Connect with us

Features

TRUMP SHOOTS FOR PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY

Published

on

by Vijaya Chandrasoma
The name is Trump. Donald Trump. 007 : LICENCE TO KILL
(with apologies to the real 007, James Bond)

The case for Presidential Immunity was heard by Washington DC Federal Appeals Court on Tuesday, January 9, where a three-judge panel heard arguments from Trump’s counsel and Special Counsel Jack Smith. A randomly chosen panel, which proved to be misogynist Trump’s worst nightmare: three women, one, the daughter of Asian immigrants (who “poison the blood of the American people”), the second an African American woman and the third, a 79-year-old white woman, not his type at all. A panel of ladies who will be responsible for the most important ruling in a life dripping with every category of criminal behavior.

Trump’s counsel had claimed total immunity for all actions taken by a sitting president, criminal acts which could be construed as critical for the security of the nation, even if such acts were against the law and the Constitution. Trump says he was acting within the scope of his presidential actions during the insurrection of January 6, 2021, because the violence of the attack on the Capitol occurred while he was conducting an investigation into election fraud in the November 2020 election!

When you consider this statement in the context of his pre-insurrection speech at the ellipse, when he exhorted his white supremacist terrorists to march to the Capitol and “fight like hell”, to prevent the peaceful and constitutional transfer of power; when he now refers to these terrorists who have been convicted and serving prison sentences as “hostages”; you realize how emotionally and mentally stunted this seditious lunatic really is.

The main argument of Trump’s counsel suggested that “even a president directing a SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution, given a former executive’s broad immunity to criminal prosecution, unless he was first impeached and convicted by Congress”.

Trump’s counsel, John Sauer, seems to be confused by the differences between political and judicial processes. As Senator Mitch McConnell argued, after he voted to acquit Trump after the Congress impeachment for inciting the January 6, 2021 insurrection, “impeachment was never meant to be the final forum for American justice”, adding, “We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation. And former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one”.

As comedian Jimmy Kimmel said, “If a sitting president is legally able to assassinate a political rival without fear of prosecution, Trump had better lock the doors at Mar a Lago because “Bazooka Joe Biden” has every reason to blow it to Kingdom Come”.

The legal concept of Trump’s counsel on presidential immunity is eerily similar to the legal code of Trump’s mentor, Russian President Putin. Putin failed in an attempt to poison Kremlin critic and chief political opponent, Alexei Navalny, who is now languishing in an Arctic penal colony in Siberia, serving a lengthy prison sentence for the vague crimes of “creating an extremist community and financing extremist activities”. Presidential immunity and absence of accountability enable Putin to contest re-election in March this year, with Navalny, who has posed serious threats to his legitimacy, safely out of the way.

An argument also reminiscent of Nixon’s flawed claim in 1974: “If the President does it, it’s legal”. An assertion shot down in flames by the then Supreme Court, which compelled Nixon, after resignation, to seek a presidential pardon from President Ford (which was a part of the deal of his resignation), to avoid future criminal prosecution, which the Supreme Court had deemed to be inevitable without such a pardon.

Which begs the facetious but valid question. Would Donald Trump, a man with a penchant for divorce, have been able to shoot Melania to avoid divorce while he was president, and escape prosecution for murder after he leaves the White House? Grounds for murder? Her resistance to be raped by him, probably because of his renowned noisome body odor and other shortcomings, caused him such mental distress and physical frustration that they prevented him from performing the presidential functions necessary to maintain the nation’s security.

Although there was no legal requirement for Trump to appear at court on Tuesday, he did so willingly, in spite of constant whining that all these court dates interfere with his election campaigns, especially a few days before the Iowa primary.

Trump calculated that his appearance in court will serve him better than a campaign rally speech, as he will be able to get free international publicity by pleading his case for presidential immunity before the world media on the steps of the courthouse. And, of course, even his ridiculous arguments will be lapped up by his “base”, irrespective of judicial inaccuracies, which will enable him, once again, to raise a ton of money from his incredibly gullible supporters.

The ruling of the federal court will be appealed, either to the full Washington DC appellate court, or more likely, the United States Supreme Court. Nothing is certain in the US judicial system, but it is likely that these courts will either refuse to hear the case or throw it out for lack of credible argument.

However, Trump would have won the victory he seeks: to buy more time and gain further delays in the numerous cases against him, to achieve his ultimate and desperate goal to gain re-election in November and so either self-pardon or instruct the Justice Department to dismiss all these cases.

Trump is fully aware that this ruling on presidential immunity is vital if he is to realize his desperate bid for the 2024 presidency. His criminal complicity in and incitement of the January 6, 2021 insurrection would be the easiest of the myriad cases against him to prove conclusively, with video evidence and hundreds of witnesses scheduled to testify against him. As would be the espionage case, where he stole and abused top-secret documents belonging to the government when he was ejected from the White House. Both criminal cases which, if he is convicted, will see him in prison for the rest of his miserable life.

Trump is facing another unexpected threat to his hitherto certain nomination to the Republican candidacy in November. Last week, Nikki Haley had a surge in the New Hampshire polls and is now within seven points of Trump’s numbers, 39% to 32%, the closest any rival has ever been to him in the polls during this election cycle.

Chris Christie unexpectedly suspended his campaign last week, with a defiant and courageous speech. The only Republican who had openly and virulently attacked Trump, he concluded his speech with a veiled shot at Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis, and those Republicans who feel that they have no other choice than a convicted felon as their candidate for the presidency.

“Anyone who is unwilling to say that Trump is unfit to be president of the United States is unfit themselves (to be president of the United States)”.

Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis squared off at the CNN sponsored debate, moderated by Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, last Wednesday in Des Moines, Iowa. The debate provided them with their last chance before the Iowa primary on Monday, January 15, to win over Iowa voters, and emerge as an admittedly long-shot alternative to Donald Trump as the Republican presidential nominee in November 2024.

Donald Trump was also invited to participate in the debate, but he declined, as he has done in all previous Republican debates. Instead, he attended an hour-long Fox News town hall meeting in Iowa on the same night, moderated by Fox anchors, Brett Baier and Martha MacCallum. Trump was talking to a captive audience, ranting the usual drivel about his stable genius, though he did try to talk down some of the more outrageous comments he has made in recent weeks. He said “I am not going to be a dictator”, and said he “wouldn’t have time for retribution”, because he’ll be too busy Making America Great Again. Predictably, he boasted about his enormous lead in the Republican polls and had the usual crude words of insult for his rivals. There seems to be little doubt that he would be the Republican nominee in November 2024, unless there is a legal implosion which will prevent him from contesting the election.

So the real choice for both Haley and DeSantis at the CNN debate was whether to rip into each other, go after Trump with their gloves off, or both. So far, they had been just playing for second place, notably Nikki Haley, who had remained, until this debate, very coy about being selected for Trump’s Vice President spot. Trump dangled this bait during the Fox News town hall meeting, when he said that he had already made his VP choice, but refused to name the person.

Predictably, Haley and DeSantis chose mainly to stay with the first alternative, attacking each other for much of the debate. They did briefly dance around the second, getting in a few telling shots against Trump, the front runner by far for the nomination.

They both agreed that Trump should be participating in the debate, to defend his record. But they refused to be specific, saying nothing about his performance during his first term of presidency, when he mismanaged the pandemic which cost over 600,000 avoidable deaths, and added $7.8 trillion to the national debt; and the 91 felonies on which he has been arrested after his defeat in November 2020. Felonies of sedition, inciting an insurrection to prevent the constitutional transfer of power, and espionage, stealing and dealing in top-secret documents belonging to the government, to name just two.

And they failed a perfect opportunity of going after Trump, when Jake Tapper asked them both the easiest softball question, one begging to be hit out of the park.

Tapper’s question: Did they believe that Donald Trump has the moral character to be president again?

Nikki Haley waffled: “I think Trump was the right president at the right time. But I think the president needs to have moral clarity….I believe in getting things done, no vendettas, no whining, just getting things done. I think it’s time for a new generational leader that’s going to go and make America proud again, and that’s what I’m trying to do”.

Same question for DeSantis, who was a little tougher on Trump, criticizing his poor record on curbing public disorder, specifically during the Black Lives Matter riots after the brutal murder of George Floyd in 2020, broken promises on the border wall and failure to attack Washington corruption.

But if they had the slightest intention of challenging Trump for the Republican nomination, there was really only one correct answer to Tapper’s question.

Donald Trump has the moral character of an axe murderer.

Wednesday’s debate was a weak dead-heat for second place, with Haley and DeSantis limping to the finish line, the winner again being the non-participating Trump. The murky Republican nomination clouds may become a little clearer after the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries next week and January 23, respectively.

Judging on Wednesday’s performance, Trump will win Monday’s Iowa primary in a hack canter, with Nikki Hayley plugging along to a distant second. And the New Hampshire primary on January 23 will see Trump conclusively clinch the Republican nomination.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Trump’s tariffs, AKD’s gazette and Sri Lanka’s diplomatic slumber

Published

on

“We are rather respectable in Colombo. We go to bed fairly early, and we remain there till morning. “

According to Sri Lanka’s diplomatic folklore, the late S.W. R. D. Bandaranaike uttered these words while explaining the reasons for Sri Lanka’s abstention on the UN resolution condemning the Soviet invasion of Hungary. Apparently, SWRD’s foreign ministry officials were asleep at home when the diplomatic cable seeking instructions was received from New York. In those days, there were no cell phones, Internet, or even fax or telex machines. The diplomatic cables were sent through post offices. Decoding them was a slow and time-consuming process. Thus, the government could not provide appropriate instructions to our mission in New York in time, and the Sri Lankan delegation abstained on that sensitive UN vote.

Sri Lanka’s Absence from Section 301 Consultations

But then, how does one explain Sri Lanka’s absence from the crucial bilateral consultation held in Washington by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) during March-April on “Forced Labour” under the Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974? Didn’t our foreign and trade ministries send appropriate instructions to Washington in time? Even if the instructions from the foreign ministry were transmitted to our embassy in Washington by pigeon carriers, there was enough time for Sri Lanka to participate in those meetings.

In March, the USTR initiated these 301 investigations on 60 trading partners, and invited all of them for confidential consultations. Out of the 60, 46 participated in these consultations. Sri Lanka was not one of them. Other countries that didn’t participate in these consultations included China, Russia, and Venezuela! In addition to that, the Section 301 Committee conducted a public hearing with interested parties on April 28 and 29. Washington-based diplomats, representatives from few trade ministries as well as representatives from many foreign trade associations and chambers participated in these hearings. Sri Lanka was once again conspicuously absent.

As a result, when the USTR published the proposed forced labour tariffs on June 2nd, Sri Lanka ended up with a 12.5% duty. Pakistani and Indonesian diplomats participated in these consultations and took appropriate follow-up measures, and managed to enter the 10% duty category. As even a threat of a modest tariff hike could disrupt supply chains and reduce competitiveness, particularly in an industry such as garments, I discussed this issue on 15 June and underscored the importance of Sri Lanka’s participation at the next hearing, which was scheduled to be held from July 7th .

Awakening from Diplomatic Slumber and AKD’s Gazette

Fortunately, Sri Lanka finally awoke from weeks of diplomatic slumber, and Ambassador Mahinda Samarasinghe participated in the public hearing on 9 July, and promised, “…. · We have agreed to the text in our negotiations with the USTR on forced labour, …. The gazette as we speak is being printed and I’m getting the gazette tomorrow morning, and the gazette will be shared with USTR as I get it“.

As promised, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake issued a gazette on 10 July banning the imports of goods produced by forced labour. These new regulations are very similar to what Pakistan and Indonesia enacted in April, after their consultations with USTR in March. Why couldn’t we do it in April? Why did we wait till the very last minute?

Challenges ahead

“War is too important to be left to generals alone,” is a famous saying attributed to former French Premier Georges Clemenceau. Similarly, monitoring our main markets is too important to be left to diplomats alone. The United States is the largest single-country market for Sri Lanka. Therefore, Sri Lankan trade chambers and associations should become more proactive in these markets and participate in these events. For example, the chairman of the Pakistani apparel exporters association participated in the April hearings. Similarly, representatives from the Indian Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, the Confederation of Indian Industry, and Reliance Industries also participated in July hearings. At an event where each speaker is given only five minutes (strictly enforced), having a number of speakers from a country is an advantage. The presence of industry representatives in these kinds of events also help them understand the market dynamics and the future challenges. This is important, particularly because there will be many more challenges with Trump’s tariffs.

With the gazette issued on 10 July, Sri Lanka has imposed a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labour. Now, the challenge will be to effectively enforce the prohibition. And what are the goods produced with forced labour? The USTR list only focuses on aluminum, cotton, electronics, lithium-ion batteries, rice, and tobacco. However, according to the U.S. Department of Labour, the list is much longer. Hence, this list may change continuously during the next two years and tariffs may fluctuate once again.

So, this is definitely not the time to slumber.

(The writer, a retired public servant, can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)

by Gomi Senadhira ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Tales of Mystery and Suspense 10 Casino for Sale

Published

on

After the overwhelming grotesquerie of J K Rowling’s latest Cormoran Strike novel (written, I should have noted, as the others were, under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith), I thought I should return to the world of fun, and also a much shorter description since this thriller moves quickly without the layers of detail that Rowling engages in.

I then move to the second comic thriller by Caryl Brahms and S J Simon. This, their second story to feature Vladimir Stroganoff and Adam Quill, was Casino for Sale, as lunatic a romp as the first, though without the emphasis on the ballet that characterized A Bullet in the Ballet.

This one begins with the impresario Stroganoff buying a casino cheap from Baron Sam de Rabinovich, only to find that it was a rundown place, not the grand casino of La Bazouche, a resort on the Frenc+h Riviera, as he had initially thought. The grand one belonged to Lord Buttonhooke, and Stroganoff could  not compete, until he thought of bringing the Ballet Stroganoff to the casino – which of course leads to Buttonhooke deciding to have ballet performances in his Casino too.

Stroganoff invites Quill to visit him, which Quill decides to do since he has left Scotland Yard, having come into a legacy. No one believes this, and he has to face questions as to what he did to have been sacked, with sympathy for having been found out.

Caryl and Simon

The day he arrives in La Bazouche there is a murder, of a vitriolic critic called Citrolo, in Stroganoff’s office. He had been going to write a damning review of the opening night of the ballet and Stroganoff, when he realizes Citrolo cannot be swayed, drugs him and dictates the review himself to the papers. He leaves Citrolo sleeping and finds him shot the next morning, whereupon he decides to muddy the waters and leave a suicide note and lots of other murder weapons. So much overkill, as it were, of course ensures that he is arrested.

But the excitable French detective who makes the arrest follows up his suggestion that Buttonhooke was also involved, and so the two casino owners find themselves in cells next door to each other, with the detective Gustave quite happy to provide creature comforts for a fee.

Quill decides he must investigate, and finds Gustave most cooperative, since he has a laid back attitude to work. So it is Quill that finds a notebook which makes it clear Citrolo is an accomplished blackmailer, and that there are lots of possible murderers, including Stroganoff’s croupier, who was crooked, Rabinovich, who was now working for Buttonhooke, a confidence trickster called Kurt Kukumber, whose prospectus for a dud gold mine was found in the office and Prince Alexis Artishok who was engaged in a deal to buy diamonds from the ballerina Dyra Dyrakova.

Stroganoff had been trying to get Dyrakova to dance for him, but having done so previously she had refused. But then to Stroganoff’s chagrin she agreed to dance for Buttonhooke. The clearly crooked Artishok had told Buttonhooke’s mistress Sadie Souse, who was not very bright, that Dyrakova possessed diamonds she was willing to sell cheap, and Sadie was determined to have them.

Quill meanwhile finds out that there was a secret passage to Stroganoff’s office, the obvious solution to what had begun as a locked room mystery, and that this was known by almost everyone apart from Stroganoff himself. And then Rabinovich is murdered, just after Gustave had released his two original suspects, leading him to blame Quill for having insisted on that and thus allowing them to kill again.

Soon afterwards Dyrakova arrives, and the town is full of posters announcing that she will appear in the casinos, elaborate posters for either one, since Stroganoff is determined that she will dance for him, and if she does not come willingly, he has devised a scheme to make her do so unwillingly. So, though Buttonhooke has her taken off to his yacht immediately she arrives at the station, Quill along with Arenskaya gets her into a launch and to Stroganoff’s casino, where she performs to tumultuous applause, not knowing for whom she is dancing.

When Quill asked her about the diamonds, she said she had sold them long ago, and that gave Quill the solution to the mystery. Rabinovich had known about this, and Artishok had killed him to prevent Sadie learning it from him, he had killed Citrolo who had recognized him for an accomplished card sharper, not a Russian prince at all. But before he is arrested, he gets away in a boat, and the police launch that pursues him is on the point of catching him up when it runs out of petrol.

Again, lots of excitement, and entertaining references  – Gustave grows marrows – and if not quite as brilliant as its predecessor, Casino was certainly a delightful read.

Continue Reading

Features

The challenge of being positive about SAARC

Published

on

The RCSS forum addressed by SAARC Secretary General Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar in progress. (Pic courtesy RCSS)

It was a few years back that a former President of Sri Lanka took it on himself to pronounce SAARC ‘dead’. Since then there have been other sections of Sri Lankan opinion that have joined the critics of SAARC and taken the solemn stance that SAARC has indeed died what may be called a natural death.

Their fatalism is understandable. SAARC has failed to meet at heads of government or state level for the past several years to take the SAARC process notably forward. Regional cooperation has more or less been only an appealing idea. No substantive concrete projects have taken off to make the idea a hard reality. ‘Inner paralysis’ seems to be SAARC’s lot. Hence the fatalism in these circles.

However, being one of the worst cash-strapped regions of the world and a teemingly populated one with people virtually left to their devices, what choices do the ‘SAARC Eight’ have other than to try their best to band together and continue with their cooperation efforts, however small they may be?

There is no escaping the mounting debt trap for many of these countries and bankrupt Sri Lanka is a glaring example, but ‘throwing in the towel’ and abandoning themselves entirely to the diktats of the strongest economies and their agencies will prove a ‘living death’ for many countries in the SAARC fold.

The gains may be meagre but giving-up on SAARC cooperation in full would prove self-defeating for the organization and South Asia. Right now, the collective intention ought to be to salvage what the region could from the tenuous cooperative efforts. Moreover, such initiatives could go some distance to generate a degree of goodwill among the Eight and help in sustaining a dialogue process.

Given this backdrop it proved ‘a stich in time’ for the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, to recently host the SAARC Secretary General Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar to a round table discussion on the unifying potential of SAARC and its future possibilities, besides other related issue areas.

Held on June 24th and moderated by RCSS Executive Director and former ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, the forum brought together a vibrant, wide ranging audience comprising academicians, diplomats, senior public servants, civil society activists and many others. Following the presentation by Ambassador Golam Sarwar titled, ‘Reigniting SAARC: Achievements, Challenges and the Way Ahead’, a lively Q&A followed.

The above forum could be described as an act of lighting the proverbial ‘candle’ rather than ‘cursing the darkness.’ It surely is a ‘darkness’ that could be seen as daunting considering that the region’s pivotal powers, India and Pakistan, are failing to act in a spirit of accord but are engaged in bitter finger-pointing on a number of questions of vital importance to SAARC.

On the other hand, what is the rest of the region doing to bring the above sides together? It is disappointing that to date the rest of SAARC has failed to launch a major diplomatic drive to bring peace between the feuding regional heavyweights. It needs to act without delay and establish its earnestness and this effort would need to prove SAARC’s staying power in the unfolding months and even years.

In assessing SAARC’s seeming failure local opinion in particular has failed to factor in what could be described as weak leadership. Since Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh, the founding father of SAARC, the region has failed to produce a visionary leader who could advance the SAARC cause with charisma and drive.

Among other reasons, weak leadership accounts considerably for the faltering and stuttering status, as it were, of SAARC. Badly needed are leaders who could go the extra mile, think less of narrow national interests and work diligently towards the collective well being of the region but SAARC’s millions of ordinary people have been made to wait in vain for leaders of such stature. Instead, they have been burdened with politicians who seem to be relishing the apparently moribund state of SAARC.

Looking back, it could be said that it was the dynamic leadership factor that led to the launching of the Non-Aligned Movement and for its sustenance for a few decades. True, it could be seen in some quarters that NAM is no more, but as in the case of SAARC, the former too has been unfortunate to be burdened over the years with politicians who lack the vision and drive to unflaggingly advance the fortunes of the South. NAM and SAARC lack the dynamism and vision of leaders of the stature of Jawaharlal Nehru, for example, to give them the required guidance and intellectual depth.

The reasons are complex for there not being among us currently political leaders with the vision and the steadfast commitment to advance the legitimate interests of the South. However, it could be stated with conviction that the majority of Southern leaders have too easily caved in to the demands of the global North and its financial agencies.

These leaders have failed to see, for instance, that the largely market economy oriented Northern governments would not view with favour a centrist economic model that attaches priority to the interests of the dis-empowered publics of the South. This realization ought to have dawned on the current government in Sri Lanka, for instance, some while ago but it has no choice but to abide by IMF dictates since economic survival at present is unthinkable without the latter’s succour.

Accordingly for SAARC this should be the time for some soul-searching. Priority needs to be attached to ending the feuding between India and Pakistan since at present the material fortunes of the region hinge largely on these regional giants giving peaceful relations among them a try. This is no easy challenge to meet but some daring, visionary diplomacy needs to take hold among the rest of SAARC.

There is some sense in SAARC bringing the peoples of the region together through programs that address their best collective interests. A meeting of minds among SAARC nations could enable SAARC and its agencies to build a region-wide people’s movement for progressive political and economic change that could in turn lead to the region’s political leaders sensitizing themselves more to the neglected needs of their publics.

However, the time is ‘now’ for the initiation of these progressive changes and the voice of SAARC well wishers would need to drown out those of their critics.

Continue Reading

Trending