WASHINGTON: Donald Trump endangered the lives of all members of Congress when he aimed a mob of supporters “like a loaded cannon” at the US Capitol, House Democrats said Tuesday in making their most detailed case yet for why the former president should be convicted and permanently barred from office. Trump denied the allegations through his lawyers and called the trial unconstitutional.
The Democratic legal brief forcefully linked Trump’s baseless efforts to overturn the results of the presidential election to the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, saying he bears “unmistakable” blame for actions that threatened the foundation of American democracy. It argued that he must be found guilty when his impeachment trial opens before the Senate next week on a charge of inciting the siege. And it used evocative language to conjure the day’s chaos, when “terrified members were trapped in the chamber” and called loved ones “for fear they would not survive.”
“His conduct endangered the life of every single member of Congress, jeopardized the peaceful transition of power and line of succession, and compromised our national security,” the Democratic managers of the impeachment case wrote. “This is precisely the sort of constitutional offense that warrants disqualification from federal office.”
Trump’s lawyers responded with their own filing that denied that he had incited the riot by disputing the election results or by exhorting his followers to “fight like hell.” In any event, they said, the trial was unconstitutional now that Trump has left the White House.
The dueling filings offer the first public glimpse of the arguments that both sides intend to present at the impeachment trial, Trump’s second. They show how Democrats will look to explicitly fault Trump for his role in the riot and to also make the case that his behavior was so egregious as to require permanent disqualification from office. On the other side will be challenges to the trial’s constitutionality and claims that Trump’s speech was protected by the First Amendment.
“It is denied that President Trump ever endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government,” defense lawyers wrote in a 14-page brief.
The Constitution specifies that disqualification from office can be a punishment for an impeachment conviction.
“This is not a case where elections alone are a sufficient safeguard against future abuse; it is the electoral process itself that President Trump attacked and that must be protected from him and anyone else who would seek to mimic his behavior,” the Democrats wrote.
The Democrats drew heavily on the words of prominent Republicans who have criticized the former president. Among them are Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, who voted for Trump’s impeachment and said there has never been a “greater betrayal” by a president, and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who said Trump “provoked” the rioters.
“The only honorable path at that point was for President Trump to accept the results and concede his electoral defeat. Instead, he summoned a mob to Washington, exhorted them into a frenzy, and aimed them like a loaded cannon down Pennsylvania Avenue,” the Democrats wrote in their 77-page brief.
Still, Republicans have signaled that acquittal is likely, with many saying they think Congress should move on and questioning the constitutionality of an impeachment trial — Trump’s second — now that he has left office. In a test vote in the Senate last week, 45 Republicans, including McConnell, voted in favor of an effort to dismiss the trial over those constitutional concerns.
Though no president has been tried after departing the White House, Democrats say there is precedent, pointing to an 1876 impeachment of a secretary of war who resigned his office in a last-ditch attempt to avoid an impeachment trial. The Senate held it anyway.
The Democrats wrote that the framers of the Constitution would not have wanted to leave the country defenseless against “a president’s treachery in his final days, allowing him to misuse power, violate his Oath, and incite insurrection against Congress and our electoral institutions” simply because he is leaving office. Setting that precedent now would “horrify the Framers,” the brief said.
“There is no ‘January Exception’ to impeachment or any other provision of the Constitution,” the Democrats wrote. “A president must answer comprehensively for his conduct in office from his first day in office through his last.”
Trump was impeached by the House while still in office, they noted, forcing a Senate trial. And there are precedents for trying former officials.
“Trump is personally responsible for a violent attack on the Capitol,” they wrote. “He was impeached while still in office. The case for trying him after he has left office is stronger than any of the precedents.”
The brief also traced Trump’s efforts to subvert democracy back to the summer of 2020, when he first declined to say he would accept the election results, through the election and his many failed attempts to challenge the results in court. When those efforts failed, the Democrats wrote, “he turned to improper and abusive means of staying in power,” specifically by launching a pressure campaign aimed at state election officials, the Justice Department and Congress.
The Democrats cited his unsuccessful efforts to sway Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and former Attorney General William Barr. Trump then became “fixated” on Jan. 6, the managers wrote. They note that many of his supporters, including the Proud Boys — who Trump told to “stand back and stand by” at a September debate — were already primed for violence.
“Given all that, the crowd which assembled on January 6 unsurprisingly included many who were armed, angry, and dangerous— and poised on a hair trigger for President Trump to confirm that they indeed had to “fight” to save America from an imagined conspiracy,” the Democrats wrote.
House Dems make case for conviction; Trump denies charges
https://arab.news/6533w
House Dems make case for conviction; Trump denies charges
- The Democratic legal brief forcefully linked Trump’s baseless efforts to overturn the results of the presidential election to the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol
- Democrats: ‘His conduct endangered the life of every single member of Congress, jeopardized the peaceful transition of power and line of succession, and compromised our national security’
South Africa seeks halt to Israel’s Rafah offensive at World Court
- The hearings on May 16 and 17 will only focus on issuing emergency measures, to keep the dispute from escalating
THE HAGUE: South Africa will ask the top UN court on Thursday to order a halt to the Rafah offensive as part of its case in The Hague accusing Israel of genocide in the Gaza Strip.
The hearings at the International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, come after South Africa last week asked for additional emergency measures to protect Rafah, a southern Gaza city where more than a million Palestinians have been sheltering.
It also asked the court to order Israel to allow unimpeded access to Gaza for UN officials, organizations providing humanitarian aid, and journalists and investigators. It added that Israel has so far ignored and violated earlier court orders.
On Thursday, South Africa will present its latest intervention seeking emergency measures starting at 3 p.m.(1300 GMT).
Israel, which has denounced South Africa’s claim that it is violating the 1949 Genocide Convention as baseless, will respond on Friday. In previous filings it stressed it had stepped up efforts to get humanitarian aid into Gaza as the ICJ had ordered.
Gilad Erdan, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations told Army Radio on Wednesday the short notice the court gave for the hearings did not allow sufficient legal preparation, adding that was “a telling sign.”
The Israel-Hamas war has killed nearly 35,000 people in Gaza, according to health authorities there. About 1,200 people were killed in Israel and 253 taken hostage on Oct. 7 when Hamas launched the attack that started the war, according Israeli tallies.
South Africa accuses Israel of acts of genocide against Palestinians. In January, the court ordered Israel to ensure its troops commit no genocidal acts against Palestinians in Gaza, allow in more humanitarian aid and preserve any evidence of violations.
The hearings on May 16 and 17 will only focus on issuing emergency measures, to keep the dispute from escalating. It will likely take years before the court can rule on the merits of the case.
The ICJ’s rulings and orders are binding and without appeal. While the court has no way to enforce them, an order against a country could hurt its international reputation and set legal precedent.
India says it is working to repatriate UN staffer killed in Gaza
- Waibhav Anil Kale, who was working with the UN Department of Safety and Security, and was killed while heading to the European Hospital in Rafah along with a colleague, who was wounded in the incident
NEW DELHI: India said on Wednesday it was working to repatriate the body of a former Indian Army officer serving as a UN staffer, who was killed in Gaza when his vehicle was hit by what the UN said was tank fire in Rafah where only Israeli tanks are present.
The staffer, Waibhav Anil Kale, was working with the UN Department of Safety and Security and was heading to the European Hospital in Rafah along with a colleague, who was wounded in the incident. The UN said he was the first international UN staffer killed in Gaza since the war began on Oct. 7, taking the total UN death toll to 191.
UN Secretary General’s deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said on Tuesday the UN had set up a fact-finding panel to determine the responsibility for Kale’s death.
“It’s very early in the investigation, and details of the incident are still being verified with the Israeli Defense Force,” he told a press cconference. Asked by reporters about the shots fired on the vehicle, he said, “we believe it came from a tank in the area” and later added, it was “safe” to assume that only the IDF tanks in that region. There are 71 international UN staff members in Gaza currently, he said. The IDF said in a statement on Monday that the incident was “under review” and the IDF had not been made aware of the vehicle’s route. But an initial inquiry indicated that “the vehicle was hit in an area declared an active combat zone.”
The Hamas-run government’s media office accused Israel of “deliberately targeting foreign staff in the Gaza Strip.”
India’s Foreign Ministry said its diplomatic missions were “in touch with relevant authorities” on the investigation into Kale’s death, and helping to bring home his body.
In a statement on Monday after Kale’s death, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres reiterated an “urgent appeal for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and for the release of all hostages,” saying the conflict in Gaza was continuing to take a heavy toll “not only on civilians, but also on humanitarian workers.” He has demanded explanations for all their deaths.
ICC ‘excited’ as cricket’s newest stadium launched in New York
- Thirty-four thousand-capacity stadium will host hotly-anticipated India-Pakistan clash on June 9
- Stadium features infrastructure from Las Vegas Formula 1 circuit, drop-in pitches prepared in Florida
NEW DELHI: The newly-built Nassau County International Cricket Stadium, near New York, was launched on Wednesday with the sport’s world body “excited” to conquer new territories through the T20 World Cup in June.
The 34,000-capacity stadium, with infrastructure from the Las Vegas Formula 1 circuit and drop-in pitches prepared in Florida, will host the hotly-anticipated India-Pakistan clash on June 9, among its eight scheduled World Cup games.
The showpiece 20-over event will be co-hosted by the West Indies and the United States starting June 1 with New York, Florida and Dallas as venues.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) remains happy with the focus on the India-Pakistan clash and the Nassau project as part of bringing the game to the US.
“Yeah, absolutely! We can run that game anywhere and the interest in the fixture would be immense,” Chris Tetley, the ICC’s head of events, told reporters in a media roundtable.
“The news stories that we have seen and the media coverage in the US itself as well as among the cricket media around the world. I have not seen that before around an ICC event.”
Tetley added: “We are really excited to bring the T20 World Cup cricket to the US and the opportunity that it presents to the sport and from what I can see there is an audience really waiting for us to come.”
T20 Cricket will also feature as one of five new sports at the Los Angeles Olympics in 2028.
Making a cricket stadium in Nassau remained a huge challenge for the ICC, who got in Adelaide Oval curator Damian Hough for the job.
Hough created the first drop-in pitch in Adelaide in 2013 and the latest strips at the Nassau County ground promise good cricket and balance between bat and ball.
“People shouldn’t be concerned about drop-in pitches,” said Hough.
“They are proven around the world, definitely in Australia. Some of the best cricket is played on drop-in pitches and are really successful.”
Slovak PM’s ‘life in danger’ and in operating theater: interior minister
- Matus Sutaj Estok: ‘We received information from the operating doctors that the prime minister is in a critical condition and his life is in danger and he is still in the operating theater’
- European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen condemned what she described as a ‘vile attack’
BANSKA BYSTRICA, Slovakia: Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico’s life “is in danger” and he is still in the operating theater after being shot multiple times, the country’s interior minister said on Wednesday.
“We received information from the operating doctors that the prime minister is in a critical condition and his life is in danger and he is still in the operating theater,” Matus Sutaj Estok told reporters at the hospital where Fico is being treated.
Reports on TA3, a Slovakian TV station, said that Fico, 59, was hit in the stomach after four shots were fired outside the House of Culture in the town of Handlova, some 150 kilometers northeast of the capital, where the leader was meeting with supporters. A suspect has been detained, it said.
Police sealed off the scene, and Fico was taken to a hospital in Banska Bystrica.
The shooting in Slovakia comes three weeks ahead of crucial European Union Parliament elections, in which populist and hard-right parties in the 27-nation bloc appear poised to make gains.
Deputy speaker of parliament Lubos Blaha confirmed the incident during a session of Parliament and adjourned it until further notice, the Slovak TASR news agency said.
Slovakia’s major opposition parties, Progressive Slovakia and Freedom and Solidarity, canceled a planned protest against a controversial government plan to overhaul public broadcasting that they say would give the government full control of public radio and television.
“We absolutely and strongly condemn violence and today’s shooting of Premier Robert Fico” said Progressive Slovakia leader Michal Simecka. “At the same time we call on all politicians to refrain from any expressions and steps which could contribute to further increasing the tension.”
President Zuzana Caputova condemned “a brutal and ruthless” attack on the premier.
“I’m shocked,” Caputova said. “I wish Robert Fico a lot of strength in this critical moment and a quick recovery from this attack.”
Fico, a third-time premier, and his leftist Smer, or Direction, party, won Slovakia’s Sept. 30 parliamentary elections, staging a political comeback after campaigning on a pro-Russian and anti-American message.
Critics worried Slovakia under Fico would abandon the country’s pro-Western course and follow the direction of Hungary under populist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
Thousands have repeatedly rallied in the capital and across Slovakia to protest Fico’s policies.
Condemnations of political violence came from leaders across Europe.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen condemned what she described as a “vile attack.”
“Such acts of violence have no place in our society and undermine democracy, our most precious common good,” von der Leyen said in a post on X.
Leaders in Latvia and Estonia also quickly condemned political violence.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk wrote on the social media network X: “Shocking news from Slovakia. Robert, my thoughts are with you in this very difficult moment.”
EU agrees on a new migration pact, as mainstream parties hope it will deprive the far right of votes
EU agrees on a new migration pact, as mainstream parties hope it will deprive the far right of votes
- EU government ministers approved 10 legislative parts of The New Pact on Migration and Asylum
- Mainstream political parties believe the pact resolves the issues that have divided member nations since migrants swept into Europe in 2015, most fleeing war in Syria and Iraq
BRUSSELS: European Union nations endorsed sweeping reforms to the bloc’s failed asylum system on Tuesday as campaigning for Europe-wide elections next month gathers pace, with migration expected to be an important issue.
EU government ministers approved 10 legislative parts of The New Pact on Migration and Asylum. It lays out rules for the 27 member countries to handle people trying to enter without authorization, from how to screen them to establish whether they qualify for protection to deporting them if they’re not allowed to stay.
Hungary and Poland, which have long opposed any obligation for countries to host migrants or pay for their upkeep, voted against the package but were unable to block it.
Mainstream political parties believe the pact resolves the issues that have divided member nations since well over 1 million migrants swept into Europe in 2015, most fleeing war in Syria and Iraq. They hope the system will starve the far right of vote-winning oxygen in the June 6-9 elections.
However, the vast reform package will only enter force in 2026, bringing no immediate fix to an issue that has fueled one of the EU’s biggest political crises, dividing nations over who should take responsibility for migrants when they arrive and whether other countries should be obligated to help.
Critics say the pact will let nations detain migrants at borders and fingerprint children. They say it’s aimed at keeping people out and infringes on their right to claim asylum. Many fear it will result in more unscrupulous deals with poorer countries that people leave or cross to get to Europe.
WHY ARE THE NEW RULES NEEDED?
Europe’s asylum laws have not been updated for about two decades. The system frayed and then fell apart in 2015. It was based on the premise that migrants should be processed, given asylum or deported in the country they first enter. Greece, Italy and Malta were left to shoulder most of the financial burden and deal with public discontent. Since then, the ID-check-free zone known as the Schengen Area has expanded to 27 countries, 23 of them EU members. It means that more than 400 million Europeans and visitors, including refugees, are able to move without showing travel documents.
WHO DO THE RULES APPLY TO?
Some 3.5 million migrants arrived legally in Europe in 2023. Around 1 million others were on EU territory without permission. Of the latter, most were people who entered normally via airports and ports with visas but didn’t go home when they expired. The pact applies to the remaining minority, estimated at around 300,000 migrants last year. They are people caught crossing an external EU border without permission, such as those reaching the shores of Greece, Italy or Spain via the Mediterranean Sea or Atlantic Ocean on boats provided by smugglers.
HOW DOES THE SYSTEM WORK?
The country on whose territory people land will screen them at or near the border. This involves identity and other checks -– including on children as young as 6. The information will be stored on a massive new database, Eurodac. This screening should determine whether a person might pose a health or security risk and their chances of being permitted to stay. Generally, people fleeing conflict, persecution or violence qualify for asylum. Those looking for jobs are likely to be refused entry. Screening is mandatory and should take no longer than seven days. It should lead to one of two things: an application for international protection, like asylum, or deportation to their home country.
WHAT DOES THE ASYLUM PROCEDURE INVOLVE?
People seeking asylum must apply in the EU nation they first enter and stay until the authorities there work out what country should handle their application. It could be that they have family, cultural or other links somewhere else, making it more logical for them to be moved. The border procedure should be done in 12 weeks, including time for one legal appeal if their application is rejected. It could be extended by eight weeks in times of mass movements of people. Procedures could be faster for applicants from countries whose citizens are not often granted asylum. Critics say this undermines asylum law because applicants should be assessed individually, not based on nationality. People would stay in “reception centers” while it happens, with access to health care and education. Those rejected would receive a deportation order.
WHAT DOES DEPORTATION INVOLVE?
To speed things up, a deportation order is supposed to be issued automatically when an asylum request is refused. A new 12-week period is foreseen to complete this process. The authorities may detain people throughout. The EU’s border and coast guard agency would help organize joint deportation flights. Currently, less than one in three people issued with an order to leave are deported. This is often due to a lack of cooperation from the countries these people come from.
HOW HAS THE ISSUE OF RESPONSIBILITIES VS OBLIGATIONS BEEN RESOLVED?
The new rules oblige countries to help an EU partner under migratory pressure. Support is mandatory, but flexible. Nations can relocate asylum applicants to their territory or choose some other form of assistance. This could be financial -– a relocation is evaluated at 20,000 euros ($21,462) per person -– technical or logistical. Members can also assume responsibility for deporting people from the partner country in trouble.
WHAT CHALLENGES LIE AHEAD?
Two issues stand out: Will member countries ever fully enact the plan, and will the EU’s executive branch, the European Commission, enforce the new rules when it has chosen not to apply the ones already in place? The commission is due to present a Common Implementation Plan by June. It charts a path and timeline to get the pact working over the next two years, with targets that the EU and member countries should reach. Things could get off to a rocky start. Hungary, which has vehemently opposed the reforms, takes over the EU’s agenda-setting presidency for six months on July 1.
