Trump is ‘not above the law,’ prosecutors say in urging judge to let federal election case proceed

Trump is ‘not above the law,’ prosecutors say in urging judge to let federal election case proceed
Former US president Donald Trump addresses the media on October 18, 2023, before leaving the courthouse for the day at the New York State Supreme Court, where he is on trial for civil fraud. Trump is also facing criminal charges in other courts. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 20 October 2023
Follow

Trump is ‘not above the law,’ prosecutors say in urging judge to let federal election case proceed

Trump is ‘not above the law,’ prosecutors say in urging judge to let federal election case proceed
  • While the US Supreme Court has held that presidents are immune from civil liability for actions related to their official duties, it has never addressed the question of whether that immunity shields a president from criminal prosecution

WASHINGTON: Federal prosecutors said Thursday that Donald Trump is “not above the law” as they urged a judge to reject the former president’s efforts to dismiss the case charging him with plotting to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
Lawyers for Trump had asked US District Judge Tanya Chutkan earlier this month to toss the federal election subversion case, asserting that he was immune from prosecution for actions he took while fulfilling his duties as president.
Special counsel Jack Smith’s team responded in its own filing Thursday that there is nothing in the Constitution, or in court precedent, to support the idea that Trump or any other former president cannot be prosecuted for criminal conduct committed while in the White House.
“The defendant is not above the law. He is subject to the federal criminal laws like more than 330 million other Americans, including Members of Congress, federal judges, and everyday citizens,” prosecutors wrote.
The question now heads to a decision from Chutkan, who is being asked to wade into the legally untested realm of a former president’s claim of immunity from criminal prosecution. She’s not likely to have the final word, though, as defense lawyers — if they fail to persuade Chutkan — will have the opportunity to press their arguments before a federal appeals court or, ultimately, a Supreme Court with a clear conservative majority.
Trump was charged in August in a four-count indictment in federal court in Washington with scheming to overturn the election that he lost to Democrat Joe Biden in the run-up to Jan. 6, 2021, when pro-Trump rioters stormed the US Capitol in a violent but ultimately failed effort to halt the transfer of power.
The Supreme Court has held that presidents are immune from civil liability for actions related to their official duties but it has never addressed the question of whether that immunity shields a president from criminal prosecution.
Trump’s defense lawyers have seized on the absence of rulings to make the case that he must be considered exempt from prosecution, arguing that the the actions he’s accused of taking fall within the bounds of the presidency.
But prosecutors rejected that argument on multiple grounds, saying the steps Trump took to stay in power — including by advancing false claims of voter fraud in an effort to block the formal counting of electoral votes — are well outside Oval Office duties and responsibilities.
They also said Trump’s claims of immunity directly conflict with the nation’s Constitution, which allows for the criminal prosecution of a president for “acts committed during — and ultimately resulting in the president’s removal from — the presidency.”
“The defendant, however, would turn the Impeachment Judgment Clause on its head and have the Court read it as a sweeping grant of immunity that forbids criminal prosecution in the absence of a Senate conviction — which, among other things, would effectively preclude any form of accountability for a president who commits crimes at the end of his term of office,” prosecutors said.
Smith’s team also said that while some legal commentators have objected to Justice Department legal opinions stating that sitting presidents cannot face federal indictment, “there has been universal agreement that a former president may be subject to federal criminal prosecution — a principle recognized in the Constitution and rooted in historical practice.”
The case, currently set for trial on March 4, 2024, is one of four criminal prosecutions that the former president is facing. Earlier this week, Chutkan, responding to a request from Smith’s team, imposed a limited gag order on Trump barring him from incendiary comments targeting prosecutors and potential witnesses.
He’s also charged by Smith’s team in Florida with illegally hoarding classified documents, is accused in Fulton County, Georgia, of conspiring to undo his election loss in that state and is awaiting trial in New York on state charges alleging that he falsified business records to cover up hush money payments to a porn actor.


Pope Francis expels a bishop and 9 other people from a Peru movement over ‘sadistic’ abuses

Pope Francis expels a bishop and 9 other people from a Peru movement over ‘sadistic’ abuses
Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Pope Francis expels a bishop and 9 other people from a Peru movement over ‘sadistic’ abuses

Pope Francis expels a bishop and 9 other people from a Peru movement over ‘sadistic’ abuses
  • Last month, the pope expelled Luis Figari, founder of the group called Sodalitium of Christian Life, after probers found that he had sodomized his recruits
  • Pedro Salinas, in the 2015 book “Half Monks, Half Soldiers” that he co-authored by with journalist Paola Ugaz, detailed the twisted practices of the Sodalitium

Pope Francis expels a bishop and 9 other people from a Peru movement over ‘sadistic’ abuses

VATICAN CITY: Pope Francis took the unusual decision Wednesday to expel 10 people – a bishop, priests and laypeople — from a troubled Catholic movement in Peru after a Vatican investigation uncovered “sadistic” abuses of power, authority and spirituality.
The move against the leadership of the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae, or Sodalitium of Christian Life, followed Francis’ decision last month to expel the group’s founder, Luis Figari, after he was found to have sodomized his recruits.
It was announced by the Peruvian Bishops Conference, which posted a statement from the Vatican embassy on its website that attributed the expulsions to a “special” decision taken by Francis.
The statement was astonishing because it listed abuses uncovered by the Vatican investigation that have rarely if ever been punished canonically — such as hacking someone’s communications — and cited the people the pope held responsible.
According to the statement, the Vatican investigators uncovered physical abuses “including with sadism and violence,” sect-like abuses of conscience, spiritual abuse, abuses of authority, economic abuses in administering church money and the “abuse in the exercise of the apostolate of journalism.”
The latter was presumably aimed at a Sodalitium journalist who has attacked critics of the movement on social media.
Figari founded the SCV, as it is known, in 1971 as a lay community to recruit “soldiers for God,” one of several Catholic societies born as a conservative reaction to the left-leaning liberation theology movement that swept through Latin America, starting in the 1960s. At its height, the group counted about 20,000 members across South America and the United States. It was enormously influential in Peru.
Victims of Figari’s abuses complained to the Lima archdiocese in 2011, though other claims against him reportedly date to 2000. But neither the local church nor the Holy See took concrete action until one of the victims, Pedro Salinas, wrote a book along with journalist Paola Ugaz detailing the twisted practices of the Sodalitium in 2015, entitled “Half Monks, Half Soldiers.”

Hoy, en su edición impresa dominical, el diario @peru21noticias pone en portada la expulsión del fundador del #Sodalicio, Luis Fernando Figari, uno de los casos más importantes de violencia física, psicológica y sexual en la historia de la Iglesia católica en Latinoamérica.

An outside investigation ordered by Sodalitium later determined that Figari was “narcissistic, paranoid, demeaning, vulgar, vindictive, manipulative, racist, sexist, elitist and obsessed with sexual issues and the sexual orientation” of Sodalitium’s members.
The investigation, published in 2017, found that Figari sodomized his recruits and forced them to fondle him and one another. He liked to watch them “experience pain, discomfort and fear,” and humiliated them in front of others to enhance his control over them, the report found.
Still, the Holy See declined to expel Figari from the movement in 2017 and merely ordered him to live apart from the Sodalitium community in Rome and cease all contact with it. The Vatican was seemingly tied in knots by canon law that did not foresee such punishments for founders of religious communities who weren’t priests. Victims were outraged.
But according to the findings of the latest Vatican investigation, the abuses went beyond Figari. They included Sodalitium clergy and also involved harassing and hacking the communications of their victims, all while covering up crimes committed as part of their official duties, according to the statement.
The investigation was carried out by the Vatican’s top sex crimes investigators, Maltese Archbishop Charles Scicluna and Monsignor Jordi Bertomeu, from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, who traveled to Lima last year to take testimony from victims.
The highest-ranking person ordered expelled was Archbishop Jose Antonio Eguren, whom Francis already forced to resign as bishop of Piura in April over his record, after he sued Salinas and Ugaz for their reporting.
In addition to Figari’s own abuses, their reporting had exposed the alleged forced eviction of peasants on lands in Eguren’s diocese by a Sodalitium-linked real estate developer.
Ugaz, the journalist, welcomed the expulsions and said the reference to Sodalitium hacking referred to her: She said her communications had been hacked in 2023 after she reported on the Sodalitium’s off-shore holdings and other financial dealings, and said she believed the group was trying to identify her sources.
“It is a demonstration that in Peru, the survivors would never have found justice and reparation (without Bertomeo and Scicluna) because the Sodalitium is an organization with a lot of political, social and economic power,” she said in a statement to The Associated Press.
Salinas, for his part, repeated that the group should be dissolved entirely and that some key figures were not included on the list.
“It’s very good news after 24 years of impunity,” he said in a message to AP. “It is to be hoped that this historic and memorable news is only the first of more, perhaps more impactful than what we know today.”
The release of such detailed information by the Vatican was highly unusual for an institution that is known more for secrecy, opacity and turning a blind eye to even obvious church crimes.
It is unclear how exactly the expulsions can be enforced or what they will mean in practical terms, especially for the laypeople involved. But at a minimum, the very public announcement would suggest that at least for this particular group, Francis was willing to take an unorthodox approach to interpreting the church’s in-house laws to send a message.
“To take such a disciplinary decision, consideration was given to the scandal that was produced by the number and gravity of the abuses that were denounced by victims, which are particularly contrary to the balanced and liberating experience of the evangelical councils,” the Vatican embassy statement said in explaining the rationale for the punishments.
The Vatican statement said the Peruvian bishops joined Francis in “seeking the forgiveness of the victims” while calling on the troubled movement to initiate a journey of justice and reparation.
There was no immediate response to a request for comment from the Sodalitium.


Zelensky alleges Russian plot on nuclear plants in defiant UN address

Zelensky alleges Russian plot on nuclear plants in defiant UN address
Updated 32 min 20 sec ago
Follow

Zelensky alleges Russian plot on nuclear plants in defiant UN address

Zelensky alleges Russian plot on nuclear plants in defiant UN address
  • Russia captured the giant Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant soon after its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022
  • Shortly after Zlensky's remarks, Putin made his most explicit threat yet to use nuclear weapons, saying Russia would consider such a response to a “massive” air attack on its soil

UNITED NATIONS: President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Russia on Wednesday of plotting potentially catastrophic attacks on Ukrainian nuclear plants, in a defiant UN address ahead of US elections that could sharply shift the stance of Kyiv’s main backer.
Zelensky addressed the annual gathering of world leaders to rally support before a high-profile visit Thursday to the White House, where President Joe Biden’s administration promised new military aid.
Speaking from the UN rostrum in a black polo jacket, Zelensky said that Russian President Vladimir Putin “does seem to be planning attacks on our nuclear power plants and the infrastructure, aiming to disconnect the plants from the power grid.”
“Any critical incident in the energy system could lead to a nuclear disaster. A day like that must never come,” Zelensky said.
“Moscow needs to understand this, and this depends in part on your determination to put pressure on the aggressor,” he told the General Assembly.
Shortly after his remarks, Putin made his most explicit threat yet to use nuclear weapons, saying Russia would consider such a response to a “massive” air attack on its soil.
Ukraine has been pushing the United States and its allies to ease restrictions on weapons that can strike deeper into Russia.
Russia captured the giant Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant soon after its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
In recent weeks it has been pounding Ukraine’s electricity grid, in what Western and Ukrainian officials describe as an attempt to leave the country shivering during the winter.

In his UN address, Zelensky singled out China and Brazil as he questioned the “true interest” of countries that have been pressing Ukraine to negotiate with Russia.
Employing the language of the Global South, Zelensky said: “The world has already been through colonial wars and conspiracies of great powers at the expense of those who are small.”
“Ukrainians will never accept — will never accept — why anyone in the world believes that such a brutal colonial past, which suits no one today, can be imposed on Ukraine now,” Zelensky said.
In response, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said Wednesday that a peace deal is the only way for Ukraine to “survive” the war.
“Only peace will guarantee that Ukraine survives as a sovereign country and Russia survives,” he said at a press conference in New York.
Zelensky last year flew to the General Assembly in a dramatic first wartime appearance. But while he still maintains star power, the political landscape has changed.
Donald Trump, running again for president in a close race against Kamala Harris, called Zelensky “probably the greatest salesman on Earth.”
“We continue to give billions of dollars to a man who refuses to make a deal, Zelensky,” the Republican candidate told a campaign rally in North Carolina.
Republicans were livid after Zelensky told The New Yorker magazine that Trump and his running mate J.D. Vance did not understand the war’s complexity.
The United States has provided around $175 billion in both military and economic assistance to Ukraine during the war. The Biden administration has ruled out sending troops.
The Biden administration announced another $375 million on Wednesday including munitions for HIMARS precision rocket launchers, cluster munitions and light tactical vehicles.
Trump in the past has voiced admiration for Putin and, during his 2017-2021 presidency, was impeached over delaying aid to Ukraine to press Zelensky to dig up dirt on Biden.
In Germany, the second-largest contributor of military aid to Ukraine, Chancellor Olaf Scholz is also facing pressure from parties opposed to support for Kyiv.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer, of Kyiv ally Britain, told the Security Council on Wednesday that Putin has been sending its citizens into a meat grinder and asked how Russia “can show its face” at the UN headquarters.

The annual UN General Assembly extravaganza marks a swansong for Biden, 81, who has passed the torch to Vice President Kamala Harris to face Trump in the November 5 election.
The summit comes against a backdrop of chaos in the Middle East as Israel ramps up attacks on the Iran-backed Lebanese militia Hezbollah, killing hundreds and prompting a mass exodus of people.
Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron met to discuss a push for a ceasefire in Lebanon.
Wednesday also saw talks at the UN on two other hotspots — Sudan and Haiti.
The United States announced millions in new assistance both for war-ravaged Sudan’s humanitarian crisis and for stabilization efforts in violence-wracked Haiti.
 


Mexico excludes Spanish king from president’s swearing-in

Mexico excludes Spanish king from president’s swearing-in
Updated 26 September 2024
Follow

Mexico excludes Spanish king from president’s swearing-in

Mexico excludes Spanish king from president’s swearing-in

MADRID: Mexican president-elect Claudia Sheinbaum angered Spain on Wednesday by barring its King Felipe VI from her swearing-in ceremony, accusing him of failing to acknowledge harm caused by his country’s conquest of Mexico five centuries ago.

The decision prompted Spain to boycott the event altogether, with its Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez calling the Mexican decision “inexplicable” and “totally unacceptable.”

Mexico’s outgoing President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in 2019 sent a letter to the king asking that he “publicly and officially” acknowledge the “damage” caused by the 1519-1521 conquest, which resulted in the death of a large part of the country’s pre-Hispanic population.

“Unfortunately, this letter was never replied to directly, as should have been the best practice in bilateral relations,” Sheinbaum said in a statement.

Mexico had in July invited just Sanchez to the swearing-in ceremony on October 1, the statement added.

The Spanish foreign ministry said in a statement that the government “has decided not to participate in the inauguration at any level.”

“Spain and Mexico are brotherly peoples. We cannot therefore accept being excluded like this,” Sanchez said later in a news conference on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York.

“That is why we have made it known to the Mexican government that there will be no diplomatic representative from the Spanish government, as a sign of protest.”

Mexico published the guest list a week ago for the inauguration of Sheinbaum, who will be the country’s first woman president following her left-wing ruling party’s landslide June election victory.

King Felipe VI was not on the list, which includes regional leftist leaders as well as US First Lady Jill Biden.

Spanish Defense Minister Margarita Robles told journalists in Madrid on Wednesday: “The head of state, the king of Spain, always attends all swearing-in ceremonies and therefore we cannot accept that in this case he should be excluded.”

While Mexico and Spain have close historical and economic links, relations between the Latin American nation and its former colonial ruler have been strained since Lopez Obrador — an ally of Sheinbaum — took office in 2018.

He has frequently complained about Spanish companies operating in Mexico and twice declared during his mandate that his country’s relations with Spain were “on pause.”

Madrid has rejected his demand for an apology for the events of the Spanish conquest five centuries ago.

Sanchez said on Wednesday, without elaborating, that Spain had “already explained its position on the subject.”

The socialist premier expressed “great frustration” at Sheinbaum’s decision, saying that he considered Mexico’s leaders to be “progressive” like his government.


Canada PM Trudeau survives vote of no confidence

Canada PM Trudeau survives vote of no confidence
Updated 26 September 2024
Follow

Canada PM Trudeau survives vote of no confidence

Canada PM Trudeau survives vote of no confidence

OTTAWA: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Wednesday survived a vote of no confidence in the first major test of his minority Liberal government whose popularity has waned after nine years in office.

His tenuous grip on power, however, is already set to face more challenges in the coming days and weeks, with the main opposition Conservatives vowing to try again to topple the government as early as Tuesday.

Following a heated debate that saw members of Parliament trade insults and slam their fists on desks, they voted 211 to 120 against the Conservative motion to unseat the Liberals and force snap elections.

Far ahead in public opinion polls, Tory leader Pierre Poilievre has been itching for a snap election since the leftist New Democratic Party (NDP) earlier this month tore up a coalition agreement with the Liberals, leaving the Trudeau administration vulnerable to being toppled.

A combative Poilievre has railed against Trudeau for what he said was a failure to address soaring costs of living, a housing crisis and crime, while doubling the national debt.

The promise of Canada, “after nine years of Liberal government, is broken,” he said during a Commons debate on Tuesday.

But other opposition parties, whose support is needed to topple the Liberals, have pushed back against his rightwing agenda.

Liberal House leader Karina Gould accused the Tories of “playing games.”

“I think it’s pretty lame that they’re going to put forward another non-confidence vote tomorrow,” she said.

Immediately following the no confidence vote, the NDP again sided with the Liberals to pass legislation on capital gains taxes, averting another political crisis.

Poilievre has vowed to keep trying, with the next opportunity to bring down the government to be presented next week. If that fails, he will have a few more chances before the end of the year.

The separatist Bloc Quebecois has also demanded concessions from the ruling Liberals for its continued support in Parliament beyond the end of October.

Trudeau swept to power in 2015, and has managed to hold on by defeating two of Poilievre’s predecessors in 2019 and 2021 ballots.

The deal with the New Democratic Party to prop up the Liberals would have kept his government in office until late 2025.

But the NDP, seeing its alignment with the Liberals hurting its own popularity, exited the deal early.

According to a recent Angus Reid poll, the Conservatives are well ahead of the Liberals, with 43 percent of voting intention against 21 percent for the ruling party. The NDP is at 19 percent.

Going forward, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh said his party would evaluate each bill in Parliament before deciding how to vote.

With legislation pending on NDP priorities including a national dental plan, political analysts who spoke to AFP suggested an election won’t likely be triggered until at least spring 2025.

However, University of Ottawa professor Genevieve Tellier told AFP: “Anything is possible. It could come before Christmas.”

In the meantime, a weakened Trudeau administration under constant threat “will find it more difficult to govern,” she said.

Bloc leader Yves-Francois Blanchette said Wednesday he would seek to keep the government afloat until the end of October.

But if there has been no movement on its legislative priorities by then, he said the Bloc would turn against the Liberals.

In Canada’s Westminster parliamentary system, a ruling party must hold the confidence of the House of Commons, which means maintaining support from a majority of members.

The Liberals currently have 153 seats, versus 119 for the Conservatives, 33 for the Bloc Quebecois, and the NDP 25.


Trump says Ukraine is ‘dead’ and dismisses its defense against Russia’s invasion

Trump says Ukraine is ‘dead’ and dismisses its defense against Russia’s invasion
Updated 25 September 2024
Follow

Trump says Ukraine is ‘dead’ and dismisses its defense against Russia’s invasion

Trump says Ukraine is ‘dead’ and dismisses its defense against Russia’s invasion
  • Says Ukraine should have made concessions to Putin in the months before Russia’s February 2022 attack
  • Blames Biden and Harris for giving egging on Ukraine to fight rather than pushing it to cede territory to Russia

Former US President Donald Trump described Ukraine in bleak and mournful terms Wednesday, referring to its people as “dead” and the country itself as “demolished,” and further raising questions about how much the former president would be willing if elected again to concede in a negotiation over the country’s future.
Trump argued Ukraine should have made concessions to Russian President Vladimir Putin in the months before Russia’s February 2022 attack, declaring that even “the worst deal would’ve been better than what we have now.”
Trump, who has long been critical of US aid to Ukraine, frequently claims that Russia never would have invaded if he was president and that he would put an end to the war if he returned to the White House. But rarely has he discussed the conflict in such detail.
His remarks, at a North Carolina event billed as an economic speech, come on the heels of a debate this month in which he pointedly refused to say whether he wanted Ukraine to win the war. On Tuesday, Trump touted the prowess of Russia and its predecessor Soviet Union, saying that wars are “what they do.”
The Republican former president, notoriously attuned to slights, began his denunciation of Ukraine by alluding to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s recent criticism of Trump and running mate JD Vance.
Zelensky, who is visiting the US this week to attend the UN General Assembly, told The New Yorker that Vance was “too radical” for proposing that Ukraine surrender territories under Russian control and that Trump “doesn’t really know how to stop the war even if he might think he knows how.”

Said Trump, “It’s something we have to have a quick discussion about because the president of Ukraine is in our country and he’s making little nasty aspersions toward your favorite president, me.”
Trump painted Ukraine as a country in ruins outside its capital, Kyiv, short on soldiers and losing population to war deaths and neighboring countries. He questioned whether the country has any bargaining chips left to negotiate an end to the war.
“Any deal — the worst deal — would’ve been better than what we have now,” Trump said. “If they made a bad deal it would’ve been much better. They would’ve given up a little bit and everybody would be living and every building would be built and every tower would be aging for another 2,000 years.”
“What deal can we make? It’s demolished,” he added. “The people are dead. The country is in rubble.”

Zelensky is pitching the White House on what he calls a victory plan for the war, expected to include an ask to use long-range Western weapons to strike Russian targets.
While Ukraine outperformed many expectations that it would fall quickly to Russia, outnumbered Ukrainian forces face grinding battles against one of the world’s most powerful armies in the country’s east. A deal with Russia would almost certainly be unfavorable for Ukraine, which has lost a fifth of its territory and tens of thousands of lives in the conflict.
Trump laid blame for the conflict on President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, his Democratic rival in November. He said Biden “egged it all on” by pledging to help Ukraine defend itself rather than pushing it to cede territory to Russia.
“Biden and Kamala allowed this to happen by feeding Zelensky money and munitions like no country has ever seen before,” Trump said.
Notably, Trump did not attack Putin’s reasoning for launching the invasion, only suggesting Putin would not have started the war had Trump been in office. He did say of Putin, “He’s no angel.”