AMERIKA
If you care about your country and your rights, don't vote for any Republicans in 2022

Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY
Sun, September 18, 2022

Now that primary season is over there is a simple test for voters, especially Republicans and independents: If you care about the future of America, democracy and your own rights, don’t vote for Republicans. Any of them. Even the officeholders who have stood up to Donald Trump and the newcomers who pitch themselves as reality-based and results-oriented.

I feel terrible thinking this, much less writing it. I’ve covered many Republicans whom I admired. I spent months reporting on political negotiations and how deals get made in Congress. I believe policy debates and compromises are healthy, and the Democratic-led Congress has produced solid bipartisan results this year in gun safety, infrastructure, industrial policy and other areas.

Even so, the Republican Party is on a dark path and should not hold power anywhere until it comes back into the light. That’s especially true on Capitol Hill.

Congressional math is unforgiving. If there is just one more Republican than Democrat in the House or Senate, a power-obsessed party in thrall to election deniers and conspiracists will control committees, agendas, investigations and leadership positions.

We sued the FEC: Hold Trump accountable for raising money

The Trump-MAGA threat is real

Republican voters are key to the outcome. About 8% of them voted for Democrats in 2018, TargetSmart CEO Tom Bonier, a Democratic data and polling expert, told me in an email. If that rises to 15% this year, he added, “the GOP has no chance of taking back either the Senate or the House.”

That’s not an unrealistic goal given the percentage of Republicans who voted for abortion rights last month in Kansas (roughly 30%, Bonier said Wednesday at a New Democrat Network webinar) and the chunk of GOP voters alarmed by Trump and his "Make America Great Again" loyalists. A new poll found a quarter of Republicans agree that Trump's MAGA movement threatens democracy.

Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store.

President Joe Biden accurately summarized that threat in a recent speech: “MAGA Republicans do not respect the Constitution. They do not believe in the rule of law. They do not recognize the will of the people. They refuse to accept the results of a free election. And they’re working right now, as I speak, in state after state to give power to decide elections in America to partisans and cronies, empowering election deniers to undermine democracy itself.”

As national security expert Tom Nichols wrote afterward in The Atlantic, “We should be deeply troubled that Joe Biden had to give this speech at all.” And he had to. Because even now, after the Trump mob’s insurrection attempt on Jan. 6, 2021, two impeachments, years of election lies, escalating legal problems and the FBI recovery of top secret government documents from Mar-a-Lago, Trump is not a spent force.

Former President Donald Trump and ally Doug Mastriano, the GOP nominee for Pennsylvania governor, at a rally in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., on Sept. 3, 2022.

Hours after Trump supporters stormed the Capitol on their deadly quest to block Congress from finalizing Biden’s win, 147 Republican lawmakers went ahead and objected to certified election results from Arizona, Pennsylvania or both. Over 18 months later, the party is still with Trump. Polls show roughly 70% of Republicans don’t view Biden as the legitimate winner of the 2020 election, and most Republicans want Trump as their 2024 nominee.

In fact, Maggie Haberman reports in her upcoming book, “Confidence Man,” Trump never intended to leave the White House – though he lost to Biden by more than 7 million votes.

'I picked 15 weeks': Sen. Lindsey Graham mansplains his federal abortion ban

Believers of Trump’s Big Lie that he was the true winner have elevated so many delusional Republicans that 60% of voters will find election deniers on their 2022 ballots, according to FiveThirtyEight. Its analysis of GOP nominees for House, Senate, governor, secretary of state and attorney general found at least 200 of 552 say the 2020 election was illegitimate. If they win, they could influence and possibly even overturn elections in 40 states.

Some of these races are out of reach for Democrats. In U.S. House contests, FiveThirtyEight found that “118 election deniers and eight election doubters have at least a 95 percent chance of winning.”

At the same time, Real Clear Politics counts eight toss-up Senate races, 11 toss-ups for governor and 34 in the House. Concerned conservatives and moderates could make the difference in these contests – particularly if they vote Democratic no matter what kind of Republican is running.

This seems unfair to Republicans who have shown principled independence. By my count, 20 in the House made it to the fall ballot despite voting for an independent bipartisan commission to investigate the violent Capitol riot. Two of them, California's Rep. David Valadao and Washington state’s Rep. Dan Newhouse, also voted to impeach Trump for inciting the rioters.

The Future of the Republican Party: What to do now with 'hot mess' that is the GOP?
Alarmed GOP voters are the fail-safe

Valadao’s tight race could be one of the few that determine House control. Does he deserve to be reelected? Maybe. But could America survive a GOP-controlled House unscathed? Also maybe, and that’s not good enough.

The same argument holds for candidates like Senate nominee Joe O’Dea in Colorado, who says he'd be an "independent-minded" senator, and House nominee Allan Fung in Rhode Island, who says he’d work with Democrats to solve problems. That’s commendable, but voting for them could produce a Republican House or Senate.

I wouldn’t even bet on fact-based Republican governors. Some could face veto-proof legislatures dominated by MAGA fantasists. And some could fold. Look at New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu and retired Army Brig. Gen. Don Bolduc, who a month ago declared that “Trump won the election. … I'm not switchin' horses baby. This is it." Sununu called Bolduc a “conspiracy theorist-type” and “not a serious candidate” for the GOP Senate nomination. But right before Tuesday's primary, Sununu said he'd endorse Bolduc if he won.

The upshot: Bolduc won, he and Sununu shared a public hug at a post-primary GOP unity breakfast, and then – in a shocking plot twist – Bolduc went on Fox News and said he had concluded that “the election was not stolen.”

A MAGA-driven America is a grim prospect. Would future Republican candidates admit defeat if they lost, or would they make sure, through legislation and manipulation, that they'd win? Would they cement minority rule and further restrict fundamental rights like voting and abortion?

Biden has correctly distinguished between “mainstream Republicans” and Trump’s extreme “MAGA Republicans.” They are different, and mainstream GOP politicians holding the line deserve credit. Nevertheless, when it comes to who controls Congress and the levers of power in states across the country, all that counts right now is the “R” after their names.

Jill Lawrence is a columnist for USA TODAY and author of "The Art of the Political Deal: How Congress Beat the Odds and Broke Through Gridlock." Follow her on Twitter: @JillDLawrence

More from Jill Lawrence:

From Trump 2020 to 'Don't Say Gay,' GOP leaders waste millions of taxpayer dollars

Standing with Ukraine won't fix the GOP. Caring about democracy at home might help.

Interstate abortion travel bans? We're supposed to be a free country, not East Germany.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.

FASCIST GOP
Lindsey Graham’s Proposed National Abortion Ban is a Warning Shot

Jessica Washington
Fri, September 16, 2022 

Photo: Antenna (Getty Images)

The war on abortion has clearly ramped up since the Supreme Court decided to overturn Roe v. Wade. And although most of the impact has been felt in conservative states, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham made it crystal clear this week that he intends to make this a national fight.

On Tuesday, Sen. Graham (R-SC) introduced the ‘‘Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions” Act. The bill, which is inaccurately labeled as regulating “late-term abortions,” bans abortion at 15 weeks. The bill makes no exceptions for the health of the fetus.

Senator Lindsey Graham’s office did not respond to requests for comment at the time of publication.

Although this isn’t the first time Graham has introduced a version of this bill, now that the constitutional right to abortion no longer exists, experts say the concept of a national ban weighs more heavily than it did before.

“We should understand what Lindsey Graham is doing with this latest version of the bill as a public statement, rather than an immediate threat to abortion access at a national scale, “ says Beth Ribet, an Adjunct Professor of Law at the UC Hastings Law School in San Francisco.

Based on the current Democratic majority, there’s no real path for this bill to pass this year, says Ribet, which means the bill will die come January.

“That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take the threat very seriously,” she says. “It’s certainly a declaration of intention to attempt to advance a much more aggressive ban that would affect states which are not currently immediately devastated by the Dobbs decision.”

Dr. Joia Crear-Perry, an OB/GYN and founder of the National Birth Equity Collaborative, a Black maternal health and reproductive justice organization, says she doesn’t think the American people would stand for a national abortion ban.


“We are confident that if the citizens of the United States of America voted on a return to land owning white men dictating who should have and raise children instead of the person with the capacity for pregnancy... the people will vote for freedom,” says Crear-Perry.

But Congress aside, the next big question about a proposed national abortion ban is whether it could get past the Supreme Court. In the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, the justices indicated that they were leaving the question of abortion access up to the states. But, Ribet says that wouldn’t prevent the justices from ruling in favor of a national abortion ban.

“If Congress were to pass a national ban I don’t think that the present Supreme Court would oppose that,” she says. “The Dobbs decision is silent on whether Congress could take action at a federal level.”

Emily Berman, an Associate Law Professor at the University of Houston Law Center, agrees with Ribet that the Supreme Court would likely uphold a national abortion ban.

“If I had to put my money on it, I would say yes, it’s more likely than not that the court would uphold this,” says Berman.

Another option for conservatives outside of legislating on abortion would be to get a case to the Supreme Court that would declare a fetus a person, says Berman.

“If you say that a fetus is a person entitled to the same constitutional protections as the person who has already been born, then arguably it becomes a crime to “kill the fetus,”” she says.

But like with Republicans in Congress, the Supreme Court might not feel they have the capital left to use after the Roe decision on something like a fetal personhood decision.

“Given the reaction to Dobbs… it seems to me that this is also not on the immediate horizon,” says Berman. “But I don’t doubt that there are people on the court who would love to make that the law of the land.”

Lauren Ralph, an epidemiologist and associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, says a 15 week abortion ban would impact marginalized communities, including Black and disabled communities, and young people, the most.

“The data is clear about who is going to be the most impacted,” says Ralph. “The people that already faced barriers to getting an abortion or have been marginalized from healthcare in general.”

According to Ralph’s research, young people and people facing food insecurity, who are disproportionately Black, are more likely to discover they’re pregnant later in their pregnancy. These groups are also more likely to face barriers to accessing abortion that push-back the time at which they’re able to access care.

Katrina Kimport, a sociologist and Professor of Reproductive Sciences at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, says a 15 week national ban would also take choices away from families who discover life-threatening fetal health conditions that don’t present until later in pregnancy.

These are parents grappling with the trauma of realizing that the baby they dreamed of isn’t going to be born, says Kimport. And under this law, they’d be forced to compound that trauma by giving birth anyway.

“We’re looking at really erasing and ignoring the complex emotional experiences of pregnant people,” she says. “It’s not everyone, but it’s a subset of people who’ve already gone through something very difficult. And then what the law will do, is compound that difficulty.”

Lindsey Graham introduced a 15-week national abortion ban despite backlash to the overturning of Roe v. Wade

Bryan Metzger,Oma Seddiq

Tue, September 13, 2022 

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina at the Capitol on April 7, 2022.Drew Angerer/Getty Images

• GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced a bill that would impose new nationwide restrictions on abortion.

• The bill, unlikely to pass the Senate anytime soon, comes amid backlash to the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

• In the wake of that decision, a slew of Republican-led states have enacted new abortion restrictions.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina introduced a bill on Tuesday that would impose a 15-week abortion ban nationwide, despite the widespread backlash to the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade.

The bill, called the "Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act," would limit how late in pregnancy a person can seek an abortion. Graham has introduced versions of the bill five times before, and in 2021, the limit was set at 20 weeks. The current version includes exceptions in cases of rape, incest or medical emergencies.

Anti-abortion advocates' use of the term "late-term abortion" to describe procedures after 15 weeks is misleading. Pregnancies are generally only viable beginning at 24 to 28 weeks of pregnancy. Though it has no accepted medical meaning, abortions later in pregnancy are generally defined as after 21 to 24 weeks.

"Abortion is not banned in America. It's left up to elected officials to define the issue," Graham said at a press conference on Capitol Hill where he unveiled the legislation. "And we have the ability in Washington to speak on this issue if we choose. I have chosen to speak."

Graham called his bill "eminently reasonable" and said a "strong majority" of Americans believe "abortion should be the exception not the rule" and would support his legislation. Graham's claims don't reflect recent polling on the issue.

A majority of Americans — about 60%, according to recent Pew polling — say abortion should be legal in some or all cases. A Wall Street Journal poll in April of this year — before the Supreme Court decision — found that 48% of Americans supported a 15-week abortion ban, including exceptions to protect the mother's health, while 43% opposed it. But another Wall Street Journal poll earlier this month found that Americans have shifted on the issue and 57% of respondents opposed a 15-week abortion ban.

Graham, who has praised the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe, attended the press conference alongside 10 female proponents of abortion bans, including Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.

The Supreme Court's June 24 ruling tossing out abortion rights has sparked widespread criticism of Republican lawmakers, who are almost uniformly in favor of restricting the procedure.

In August, voters in the deep red state of Kansas rejected a constitutional amendment that would have removed the right to an abortion from the state constitution. And Democrats, campaigning on abortion rights, have also outperformed expectations in recent special elections. Abortion has quickly become a top issue for voters heading into this year's midterms, according to recent polls. Some Republican candidates have since tried to water down their stances on abortion.

Democrats quickly seized on Graham's proposed ban. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday called the bill "the latest, clearest signal of extreme MAGA Republicans' intent to criminalize women's health freedom."

"With Roe now out of their way, extreme MAGA Republicans are gleefully charging ahead with their deadly crusade to punish and control women's health decisions," the top Democrat said.

The White House also weighed in, saying the "bill is wildly out of step with what Americans believe."

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris are "fighting for progress, while Republicans are fighting to take us back," White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.

The bill also comes despite Graham's repeated insistence that abortion should be decided by states and not by the US Congress. When asked by Insider about his apparent flip on the issue, the Republican senator said he's simply reacting to Democratic legislation aimed at protecting abortion rights.

"They introduced the bill to define who they are, I thought it'd be nice to introduce a bill to define who we are," he said.

Also in May, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell threw cold water on the idea of new nationwide abortion restrictions. Graham said on Tuesday that he hasn't discussed the bill with McConnell.

"I think it's safe to say there aren't 60 votes there at the federal level, no matter who happens to be in the majority, no matter who happens to be in the White House," McConnell said at the time. "So I think the widespread sentiment of my caucus is that this issue will be dealt with at the state level."

Graham's bill is virtually guaranteed to go nowhere in the Democratic-controlled Congress. If Republicans win control in November, the bill still appears unlikely to get the necessary 60 votes to pass the Senate.

After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a slew of Republican-led states have enacted restrictions on abortion, whereas Democratic-led states have taken steps to protect and expand abortion access. In Graham's home state of South Carolina, Republican state legislators recently failed to receive enough support to pass a total ban on abortion, instead opting to update another law that bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. The state Supreme Court has currently blocked that law from being enforced as litigation remains ongoing.

Ahead of the midterms, Democrats have also sought to highlight other nationally unpopular proposals put forward by Republican senators. Most recently, the White House has zeroed in on Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida's GOP agenda, which calls for increasing taxes on half of Americans via a mandatory income tax for all.

An airline rescued 1 of its 4 Airbus planes stranded in Ukraine in a daring stealth mission at low altitude

Ryan Hogg Sat, September 17, 2022

Wizz Air rescued one of four planes stranded in Ukraine on Tuesday in a daring escape.Getty Images

• An airline rescued an Airbus plane stranded in Ukraine for seven months in a daring mission.

• Flightradar24 data appeared to show the WizzAir jet flying at 10,000 feet with its transponder off.

• WizzAir confirmed it repatriated the jet on Tuesday following an "in-depth risk assessment."

An airline rescued one of its planes stranded in Ukraine in a daring escape that involved flying at a low altitude and turning off its transponder, data suggests.

Budapest-based Wizz Air repatriated one of four Airbus jets that have been stranded in the country since Russia invaded Ukraine in late February.

Data from Flightrader24 showed that the Airbus A320 flew from Lviv in western Ukraine to Katowice in neighboring Poland on Tuesday. The jet was flying at 10,000 feet when it eventually reappeared on radar as it entered Polish airspace after appearing to switch off its tracking system.

Ukraine's airspace has been largely closed to passenger jets since Russia's invasion, as have a number of its airports, leaving four Wizz Air jets stranded for nearly seven months.

Flying at a low altitude may have helped the jet avoid being detected by radar or anti-aircraft missiles.

An airline spokesperson told Insider: "Wizz Air confirms that, following an in-depth risk assessment and thorough preparation, its one aircraft based in Lviv departed from Danylo Halytskyi International Airport and successfully landed in Katowice on 13 Sep 2022."

The rescue mission marks the first step in Wizz's plans to rescue its jets. The airline didn't comment on plans to liberate the remaining three Airbus planes that are still stuck in Kyiv.

Wizz Air is one of several airlines and leasing companies whose jets remain stranded in Ukraine and Russia. Global market leader AerCap has 152 planes trapped in Russia and Ukraine, according to aviation consultancy IBA.

The airline has long expressed a desire to start flying again to both Ukrainian and Russian cities. In March it offered 100,000 free tickets to Ukrainians in neighboring countries.

Last month the airline told Gulf News that it planned to return to Russia with an Abu Dhabi to Moscow route in October, before backpedaling citing "industry supply chain limitations."

SPACE RACE 2.0
Chinese astronauts go on spacewalk from new station




In this photo released by China's Xinhua News Agency, a screen at the Beijing Aerospace Control Center in Beijing shows Chinese astronaut Cai Xuzhe exiting the station lab module Wentian to conduct extravehicular activities, also known as a spacewalk, Saturday, Sept. 17, 2022. 

(Guo Zhongzheng/Xinhua via AP)

Sat, September 17, 2022 at 7:16 AM·1 min read

BEIJING (AP) — Two Chinese astronauts went on a spacewalk Saturday from a new space station that is due to be completed later this year.

Cai Xuzhe and Chen Dong installed pumps, a handle to open the hatch door from outside in an emergency, and a foot-stop to fix an astronaut's feet to a robotic arm, state media said.

China is building its own space station after being excluded by the U.S. from the International Space Station because its military runs the country's space program. American officials see a host of strategic challenges from China’s space ambitions, in an echo of the U.S.-Soviet rivalry that prompted the race to the moon in the 1960s.

The latest spacewalk was the second during a six-month mission that will oversee the completion of the space station. The first of two laboratories, a 23-ton module, was added to the station in July and the other is to be sent up later this year.

The third member of the crew, Liu Yang, supported the other two from inside during the spacewalk. Liu and Chen conducted the first spacewalk about two weeks ago.

They will be joined by three more astronauts near the end of their mission in what will be the first time the station has six people on board.

China became the third nation to send a person into space in 2003, following the former Soviet Union and the United States. It has sent rovers to the moon and Mars and brought lunar samples back to Earth.

 Dismantle the Commonwealth: Queen Elizabeth's Death Prompts Reckoning with Colonial Past in Africa

Democracy Now!

The death of Queen Elizabeth II has focused global attention on the British royal family and renewed criticism of the monarchy both inside the U.K. and abroad, especially among peoples colonized by Britain. "There's a degree of psychosis that you can go to another people's land, colonize them, and then expect them to honor you at the same time," says Kenyan American author Mukoma Wa Ngugi, who teaches literature at Cornell University and whose own family was deeply impacted by the bloody British suppression of the Mau Mau revolution. He says that with Queen Elizabeth's death, there needs to be a "dismantling" of the Commonwealth and a real reckoning with colonial abuses. We also speak with Harvard historian Caroline Elkins, a leading scholar of British colonialism, who says that while it's unclear how much Queen Elizabeth personally knew about concentration camps, torture and other abuses in Kenya during her early reign, the monarchy must reckon with that legacy. "Serious crimes happened on the queen's imperial watch. In fact, her picture hung in every detention camp in Kenya as detainees were beaten in order to exact their loyalty to the British crown," says Elkins. 

Democracy Now! is an independent global news hour that airs on over 1,500 TV and radio stations Monday through Friday. 

Watch our livestream at https://democracynow.org Mondays to Fridays 8-9 a.m. ET.

 

Royal family: Protests raise questions about the future of the monarchy in the U.K.

USA TODAY Sep 17, 2022

After anti-monarchist protesters were arrested, Britons wonder about freedom of speech, the timing of the protests and what's next for the U.K.

RELATED: 'Small bit of service' to wait in a 5-mile line to see the Queen

https://bit.ly/3BrxWgE

Queen Elizabeth II's death has sparked widespread grief in the U.K., along with concerns that civil rights were undermined during brief crackdowns on protesters.

But amid an economic crisis and waning support for a monarchical system, when the queen's mourning period ends, some Britons think it's time to talk about the monarchy.

"A significant amount of appreciation in the U.K. for the monarchy wasn't necessarily for the institution. It was for the queen," said Paul Powlesland, 36, a lawyer who stood outside the Houses of Parliament on Monday with a blank piece of paper in his hand and said he was told he would be arrested if he wrote "Not my king" on it, a reference to his disapproval of King Charles III, who inherited the throne from his mother.

"Now that she's gone I think there's going to be a lot of people reassessing their relationship with the monarchy, especially as I think Charles is inherently less likable," he said.

Arrest of UK anti-monarchy protestersraises free speech  concerns
Sep 16, 2022
Al Jazeera English
It has not been all celebration, since King Charles III became Britain's monarch. Some have been making their Republican views known by protesting.
Al Jazeera's Neave Barker reports from London

Taxpayers 'pay for your parade': 

Charles heckled in Wales on cost of 

monarchy

Anti-monarchists protest outside British parliament

Tue, September 13, 2022

STORY: Among those attending Tuesday's protest was the lawyer in question, 

36-year-old Paul Powlesland, who said people need to separate the issue of 

mourning the Queen and the new king's succession, pointing out they were not 

protesting near any funeral or remembrance.

"We’re at the political centre of power, where the king came yesterday to say that he's the new king,. We're his subjects and we’re here to say (that) actually we disagree. We politely and very respectfully disagree with you. You're not my king.”

Powlesland, had posted on social media an altercation he had with an officer in Parliament Square on Monday, while reportedly holding up a blank piece of paper. He said the officer told him he risked being arrested if he went ahead and wrote "not my king" on it because "someone might be offended".

The clip went viral, with more than one million views on Twitter. Scotland Yard later issued a statement, saying: "The public absolutely have a right to protest," British media reported.

Holding a "not my king" sign at Tuesday's rally, Powlesland said it was "great to be able to do that and to stand here peacefully expressing my opinion and exercising a very ancient British right that I think we’re all entitled to."

Charles, 73, automatically became king of the United Kingdom and 14 other realms, following the death of Queen Elizabeth on Thursday (September 8).

Anti-monarchy protesters boo King outside UK parliament | AFP

Sep 12, 2022

Two anti-monarchy protesters boo King Charles III as he leaves the British Parliament in London where he received condolences from the Speakers of both Houses following the death of Queen Elizabeth II. 'You can't have any philosophical or moral justification for one family having political power like that just by virtue of their birth,' says one protester.

 

IN SCOTLAND; PRINCE ANDREW CALLED DIRTY OLD MAN, PROSTER ARRESTED

 

Gravitas: British cops crack down on anti-monarchy protesters

Sep 13, 2022

WION

Cops in the United Kingdom are being criticized for arresting anti-monarchy

 protesters. Republican groups have now threatened to hold more protests 

during the coronation of King Charles. Molly Gambhir gets you the details.

  

Arrest of UK anti-royal protesters raises concerns for free speech by human rights groups 

Sep 14, 2022

ABC News (Australia)

In the UK, authorities are preparing for hundreds of thousands of people to pay their respects to the late Queen Elizabeth as she lies in state in central London. Amid the largely supportive wall-to-wall coverage of the solemn proceedings, some have expressed concern about the police response to anti-monarchy protesters. From London, here's James Glenday.

 

Scottish demonstrators hold up blank signs to show support for free speech, anti-monarchy protesters

Sep 13, 2022

Global News

Protesters held up blank signs and banners during a demonstration in Edinburgh, Scotland on Tuesday to protest a perceived crackdown on free speech amid reported arrests of anti-monarchy protesters during the processions carrying Queen Elizabeth II’s casket throughout the capital on Sunday and Monday.

Scottish police said they made three arrests in Edinburgh on those days. A 22-year-old woman, who had been pictured holding an anti-monarchy sign, and a 74-year-old man were arrested separately on Sunday and charged with “breaching the peace.”

“People have been arrested for peacefully holding up signs with anti-monarchy views,” one protester said. “So my sign is blank today. But if it said a message that was against the monarchy, judging by the last few days, we could be arrested.”

Video posted to social media on Monday also showed a man who appeared to have heckled Prince Andrew during the procession of the queen’s coffin along Edinburgh’s Royal Mile being pushed to the ground as police pulled him away.

Symon Hill tells PoliticsJOE he was arrested by the police for questioning the legitimacy of the monarchy in public.

 

Andrew Marr slams arrests of people for protesting against King Charles

This video clip is from Andrew Marr's LBC show which took place on September 12th 2022

 

NOT PUTIN'S WEEK

Putin tells Modi he'll 'stop' the Ukraine invasion he ordered 'as soon as possible' after the Indian leader criticized Russia's war to his face

John Haltiwanger
Fri, September 16, 2022

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi attend a meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Samarkand, Uzbekistan September 16, 2022.Sergey Bobylev/Reuters

Modi explicitly criticized Russia's war in Ukraine while meeting with Putin on Friday.

"Today's era is not an era of war, and I have spoken to you on the phone about this," Modi said.

"I know about your concerns. We want all of this to end as soon as possible," Putin told Modi.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday criticized Russia's war in Ukraine while meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin face-to-face while both were in Uzbekistan for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit.

"I know that today's era is not an era of war, and I have spoken to you on the phone about this," Modi told Putin, according to Reuters.

Putin told the Indian leader, "I know about your position on the conflict in Ukraine, and I know about your concerns. We want all of this to end as soon as possible."

The Russian president's remarks to his Indian counterpart echoed comments on Russia's unprovoked war in Ukraine that he made to Chinese leader Xi Jinping the day prior. "We highly value the balanced position of our Chinese friends when it comes to the Ukraine crisis," Putin said to Xi at the summit in Uzbekistan.

"We understand your questions and concerns in this regard," Putin added. "During today's meeting, of course, we will explain in detail our position on this issue, although we have spoken about this before."

China and India have close ties with Moscow — and have continued to buy its oil, gas and coal as Western nations moved to cut their purchases — but foreign policy experts and Russia watchers say that the war in Ukraine appears to be driving a major wedge in relations.

"Having been thrashed on battlefield, Putin is getting thrashed at conference table, too. Doesn't take much clairvoyance to see that Xi, Modi, and others are deeply annoyed by fallout from Russia's war in Ukraine. Stunning erosion of Russia's — and Putin's — diplomatic position," Hal Brands, a professor of global affairs at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, said in a tweet.

"Nobody likes losers, and he's losing now in Ukraine," Michael McFaul, the former US ambassador to Russia, said in an appearance on MSNBC on Thursday.

Putin's phrase, "as soon as possible," could merely be rhetoric to placate a trade partner. Putin has tried to justify the invasion as a war of necessity, and has alluded to it as a conquest of territory that is rightfully Russian amid fitful attempts at a diplomatic resolution that Western diplomats have viewed as window dressing. Inside Russia, authorities are accosting those who protest or even describe the effort as a war — Putin made it illegal to spread "fake news" about the military — despite a casualty toll the US estimates to be as high as 80,000 troops.

Russia has suffered devastating troop losses in Ukraine, and its forces were recently pushed into retreat as a result of a blistering Ukrainian counteroffensive in the country's east, and as a wider effort to recapture territory in the south gains momentum. Meanwhile, Russia has been widely accused of war crimes, as it faces crippling economic sanctions over the war. The war has led to an energy crisis and contributed to rising inflation worldwide.

"I think what you're hearing from China, from India, is reflective of concerns around the world about the effects of Russia's aggression on Ukraine, not just on the people of Ukraine," US Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters on Friday, per Al Jazeera, adding, "I think it increases the pressure on Russia to end the aggression."

Narendra Modi’s admonishment for Vladimir Putin: ‘I told you this was not an era for war’

Nataliya Vasilyeva
Fri, September 16, 2022


Vladimir Putin meets with Indian prime minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit -

 SERGEI BOBYLEV/SPUTNIK/KREMLIN POOL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

Vladimir Putin was publicly upbraided on Friday over his invasion of Ukraine by India's prime minister, who told him now "is not an era for war".

In a rare moment of confrontation for the Russian president, Narendra Modi said he had "spoken to you on the phone" about the need to end the war as the two met in Uzbekistan's capital, Samarkand.

“I know that today’s era is not an era of war, and I have spoken to you on the phone about this,” Mr Modi told Mr Putin in televised remarks on the sidelines of the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) that brought together strongmen leaders from across Asia.


Hearing the remarks, Mr Putin pursed his lips, glanced at the Indian prime minister then looked down at his notes.

In reply, he told Mr Modi he "understood" his concerns and wished to end the war as soon as possible. He said Ukraine had rejected negotiations.

Diplomatic relations with Delhi are increasingly important for Russia, as India has become the second biggest buyer of Russian oil, behind China.
Putin 'understood' China's war concerns

The Russian leader has been forced onto the backfoot at the SCO summit, where he was hoping to rally support from nations who have not joined the West's sanction regime.

On Thursday, he told Xi Jinping, China's president, that he understood his "concerns" about the war in Ukraine, which has killed thousands and upended global markets.

Observers have noted that Mr Putin has lacked his typical aura at the summit.

On Thursday, he was forced to stand and wait for the president of Kyrgyzstan to arrive for their televised meeting, and he faced a repeat on Friday as the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, left him standing listlessly in front of the cameras for several minutes.

Mr Erdogan, who has made several attempts to mediate between Russia and Ukraine and hosted cease-fire talks in March, was expected to try to persuade the Russian president to sit down with Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, for peace talks.

Mr Putin told Russian reporters at the end of his visit to Uzbekistan on Friday that no such discussion was had.

Instead, the Russian president throughout the press conference with Kremlin-approved reporters sought to portray Moscow as an innocent victim of Western machinations.

Indian prime minister Narendra Modi told Vladimir Putin about the need to end the war - AP

“They just won’t do it,” he said of Ukrainians’ stance on peace talks. “Mr Zelensky has said publicly… that he’s not ready and he won’t talk with Russia. So he’s not ready? Oh well!”

Asked about staggering Russian losses in the south of Ukraine in recent weeks, Mr Putin insisted that the Russian conquest was proceeding as planned.

“Our main goal is to liberate all of the Donbas,” he said. “This work is continuing.”

He made no mention, however, of the areas Russia occupied in Ukraine’s Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions that just weeks before the Ukrainian counter-offensive were poised for a Russian “referendum” on a possible annexation.

Mr Putin also ominously threatened to target more of Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure if Ukraine keeps on attacking military targets in the south of Russia.

He claimed that Russian intelligence managed to foil “terrorist plots” to hit areas near nuclear power stations in Russia but did not add further details.

“Our response will be even stronger if the situation continues to develop the way it has been going,” he said, referring to Russia’s recent retaliatory strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure including a dam in Mr Zelensky’s hometown.
Ukrainian officials mock Putin's summit isolation

Ukrainian officials on Friday mocked Mr Putin’s perceived isolation at the summit in Uzbekistan and made fun of his claims to seek peace after unleashing a brutal war on Ukraine seven months earlier.

“This is the last autumn for Russian autocrats,” Mikhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukrainian President Zelensky, tweeted.

“The ‘solution to the conflict’ is very simple: an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops from all of Ukraine.”

In separate comments at the Samarkand summit, Mr Xi said the world had entered a period of turmoil and that his fellow leaders should join together to suppress "colour revolutions", a term used to describe pro-democracy movements including Hong Kong's.

"We should support each other's efforts to safeguard security and development interests, prevent external forces from staging colour revolutions, and jointly oppose interference in the internal affairs of other countries under any pretext," Mr Xi said.

Mr Xi stayed away from a dinner attended by 11 heads of states in line with his delegation's Covid policy, a source in the Uzbek government told Reuters on Friday. He was also absent from a group photo of the world leaders and another image taken of Mr Putin chatting with Belarus's president, Alexander Lukashenko, and Mr Erdogan on leather sofas in a break from the high-level diplomacy

Russian council faces dissolution after it called for Putin's removal from office

Tue, September 13, 2022
By Mark Trevelyan

(Reuters) - A group of St Petersburg local politicians who called for President Vladimir Putin to be sacked over the war in Ukraine faces the likely dissolution of their district council following a judge's ruling on Tuesday, one of the deputies saidNikita Yuferev said the judge decided that a series of past council meetings had been invalid, paving the way for it to be broken up by the regional governor.

Another council member, Dmitry Palyuga, said the same court then fined him 47,000 roubles ($780) for "discrediting" the authorities by calling for Putin's removal. Court officials could not be reached by telephone for comment.

Four more members of the Smolninskoye local council are due to appear in court in the next two days.




Last week, a group of deputies from the council appealed to the State Duma to bring charges of state treason against Putin and strip him of power, citing a series of reasons including Russia's military losses in Ukraine and the damage to its economy from Western sanctions.

Another local deputy said 65 municipal representatives from St Petersburg, Moscow and several other regions had signed a petition she published on Monday calling for Putin's resignation.

While posing no current threat to Putin's grip on power, the moves mark rare expressions of dissent by elected representatives at a time when Russians risk heavy prison sentences for "discrediting" the armed forces or spreading "deliberately false information" about them.

Palyuga told Reuters before Tuesday's hearing that the group's appeals were aimed not only at liberal Russians but also at "people loyal to the authorities who are starting to have doubts when they see the lack of success of the Russian army".

He said he expected the numbers of such people to increase after last week's lightning counter-offensive in which Ukraine drove Russian forces out of dozens of towns and recaptured a large swathe of territory in its northeast Kharkiv region.

"Of course, what is happening now has successfully coincided with our agenda. Many people who liked Putin are starting to feel betrayed. I think the more successfully the Ukrainian army operates, the more such people will become," he said.

'VERY, VERY THIN' LINE

Russian political analyst Tatiana Stanovaya said the greater risk to the Kremlin lay not in the councillors' protest itself but in the danger of responding too harshly to it.

"The reaction, or overreaction, may cause more political damage to the regime than this petition. But I have no doubts that all those who signed the petition will (come) under political pressure," said Stanovaya, founder of the independent analysis project R.Politik.

Thousands of legal cases have been launched against people accused of discrediting the army, usually leading to fines for first-time offences, but a Moscow district councillor was jailed for seven years in July after being convicted of spreading false information. Several other journalists and opposition figures have been charged and face potential prison terms.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday that critical points of view were tolerated, within the limits of the law. "As long as they remain within the law, this is pluralism, but the line is very, very thin, one must be very careful here," he said.

Ksenia Thorstrom, a St Petersburg local councillor who published Monday's petition calling for Putin's resignation, said it was too early to say how the campaign would turn out.

"To call for a politician to resign is absolutely normal. There can be nothing criminal about it," she told Reuters.

"Of course there is a certain risk, but to show solidarity with our colleagues - independent politicians who still remain in Russia - is much more important."

(Additional reporting by Filipp Lebedev; Editing by Bill Berkrot)


Kremlin TV Airs Call for Russia to Admit ‘Serious Defeat’

Julia Davis
Tue, September 13, 2022

Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images

Brutal realizations have been raining upon the Kremlin’s top propagandists—and when it rains, it pours. The same pundits who used to threaten NATO countries with nuclear strikes are begrudgingly acknowledging that Russia’s Armed Forces have suffered a series of humiliating setbacks in Ukraine.

Appearing on Russia’s NTV show The Meeting Place on Monday, policy analyst Viktor Olevich surmised: “Unfortunately, the situation is difficult. Can we say that the Russian forces moved closer to meeting the goals and carrying out the tasks set by the president at the beginning of the special operation—or did they get further away? Obviously, we’re now further away.”

Bogdan Bezpalko, member of the Council for Interethnic Relations under the President of the Russian Federation, was even more outspoken. “For two months, Ukrainian Armed Forces and military equipment have been massing in that area, all Telegram channels have been writing about it. Where was our damn reconnaissance? All of their heads should be laying on Putin’s desk, hacked off at the base... Of course, this is a tactical defeat. I hope it will be very sobering.”

On Monday’s broadcast of The Evening With Vladimir Solovyov, filmmaker Karen Shakhnazarov likewise dispensed a large dose of brutal honesty. “I urge everyone not to panic in the face of a defeat we’ve suffered in the Kharkiv region, and we have to acknowledge it,” he said. “A defeat has some meaning when you acknowledge it and draw new conclusions. And if you don’t acknowledge it, all you get is another defeat, perhaps even more devastating. This is a very difficult situation and we have to recognize that we’re battling a very powerful adversary.”

Shakhnazarov, whose public calls to cease the hostilities made waves shortly after Russia initially invaded Ukraine, regressed to a diametrically opposite position. With the conviction of a fatalist, he asserted: “No one can stop this war, because it was historically necessary... Neither Vladimir Vladimirovich [Putin], nor Zelensky and not the West can end this war. This war can end only with the defeat of one of the sides. For us, this defeat may prove fatal. We should understand that it might lead to the disintegration of the country.”

Political scientist Sergey Mikheyev described recent developments in Kharkhiv as “a serious failure,” on the part of Russia. “Call it 'regrouping' or whatever else... This is our most serious defeat during the last six months, and the most significant success of our adversary... Perhaps this failure is beneficial, because being so obvious, now it’s impossible to pull the wool over our eyes, pretending that everything is wonderful,” he said.

Mikheyev argued that failures would likely prompt “serious people” to make some “radical decisions,” like striking Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure—a move that is often praised on Russian state TV, with propagandists promoting the idea of causing a total blackout that would deprive all of Ukraine of roads, bridges, electricity and running water.

State TV pundits concur that such measures are necessary because Russia’s Armed Forces can’t keep up with the goals set by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Shakhnazarov noted: “All of us are aware of the problems experienced by our Armed Forces. In my opinion, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation were obviously unprepared for the magnitude of this war. Ukraine’s Armed Forces were prepared, they’ve been training and getting ready for eight years.”

Solovyov was unwilling to concede Russia’s defeat to the Ukrainian troops and claimed that American and British soldiers were covertly fighting in their ranks. “In the process of preparing the battle-ready Ukrainian troops, it turns out they’ve been rapidly turning darker in color and becoming fluent English speakers. They’re becoming indistinguishable from the mercenaries... Some of them have a Southern drawl, others speak with a British accent. Stop pretending already,” he said. The idea of being defeated by NATO, as opposed to this smaller neighboring country, seems to sweeten the pot for many of the Kremlin’s cheerleaders.

Team Putin Admits Their Worst Case Scenario Is Coming True

Shakhnazarov complained that the patriotic mood in the country is being negatively undermined from within by a continued obsession with the Western lifestyle and entertainment: “It starts with small things. Why are they showing American movies on our television? Eff me! I just want to say, eff me, why are you doing that? It’s humiliating!”

The filmmaker urged for clarity in the “political solution of the Ukrainian question.” While no one argued with Shakhnazarov about Russia’s defeat, the existence of the Ukrainian ethnicity was too much to bear for some of the Kremlin’s mouthpieces. Political analyst Dmitry Drobnitsky asserted: “The recognition of the existence of the Ukrainian people is the biggest mistake in our Soviet history.” Shakhnazarov followed up: “So there are no Ukrainian people?” Drobnitsky replied: “The Ukrainian people do not exist. Any historian will tell you that they don’t exist... You’re offering me to recognize their existence. Thanks, but no thanks.”

After objecting to arguments about the supposed non-existence of the Ukrainian ethnicity and the Ukrainian language, the Germany-based pundit Alexander Sosnovsky became visibly unsettled by what he was hearing. In a scene that resembled a Mitchell and Webb sketch, in which two Nazi officers come to the realization that they are the ‘baddies’ in WWII, he bitterly concluded: “I don’t want to go any further, because this smells of nationalism.”