Home » Archives by category » News » Politics (Page 546)

Looks like Bin Laden won . Wherever he is, I’m sure he’s watching and laughing: Two Senators have been warning for months that the government has a secret legal interpretation of the Patriot Act so broad that it amounts to an entirely different law — one that gives the feds massive domestic surveillance powers, and keeps the rest of us in the dark about the snooping. “There is a significant discrepancy between what most Americans – including many members of Congress – think the Patriot Act allows the government to do and how government officials interpret that same law,” wrote the Senators, Ron Wyden and Mark Udall. “We believe that most members of the American public would be very surprised to learn how federal surveillance law is being interpreted in secret. ” The Senators tried to get the government to reveal some of the law’s contents , by forcing the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General to produce a report outlining when this secret surveillance has gone overboard. Yesterday, the effort failed. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said no to the report by rejecting Wyden and Udall’s amendment to the FY2012 Intelligence Authorization Act. In other words: we are all still in the dark about how the government is spying on us.The Senators won’t say, exactly, what elements of this secret Patriot Act have them so spooked. But Wyden told Danger Room in May that the so-called “business-records provision” is a major source of concern. It empowers the FBI to get businesses, medical offices, banks and other organizations to turn over any “tangible things” it deems relevant to a security investigation. So instead, the Senators are left to make vague — if vociferous — protests. “In our view, the executive branch’s decision to conceal the U.S. government’s official understanding of what this law means is unacceptable, and untenable in the long run,” Wyden and Udall wrote in the committee’s report on the Authorization Act . “Intelligence agencies need to have the ability to conduct secret operations, but they should not be allowed to rely on secret laws.” Just a few weeks ago, Microsoft admitted that data stored in the European-based cloud were still subject to access by the U.S. government under the Patriot Act.

Continue reading …
US stock market slump continues

All eyes turn to US employment figures due out on Friday after Dow narrowly avoids ninth day in red It hasn’t happened since Jimmy Carter was in the White House and Abba ruled the charts. But US stock markets threatened to end trading down for the ninth day in a row, as worries about the state of the world’s largest economy continued to terrify the financial markets. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, the Wall Street index of leading US companies, was down more than 100 points at lunchtime and set to continue a losing streak that has lasted even longer than the trough in October 2008 after Lehman Brothers went bust and the global financial crisis began. In the event a last minute rally helped it narrowly avoid the ignominious record. After Lehman collapsed, the Dow fell for eight days in a row, but with investors worried about weakening economies in the US and Europe and political uncertainty in Washington and abroad, the Dow was on course on Wednesday to clock up a ninth day in the red – a run unseen since 22 February 1978, when the US was suffering a recession, an energy crisis and sky-high inflation. The comparison will be an uncomfortable one for Barack Obama. Some of his critics have taken to drawing parallels with Carter, whose one-term presidency was handicapped by financial crisis. Paul Dales, senior US economist at Capital Economics, said investors had already assumed a deal would be done, and that markets were being driven lower by fears that the economy is again weakening. “Now that the debt deal is done, people are focussing their attention on the economy, and the recent figures have been disappointing,” he said. Recent reports on gross domestic product and consumer spending had all been poor, he said. “The fundamentals are weak. It’s all about the economic data,” he said. Dales said all eyes were now on US employment figures due out on Friday. He said those numbers would be “pivotal”. “If those are weak then this slide will continue; if the numbers are strong, then it could ease fears,” he said. The US news and Europe’s continuing debt crisis spooked investors around the world. In London, the FTSE 100 dropped 2.3% to close at its lowest point since November last year, and markets in France and Germany suffered similar falls. Jack Ablin, chief investment officer of Harris Private Bank in Chicago, said: “Investors no longer believe we can rely on Washington to cushion the blow. We have had 30 years of [Federal Reserve chairmen] Greenspan and Bernanke cutting interest rates when the economy looked soft. Now the government is spending to create jobs, and it’s not working. Now we are in a situation where we have to let the chips fall where they may. That’s a very daunting prospect.” US economy United States Dow Jones Stock markets Global economy Economics Dominic Rushe guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Chris Matthews: Southern ‘Secessionists’ Want to ‘Kill’ Obama…’Politically’

MSNBC's Chris Matthews took his hateful attacks on conservatives to a new level Wednesday, smearing “southern” “secessionists” as wanting to “kill” Obama. The Hardball host quickly amended, “politically.”

Continue reading …

Geithner tries to spin the debt ceiling deal and answer questions about how cutting spending won’t hurt job growth which makes no sense to a lot of us. I was going to write up a post on this, but Digby covers it rather well, so watch the video here and read her full analysis here: I have seen some fatuous spin in my day, but this drivel from Tim Geithner is enough to make me gag.. read on

Continue reading …

Geithner tries to spin the debt ceiling deal and answer questions about how cutting spending won’t hurt job growth which makes no sense to a lot of us. I was going to write up a post on this, but Digby covers it rather well, so watch the video here and read her full analysis here: I have seen some fatuous spin in my day, but this drivel from Tim Geithner is enough to make me gag.. read on

Continue reading …

NBC's Andrea Mitchell, in an exclusive Wednesday interview with Nancy Pelosi aired on her MSNBC show, hit the Democratic House Minority Leader from the left on the debt agreement as she pronounced it “a bad deal” because “there's no taxes in it” and whined: ” Was the President a bad negotiator? Did he give away too much?” For her part, Pelosi agreed that it was a “bad deal” but rationalized that at least it was “a done deal” and “it's time for us to move on.” Throughout the interview Mitchell played up liberal talking points as she pressed Pelosi to criticize Obama, even asking “Did the Tea Party win?” because, as Mitchell put it “the President and your hands are really tied in terms of new spending. It's going to all be on the downside in terms of cutting and perhaps raising taxes.” The following is the relevant exchange with Pelosi as it was aired on the August 3 edition of Andrea Mitchell Reports: ANDREA MITCHELL: The American people want to see jobs. They want to see the economy improve. But a lot of Democrats, your members, the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus feel that this deal is a bad deal and it will lead to a slowing of the economy. Congressman [Emanuel] Cleaver called it a “Satan sandwich.” You added on that it's “a Satan sandwich with a side of Satan fries.” It's a bad deal. REP. NANCY PELOSI: It's a bad deal, but it's a done deal, as my colleague Steve Israel says. It's a bad deal but it's a done deal and it's time for us to move on. It's the basis on which we are going to proceed and we have to get on with it. We've got to go to the table, do the best we can, in a balanced bipartisan way to create jobs, reduce the deficit and takes us into the future. Just talking about how we got here and, and our complaints about this bill – don't get me started. But that's not – MITCHELL: Well let me get you started a little bit. Was the President a bad negotiator? Did he give away too much? PELOSI: This is not – I don't think so. MITCHELL: Why not? PELOSI: I think the President was great. But again, what is the point of talking about what is finished? On every, on anything that happens around here anyone one of us could have done it better. Right? We could have written it better. We could have, whatever it is. But the fact is the president wanted a balanced bipartisan agreement… MITCHELL: But he didn't get a balance. There's no taxes in it. PELOSI: That's right. And nobody knows that better than I or perhaps some do. But I fully appreciate that. But the – again, this is about how we go to the next step. Jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. We get sort of like it's a cottage industry here in Washington, D.C. that we have to talk about what we did, why we did it. It's horrible in the, in, in realtime. And now we're gonna continue to talk about it. MITCHELL: But it was a turning point many people feel. I've covered Congress many years and have never seen it quite as poisonous. … MITCHELL: Did the Tea Party win? Because they have redefined the debate and now the President and your hands are really tied in terms of new spending. It's going to all be on the downside in terms of cutting and perhaps raising taxes?

Continue reading …
Mubarak in the dock: historic trial of former Egyptian president begins

Millions tune in to see former leader face charges as confusion reigns in Cairo courtroom and violence continues outside The last time Hosni Mubarak visited New Cairo’s police academy building, his name was written above the door – one institution among hundreds around the country, from schools to metro stations, that had been named after the wartime pilot who rose to become president and transformed Egypt into his private fiefdom. On that day – 23 January this year, only 48 hours before revolution swept the streets – Mubarak thanked his police force, the group he relied upon to continue his three decades in power. “I and all Egyptians salute policemen on their day of celebration and affirm our pride in their role and sacrifice,” he said to an apparently devoted audience. Just over six months later, Mubarak returned to the police academy on Wednesday morning to find his name unceremoniously stripped from the walls. His lectern had been replaced by a metal cage, his suit swapped for standard-issue prison overalls, his security forces and judiciary now tasked with locking him up and deciding his culpability, a verdict that could lead to his execution. The struggles against dictatorship that have consumed the Arab world this year boast many historic moments, but few were as dramatic, or cathartic, as this. Lying on a stretcher under the gaze of state television cameras and accompanied by his two sons and codefendants, Alaa and Gamal, the 83-year-old spoke only once to confirm his presence and enter a plea. “I deny all these charges and accusations categorically,” he said. The case was adjourned until 15 August. At times, the trial that most Egyptians thought could never happen – at least partly because there was widespread scepticism that Egypt’s ruling generals would ever bow to public pressure and turn so decisively against their former commander-in-chief – descended into a bawdy cocktail of confusion and farce. As rocks flew outside the temporary court house, courtesy of running battles between supporters and opponents of Mubarak which left 53 people injured, mayhem often prevailed within. Lawyers squabbled and shouted to gain the beleaguered judge’s attention as he tried to deal with procedural matters; at one point, an attorney even demanded Mubarak be given a DNA test, claiming he had actually died in 2004 and had been replaced by an impostor. But moments of levity, including a camera shot of the former tyrant picking his nose, quickly melted away as the prosecutor read to Mubarak the accusations against him. This was still history in the making. The three charges – profiteering, illegal business-dealing involving Israeli gas exports, and the unlawful killing of protesters who rose up to challenge his rule – may not even begin to encompass the crimes committed by his regime, but they all spoke to key aspects of the nation Mubarak created. Twenty years after Egypt first accepted an IMF “structural adjustment package” and embarked on aggressive neo-liberal reforms that left 90% of the country worse off but enriched the elite to unimaginable levels, corruption remains one of the defining features of modern Egypt. So does political stagnation, symbolised by the country’s declining status in the region and the pursuit of a slavish pro-US and pro-Israeli foreign policy, of which subsidised gas exports to Israel were only one component. And the state-sponsored murder of demonstrators in January and February this year arose from a security apparatus in which torture and abuse had become systematically embedded. As the litany of wrongdoing continued and the names of some of those who died in the uprising were read, many onlookers wept. “It’s a glorious day,” said Hossam Bahgat, head of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. “Many of us were worried Mubarak would use the trial to turn public opinion in his favour and plea for sympathy, but in fact it revived that sense of achievement we felt when he was unseated back in February. This can only be good for the revolution.” The court could extend its current remit. Other people and institutions were implicated by lawyers and may be dragged in – including state media officials accused of spreading disinformation during the protests, mobile firms who agreed to shut down their networks at the height of the revolt, and Omar Suleiman, Mubarak’s intelligence chief and, briefly, vice-president, who is yet to face any charges. “We’re now getting a sense of the byproducts that may come out of Mubarak’s prosecution,” said Bahgat. “These are examples of how the trial will not just provide justice for victims of the uprising and their families, but also shed real light on the truth of what happened during those 18 days. That’s particularly important given the military council’s refusal to initiate a fact-finding mission into all the past crimes of the Mubarak regime.” The army generals will also be watching proceedings nervously. They can expect a short-term popularity boost after keeping their promise to put Mubarak in the dock, but remain uneasy about what revelations may emerge when he takes the stand. Samer Shehata, an assistant professor and Egypt expert at Georgetown University, said: “Some of the lawyers have already requested that [Egypt's current de facto leader, field marshall Mohamed Hussein] Tantawi, [army chief of staff] Sami Anan and other senior generals come to the court and bear witness. I don’t think their attendance is likely, but there’s certainly a possibility that Mubarak, if cornered, might start speaking about the extent of corruption within the military council and pinpoint Tantawi in particular.” Relations between the military and revolutionaries are at an all-time low following a brutal assault by soldiers in Tahrir Square this week and the persistent use of military trials, a timely reminder of just how far Egypt still has to go in its battle for meaningful reform. As Mubarak’s case was concluded for the day, only a few miles across town, demonstrators who had been participating in the Tahrir sit-in were being interrogated at a different courthouse, accused of breaking a new law created by the generals which forbids protests. Tantawi and his fellow officers have done their best to paint these young people as baltagiyya , or thugs, but were it not for their street rallies, there is little doubt Mubarak would not be on trial. Mona Seif, a cancer researcher who campaigns against arbitrary arrests and military trials, and who has been involved in the occupation of Tahrir, said: “We’re celebrating today because it’s not just about seeing Mubarak in court, it’s also about regaining a bit of the popular support that we seem to have lost recently. “We keep on getting framed by the media as people who don’t have anything better to do than sit in the road and make trouble, so for those of us who have been detained and beaten in the process, the knowledge that it was our pressure that forced them to have this public trial – that’s very uplifting.” Millions were glued to their TVs as the trial unfolded, turning central Cairo into a ghost town and sending the stock exchange to a 10-year low as traders stopped work to follow proceedings. Many companies set up viewing areas for staff; others stayed at home, such as Gelal Faisal Ali, whose brother was killed during the uprising. “The martyrs’ families had lost faith in the judicial system, and we thought that today the court would do little other than try to calm public anger,” Ali said. “Forgive me, but I am still concerned that this is what’s happening. Mubarak deserves nothing less than the death penalty.” Some took a different view, arguing that the sight of a former leader behind bars was a national humiliation. Reda Tohami Ibrahim, the owner of a Cairo clothing store, was one: “If there has to be a court case, it shouldn’t be public – this is a man with a long history. The entire world is watching this charade, and as an Egyptian I say it’s not fitting or appropriate.” Ibrahim’s objections put him in a minority on a day that, for all the procedural wrangling, will stand as a symbolic landmark not just for Egypt, but for much of the world beyond. “We don’t know what will happen next, because none of this has been scripted,” said Shehata at Georgetown University. After three decades of having the script written for them by one of modern history’s most entrenched dictators, that messy uncertainty is just what many Egyptians have been looking forward to. Additional reporting by Mohamed El-Dahshan Hosni Mubarak Egypt Africa Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Protest Jack Shenker Mohamed El Dahshan guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Mubarak in the dock: historic trial of former Egyptian president begins

Millions tune in to see former leader face charges as confusion reigns in Cairo courtroom and violence continues outside The last time Hosni Mubarak visited New Cairo’s police academy building, his name was written above the door – one institution among hundreds around the country, from schools to metro stations, that had been named after the wartime pilot who rose to become president and transformed Egypt into his private fiefdom. On that day – 23 January this year, only 48 hours before revolution swept the streets – Mubarak thanked his police force, the group he relied upon to continue his three decades in power. “I and all Egyptians salute policemen on their day of celebration and affirm our pride in their role and sacrifice,” he said to an apparently devoted audience. Just over six months later, Mubarak returned to the police academy on Wednesday morning to find his name unceremoniously stripped from the walls. His lectern had been replaced by a metal cage, his suit swapped for standard-issue prison overalls, his security forces and judiciary now tasked with locking him up and deciding his culpability, a verdict that could lead to his execution. The struggles against dictatorship that have consumed the Arab world this year boast many historic moments, but few were as dramatic, or cathartic, as this. Lying on a stretcher under the gaze of state television cameras and accompanied by his two sons and codefendants, Alaa and Gamal, the 83-year-old spoke only once to confirm his presence and enter a plea. “I deny all these charges and accusations categorically,” he said. The case was adjourned until 15 August. At times, the trial that most Egyptians thought could never happen – at least partly because there was widespread scepticism that Egypt’s ruling generals would ever bow to public pressure and turn so decisively against their former commander-in-chief – descended into a bawdy cocktail of confusion and farce. As rocks flew outside the temporary court house, courtesy of running battles between supporters and opponents of Mubarak which left 53 people injured, mayhem often prevailed within. Lawyers squabbled and shouted to gain the beleaguered judge’s attention as he tried to deal with procedural matters; at one point, an attorney even demanded Mubarak be given a DNA test, claiming he had actually died in 2004 and had been replaced by an impostor. But moments of levity, including a camera shot of the former tyrant picking his nose, quickly melted away as the prosecutor read to Mubarak the accusations against him. This was still history in the making. The three charges – profiteering, illegal business-dealing involving Israeli gas exports, and the unlawful killing of protesters who rose up to challenge his rule – may not even begin to encompass the crimes committed by his regime, but they all spoke to key aspects of the nation Mubarak created. Twenty years after Egypt first accepted an IMF “structural adjustment package” and embarked on aggressive neo-liberal reforms that left 90% of the country worse off but enriched the elite to unimaginable levels, corruption remains one of the defining features of modern Egypt. So does political stagnation, symbolised by the country’s declining status in the region and the pursuit of a slavish pro-US and pro-Israeli foreign policy, of which subsidised gas exports to Israel were only one component. And the state-sponsored murder of demonstrators in January and February this year arose from a security apparatus in which torture and abuse had become systematically embedded. As the litany of wrongdoing continued and the names of some of those who died in the uprising were read, many onlookers wept. “It’s a glorious day,” said Hossam Bahgat, head of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. “Many of us were worried Mubarak would use the trial to turn public opinion in his favour and plea for sympathy, but in fact it revived that sense of achievement we felt when he was unseated back in February. This can only be good for the revolution.” The court could extend its current remit. Other people and institutions were implicated by lawyers and may be dragged in – including state media officials accused of spreading disinformation during the protests, mobile firms who agreed to shut down their networks at the height of the revolt, and Omar Suleiman, Mubarak’s intelligence chief and, briefly, vice-president, who is yet to face any charges. “We’re now getting a sense of the byproducts that may come out of Mubarak’s prosecution,” said Bahgat. “These are examples of how the trial will not just provide justice for victims of the uprising and their families, but also shed real light on the truth of what happened during those 18 days. That’s particularly important given the military council’s refusal to initiate a fact-finding mission into all the past crimes of the Mubarak regime.” The army generals will also be watching proceedings nervously. They can expect a short-term popularity boost after keeping their promise to put Mubarak in the dock, but remain uneasy about what revelations may emerge when he takes the stand. Samer Shehata, an assistant professor and Egypt expert at Georgetown University, said: “Some of the lawyers have already requested that [Egypt's current de facto leader, field marshall Mohamed Hussein] Tantawi, [army chief of staff] Sami Anan and other senior generals come to the court and bear witness. I don’t think their attendance is likely, but there’s certainly a possibility that Mubarak, if cornered, might start speaking about the extent of corruption within the military council and pinpoint Tantawi in particular.” Relations between the military and revolutionaries are at an all-time low following a brutal assault by soldiers in Tahrir Square this week and the persistent use of military trials, a timely reminder of just how far Egypt still has to go in its battle for meaningful reform. As Mubarak’s case was concluded for the day, only a few miles across town, demonstrators who had been participating in the Tahrir sit-in were being interrogated at a different courthouse, accused of breaking a new law created by the generals which forbids protests. Tantawi and his fellow officers have done their best to paint these young people as baltagiyya , or thugs, but were it not for their street rallies, there is little doubt Mubarak would not be on trial. Mona Seif, a cancer researcher who campaigns against arbitrary arrests and military trials, and who has been involved in the occupation of Tahrir, said: “We’re celebrating today because it’s not just about seeing Mubarak in court, it’s also about regaining a bit of the popular support that we seem to have lost recently. “We keep on getting framed by the media as people who don’t have anything better to do than sit in the road and make trouble, so for those of us who have been detained and beaten in the process, the knowledge that it was our pressure that forced them to have this public trial – that’s very uplifting.” Millions were glued to their TVs as the trial unfolded, turning central Cairo into a ghost town and sending the stock exchange to a 10-year low as traders stopped work to follow proceedings. Many companies set up viewing areas for staff; others stayed at home, such as Gelal Faisal Ali, whose brother was killed during the uprising. “The martyrs’ families had lost faith in the judicial system, and we thought that today the court would do little other than try to calm public anger,” Ali said. “Forgive me, but I am still concerned that this is what’s happening. Mubarak deserves nothing less than the death penalty.” Some took a different view, arguing that the sight of a former leader behind bars was a national humiliation. Reda Tohami Ibrahim, the owner of a Cairo clothing store, was one: “If there has to be a court case, it shouldn’t be public – this is a man with a long history. The entire world is watching this charade, and as an Egyptian I say it’s not fitting or appropriate.” Ibrahim’s objections put him in a minority on a day that, for all the procedural wrangling, will stand as a symbolic landmark not just for Egypt, but for much of the world beyond. “We don’t know what will happen next, because none of this has been scripted,” said Shehata at Georgetown University. After three decades of having the script written for them by one of modern history’s most entrenched dictators, that messy uncertainty is just what many Egyptians have been looking forward to. Additional reporting by Mohamed El-Dahshan Hosni Mubarak Egypt Africa Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Protest Jack Shenker Mohamed El Dahshan guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

An arguably unconstitutional effort in San Francisco at regulating the speech of pro-life crisis pregnancy centers was portrayed by Times reporter Jesse McKinley as an effort to “stem… misleading advertising”: Seeking to stem what they call misleading advertising, San Francisco officials on Tuesday began a two-pronged attack on ‘crisis pregnancy centers,’ which are billed as places for pregnant women to get advice, but often use counseling to discourage abortions. McKinley noted that the “first element was a bill introduced to the city’s Board of Supervisors that would make it illegal for such centers to advertise falsely about their pregnancy-related services,” noting that Supervisor Malia Cohen wrote the bill “to protect low-income women who are drawn into the centers, which often offer free services.”

Continue reading …

An arguably unconstitutional effort in San Francisco at regulating the speech of pro-life crisis pregnancy centers was portrayed by Times reporter Jesse McKinley as an effort to “stem… misleading advertising”: Seeking to stem what they call misleading advertising, San Francisco officials on Tuesday began a two-pronged attack on ‘crisis pregnancy centers,’ which are billed as places for pregnant women to get advice, but often use counseling to discourage abortions. McKinley noted that the “first element was a bill introduced to the city’s Board of Supervisors that would make it illegal for such centers to advertise falsely about their pregnancy-related services,” noting that Supervisor Malia Cohen wrote the bill “to protect low-income women who are drawn into the centers, which often offer free services.”

Continue reading …