Sabtu, 05 Oktober 2019

Deaths Mount as Iraq Goes to War With Itself - The New York Times

Iraq is at war again, but this time with itself.

Security forces have repeatedly turned their weapons on fellow Iraqis this past week, killing at least 87 and wounding more than 2,000, as of Saturday.

This week, tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets in Baghdad and across southern Iraq to protest widespread government corruption, unemployment and a lack of basic services such as electricity.

The Iraqi authorities lifted a multiday curfew in Baghdad on Saturday that many antigovernment protesters had ignored. Parliament was set to meet to discuss protesters’ demands, while senior Iraqi officials, including the prime minister and Parliament speaker, were set to meet with protesters.

The harsh response by the security services suggested, however, that they had been given leeway by the leadership to take any steps necessary to halt the protests, signaling how ill-prepared the government was to respond to the demands of its own citizens.

It was also a reminder that Iraq, which never experienced an Arab Spring-like rebellion with people pouring into the streets, had security forces that were trained to deal with terrorism but were a loss to find less lethal ways to control crowds.

“I came out to the streets to ask for reform in my country and to find salvation from the mafias who have stolen my country and was greeted brutally by the security forces,” said Ibrahim Ahmed Yusuf, 34, who was wounded in the neck while demonstrating in Tahrir Square in Baghdad.

“We are peaceful protesters, but the security forces treated us with brutality, as if we were animals, not humans demanding our rights,” he said.

There have been protests in Iraq before, and some seemed more violent, including those in 2016, when crowds entered the Parliament and demanded an end to corruption, which is a core demand of the protesters now. This time, however, the protests have come with a broader and deeper sense of the government’s incompetence, and draw support from Iraqi youth, intellectuals and educated people, as well as from some political parties trying to make the most of it.

Many Iraqis are jobless, and despite the end of the largest part of the fight against the Islamic State, as well as the government’s increased oil revenues, little money is being put into jobs programs or improving services, at least not enough that people feel a significant difference in their daily lives.

Iraqis are continuing to protest despite a more violent, at times deadly, response on the part of the security forces, who in some cases have been firing directly at the protesters rather than into the air to disperse them, according to multiple reports from protesters. This itself suggests desperation, even a willingness to risk everything.

“This reflects a broad realization that the system is incapable of reforming itself,” said Randa Slim, a senior fellow and director of conflict resolution at the Middle East Institute.

“But then what is the path forward?” said Ms. Slim, who was in Iraq recently to meet with people from different backgrounds and political orientations. “I don’t think anyone has a clue.”

The protests, which began on Oct. 1, seemed to come out of nowhere, but were apparently sparked by a recent, disturbing political event: the removal in September of a highly respected general, Abdul-Wahab Al-Saadi, from the leadership of the counterterrorism command.

General Al-Saadi, who was widely believed to have done a good job in fighting the Islamic State, especially on the difficult battlefields of Mosul and Falluja, was peremptorily removed from his job and assigned to the ministry of defense.

General Al-Saadi’s profile — he is a Shiite but not aligned with any party — made him something of an Everyman soldier-hero. His dismissal was explained on the street as linked to his lack of corruption, in contrast to other senior figures, and his refusal to kowtow to the Popular Mobilization Forces, military entities within the Iraqi security forces, some of which have links to Iran.

Whether people knew General Al-Saadi was less important than what he stood for, said Abbas Kadhim, the director of the Iraq Initiative and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council who was visiting southern Iraq when demonstrations started.

“This was just a spark that unleashed all built-up grievances,” he said.

“Many of the grievances are not about Adil Abdul-Mahdi’s government,” he added. “But when you are the prime minister, you have to pay for your mistakes and those of previous leaders.”

At first, the demonstrations were small, but as the police and security forces responded with violence, they grew in size and quickly spread. The government made little effort to curb the security forces’ violence, and by Friday the Iraqi Federal Police had warned in a statement that snipers who were not part of the security forces were shooting at both the protesters and the police.

It was unclear whether these were shadowy entities within the Iraqi security establishment or elements linked to political parties or to neighboring countries seeking to promote instability in Iraq.

Caught off guard by the demonstrators, the government at first met the protesters’ anger with silence, allowing repressive actions by the security forces to dominate the narrative. Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi put a curfew in place, shut down the internet and called in additional police forces. Then he made a brief statement that backed up the security forces.

Only on Friday — as criticism rained down from the senior Shiite clerics, the United Nations and rights groups, and the repression seemed to have little effect — did the government began to reach out to those among the demonstrators whom they called the “peace protesters.”

The Parliament speaker, Mohammed Al-Halbousi, invited representatives of the protesters to meet with him, offering a laundry list of concessions. Mr. Mahdi also was planning to meet with protesters on Saturday.

The problem is that political parties now smell blood and believe they can topple Mr. Abdul-Mahdi and gain ground for themselves. Already, the leaders of two sizable political parties, Sairoon and Al Hikma, openly criticized the government and called for reform. The former is led by Moktada al-Sadr, the nationalist Shiite cleric who has been a thorn in the side of whoever has been in charge in Iraqi since 2003.

Mr. al-Sadr called for his bloc to stop participation in the Parliament and for the government to resign. If he decides to call his followers to the streets, he has broad influence in Sadr City, a sprawling, largely poor neighborhood of Baghdad that is home to more than a million people, as well as in Iraq’s second largest city, Basra, and elsewhere in southern Iraq.

Unlike the 2016 protests, when many participants were followers of the cleric, these protests include a cross-section of Iraqis, many without ties to political parties.

Different provinces have different demands, however. The disparate goals that drove people into the streets mean that, at least for now, there are no clear leaders to negotiate on behalf of the aggrieved.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/05/world/middleeast/iraq-protest.html

2019-10-05 12:20:00Z
52780400196961

Will the entire Republican Party serve as Trump's impeachment propaganda machine? - Salon

At the end of the first week of Donald Trump’s impeachment inquiry, the president finds himself without a corroborated factual defense against allegations of corruption. Yet he has the consensus support of virtually the entire Republican caucus on Capitol Hill. Rather than back away from a president whose crimes are revealed at a near-hourly rate, Republicans in Congress have now pledged to aid in the White House’s propaganda campaign meant to slow-walk the impeachment inquiry. 

After screaming “NO COLLUSION!” for the last three years, Trump flatly asserted on Thursday that he has “an absolute right” to ask a foreign government to investigate his political rival. Further attempting to normalize his impropriety, the president turned to the television cameras gathered on the South Lawn of the White House lawn and asked the government of China for help in investigating Joe Biden, a potential political rival, as he had admittedly already done. 

Advertisement:

Late Thursday brought yet another test to Republicans’ resolve when Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee released text messages between U.S. diplomats and a senior Ukrainian aide that show how a potential Ukrainian investigation into Joe Biden and the 2016 election was linked to a possible meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Trump, which authorities in Kyiv badly wanted.

Although the evidence is unambiguous, Trump seems to believe that enough Americans see nothing wrong with using public funds to pressure foreign leaders to investigate political rivals. 

He just has to tweet “NO QUID PRO QUO!” enough times. After all, he hasn’t lost the support of one Republican in Congress, with perhaps the ambiguous exception of Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, the last non-Trump Republican presidential nominee. Everyone else seems to have realized that he really is above the law, and as long as they stick with him, so are they. It is increasingly clear with every passing hour that they will never abandon their man. 

As Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., suggested after hours of testimony and pages of communications were provided by Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special representative for Ukraine, “the administration is an even stronger place today than they were this morning.” 

House Republicans, after initially attacking the intelligence community whistleblower who reported Trump’s pressure campaign against Ukraine, have finally settled on an impeachment pushback plan: Distraction.

Following Trump’s demand that House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., be arrested for treason, House Republicans announced plans to formally rebuke the congressman.

Advertisement:

They also kicked off a weekly briefing session this week to keep Republicans on-message with the White House. The Trump administration is now reportedly arguing that it's not compelled to provide documents in the impeachment inquiry unless a formal vote is held by the full House. 

“The president has confessed his violation of his oath of office so we don’t need too much inquiry,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi noted on Thursday. 

Advertisement:

Trump has essentially made it open season for foreign governments to help him get re-elected. The silence of the vast majority of Republicans is deafening. “Your silence,” as constituent Amy Haskin told Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, this week, “supports him.” Ernst is up for re-election next year in a purple state that Trump won in 2016 but that Barack Obama carried twice, and where Trump's approval rate has gone deep underwater. 

So far Romney is the only Senate Republican to voice concern on the record about the president’s alleged actions, tweeting that if Trump “asked or pressured Ukraine’s president to investigate his political rival, either directly or through his personal attorney, it would be troubling in the extreme.”

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, a Republican who plans to retire in 2022, said on Thursday that there was nothing improper about Trump's call on Chinese officials to investigate Biden. A year before, Johnson had said that "any foreign interference in our elections is unacceptable."

Advertisement:

Senate and House Republicans are standing by their man because they sense that if they abandon Trump, they won’t win another national election in a generation. As Peter Beinart wrote: "For many Republicans, Trump remains uncorrupt — indeed, anticorrupt — because what they fear most isn’t the corruption of American law; it’s the corruption of America’s traditional identity.”

But as Trump grows ever more emboldened in his lawlessness, he may well damage the egos of at least some prominent Republicans who pride themselves on portraying a personal brand that embodies fidelity to the law.

“Hold up: Americans don’t look to Chinese commies for the truth,” said Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska in a recent written statement. “If the Biden kid broke laws by selling his name to Beijing, that’s a matter for American courts, not communist tyrants running torture camps.” The president has recently lavished praise on Sasse, a onetime Never-Trumper. Democrats would be wise to force embattled Senate Republicans up for re-election next year — a list that includes Sasse, Ernst, Susan Collins of Maine and Cory Gardner of Colorado — to keep on defending Trump as his words and deeds keep getting more blatant.

Advertisement:

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.salon.com/2019/10/05/will-the-entire-republican-party-serve-as-trumps-impeachment-propaganda-machine/

2019-10-05 11:00:00Z
52780399935508

Impeachment takeaways: From diplomatic texts to Trump's tweets - POLITICO

Another week, and the impeachment drama increases. The latest developments — from diplomatic text messages to presidential tweets — could leave even the most dialed-in politico’s head spinning.

We asked four reporters who have been covering Trump’s presidency and the investigations to share their thoughts on where we are and where we’re going.

Where are congressional Republicans and are there any signs of cracks in Trump’s firewall of support?

Melanie Zanona, Congress reporter: I don’t expect to see a GOP jail break — at least not yet. Only a few Republicans have spoken out publicly against Trump, but it’s mostly the usual Trump critics or retiring members. Most Republicans are just keeping their heads down and waiting to see what else comes out and how it plays back home. I suspect we’ll have a better sense of where the GOP conference stands after the recess.

Ben Schreckinger, national political correspondent: Mitt Romney and Ben Sasse have both criticized Trump for calling on China to investigate the Bidens. But they are part of the same small group of Republican senators who have been willing to take on Trump all along. Marco Rubio, a China hawk, has declined to call out Trump for it. It does not seem like his firewall is breaking in the Senate, which is all that will matter if he is impeached.

Josh Gerstein, legal affairs contributor: I don’t see Trump’s wall of support collapsing, but a few bricks do seem to be jostling loose. I was struck this week by some commentators who almost always align themselves with the president, openly criticizing him over the Ukraine episode. “Donald Trump should not have been on the phone with a foreign head of state encouraging another country to investigate his political opponent Joe Biden. … There's no way to spin this as a good idea,” Fox host Tucker Carlson and Daily Caller publisher Neil Patel wrote. They went on to say Trump’s infraction didn’t merit impeachment, but any disagreement from Trump’s Amen chorus must get under his skin given his repeated insistence that the call was “perfect.”

Heather Caygle, Congress reporter: Republicans left the closed-door House intelligence committee hearing Friday seeking to deflect criticism of the president onto Adam Schiff, the Democrat who heads it. Republicans are attacking Schiff more than defending Trump, accusing the Intel chairman of helping orchestrate the allegations. It’s been easier for Republicans to stay quiet, in part, due to the congressional recess — a two-week break where most members are away from the Capitol and its press corps.

What’s the Biden campaign’s strategy to deal with these accusations and deal with voters’ concerns that he carries some political baggage from his past service?

Melanie: Biden can use this fight as an opportunity to show voters what a Biden-Trump matchup would look like. And he can argue that the president views him as his biggest threat in the general election — a central pillar of Biden’s argument for why he should be the Democratic nominee.

Ben: Biden’s family — and their business dealings — are a sensitive issue for the campaign, perhaps a reason they were slow out of the gate to seize on questions about Trump’s use — or misuse — of his office. Biden has been more forceful recently in condemning Trump, but there remains a real messaging dilemma for Democrats. Elizabeth Warren has struggled to answer a question about whether her ethics plan would allow a vice president’s child to sit on the board of a foreign company. And Biden’s allies are unhappy that the Democratic National Committee has barely lifted a finger to defend the Bidens, even as the Republican National Committee goes after them nonstop, as Marc Caputo and Natasha Korecki reported this morning.

Josh: Democrats may be loath to admit it to reporters or pollsters, but I suspect Trump’s attacks are fueling doubts about whether Biden’s extensive experience is in some respects a liability and that there may be too much history that provides fodder for political attacks. Ethical concerns about relatives have long dogged presidents. Even with Trump’s own vulnerability on cronyism and a slew of ethics issues, some Democrats may be looking for a candidate without even the whiff of scandal. Biden’s camp seems to be arguing that embarking on such a quest is giving in to Trump, since he’ll try to tar anyone the Dems offer up.

Heather: The Biden campaign hopes that confronting the issue and dismissing the allegations against Hunter now will neutralize the issue in the general election. The strategy appears to be one designed to show Biden not shying away Trump’s claims about his son, many of which lack evidence. It’s another way for Biden to prove he’s the best candidate to take on Trump.

What do the latest developments mean for the State Department and Secretary Mike Pompeo, as they are both dragged into — or willingly stepped into — the political vortex?

Melanie: Now we know Rudy Guiliani wasn’t just freelancing in his Ukraine pressure campaign: U.S. diplomats were actively pushing Ukraine to investigate Biden and the 2016 election on behalf of Trump. Expect Democrats to paint a picture of a president who was using foreign diplomacy for personal gain. This could also damage the credibility of Pompeo, who is said to have political ambitions of his own.

Ben: Aside from the question of whether Pompeo is implicated in the scandal, the fact that the president had his personal lawyer running a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine further undermines the State Department’s standing. I also expect the role of Rick Perry and U.S. energy policy to become a bigger part of this story

Josh: We’re starting to learn more about what the key players in Ukraine policy knew about all this. Special Envoy Kurt Volker’s insistence that the investigation he was pressing Ukraine to commit to in order get a visit to the White House was not at all a probe into Joe Biden seems implausibly naïve for a sophisticated diplomat. But there must be many other players in this saga at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, at the State Department and at the National Security Council, who know at least as much as the CIA whistleblower, if not more.

As for Pompeo, everyone has wondered how he’s managed to stay in Trump’s good graces, where so many other officials have not. His actions to bolster Trump’s political goals with the Ukrainians help explain the unusual favor Pompeo has enjoyed in a Cabinet that has seen incredible turnover.

Heather: For Pompeo, everything is likely viewed, at least in part, through the lens of how this could impact his long-term political career. He is rumored to be considering a Senate run in his home state of Kansas and has notably refused to rule out the possibility. He has been, and remains, a close ally and defender of Trump, and seems to have earned the president’s trust in a way that some of Trump’s other current and former cabinet officials weren’t able to do. Pompeo has continued to define himself as a fierce defender of the president, as evidenced earlier this week when he threatened to block State Department officials from testifying as part of the House’s impeachment inquiry.

Where does Attorney General Bill Barr’s credibility stand with lawmakers and the public now that it has been revealed that he enlisted the White House — and in some cases, President Donald Trump personally — in seeking international cooperation in the probe into how the Trump-Russia investigation began?

Melanie: Democrats have long viewed Barr suspiciously, ever since he put out that initial summary of the Mueller report and took the extraordinary step of determining Trump did not obstruct justice. They say he is acting like the president’s personal attorney as opposed to the nation’s attorney. The whole Ukraine episode is only to give Democrats more ammunition, but I don’t expect them to target Barr with something like a censure resolution or trying to get him disbarred — they have bigger fish to fry.

Ben: Normally, an attorney general will go to lengths to avoid the appearance of politicizing the Justice Department (though they often fall short). Few things appear more political than investigating the origins of an investigation into the president. Then again, pressuring a foreign government to investigate your rival counts as one of those few things, so, as Melanie points out, Barr may luck out here by finding the story move past him.

Josh: Democratic lawmakers soured on Barr long ago., especially for what they regarded as spin that he put on the Mueller report. But that was mostly a complaint that he gave a skewed preview of a report that was made public in large part a few weeks later.

The confirmation this week that Barr asked Trump to reach out to world leaders to seek cooperation in Justice Department’s ongoing review of the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation is a highly irregular step because of Trump’s direct personal and political interest in the outcomes of that review. Why couldn’t State Department officials or ambassadors have handled that outreach? Dems are focused on a bigger target at the moment, but Barr—who portrays himself as a by-the-book type— will have to grapple with these questions eventually.

Heather: When Barr initially took the position, many Democrats were privately relieved that a career official with a long history of government service would be assuming the important role as the nation’s top cop. But after Barr’s handling of the Mueller report drew accusations that he was seeking to defend and protect Trump, Democrats have universally soured on the attorney general. Barr’s credibility in their eyes only continues to diminish as more information comes out about his attempts to validate Trump’s efforts to discredit the origins of the Russia investigation. Barr has also been the public face of the Justice Department’s all-out blockade of House Democrats’ sprawling oversight requests, and some of those disputes are still playing out in federal court.

Where are we at the end of this week? Do impeachment/a Senate trial/other damaging outcomes for Trump seem more likely after the disclosures of the past seven days?

Ben: Trump’s impeachment does seem more likely, especially in light of the president asking China to investigate the Bidens and the disclosure of text messages in which one U.S. diplomat made it clear he believed the administration was withholding security assistance to Ukraine in order to help Trump’s reelection. We’ve also seen a number of figures involved in this saga, including Rudy Giuliani and his associate Lev Parnas, lawyer up, another sign that we are in for another full-blown Washington legal-political showdown. It’s shaping up to be a Mueller re-match.

Melanie: It’s quickly becoming a question of when, not if, Democrats put articles of impeachment on the House floor. It just depends on when they feel like they have enough evidence to make a convincing case to the American public. There are a whole lot of dots — and now Democrats need to connect them. But things are a little more murky in the Senate: Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made clear that he has to consider impeachment if the House follows through, but he hasn’t indicated how long the trial will last or if he will just move to dismiss it immediately.

Josh: We’re definitely closer to impeachment now, largely because of the new disclosures about Trump’s Ukraine strategy being operationalized by diplomats.

But an even bigger problem for the president may be his decision that he’ll defend himself against impeachment on the fly, without heeding professional advice. This--and goading from reporters--seems to lead to ever-escalating claims on the president’s part about his right to do anything he wants to tar Biden. Trump’s China comments triggered new criticism from Romney. But Trump’s inability to stick to a clear message--like when he denied a quid pro quo and then suggested that he’d be entirely justified in offering one-- has even complicated the efforts of those trying to help him. He routinely saws off boards that his allies are presently standing on.

Heather: Democrats saw this week as a victory in their efforts to paint Trump’s conduct as an abuse of his power and of the office of the presidency. But they also feel like they succeeded in another area — keeping momentum behind the impeachment inquiry and winning the messaging war against a president who generally dictates the direction of the news cycle on a daily basis. For Democrats, it’s something many felt they weren’t able to do in the aftermath of the Mueller investigation, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other leaders remained opposed to an impeachment investigation.

Impeachment seems almost inevitable, especially after the release of damning text messages from senior diplomats discussing Trump’s desire to exert his leverage over foreign leaders in order to satisfy his political objectives. In addition, Democrats are showing they have no intention of slowing down their investigation, with subpoenas (or the threat of one) slapped on Pompeo and the White House. And on Friday, Democrats further escalated their inquiry by demanding Vice President Mike Pence turn over any documents he has related to the Ukraine controversy.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/05/impeachment-trump-takeaways-030098

2019-10-05 10:32:00Z
52780399935508

White House struggles to contain Ukraine fallout | TheHill - The Hill

The White House is struggling to contain the fallout from President TrumpDonald John TrumpGordon Sondland expected to appear for House deposition Ivanka Trump on impeachment: 'Everything's a question of priorities' Second intel official considering filing complaint over Trump: report MORE’s calls for foreign governments to look into matters related to the 2016 election and one of his chief political rivals.

Days after news reports of the initial story, Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiBiden: Trump has 'indicted himself by his own statements' House Democrats subpoena White House for Ukraine documents House conservatives press Schiff over knowledge of whistleblower complaint MORE (D-Calif.) had thrown her support behind an impeachment inquiry.

The release of a reconstructed transcript of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine’s president stoked momentum for impeachment further, as did the release a day later of a whistleblower’s report that was first instigated by the call.

ADVERTISEMENT

Since then, the release of texts showing the discomfort of at least some administration officials toward the president’s actions, coupled with Trump’s public statements, have the entire drama feeling like it could spin out of control.

Trump, already under fire for urging Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to “look into” former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenGordon Sondland expected to appear for House deposition Ivanka Trump on impeachment: 'Everything's a question of priorities' Second intel official considering filing complaint over Trump: report MORE, deepened Democrats’ scrutiny by telling reporters Thursday that China should consider an investigation into the leading Democratic presidential candidate and his son.

The text messages released by three Democratic committee chairmen late Thursday showed multiple State Department officials indicating that a White House meeting between Zelensky and Trump was contingent on Ukraine investigating a Ukrainian energy company linked to Biden’s son and the 2016 election.

Meanwhile, Democrats are widening their scrutiny to include some of Trump’s top cabinet officials, including Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoGordon Sondland expected to appear for House deposition Democrats claim new momentum from intelligence watchdog testimony Overnight Defense: House Dems subpoena White House for Ukraine documents | Pence pulled into inquiry | GOP senator says he confronted Trump over Ukraine aid | Iran hackers target 2020 campaign MORE.

As the intelligence community inspector general testified before Congress behind closed doors Friday, Democrats readied an expansive document request for the vice president’s office.

The news cycle has moved at a breakneck pace, forcing White House officials previously on the fringes of the scandal to come to the president’s defense as he insists he did nothing wrong.

Republicans have privately expressed concerns about the White House strategy, arguing Trump is serving as a one-man messaging team. 

“The President did nothing wrong and we have been transparent throughout this entire process. There is not a lot of messaging or coordination to be had around those simple facts,” White House press secretary Stephanie GrishamStephanie GrishamHouse Democrats subpoena White House for Ukraine documents Trump approves Poland's entry to visa waiver program Trump: Democrats wasting time on 'bulls---' with impeachment inquiry MORE told The Hill in an emailed statement, pushing back at such arguments. 

Grisham said Democrats should be “flat out ashamed of themselves,” accusing the party of pursuing “impeachment with no crime.”

The White House has long been marked by factions and in-fighting, and those issues have further complicated efforts to keep up with Trump’s barrage of new statements and Democrats’ fast-moving impeachment inquiry.

The result has been individual Cabinet officials and aides offering their own defenses of Trump’s conduct and seeking to downplay their own connections to it.

Pence, who has largely skirted Trump controversies, made clear on Thursday that he stood by Trump.

“One of the main reasons we were elected to Washington, D.C. was to drain the swamp,” Pence said in Arizona. “And I think the American people have a right to know if the vice president of the United States or his family profited from this position as vice president during the last administration.”

ADVERTISEMENT

National Economic Council Director Larry KudlowLawrence (Larry) Alan KudlowMORE and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, two of Trump’s most prominent surrogates for discussing the state of China trade talks, were forced Friday morning to address the president’s calls for Beijing to investigate Biden and a subsequent report that Trump had raised Biden in a June call with Chinese President Xi Jinping. 

Kudlow downplayed the significance of the latest furor, asserting it would not have much of an effect on scheduled trade talks with Chinese officials next week.

“In some sense I can’t assure you of anything, but I would say my own expectation is that’s not going to be front and center when [U.S. Trade Representative] Lighthizer and [Treasury Secretary] Mnuchin speak with Vice Premiere Liu He,” he told Bloomberg TV.

Navarro was more combative, refusing to tell CNN whether he had raised Biden during his own conversations with Chinese officials and criticizing the network’s reporting.

Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiTrump holds call with House GOP amid impeachment inquiry Democrats claim new momentum from intelligence watchdog testimony Overnight Defense: House Dems subpoena White House for Ukraine documents | Pence pulled into inquiry | GOP senator says he confronted Trump over Ukraine aid | Iran hackers target 2020 campaign MORE, the president’s personal attorney who has been at the center of efforts to get dirt on the Bidens, told The Hill in an interview this week that he wouldn’t share his strategy with those inside the White House because they are “untrustworthy” and tend to leak to the press.

Consequently, much of the messaging has been left to Trump himself, who has on his Twitter feed and in public remarks angrily attacked Democrats over what he views as an effort to bruise him as the 2020 campaign gets underway. 

“I question the need for an organized operation when he has the biggest megaphone on planet earth and will be more forceful than anyone else,” one former administration official said of the messaging strategy.

Trump has employed increasingly caustic rhetoric to lash out at Democrats, calling House Intelligence Chairman Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffSecond intel official considering filing complaint over Trump: report Trump mocks Schiff with Pinocchio-themed video Democrats claim new momentum from intelligence watchdog testimony MORE (D-Calif.) to be investigated for “treason,” decrying the impeachment inquiry as a “coup” and quoting a supporter who said his removal could trigger a second “civil war.” 

Trump’s campaign, meanwhile, has also gone on offense, spending millions on television ads hammering the allegations against Biden and likening the Democratic impeachment inquiry to a “coup.” CNN said it would not run the ads, asserting they are misleading.

The administration has sent early signals it is prepared to fight Democrats’ requests and subpoenas. Pence’s office called Democrats’ documents request on Friday unserious, and Pompeo raised a myriad of issues with committees’ demands for testimony from current and former State officials earlier this week.

Ian Prior, a former Justice Department official under Trump, surmised the impeachment inquiry would have minimal effect on Trump, arguing his actions didn’t rise to the level of past conduct by presidents who have faced impeachment, including Richard Nixon and Bill ClintonWilliam (Bill) Jefferson ClintonCNN's Van Jones: Democrats in 'lose-lose' situation on impeachment New York prosecutors blast DOJ filing in lawsuit over tax return subpoena Ignore the hype — this is not an impeachment inquiry MORE, and that the public would lose interest in Democrats’ narrative. 

“He’s a little more forthcoming in what he says, certainly sometimes to his detriment, but is it an impeachable offense that is going to get him removed from office? Absolutely not,” Prior said.

While Trump acknowledged Friday that Democrats appear to have the votes to impeach him, the effort is unlikely to gain traction in the GOP-controlled Senate, where most Republicans have offered varying degrees of defense of Trump’s actions. 

Trump continued to insist on Friday that there was “no quid pro quo” involved in his contacts with Ukraine, even as the text messages released late Thursday showed that some in his own administration doubted that. 

“When I speak to a foreign leader, I speak in an appropriate manner,” Trump told reporters, saying he was only interested in “corruption” and didn’t care about “politics.” 

More than a dozen text message exchanges provided by Kurt VolkerKurt VolkerTrump declares 'case closed' after text messages reveal officials pressed Ukraine on inquiries The Hill's Morning Report — Trump broadens call for Biden probes Top US diplomat threatened to quit over Ukraine dealings MORE, the administration’s former special envoy to Ukraine, highlighted the extent to which multiple diplomatic officials in the Trump administration pushed for Ukraine to take up investigations related to the 2016 election and Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company that Biden’s son Hunter worked for.

In his opening remarks at a closed session with congressional lawmakers on Thursday, Volker distanced himself from any efforts by Trump to press for investigations into Biden. Instead, Volker appeared to shift blame to Giuliani, accusing him of helping impart on Trump a “deeply rooted negative view on Ukraine.” 

 

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/464458-white-house-struggles-to-contain-ukraine-fallout

2019-10-05 09:59:55Z
52780399935508

Here's the latest on the fast-moving impeachment inquiry - CNN

The House committees involved in the impeachment probe issued subpoenas to the White House on Friday evening.
Earlier Friday Trump wouldn't say if his administration would comply with subpoenas. And late on Friday night, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo missed a subpoena deadline from the three committees.
That's as the New York Times reported that there may be a potential second whistleblower. A second intelligence official with concerns and more direct knowledge regarding President Donald Trump's dealings with Ukraine is considering filing a complaint, The New York Times reported Friday

The texts say it all

Don't listen to Trump. Don't listen to Democrats.
We went through the release of Kurt Volker's text messages, line by line, and they pretty clearly show that the phone call where Trump pushed Zelensky for investigations of the Russia investigation and Bidens was not a one-off. It was part of a coordinated campaign.
The political appointees, US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland seemed to realize when career diplomat Bill Taylor texted: "Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations?"
Sondland responded: "Call me."

Watch, read, listen

CNN is nearly wall-to-wall on this momentous story on TV. Watch
We are up-to-the minute with the latest on impeachment at CNN.com. Read
David Chalian is podcasting weekdays on the politics of the inquiry. Listen

The Latest

New key player -- Meet Bill Taylor, the official who was nervous about injecting US politics in Ukraine security aid. Full cast of characters
Another big deposition -- Sondland is now expected to testify on Tuesday in front of the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees.
House gives VP Mike Pence Oct. 15 deadline for docs. LINK
Today's closed-door testimony: The intelligence community inspector general provided documents to the House Intelligence Committee showing efforts to corroborate the whistleblower complaint concerning Trump's pressure on Ukraine. LINK
Jared Kushner and Mick Mulvaney -- The President's adviser/son-in-law and the acting White House chief of staff are now running Trump's impeachment defense. LINK
Rick Perry says he's talked to every major player in this story -- "God as my witness," a Biden never came up, Corruption, yes. Bidens no, he tells CBN. LINK

Trump says he's just fighting corruption. He's not

From CNN's Marshall Cohen -- Trump's latest defense -- that he's just an apolitical anti-corruption crusader -- doesn't hold up under scrutiny. New documents unearthed from the impeachment inquiry, and many of Trump's past comments, undermine his claims that this isn't about Biden or 2020 politics.
Here are just a few reasons:
Trump hasn't publicly raised these issues before with Ukraine.
So far, the supposed anti-corruption campaign is only focused on Biden.
Trump defended his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who made millions from Ukraine's corrupt former president.
Trump has praised other world leaders mired by more well-founded corruption scandals, like Russia's Vladimir Putin and Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu.

Volker's side

The messages were provided by Kurt Volker, who was the volunteer special envoy to Ukraine. He's since resigned.
In testimony, Volker told the Impeachment probe that Trump was convinced Ukraine "tried to take me down" in 2016
He argued there was no focus on Biden in the text messages. True, Biden's name does not come up.
But the name of the company that employed his son is all over the place and investigating Burisma is listed as a prerequisite for Trump to meet the Ukrainian President.
Volker portrayed himself as someone trying to divert the influence of Giuliani and get Trump serious about Ukraine, according to CNN's Jeremy Herb.
Jake Tapper reports that Volker is also leaving his full-time role as director of the McCain Institute, which the institute has denied in a statement.

Romney takes a lonely stand with Sasse

Turning on Trump will be a fraught endeavor for any Republican. The lawmakers who have actually done it either didn't seek reelection (Jeff Flake) or left the party (Justin Amash).
Not Mitt Romney. While he didn't exactly endorse impeachment, he did say on Twitter today that he's apalled. And that's something.
Romney: When the only American citizen President Trump singles out for China's investigation is his political opponent in the midst of the Democratic nomination process, it strains credulity to suggest that it is anything other than politically motivated. By all appearances, the President's brazen and unprecedented appeal to China and to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden is wrong and appalling.
Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, who sometimes pipes up as a Trump critic, gave a very strong statement to the Omaha World-Herald.
"Americans don't look to Chinese commies for the truth. If the Biden kid broke laws by selling his name to Beijing, that's a matter for American courts, not communist tyrants running torture camps."

GOP positioning

How Republicans ultimately land on Trump's behavior is the ultimate key to his presidency. They have the votes to protect him from impeachment in the Senate, but that assumes the party stays with him. As CNN's Chris Cillizza wrote, the real issue isn't Trump, it's his party.
Cillizza: Trump's behavior -- while hugely unorthodox, erratic and unpresidential -- isn't actually all that surprising. This is who he is -- and is reflective of the sort of campaign he ran for president and how he has acted once in the office. What is surprising, or shocking might be the better word for it, is the fact that Republican elected officials seem willing to not just condone this sort of behavior but even defend it.
Marco Rubio told reporters in Florida he thinks Trump was just kidding around by asking China and Ukraine to investigate Biden.
Ron Johnson, the Wisconsin senator who today contorted himself to admit to the Wall Street Journal that he had directly asked Trump back in August whether he was holding up Ukraine funding to push investigations there. He had heard from Sondland that the aid was tied to an investigation.
Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, is raising money off the fight, pointing out, probably accurately, that he's standing between Trump and impeachment.
Lindsey Graham is leading the charge to defend Trump and is demanding a House vote to officially begin impeachment proceedings. Pelosi skipped that step.

What do the people want?

CNN's political forecaster, Harry Enten, wrote about all the numbers, but here's the nut of it.
TRUMP -- In an average of polls taken since House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a formal inquiry last week, 51% support an impeachment inquiry. A minority, 44%, are against it.
CLINTON -- At no point during the impeachment proceedings against Clinton did anywhere close to a plurality of Americans want Clinton impeached and removed from office. Right now, you could argue that we're already at that point with Trump.
NIXON -- The 46% in favor of impeaching and removing Trump now is greater than the 43% who favored it during a similar point in the Nixon impeachment process. It wasn't until right before Nixon resigned that close to a majority wanted him out.

The China side of things

The focus remains on Ukraine, where Trump admits to having pressured Zelensky.
Less clear is where his public call for China to investigate Hunter Biden will lead. Trump is in the midst of high stakes trade talks with China. His top economic adviser, Peter Navarro, got testy when asked about it by CNN's Jim Sciutto.
Navarro said he won't "confirm or deny" whether he "personally" raised investigating Joe Biden or his son during contacts with Chinese officials.
"Me, personally? Now, here's the thing, I will never talk about what happens inside the White House," Navarro said during the contentious exchange which he said was an "interrogation."

What are we doing here?

The President has invited foreign powers to interfere in the US presidential election.
Democrats want to impeach him for it.
It is a crossroads for the American system of government as the President tries to change what's acceptable for US politicians. This newsletter will focus on this consequential moment in US history.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/05/politics/impeachment-tracker-october-4/index.html

2019-10-05 06:26:00Z
52780401566993

China Loves News About Trump’s Controversies. Not This Time. - The New York Times

BEIJING — Since a trade war broke out with the United States, China’s state-run media has not held back from commenting on the swirl of political controversies around President Trump. At least, not until now.

After Mr. Trump openly urged China on Thursday to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter, Chinese news media and officials were strikingly muted.

While news of Mr. Trump’s request has seeped onto the Chinese internet, official media have been silent so far and social media mentions have been sparse, suggesting censors are at work. As of Saturday, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs had not publicly responded. Even Global Times, a nationalist Chinese tabloid that is reliably voluble about Mr. Trump, has been quiet.

The lack of response reflects China’s awkward choices as it tries to stand tough against the Trump administration while trying to avoid a spiral of worsening tensions, several experts said.

China’s ties with the Trump administration are volatile. Tit-for-tat tariffs have created a cloud over both economies, and the United States is heading into a presidential election in which China fears it may become a front-burner topic. Relations are especially sensitive at the moment, as top Chinese officials head to Washington in the coming days for the next round of trade talks.

Now Mr. Trump has pushed China into the bonfire of controversies that has prompted Democrats in Congress to initiate an inquiry into his possible impeachment.

“The tag line ‘silence speaks volumes’ is a good one to capture the logic of the likely Chinese response,” said Susan Shirk, who was a deputy assistant secretary of state responsible for China during the Clinton administration and is now chair of the 21st Century China Center at the University of California San Diego.

“Chinese government and media are likely to suppress all discussion in order not to provoke President Trump,” Professor Shirk said by email. China’s leader, Xi Jinping, “is not unusual in working hard to avoid provoking our volatile president and even to try to build some good will with him despite his unpredictability,” she said.

Beijing’s low-key posture may shift in coming days. China is still enjoying its annual National Day holiday, when media and officials are usually slower to respond to news.

The holiday ends after Sunday, and China’s top trade negotiator, Liu He, is expected to travel to Washington for resumed talks starting on Thursday, potentially thrusting him under an unwelcome limelight created by Mr. Trump’s demands for a Chinese inquiry.

Mr. Liu already played an unexpected walk-on role in one of Mr. Trump’s political dramas in February. Mr. Trump chided the United States top trade negotiator, Robert Lighthizer, in front of reporters while Mr. Liu was visiting the Oval Office.

“Undoubtedly, Trump’s request is a very delicate issue for China,” Zhang Jian, a professor at Peking University who teaches about American politics, said in an interview.

“China has its declared stance of not meddling in other countries’ internal affairs, and if it somehow went along with him that would be difficult to explain both at home and abroad.”

Even if China were to look into Hunter Biden’s business dealings, the government would very likely seek to keep any findings to itself, Professor Zhang said. “They’ll want to play this in a very low-key way,” he said.

In Chinese, Mr. Trump’s name is rendered as Te-lang-pu, and on China’s internet he has gained a similar-sounding nickname, Te-mei-pu, a slang phrase meaning “totally unpredictable.” China has experienced Mr. Trump’s changeable ways more than most countries.

As president-elect, Mr. Trump affronted Beijing by holding a telephone call with Tsai Ing-wen, the president of Taiwan, the island-democracy that China claims as its own territory. After he took office, the Chinese government worked energetically to smooth relations. When Mr. Trump visited Beijing in 2017, Mr. Xi courted him in the imperial Forbidden City.

Since then their relations have soured. From last year, the two governments have been locked in disagreement over the Trump administration’s demands that China buy more American goods and pull down protective barriers that foreign businesses say put them at a heavy disadvantage in China. The two sides have been trying to contain the trade tensions, but Mr. Trump has also said that he is in no rush to reach an agreement.

Ties with the United States have also been strained over human rights disputes, including China’s mass detentions of Muslim minorities; accusations of Chinese intelligence operations in the United States; American restrictions on visas for Chinese academics and other visitors, and limits on Chinese companies, especially Huawei; and Chinese anger over the United States’ criticisms of policy in Hong Kong, the semiautonomous city where protesters have raged for months against the city’s Beijing-backed leadership.

China’s calculus in dealing with Mr. Trump has become even more fraught after he demanded that Mr. Xi’s government investigate Mr. Biden, an aspiring Democratic challenger to Mr. Trump in the 2020 presidential election. Mr. Trump already faces a congressional inquiry over his efforts to press Ukraine to investigate the Bidens.

“China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine,” Mr. Trump told reporters. Moments earlier he had commented on the upcoming trade talks with China, and said “if they don’t do what we want, we have tremendous power.”

When asked on Friday if he would be more likely to agree to a trade deal with China if it investigated the Bidens, Mr. Trump said: “One thing has nothing to do with the other.”

Mr. Trump’s demand for an investigation appears to focus on a business venture that involved Mr. Biden’s son, Hunter, and Chinese state-owned financial companies. Mr. Trump suggested that China had channeled $1.5 billion to Hunter Biden in an effort to influence his father.

But the allegation seems to find little, if any, support in the established facts. Mr. Biden and other Democratic contenders for the presidency have denounced Mr. Trump’s comments.

Chinese media have widely reported that Mr. Trump pressed Ukraine to investigate the Bidens, making the silence over his similar call to China more jarring. Before Mr. Trump made his comments pressing China to investigate, the Chinese foreign minister, Wang Yi, had already said his government did not want to become mired in American political strife.

“We’ve never meddled in American domestic affairs, and are confident that the American people can solve their own problems,” Mr. Wang said in a speech in New York in late September, according to Xinhua, the official Chinese news agency. (On Friday, Global Times used its Twitter feed to cite similar words from Mr. Wang, but there was no evidence that he used them after Mr. Trump called for an investigation.)

Beijing has reason to worry that its policies could become a focus for candidates in the coming presidential election, said Bonnie S. Glaser, the director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

American public opinion about China has turned sharply negative, according to findings recently published by the Pew Research Center. The latest opinion survey conducted in spring this year found that 60 percent of American respondents had an unfavorable opinion of China. That was the highest unfavorable level in 15 years of Pew polling of American views of China, and a 13-percentage-point jump in negative opinion compared with views last year.

Mr. Biden has vowed to get tough on China, while also criticizing Mr. Trump’s tariffs on goods made in China as damaging to the American economy and consumers. Other Democratic contenders for the presidential nomination, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, have been more bluntly critical of China’s policies.

“I do think China will be a focus of discussion and debate,” Ms. Glaser said. “Candidates may vie for who can advocate the toughest policy responses.”

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/05/world/asia/trump-china-biden.html

2019-10-05 08:53:00Z
52780399935508

Jumat, 04 Oktober 2019

Iraq protests: All the latest updates - Aljazeera.com

Nationwide protests broke out across Iraq on Tuesday, as thousands of mostly young men demonstrated against corruption and calling for an end to endemic corruption in the oil-rich country.

Protesters have also called for improved public services such as electricity and water. 

Security forces have responded using water cannon, tear gas, live rounds and rubber bullets. Dozens of protesters have been killed and hundreds more wounded. 

Tensions have been exacerbated by a near-total internet blackout as the authorities seek to prevent protesters communicating with each other or posting footage of the chaotic demonstrations.

The mostly leaderless demonstrations are the biggest challenge yet to the one-year government of Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, who has imposed curfews in Baghdad and other cities to try to stop the protests gathering steam.

Here are the latest updates from Iraq:

Friday, October 4

UN urges Iraq to probe protest deaths 'transparently'

The United Nations called on Iraq to rapidly and transparently investigate force used by anti-riot police in clashes with protesters that have left dozens dead.

"We call on the Iraqi government to allow people to freely exercise their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly," Marta Hurtado, spokeswoman for the UN rights office, told journalists in Geneva.

"We are worried by reports that security forces have used live ammunition and rubber bullets in some areas, and have also fired tear gas cannisters directly at protestors," Hurtado said, insisting that in dealing with demonstrations, "the use of force should be exceptional".

"Any use of force must comply with applicable international human rights norms and standards," she said, stressing that firearms should never be used "except as a last resort to protect against an imminent threat of death or serious injury."

"All incidents in which the actions of security forces have resulted in death and injury should be promptly, independently and transparently investigated," she said.

Iraq's Grand Ayatollah backs protests

Iraq's top Shia cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani urged security forces and protesters not to use violence, and criticised Iraqi leaders for failing to eradicate corruption

He has called on the Iraqi government to heed the protesters' demands "before it is too late".

In a letter read out by his representative Ahmed al-Safi during a sermon in the holy city of Kerbala, Sistani described the deaths from the protests as "sorrowful", and maintained that the government has not "achieved anything on the ground".

"Lawmakers hold the biggest responsibility for what is happening," Sistani said.  

He also said the government "must do what it can to improve public services, find work for the unemployed, end clientelism, deal with the corruption issue and send those implicated in it to prison".

Red Cross calls for restraint as protests continue

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said it was concerned by "increasingly violent clashes" between protesters and security forces.

"The use of force by security forces must be proportionate to the situation and is an exceptional measure," said the ICRC's head of delegation in Iraq, Katharina Ritz.

"In particular, firearms and live ammunition must only be used as a last resort, and to protect against an imminent threat to life."

Death toll rises to 44: police, security sources 

The death toll from three days of anti-government protests in Iraq climbed to 44, police and medical sources told Reuters.

Iraqi security forces fire on protesters in Baghdad

The largest number of casualties occurred in the southern city of Nasiriya, where 18 people were killed, followed by the capital Baghdad where the death toll stood at 16, they said.

The protests, in which hundreds of people have also been injured, began over unemployment and poor services but have escalated into calls for a change of government and pose one of the country's biggest security challenges in years.

Qatar urges citizens not to travel to Iraq 

Qatar's foreign ministry advised its citizens on Friday not to travel to Iraq and urged those already there to leave immediately in view of ongoing unrest.

Iraqi security forces open fire on protesters in Baghdad

Iraqi security forces opened fired on dozens of protesters gathering in Baghdad on Friday for a fourth day of demonstrations against corruption, unemployment and poor public services.

"These protesters have now been dispersed to neighbouring streets and there are running battles taking place," said Al Jazeera's Imran Khan, reporting from Baghdad.

Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi said there was "no magic solution" to Iraq's problems but pledged to work on laws granting poor families a basic income, provide alternative housing, and fight corruption.

Read more here.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/iraq-protests-latest-updates-191004085506824.html

2019-10-04 11:19:00Z
52780400196961