Palestinians and the world must not lose hope
When in early October we, Palestinians, laid out to the world what was going to happen, our testimonies and foresight were seen as an exaggeration. Our warnings of Israel’s terrifying enthusiasm for using excessive violence were not taken seriously. Worse, our warnings that Israel was going to commit killings of Palestinians on a massive scale were dubbed “anti-Semitic”. Today, the official statistics say 33,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli air strikes with US-made bombs, shelling and field executions in Gaza and the West Bank. This number does not account for all those “missing” under the rubble, shot dead in the streets or in their homes by the occupation soldiers, or buried under the sand by their bulldozers. And while Gaza is bearing the brunt of Israel’s tormenting violence, Palestinians in the West Bank are being arrested by the thousands, including children, most of whom are denied trial. They are held under torturous and abusive conditions that have resulted in the killing of at least 13 Palestinian captives in the last six months. Meanwhile, Palestinians with Israeli citizenship as well as Palestinians in Jerusalem suffer under Israel’s draconian apartheid laws while being policed, detained, tortured and attacked by Israeli mobs for simply sharing social media posts or consuming what Israel calls “terrorist media”. If I were to describe the past 26 weeks, it would be one hour after another of just barely pulling through. I have asked myself, what is the point of writing another piece about Israel’s remorseless sadism? Between pitching this article and finding the strength to actually write it, more than 3,000 Palestinian children, women and men were killed. Al-Shifa Medical Complex was completely destroyed and the extrajudicial killings in the West Bank have only intensified. The feeling of numbness, of paralysis among Palestinians is one of the aims of the Israeli “attrition” strategy. A war of attrition is meant to create the conditions to drain, exhaust and weaken an opponent. It is meant to diminish the capacity to fight back. Israel’s goal is the emotional, moral and mental depletion of those resisting its occupation and colonisation so they lose motivation and commitment to engage and mobilise in the face of brute repression. It has applied this strategy in “peacetime” as well. Following in the footsteps of European colonialists and their logic of pacification, Israel has sought to wear down the Palestinian population into full submission by making life impossible at all levels. While feeding the world the false narrative of “self-defence”, it has tried to create the moribund Palestinian: not necessarily dead, but always on the edge, constantly facing the choice between death and torment. I do not think I will ever be able to fully explain what it is like to be a Palestinian – in all the shades of bruises we come in. It is not for the lack of words as much it is for the recognition that if I were to speak of the horrors, I am not confident that those who listen would bear to hear all the pain embedded in the Palestinian experience. For the past 182 days, Palestinians have been plunged into waves of deep grief, penetrating pain, and a crippling fear of anticipated loss. Quivers of terror remain stuck in our spine unable to escape, just like us. One of the most testing parts of this aggression is having to manage this grief. So many people we know are either killed, arrested or displaced. Palestinians have suffered not only physical displacement but psychological displacement as well; our mental and emotional anchors have been dislodged. It is an excruciating type of pain to keep witnessing the different ways in which Palestinian bodies can be turned lifeless. There is no capacity to bury the slain bodies, no ability to collectively mourn our losses, not just the material but also the emotional: the destroyed homes, the destroyed memories, and the destroyed hope we mustered to have. With continued exposure to Israel’s unyielding psychopathy, comes a collective feeling of burnout not only among the population still trying to survive Israel’s slaughter, but also among those mobilising to stop a genocide still being committed as I write these words. The burnout is real. Too many of us are too exhausted to say anything, to resist succumbing to the delusion that our voices do not matter and will achieve nothing. As we sit with those uncomfortable and hopeless feelings, the war persists and the scale of the horrors increases. And it is not just us, Palestinians in Palestine. This extends to those in the world who rose up against the genocide. Israel has responded to global resistance with more slaughter – like the killing of international humanitarian workers – and more lobbying for its critics to be punished. As governments refuse to take action to end the slaughter, those mobilising against the genocide are slowly and strategically pushed towards incapacitation, despair, and the conviction that the Israeli onslaught cannot be stopped. In May of 2021, when Palestinians were in the midst of the largest uprisings of the past decades, when they showed true unity across Gaza, the West Bank, the 1948 territories and the diaspora, I wrote a piece for the Guardian titled, Why are Palestinians protesting? Because we want to live. I wrote the piece on my phone in between running from tear gas fired by Israeli soldiers and barely escaping the brutal beatings at the hands of the Palestinian Authority’s security forces. Those were brutal times, terrifying times, and defining times. In that piece, I tried to capture the strategy of colonialism: “This is what colonialism does: it suffocates every part of your life, and then it finishes by burying you.” I was not trying to draw a silhouette of a killer. I was trying to capture the moment of defiance and renewed unity among Palestinians from the river to the sea and in the diaspora. “It is a strategic, deliberate process, and it is only obstructed or delayed because oppressors are
‘Mission impossible’: Families slam Canada’s Gaza visa scheme as a failure
Montreal, Canada – “Unlivable.” That’s how Canada’s immigration minister, Marc Miller, described the situation in the Gaza Strip in late December. The Palestinian territory was under fierce Israeli bombardment at the time. At least 20,000 people had been killed, and hunger was spreading at an alarming rate as Israel blocked deliveries of food, water and other necessities. As conditions continued to deteriorate, Miller announced that the Canadian government was launching a special visa programme to allow citizens and permanent residents to bring extended family members from Gaza to Canada. “To be clear, today is about providing a humanitarian pathway to safety and recognising the importance of keeping families together given the ongoing devastation,” he told reporters on December 21. But more than three months later, not a single Palestinian applicant has left the Gaza Strip as a result of the visa programme. That has fuelled a sense of anger and frustration for families who say Canada has abandoned them and their loved ones — and are demanding action from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government. Samar Alkhdour stands in front of Canadian Immigration Minister Marc Miller’s office in Montreal on March 29 [Jillian Kestler-D’Amours/Al Jazeera] “What are they waiting for?” asked Samar Alkhdour, a Palestinian mother who has lived in Canada since 2019 and received permanent residency in February. Alkhdour began a daily sit-in outside Miller’s office in Montreal, the second-largest city in Canada, late last month to put pressure on the government to get her relatives out of Gaza. She is trying to bring her sister, her sister’s husband and their two children — who are currently living with relatives in Deir el-Balah, in central Gaza — to Montreal to join her and her family. But the family’s applications remain in the early stages of the process, Alkhdour told Al Jazeera. “I’m still fighting, I’m working on it,” she said in late March at the sit-in, a black-and-white keffiyeh draped over her shoulders. “But deep down inside, in my heart, I’m starting to lose hope. “And maybe that’s one reason I’m here — because no one’s doing nothing.” Adblock test (Why?)
Amid diplomatic spat, Mexico grants former Ecuadorian vice president asylum
Amid a developing diplomatic spat, Mexico has granted asylum to a former Ecuadorian vice president accused of bribery while in office. In a statement on Friday, Mexico’s foreign ministry said it had offered political asylum to Jorge Glas, who has been staying in Mexico’s embassy in Quito since late last year. The statement called on Quito to grant “safe passage” to Glas, who had twice been convicted of corruption, to leave the country. “Once asylum is granted, the asylum state can request the departure of the asylum seeker to a foreign territory, and the territorial state [Ecuador] is obliged to immediately grant the corresponding person safe passage,” Mexico’s foreign ministry wrote. The ministry also condemned what it described as an “increase in the presence of Ecuadorian police forces” outside of its embassy in Quito. Ecuadorean authorities have continually sought permission to enter the embassy and arrest Glas, who was sentenced to six years in prison in 2017. The announcement has come at a moment of heightened tension for the two countries. On Thursday, Ecuador declared Mexico’s ambassador a “persona non grata”, in response to comments made by Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. What did Lopez Obrador say? The remarks that set off the diplomatic incident were aired on Wednesday, during Lopez Obrador’s daily news briefing. Speaking to reporters, the left-leaning Mexican president implied that violence had affected the outcome of Ecuador’s recent presidential elections. “In a very strange way, there were elections in Ecuador,” Lopez Obrador explained. He then proceeded to address the assassination of Ecuadorean presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio in August 2023, weeks before the first round of voting. Lopez Obrador implied that frontrunner Luisa Gonzalez ultimately lost Ecuador’s election because of Villavicencio’s murder and the media speculation it produced. Villavicencio had been a longtime anticorruption campaigner and was a vocal critic of Gonzalez’s left-wing party, the Citizen Revolution Movement. “A male candidate who speaks ill of the female candidate who was on top is suddenly murdered,” Lopez Obrador said, without naming either Villavicencio or Gonzalez. “And the female candidate who was at the top falls.” In the run-off vote in October, Gonzalez narrowly lost the Ecuadorian presidency to centre-right businessman Daniel Noboa, a relative newcomer to national politics and the heir to a banana industry fortune. What was the reaction? The Ecuadorian foreign ministry followed Lopez Obrador’s statements on Thursday by declaring Mexico’s ambassador to Ecuador, Raquel Serur Smeke, persona non grata and telling her to leave the country “soon”. It also acknowledged Villavicencio’s assassination, which took place outside of a political rally in Quito on August 9. “Ecuador is still mourning this unfortunate event that caused shock in Ecuadorian society and threatens democracy, peace and security,” the ministry wrote. It also called Lopez Obrador’s statements on the matter “unfortunate”. Supporters of the Mexican president, however, defended his remarks, saying that he was attempting to compare the situation in Ecuador to the recent violence Mexico has faced in the run-up to its June 2 elections. Several local candidates in Mexico have already been killed, including Bertha Gisela Gaytan, a candidate representing Lopez Obrador’s Morena party in the race to be mayor of Celaya. Critics have also pointed out that Lopez Obrador’s statements appeared to be largely critical of the media. In his Wednesday remarks, Lopez Obrador accused media companies of whipping up a “heated atmosphere” in Ecuador before the vote. On Friday, Lopez Obrador said Mexico would not expel Ecuador’s ambassador in retaliation. Speaking shortly before his foreign ministry made the announcement on Glas, he shrugged off the suggestion that there was any dispute between the two countries. “For there to be a fight, there need to be two parties involved,” he said. He also called Mexico’s ambassador to Ecuador, Serur Smeke, an “exceptional person”. Known for his outspokenness, Lopez Obrador has spurred tensions in recent years with his comments about regional politics. Last year, for instance, he provoked ire in Peru after offering asylum to impeached former President Pedro Castillo, who is currently in jail. He also questioned the legitimacy of Castillo’s successor, current President Dina Boluarte. “So long as there isn’t democratic normalcy in Peru, we don’t want economic or trade relations with them,” he said. Peru’s Congress responded by declaring Lopez Obrador a “persona non grata”. Adblock test (Why?)
‘Fishing’: Judge denies Trump team bid to seize NBC Stormy Daniels material
Judge Juan Merchan criticised the defence team’s attempt to compel NBC to turn over documents related to Stormy Daniels. A New York Judge has blocked an attempt by Donald Trump‘s lawyers to force the NBC news network to turn over materials related to a recent documentary about adult film actor Stormy Daniels. The ruling on Thursday by Manhattan Judge Juan Merchan comes shortly before a trial related to both Trump and Daniels is set to start on April 15. In New York, Trump – the former United States president – faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records for alleged hush money payments he made to Daniels and others. Marchan called the Trump team’s efforts to subpoena NBC “the very definition of a fishing expedition”. The request, he said, did not meet the heavy legal burden needed to require a news organisation to provide unrestricted access to its reporting. The ruling is the latest setback for Trump, who is set to be officially named the Republican Party’s candidate for the 2024 presidential race. He faces four separate criminal cases, with the New York trial the first to begin. The case centres on allegations that Trump falsified his company’s internal records to hide the true nature of the hush money payments, made during the 2016 presidential campaign. The payments were made through his former lawyer Michael Cohen, who allegedly helped bury negative stories about Trump, a presidential hopeful at the time. Among other payments, Cohen offered Daniels $130,000 to suppress her claims of an extramarital sexual encounter with Trump years earlier. Daniels is set to be a key prosecution witness in the trial. On Wednesday, Merchan also rejected a request from the defence team to delay the trial until the US Supreme Court rules on claims of presidential immunity claims Trump has made in a separate case. Merchan said the request was untimely. Trump’s lawyers had previously failed to block Cohen and Daniels from testifying in the trial. The New York indictment was the first of the four criminal cases against Trump to be announced. After the history-making indictment in March of last year, Trump pleaded not guilty to the 34 felony counts. His lawyers had argued the payments were legitimate legal expenses. The former president has also denied having a sexual encounter with Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford. Trump’s lawyers had subpoenaed NBC Universal on March 11. They sought all documents related to the production, editing, marketing and release of the documentary, as well as any compensation Daniels received and any agreements between her and the network. The lawyers argued the subpoena would yield evidence that NBC Universal and Daniels colluded to release the documentary close to the start of the trial to bias the public and increase profits. NBC had denied those claims. In the four-page decision, Judge Merchan wrote that the defence subpoena was “far too broad” and that its collusion claims were “purely speculative and unsupported” by evidence. Merchan added the subpoena sought to “rifle through the privileged documents of a news organization”. In addition to the New York state hush money case, Trump also faces two federal criminal cases. One, in Florida, is for allegedly hoarding classified documents after leaving office. The other, in Washington, DC, accuses him of conspiring to overturn the 2020 presidential elections. He faces a fourth criminal case in Georgia for efforts to overturn election results in that state too. Adblock test (Why?)
Is India behind targeted killings in Pakistan? What we know
Islamabad, Pakistan — Since June 2021, Pakistan has tracked and accused Indian intelligence agencies of multiple attempts — some successful — at assassinating individuals New Delhi views as terrorists sheltered by Islamabad. On Thursday, British newspaper The Guardian backed those claims, three months after Pakistan’s government formally levelled similar allegations against India. But in the murky world of spies and contract killers, where little can be confirmed independently, New Delhi has long denied its role in extraterritorial assassinations — even as allegations against it have mounted, including from the United States and Canada, friends of India. Here’s what’s known about the alleged killings in Pakistan, what remains limited to accusations, and the implications of the allegations. Who is India accused of having killed in Pakistan? Pakistani security officials speaking to Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity acknowledged at least six killings in 2023, and two in the year before, as those that they believe were carried out by a “hostile intelligence agency” — code for India’s external spy agency, the Research and Analysis Wing — and were investigating. In January this year, Pakistan’s top diplomat in a news conference also claimed that there is “credible evidence” of Indian involvement in killings in the country. “These are killings-for-hire cases involving a sophisticated international set-up spread over multiple jurisdictions,” Foreign Secretary Muhammad Syrus Sajjad Qazi told reporters on January 25 in Islamabad. Qazi specifically mentioned the murders of Muhammad Riaz, killed in Pakistan-administered Kashmir in September 2023, and Shahid Latif, killed a month later in the city of Sialkot in the eastern province of Punjab. The diplomat alleged that both the murders were orchestrated by Indian agents. After the killing of two men, Indian news outlets claimed that Riaz was a top commander of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-based armed group that New Delhi has long accused of some of the deadliest attacks on its soil — including in Mumbai in 2008, when gunmen killed 166 people over three days. Latif, Indian channels claimed, was associated with another Pakistan-based armed group, the Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM), and was allegedly a key figure involved in the attack on an Indian airbase in Pathankot in January 2016, in which one civilian and seven Indian security personnel were killed. Pakistan did not confirm these alleged links. While Pakistan has not formally acknowledged any other killings besides the two, Qazi in his news conference said there were more incidents that the government is probing into. “There are a few other cases of similar gravity at various stages of investigation,” he said. Among the suspected assassinations was the killing of Sikh community leader Paramjit Singh Panjwar in Lahore — Panjwar was shot dead in May last year. The Indian government had declared Singh an “individual terrorist”, issuing a notification [PDF] in 2020, which accused him of arranging arms training and supplying weapons to carry out attacks in India. Saleem Rehmani, also wanted by India as a “terrorist”, was shot dead in January 2022 in Pakistan. The residence of Hafiz Saeed, co-founder of the banned organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), was targeted in June 2021 in Lahore [EPA] What about other Indian operations in Pakistan? Abdul Sayed, a Sweden-based researcher on armed groups says the recent killings — if indeed orchestrated by India — were foreshadowed by a significant event three years ago in June 2021 when a car bomb explosion in Lahore took place near the residence of Hafiz Saeed, the co-founder of the LeT. “Pakistani authorities attributed this incident to Indian intelligence,” Sayed told Al Jazeera. “Subsequently, there was an escalation in attacks from early 2022 onwards, targeting key commanders of various former Kashmiri armed groups.” National Security Advisor Moeed Yusuf had first blamed India for the attack outside Saeed’s house in July 2021 — a charge that Pakistan levelled again in December 2022. Saeed, who is currently in custody in Pakistan, is accused by India and the United States of masterminding the 2008 Mumbai attacks. India has been demanding that Pakistan hand over Saeed — who has denied the charges — to face trial in the case. The last such demand was made by the Indian government in December last year. The primary bone of contention between the two nuclear-armed neighbours is the picturesque Kashmir valley, which is currently divided in two, with both India and Pakistan controlling parts of it. They have fought two of their three full-fledged wars over the territory. India accuses Pakistan of supporting armed groups such as the LeT and JeM in a bid to foment trouble in Indian-administered Kashmir. Pakistan has steadfastly denied the charges, saying it merely supports the right of Kashmiri citizens to self-determination against Indian rule. India calls armed rebels in Kashmir “terrorists”. What has India said about Pakistan’s allegations? India, which denied the allegations in the latest news report, has also rejected the accusations made by Pakistan previously that New Delhi’s spies were involved in killings on foreign soil. In January, after the Pakistani foreign secretary’s media briefing, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs described the allegations as Pakistan’s attempt at “peddling false” propaganda, saying Pakistan will “reap what it sows”. “As the world knows, Pakistan has long been the epicentre of terrorism, organised crime, and illegal transnational activities. India and many other countries have publicly warned Pakistan cautioning that it would be consumed by its own culture of terror and violence,” the Indian statement said. But Pakistan is no longer the only country levelling such allegations against India. Is India accused of other killings on foreign soil? The allegations and reports of India’s involvement in the killings of Pakistani nationals come at a time when New Delhi has also been accused by the US and Canada of a potential role in plots to assassinate dissidents living in those countries. In November, US prosecutors said an Indian intelligence official had masterminded a plan for the killing of Sikh separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a dual citizen of the US and Canada, in New York. Nikhil Gupta, a middleman tasked with finding
Few changes after Kuwait holds first parliamentary election under new emir
Opposition candidates won 29 seats in the 50-member assembly, closely matching the outcome of last year’s polls, official results show. Opposition politicians maintained a majority in Kuwait’s parliament, results have shown after the country’s third parliamentary vote in as many years. The polls on Thursday were the first to be held under new Emir Sheikh Mishal al-Ahmad al-Sabah who came to power late last year after the death of his half-brother and predecessor, Sheikh Nawaf al-Ahmad al-Jaber al-Sabah. The official KUNA news agency said on Friday that opposition candidates had won 29 seats in the 50-member assembly, matching the outcome of last year’s election. Results also showed a single female candidate was elected, the same as in the previous parliament, while Shia Muslim legislators secured eight seats in the predominantly Sunni Muslim country, one more than last year. Seats for the Islamic Constitutional Movement, which represents the Kuwaiti branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, fell to one from the previous three. Overall, the makeup of the new parliament is very similar to the outgoing one, with all but 11 politicians retaining their seats. “No radical change was expected in the results,” said Bader al-Saif, assistant professor of history at Kuwait University. “This is one of the lowest change ratios,” he told AFP news agency. Turnout was about 62 percent after polling stations closed at midnight, the information ministry said. Parliamentary elections have become an annual occurrence for Kuwait, which has seven percent of the world’s oil reserves and the monarchical Gulf’s most powerful elected assembly. However, disputes between the national assembly and the royal-appointed cabinet have caused constant deadlocks, delaying much-needed reforms. The vote was the third since 2022 and the fourth in five years. Political showdown With little change to the parliamentary lineup, the political impasse is expected to continue, according to al-Saif. “A new showdown is in the making,” he said, adding that “some of the new faces are quite outspoken.” Sheikh Mishal has been eager to push through economic reforms in what observers say is an apparent attempt at helping the OPEC producer to catch up with Gulf neighbours which have been implementing ambitious plans to wean their economies off oil. The 83-year-old took aim at the last National Assembly and the government in his first speech before parliament after taking office in December, saying they were “harming the interests of the country and its people”. The government of Sheikh Ahmed Al-Nawaf resigned hours after the speech. Sheikh Muhammad Sabah Al-Salem Al-Sabah formed a new government that included new ministers of oil, finance, foreign affairs, interior and defence. Sheikh Mishal then dissolved parliament on February 15, less than two months into his tenure. His decree cited the assembly’s “violation of the constitutional principles” as a reason for the dissolution. The new parliament will be tasked with approving the emir’s choice of crown prince, Kuwait’s future emir. If the assembly takes the unprecedented step of rejecting his heir, Sheikh Mishal will submit three candidates for parliamentarians to choose from. Adblock test (Why?)
Why are doctors striking in several countries?
Doctors are trying to make the field more accessible, but are they concerned about quality of care or their own prestige? Many countries around the world are facing a shortage of qualified doctors. Several countries have taken steps in recent months to make achieving qualification as a doctor more accessible. But these attempts have been met with pushback from doctors, especially younger junior doctors, with many expressing frustration at having undertaken long and expensive degrees that will no longer have the same value. Some have taken their frustrations to extremes, with patients dying as junior doctors in South Korea strike. Presenter: Myriam Francois Guests: Dr Habib Rahman – Cardiology registrar Dr David Bhimji Atellah – KMPDU secretary-general Dr Alice Tan – Internal medicine specialist Adblock test (Why?)
No Labels group abandons US presidential third-party bid
It was the third-party challenge that wasn’t. The No Labels group announced on Thursday that it will not field a third-party candidate to challenge Democrat Joe Biden and Republican Donald Trump in November’s presidential election. The move comes after the organisation, which has billed itself as a bipartisan antidote to hyper-partisanship in the United States, failed to attract a high-profile centrist to be its champion. The US has long been dominated by two main parties — Republicans and Democrats — with third-party candidates generally failing to gain traction. They are often accused of siphoning votes from mainstream candidates. “No Labels has always said we would only offer our ballot line to a ticket if we could identify candidates with a credible path to winning the White House,” Nancy Jacobson, the group’s CEO, said in a statement sent out to allies. “No such candidates emerged, so the responsible course of action is for us to stand down.” The announcement further cements the general election matchup between Biden and Trump, both of whom have occupied the White House — and both of whom have seen tanking popularity in recent months. The update leaves only anti-vaccine activist Robert F Kennedy Jr, a scion of the Kennedy political dynasty, as the only prominent outsider still seeking the presidency. Kennedy said this week that he had collected enough signatures to qualify for the fall ballot in five states. No Labels’ decision comes just days after the death of founding chairman Joe Lieberman, a former Democratic senator and vice presidential candidate who became a political independent during his final term in office. Thursday’s move caps months of internal discussions at No Labels, during which the group raised tens of millions of dollars from a donor list it has kept secret. Democrats had feared the ticket would be damaging to Biden and threatened to fracture the diverse coalition of voters seen as his best pathway to victory, particularly in key battleground states. No Labels never named all of its delegates and most of its deliberations took place in secret, further stoking concerns it could scuttle Biden’s chances. “Millions of Americans are relieved that No Labels finally decided to do the right thing to keep Donald Trump out of the White House,” said Rahna Epting, a No Labels critic and executive director of the progressive organisation MoveOn. “Now, it’s time for Robert Kennedy Jr to see the writing on the wall that no third party has a path forward to winning the presidency. We must come together to defeat the biggest threat to our democracy and country: Donald Trump.” Kennedy’s campaign did not immediately comment. No Labels had previously said it qualified to appear on ballots in 21 states. But several potential presidential candidates said they would not be the group’s standard-bearer. They include former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley, who suspended her campaign for the Republican presidential nomination last month. Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat who has long roiled the party, also ruled out running, and former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, a centrist Republican, decided to run for the US Senate instead. Last month, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a Republican candidate for the presidency in 2024, also said he would not run under the No Label banner. The group had been weighing a so-called “unity ticket” with a presidential candidate from one major party and a vice presidential candidate from the other, to appeal to voters unhappy with both Biden and Trump. “We are deeply relieved that everyone rejected their offer, forcing them to stand down,” said Matt Bennett of the centrist group Third Way, which has been fighting No Labels’ 2024 ambitions. “While the threat of third-party spoilers remains, this uniquely damaging attack on President Biden and Democrats from the centre has at last ended.” Dan DuPraw, a 33-year-old sales worker in Philadelphia who would have been a delegate for the No Labels convention, called Thursday’s decision disappointing but prudent. He said he trusts the No Labels leadership to make the right call. “I understand why they made the decision, and I think it’s the right thing to do in this moment,” DuPraw told The Associated Press news agency. “But I’m so disappointed that we get Trump and Biden again. I think it’s such a horrible thing for our country.” DuPraw said he will now decide between Biden and Kennedy. “I’m excited that there are other options than the two main parties,” he said. Adblock test (Why?)
US judges reject Trump’s attempt to dismiss charges in two criminal cases
Trump has sought to dismiss cases accusing him of election interference in Georgia and of mishandling classified files. Donald Trump has suffered setbacks in two criminal cases against him, after judges in the United States nixed the former president’s efforts to dismiss charges over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents. In Florida on Thursday, US District Judge Aileen Cannon rejected Trump’s attempt to have the case accusing him of mishandling secret government files thrown out. Trump had argued that US law authorised him to retain highly sensitive documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, after leaving office in 2021. He cited the Presidential Records Act, which allows former presidents to keep personal records unrelated to their official responsibilities. But prosecutors said he was not authorised to keep secret information related to US national security, even if he viewed the records as personal. Separately on Thursday, the judge overseeing the election interference case in Georgia rejected Trump’s argument that the indictment seeks to criminalise political speech protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to free speech. But Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee wrote in his decision that, at the current pretrial stage, he must consider the language of the indictment in a way that is favourable to the prosecution. Georgia prosecutors have accused Trump and 18 others of joining a conspiracy to “unlawfully change the outcome” of the 2020 vote in the US state. But McAfee wrote that the charges do not suggest that Trump and the other defendants are being prosecuted simply for making false statements, but rather that they acted willfully and knowingly to harm the government. “Even core political speech addressing matters of public concern is not impenetrable from prosecution if allegedly used to further criminal activity,” the judge wrote. Thursday’s decisions mark the latest developments in ongoing efforts by Trump and his legal team to challenge the four criminal indictments against him, two of which relate to his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. He lost that race to current President Joe Biden. Trump has pleaded not guilty in all the cases. He has also accused prosecutors of conducting a politically motivated “witch hunt” that aims to derail his 2024 election campaign. Trump is the presumptive Republican presidential nominee and is expected to face Biden in November’s contest. While the criminal indictments have failed to curb Trump’s support among his Make America Great Again (MAGA) base, experts say a potential conviction in any of the cases could affect his chances at the ballot box. But it remains unclear whether a verdict will be reached before the election, and Trump’s team has sought to delay many of the legal proceedings. Trials in any of the four cases could create scheduling conflicts during a busy campaign season. Georgia decision Thursday’s decision in Georgia echoed an earlier ruling in the federal election interference case against Trump, brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith. US District Judge Tanya Chutkan wrote in December that “it is well established that the First Amendment does not protect speech that is used as an instrument of a crime”. The Georgia judge, McAfee, added in his decision that even lawful acts involving speech protected by the First Amendment can be used to support a charge under Georgia’s anti-racketeering law, which is being invoked in the case. But McAfee did leave open the possibility that Trump and others could raise similar arguments “at the appropriate time after the establishment of a factual record”. Steve Sadow, Trump’s lead lawyer in Georgia, said in an email to The Associated Press (AP) that Trump and the other defendants “respectfully disagree with Judge McAfee’s order and will continue to evaluate their options regarding the First Amendment challenges”. He called it significant, though, that McAfee made it clear they could raise their challenges again later. A spokesperson for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis declined to comment to AP. Adblock test (Why?)
Russia-Ukraine war: List of key events, day 771
As the war enters its 771st day, these are the main developments. Here is the situation on Friday, April 5, 2024. Fighting The death toll in a Russian drone attack on Kharkiv rose to four, including three rescue workers who were killed in a second strike after they’d gone to provide assistance following the initial attack. Governor Oleh Synehubov said 12 people were injured, with three in serious condition. The attack also cut power to about 350,000 people. In separate incidents, four people were killed in Russian artillery fire and aerial bomb attacks in the regions of Donetsk, Kharkiv and Sumy, according to local officials. Moscow-installed officials in Russian occupied parts of eastern and southern Ukraine said a total of six civilians were killed in Ukrainian drone and shelling attacks. Vasily Golubev, the governor of Russia’s Rostov-on-Don region bordering Ukraine, said air defence destroyed more than 40 airborne targets. An electricity substation in Morozovsk district was hit and work was under way to restore power supplies, he added. Border police in Moldova said they found what appeared to be fragments of an Iranian-made Russian drone about 500 metres (1,600 feet) from the border with Ukraine. The area was cordoned off. Politics and diplomacy Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said China’s 12-point peace plan, released on the first anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, was “reasonable” because it was “based on an analysis of the reasons for what is happening and the need to eliminate these root causes.” Critics have called the plan vague. An investigation by Monitor magazine and shown on public broadcaster ARD said two German construction companies were involved in rebuilding the Ukrainian city of Mariupol, which Russia seized two years ago after a weeks-long siege that killed thousands and left the city in ruins. Ukraine said it sentenced a resident of the eastern city of Kramatorsk to life in prison after he was found guilty of high treason for helping Russia target a missile strike on a pizzeria last June killing 13 people and injuring dozens more. Switzerland’s population grew last year at its fastest rate in 60 years, pushed by record immigration including thousands of people from Ukraine, according to preliminary figures from the Federal Statistics Office. Weapons Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala said Prague will donate tens of millions of euros to an initiative it is leading to buy hundreds of thousands of artillery ammunition rounds for Ukraine. The first deliveries are expected by June. NATO members agreed to scour their arsenals to provide more air defence systems to help Ukraine protect itself from Russian ballistic missile attacks, but provided no specific targets or pledges. Adblock test (Why?)