election results. The hearings have focused heavily on testimony that Trump fully knew he had lost and went full steam ahead to concoct schemes to stay in power.New revelations damaging to Trump emerged on Thursday when Greg Jacob, the ex-counsel to former vice-president Mike Pence, recounted in detail how Eastman and Trump waged a high-pressure drive, publicly and privately, even as the Capitol was under attack, to prod Pence to unlawfully block Biden’s certification by Congress on January 6.The Eastman pressure included a scheme to substitute pro-Trump fake electors from states that Biden won for electors rightfully pledged to Biden – a scheme the DoJ has been investigating for months and that now involves a grand jury focused on Eastman, Giuliani and several other lawyers and operatives.Eastman at one point acknowledged to Jacob that he knew his push to get Pence on January 6 to reject Biden’s winning electoral college count would violate the Electoral Count Act, and that Trump, too, was told it would be illegal for Pence to block Biden’s certification.Paul Pelletier, a former acting chief of the DoJ’s fraud section, said: “It is a target-rich environment, with many accessories both before and after the fact to be investigated.”But experts caution any decision to charge Trump will be up to the current attorney general, Merrick Garland, who has been careful not to discuss details of his department’s January 6 investigations, which so far have led to charges against more than 800 individuals, including some Proud Boys and Oath Keepers charged with seditious conspiracy.After the first two hearings, Garland told reporters, “I’m watching and I will be watching all the hearings,” adding that DoJ prosecutors are doing likewise.Garland remarked in reference to possibly investigating Trump: “We’re just going to follow the facts wherever they lead … to hold all perpetrators who are criminally responsible for January 6 accountable, regardless of their level, their position, and regardless of whether they were present at the events on January 6.”But Garland has not yet tipped his hand if Trump himself is under investigation. Despite that reticence, justice department veterans say the wealth of testimony from one-time Trump insiders and new revelations at the House hearings should spur the department to investigate and charge Trump.Barbara McQuade, a former US attorney for eastern Michigan, said the panel’s early evidence was strong, including “video testimony of Trump insiders who told Trump that he was going to lose badly, and that with regard to claims of election fraud, there was ‘no there there’,” as Trump’s ex-chief of staff Mark Meadows acknowledged in one exchange made public at the hearings.McQuade added that Barr’s testimony was “devastating for Trump. He and other Trump insiders who testified about their conversations with Trump established that Trump knew he had lost the election and continued to make public claims of fraud anyway. That knowledge can help establish the fraudulent intent necessary to prove criminal offenses against Trump.”In a novel legal twist that could emerge if Trump is charged, Bromwich said: “Bizarrely, Trump’s best defense to the mountain of evidence that proves these crimes seems to be that he was incapable of forming the criminal intent necessary to convict. That he was detached from reality, in Barr’s words. But there is strong evidence that he is not crazy – but instead is crazy like a fox.“How else to explain his attempts to pressure the Georgia secretary of state to ‘find the votes’ necessary to change the result? Or his telling DoJ officials to simply declare the election ‘corrupt’ and leave ‘the rest to me’ and Republican House allies?”Bromwich added: “All of this shows not someone incapable of forming criminal intent, but someone who understood what the facts were and was determined not to accept them. Because he couldn’t stand to lose. That was far more important to him than honoring our institutions or the constitution.”Former federal prosecutor Michael Zeldin said Trump could face charges over what Cheney called the “big rip-off”, which centers on the allegation that “Trump raised money from small-dollar donors after the election under false pretenses”.Zeldin said: “Specifically, he asked for money to fight election fraud when, in fact, the money was used for other purposes. This type of conduct could violate the wire fraud statute.”Ayer cited the importance of a justice department regulation identifying factors to consider in deciding whether to charge, and noted three of particular relevance to Trump – the nature and severity of the offence, the important deterrent effect of prosecutions, and the culpability of the individual being charged.But it might not be all plain sailing.Simmering tensions between the panel and the justice department have escalated over DoJ requests – rebuffed so far – to obtain 1,000 witness transcripts of committee interviews, which prosecutors say are needed for upcoming trials of Proud Boys and other cases. However, the New York Times has reported some witness transcripts could be shared next month.Nonetheless, as Garland weighs whether to move forward with investigating and charging Trump, experts caution a prosecution of Trump would require enormous resources, given the unprecedented nature of such a high-stakes case, and the risks that a jury could end up acquitting Trump – which might only enhance his appeal to the Republican base. Yet at the same time ,the stakes for the country of not aggressively investigating Trump are also extremely high.“No one should underestimate the gravity of deciding to criminally charge an ex-president,” said former federal prosecutor Dennis Aftergut.For Aftergut, though, charging Trump seems imperative.“Ultimately, the avalanche of documents and sworn testimony proving a multi-faceted criminal conspiracy to overturn the will of the people means one thing: if no one is above the law, even an ex-president who led that conspiracy must be indicted.”TopicsDonald TrumpJanuary 6 hearingsUS politicsUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

    • 75 Shares149 Views

      in World Politics

      India’s Foreign Minister Schools Western Journalist

      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

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘It gives us great hope’: mom of missing US serviceman says video is authentic

      by

      ‘It gives us great hope’: mom of missing US serviceman says video is authenticA video of Alexander Drueke expressing his love for his mother has not yet been validated by the state department The mother of an American military veteran who volunteered to defend Ukraine from Russian invaders and was reportedly captured recently said a video of him expressing his love for her gave her “great hope”.Lois Drueke told the Guardian on Friday that she believes the video of her son Alexander Drueke – distributed by Russian state media – is authentic because of a phrase he uttered in the clip with his distinctively deep voice.Lois Drueke declined to specify what that phrase was, but in the video, her 39-year-old son is seen saying: “Mom, I just want to let you know that I’m alive, and I hope to be back home as soon as I can. So love diesel for me. Love you.”Third American volunteer fighter reported missing in UkraineRead moreShe added that the US state department, which is investigating the capture of Drueke and at least one other American volunteer in Ukraine, had still not officially confirmed the video’s authenticity. But, she acknowledged, “We think it’s Alex – it looks like him, [and] it sounds like him.“Just seeing him move, just hearing his voice, gives us great hope. I don’t want to get my hopes up too much, but it does seem to be him.”The brief video clip in question began circulating after US president Joe Biden told reporters that he had been briefed on the disappearances in Ukraine of Drueke, his fellow military veteran and Alabama resident Andy Tai Ngoc Huynh, and Grady Kurpasi, who apparently went missing in April.“We don’t know where they are,” Biden said to reporters. “But I want to reiterate: Americans should not be going to Ukraine now.”Biden’s remarks came a day after a photograph surfaced that appeared to show both Drueke and Huynh in the back of a military truck with their hands tied behind their back, the clearest piece of evidence that they were no longer missing but had been arrested by Russian forces invading Ukraine.That photo was followed on Friday with the video apparently depicting Drueke addressing his mother, along with another clip in which he said in English, “I am against war.”Videos of Huynh also surfaced, including one with Russian state media branding in which he calmly recounts a purported version of events on the day he and Drueke were captured.Huynh, 27, said he and Drueke were part of a unit with a large number of French nationals that became locked in a gunfight with Russian troops.“The Ukrainians were retreating, and we were asked to cover their retreat,” Huynh says in the clip. “When we were covering them, the Russian forces overran our position.”Huynh said he and a colleague waited for three hours “in a fighting hole just to make sure the coast is clear”. After emerging, the pair walked five more hours through the woods and on to a road where they “surrendered” to Russian forces, Huynh said on the video.The Telegraph, which was first to report that Drueke and Huynh had gone missing, cited an account from an unnamed fellow fighter who said the pair were taken prisoner after a battle with Russian forces north-east of Kharkiv on 9 June.Lois Drueke cautioned against taking everything in the videos at face value. She said her son – before going to Ukraine – had warned her that he could be taken prisoner and, if that happened, might be made to say inauthentic things on video by his captors.Many have called on people to not share videos of those taken captive during the Ukraine-Russia war, arguing that they violate the Geneva conventions’ prohibition against making a spectacle of imprisoned combatants. But media organizations can report on such images without breaching the conventions, which apply only to nation states or other so-called detaining powers.Drueke, Huynh and Kurpasi are believed to be among hundreds of Americans – and possibly more – who went to Ukraine in hopes of helping the country repel the Russian invasion that began in February.Drueke served two combat tours in Iraq and was teaching Ukraine’s troops how to use American-made weapons. Huynh and Kurpasi each previously spent time with the US Marines.Captured American-born defenders of Ukraine create a diplomatically tricky situation for the US. The US is pumping billions of dollars into supporting Ukraine’s defense but is avoiding a direct clash with Russia.Drueke’s aunt, Dianna Shaw, on Friday pleaded with the captors of her nephew and Huynh to treat them “humanely”.She also said that a bipartisan congressional delegation from Alabama was working hard to keep his and Huynh’s loved ones informed about their apparent capture. Shaw singled out the aides of both Democratic House representative Terri Sewell, of Huntsville, and Republican senator Richard Shelby, of Birmingham, as being particularly open about where things stood.“We are very encouraged by the way all … have communicated consistently with us and with each other,” Shaw said.TopicsUS militaryUkraineRussiaAlabamaUS politicsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A one-sided witch-hunt’: angry Trump lashes out at January 6 hearings

      by

      ‘A one-sided witch-hunt’: angry Trump lashes out at January 6 hearingsFormer president attacks ‘disgraceful performance of the unselect committee’ and denies he bullied Mike Pence to overturn election Donald Trump has launched an angry verbal attack on the congressional January 6 hearings, dismissing them as a “rigged deal” and “one-sided witch-hunt” that are “getting terrible ratings”.In his first public appearance since the televised sessions began, Trump on Friday claimed without evidence that the House of Representatives panel has made its case using doctored videos and deceptively edited witness depositions.Biden says Americans are ‘really, really down’ in rare one-on-one interviewRead moreHe also denied the allegation made on Thursday that he bullied Vice-President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 election. “I never called Mike Pence a wimp,” Trump told a gathering of religious conservatives in Nashville, Tennessee. “Mike Pence had a chance to be great, he had a chance, frankly, to be historic. Mike – and I say it sadly because I like him – but Mike did not have the courage to act.”Trump’s desperate attempts to remain in power after he lost the election to Joe Biden have been thrown back into the spotlight by the select committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol, with visceral footage and damning testimony from his closest aides and family.The panel is methodically making the case that the attack on the US Capitol was an attempted coup and that Trump was at the centre of the conspiracy. On Thursday, it heard that the attack jeopardized Pence’s life. The findings could prompt the justice department to pursue a criminal prosecution against Trump.Wearing a dark suit, white shirt and red tie, the former president walked on to a stage framed by a faux classical temple with Corinthian columns in a ballroom at the Gaylord Opryland Resort & Convention Center in Nashville, Tennessee.Trump was nearly two hours later than scheduled at the Faith & Freedom Coalition’s “Road to Majority” conference, but attendees gathering under a ceiling painted to resemble a blue sky and clouds greeted him with rapturous cheers and chants of “USA! USA!”Unrepentant, he continued to push his “big lie” of a stolen election and likened Pence to a “robot” and “human conveyor belt” for accepting the advice of those who said he did not have the authority to reject state electors and therefore keep Trump in the Oval Office.Trump described the hearings as an “insurrection hoax” reminiscent of the investigations into his election campaign ties with Russia but said it was ultimately “peanuts” by comparison.“There’s no cleaner example of the menacing spirit that has devoured the American left than the disgraceful performance being staged by the ‘unselect’ committee,” Trump said during a rambling speech. “They’re con people. They’re con artists. Every one of them is a radical left hater, hates all of you, hates me even more than you, but I’m just trying to help you out.“The ‘unselects’ have shredded every standard of decency, fairness, precedent, tradition, separation of powers, executive privilege and due process. Nobody’s ever done this before. They are knowingly spinning a fake and phony narrative and in a chilling attempt to weaponise the justice system against their political opponents.”The committee hearings have turned the words of Trump’s inner circle against him. His attorney general William Barr was seen in a deposition describing the claims of election fraud as “bullshit”, and the former president’s daughter testified that she accepted Barr’s assessment.Without offering evidence, Trump claimed that the panel was using video that has been misleadingly doctored and edited out of context. “The committee is taking the testimony of witnesses who defended me for eight hours, chopping it up and truncating soundbites to make it sound like what they said was absolutely terrible,” he remarked.He added: “Just remember, it’s also the people that weren’t allowed to even testify but wanted to. A lot of people wanted to go and testify about what they saw and how crooked it was. Meanwhile, the committee refuses to play any of the tape of people saying the good things, the things that we want to hear.”The former president went on to hurl puerile insults at Congressman Adam Kinzinger, one of two Republicans on the committee along with seven Democrats.“It’s a one-way street. It’s a rigged deal. It’s a disgrace and it’s never happened in the history of our country where we have no representation,” Trump said. “They say, ‘Oh, they have Republicans!’ Who are they? Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, the crier. He cries every time he speaks.”Pointing to his head, Trump mocked: “This guy’s got a mental disorder.” Pretending to trace tears from his eyes, he added: “He cries. Every time this guy gets up to speak, he starts crying. I said there’s something wrong with that guy. These are our representatives.”Trump said that he would “very, very seriously” consider pardons for those involved in the riot if he became president again. “What happened on January 6th was a simple protest that got out of hand,” he said.He compared the size of a crowd at his speech earlier in the day to that which attended civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr’s “I Have A Dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. “I made a nice speech but I liked his speech better,” he quipped.He claimed that “no one was killed” except the Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot while attempting to climb through a broken window inside the Capitol. In fact, a bipartisan Senate report connected seven deaths to the insurrection.Trump summed up: “Let’s be clear, this is not a congressional investigation, this horrible situation that’s wasting everyone’s time. This is a theatrical production of partisan political fiction that’s getting these terrible, terrible ratings, and they’re going crazy.”He also used his speech to attack the Biden administration and insist that war would never have broken out in Ukraine if he was still president. As is customary at his rallies, he teased another White House run in 2024. “Would anyone like me to run for president?” he asked. There was a sustained roar of approval from the crowd.It is hard to find anyone at the Faith & Freedom event who is being swayed by the January 6 committee. Asked if she watched Thursday’s hearing, Susanne Thoen, 67, a retired human resources director from Nashville, said: “The farce? Excuse me? You mean the leftist agenda? No. There was no insurrection. I’m not going to waste my time watching the mainstream media.”Joseph Padilla, 42, a retired US marine, added: “It’s another distraction. Is this something that they’re trying to make a big push to divide us more because of the midterms coming up? They’re trying to point out flaws because this administration has nothing but flaws.”TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More