Tag: global
Not A Joke! Retired Justice Kennedy Praises Supreme Court's 'Independence'

Not A Joke! Retired Justice Kennedy Praises Supreme Court's 'Independence'

Retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is very concerned about what is happening with the courts, you guys. No, he didn’t have anything to do with it. Why do you ask?

Kennedy’s remarks came during his Thursday speech at a forum titled “Global Risks to the Justice System—A Warning to America.” He was one of several speakers, including judges from countries where authoritarian crackdowns threatened the independence of the judiciary.

The bravery of those judges most definitely did not rub off on Kennedy, who was appointed to the Supreme Court by Ronald Reagan. In the face of repeated and ongoing attacks on the judiciary by President Donald Trump and his administration, the best Kennedy could do was praise judicial independence, as if that exists on the nation’s highest court any longer.

“Judges decide issues which have political consequences, but they don’t decide in a political way,” Kennedy claimed. “We have to honor the fact that judicial independence does not mean judges are put on the bench so they can do as they like—they're put on the bench so they can do as they must.”

Come on, Tony. Your cute little deal with Donald Trump in 2018, where you personally lobbied him to choose your former clerk Brett Kavanaugh to succeed you, was step two in Trump’s transformation of the court into a conservative grievance machine, following on the heels of Justice Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation the previous year.

You were perfectly aware that opposition to abortion was one of Trump’s litmus tests for Supreme Court nominees—he even campaigned on it. You were also perfectly aware that many of his lower court picks during his first term openly held anti-LGBTQ+ views. Trump explicitly chose judges because they would rule “as they like” instead of ruling “as they must.”

Indeed, when judges do rule as they must, and Donald Trump doesn’t like it, he attacks them personally. He called for Judge James A. Boasberg to be impeached after he blocked the administration from deporting Venezuelan immigrants.

At least 11 judges have had their families threatened with violence after they ruled against the Trump administration. Many of the threats occurred over at Elon Musk’s Nazi bar, X, where Musk himself amplified some of them. High-profile Trump supporter Laura Loomer shared a photo of Judge Boasberg’s daughter, alleging that she was helping undocumented gang members and calling for Boasberg and his daughter to be arrested and his entire family to be deported. James Boasberg was born in California to U.S. citizens, so the deportation demand is equal parts chilling and weird.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour faced both a bomb threat and a swatting incident after he ruled Trump’s birthright citizenship order was unconstitutional. During his speech, Kennedy fretted that “Judges must have protection for themselves and their families. Our families are often included in threats” without ever acknowledging who is whipping up those threats.

Congressional Republicans have attacked judges on every front. They’ve called for the impeachment of judges who block Trump’s illegal actions. The Senate tried to get a provision in the Big Beautiful Bill restricting lower courts from issuing preliminary injunctions against the government unless the plaintiff posted a bond equal to whatever the government said were its costs and damages from not being able to do illegal things right away.

Whenever conservatives want to both-sides the threats to the judiciary, they have literally one example: At a 2020 rally outside the Supreme Court, Sen. Chuck Schumer called out Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch and said, “You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Roberts immediately issued a statement quoting Schumer and saying that “threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous.”

But when Trump relentlessly attacks the judiciary, including routinely defying court orders, and elected officials call for judges to be impeached, the best Roberts could come up with was, “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”

This is equally as mealy-mouthed as Kennedy’s comments that the judiciary should stand for the rule of law and “we must always say no to tyranny and yes to truth.” Notably absent is any mention of who is attacking the rule of law. Notably absent is any mention that the rule of law went out the window when the conservative majority granted Trump immunity. Notably absent is any mention of who is saying yes to tyranny and no to truth.

Kennedy doesn’t deserve praise or a cookie for these vague statements. If he genuinely cared about attacks on the rule of law, he would need to challenge his former colleagues. He would need to challenge Trump, the man he cut a deal with to get Kavanaugh a lifetime appointment. He would need to say that the threats of violence against judges only occur when they rule against the administration. He would need to call out the ceaseless attempts by GOP elected officials to knee-cap the courts.

Kennedy is not going to do any of those things, but he’s probably going to continue to make a lot of high-minded speeches. Feel free to ignore him until he tells the truth.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Trump and Biden

Major Poll Destroys Trump Claim About Global Views Of Biden

One of former President Donald Trump's talking points on the campaign trail has been that respect for the United States in other countries plummeted after he left the White House on January 20, 2021 and Joe Biden was sworn in as president.

That talking point has been echoed repeatedly by Trump's supporters at Fox News and Fox Business, while many pundits on MSNBC — including Joe Scarborough, a Never Trump conservative and ex-GOP congressman — have countered that the United States' North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies dread the possibility of Trump returning to the White House if Biden is voted out of office.

Similarly, Washington Post columnist Max Boot, another pro-Biden Never Trump conservative, has been quite critical of the United States' withdrawal from Afghanistan under Biden's watch but overall, considers Biden a vast improvement over Trump on foreign policy.

In his June 17 column, MSNBC's Steve Benen cites some polls countering Trump's talking points on Biden and foreign officials.

"This has been a rhetorical staple for the presumptive GOP nominee for quite a while," Benen argues. "In fact, as recently as April, Trump told a Pennsylvania audience, referring to his White House tenure, 'We were the most respected country in the world. We were the most respected that we were ever respected. We were never more respected than we were four years ago.'"

But polls on other countries, Benen emphasizes, don't bear that out — including a Pew Research survey released on June 11.

"There's quite a bit of data to review in the report, which gauged public attitudes in 34 countries, across several continents, but there were a couple of key takeaways," Benen observes. "First, internationally, more people have confidence in Biden to do the right thing regarding world affairs, as compared to Trump. And second, while confidence in the White House slumped badly, during Trump’s presidency, those numbers have rebounded under Biden."

Pew's poll, Benen notes, is "consistent with other data from the last few years."

"Revisiting our earlier coverage," Benen explains, "a Gallup report in 2021 found that approval ratings of U.S. leadership around the world had 'largely rebounded from the record-low ratings observed during the Trump Administration.' Around the same time, the Pew Research Center released a related report documenting 'dramatic' improvements in the United States' international stature once Biden replaced Trump in the Oval Office."

The liberal MSNBC columnist continues, "A year later, Gallup released another report on the United States’ standing among NATO members, concluding that U.S. leadership in the Biden era 'was stronger across much of NATO than it had been in years, after languishing at low levels during the Trump Administration.'"

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Entertainment’s Place In Post-Attack Rebuttal

Entertainment’s Place In Post-Attack Rebuttal

By Steven Zeitchik, Los Angeles Times (TNS)

Global tragedy strikes these days with a kind of wearying familiarity. The pain is fresh, but our thoughts — as they did after Madrid, London, Mumbai and elsewhere — return to a well-known place.

As the Paris attacks and their aftermath have played out this weekend, once again we stare dazed at the cable news screen, facing questions we never imagined — questions we suspect have no answers, even as the scouring of CNN for motives and details and revelations provides a comforting illusion otherwise.

And once again, those of us immersed in entertainment — as producers, as distributors, as chroniclers, or even just as devotees — are left to ask where it fits in. Cultures have been grappling for centuries with how much space to allow levity in the place of a tragedy. But the relevance and even the defensibility of entertainment has lately been thrust forward as never before. These are new and confusing times, an age when mass civilian murders are common and our individual responses to them, thanks to social media, widely known. The proper reaction remains unclear; the rules of collective grief are still unwritten.

Was going to the movies, for instance, acceptable this past weekend? Was it OK to tweet about a television series or college football game? Was there a palatable way to return to, or justification for embracing, the shows, sports, movies, music and other pursuits that fill our typical weekends?

Was doing some of these things perhaps even an act of noble defiance — the attacks, after all, had taken place in part at a musical performance and seemed intended to strike at the freedom to enjoy life in such a manner — or an act of unsavory and even heartless self-distraction?

Would it be OK to wait 24 hours and then resume such activities? What about 48? Was the very idea of a statute of limitations untoward?

Entertainment companies faced their own dilemmas. Lionsgate weighed how to proceed with a Los Angeles premiere for its new Hunger Games movie on Monday, ultimately deciding to hold the event without a traditional red carpet. Saturday Night Live also scaled down but didn’t step out: It scrapped its usual comedic opening this past weekend in favor of a touching salutation, in English and French, from cast member Cecily Strong, then carried on with the show.

A friend at a Hollywood publication said he was in a quandary over whether to overhaul an upcoming issue to focus on the attack. On the one hand, Paris was all we were thinking about, and it would be insensitive, even inaccurate, to carry on with the coverage of ratings and box office and first-look deals as if we weren’t. On the other hand, the Paris attacks were not fundamentally an entertainment story, and wouldn’t it be tone-deaf to pretend that they were?

And yet through it all, entertainment may have already been playing a role in our processing mechanism. In movie theaters these past few months, films have, in their own oblique way that seem clearer after Friday, already been speaking to the issues underlying the attack, to the perpetrators and the victims, to the dangers posed and the values threatened.

The season has brought the high-wire-walking story The Walk and its spirit of unbridled humanity, whose main character uses ingenuity and showmanship to enhance lives instead of diminishing them, a fitting antidote to what happened in Paris. That said character was French and was walking between New York’s twin towers that themselves would become a target and symbol only underlines the comparison.

There is the new release Spotlight, an abuse drama in which truth-seeking journalists push forward and try to do what we all hope to do in the face of cataclysm: find justice, and maybe a little comfort for the afflicted, even as they are tempered by the knowledge their actions will always be insufficient. They press on while Sept. 11 strikes right in the middle of their efforts.

There has been The Martian, which in its own Hollywood escapist way has showed the power of countries and people around the world to band together when life is at stake, differences of nationality and ideology suddenly irrelevant.

There are, of course, literal attempts in Hollywood at understanding militant attacks, as with the upcoming 13 Hours and Patriots’ Day, each about those trying to prevent the murder of innocents. But comprehension also comes more subtly, as with the current Spectre, in which disparate acts of mass murder are chillingly realized to be emanating from a common source.

The movie seeks to fathom what could drive such bloodthirsty nihilism (while also depicting the struggles of democratic governments to contend with it). Like many other examples, Spectre is part of a feedback loop that circles between our brains and our screen, fears of an attack making their way from the first to the second, then coming back to us in a different form once such violence takes place in real life.

The question after attacks like Friday’s is whether to allow entertainment back in. But perhaps that elides the real issue. Perhaps entertainment has been here all along.

When it comes to a post-tragedy pop culture, there are the easy calls to make — the French distributor that decided to pull an upcoming movie in which Paris was under attack, for example. Most choices are harder. There are no answers — certainly no one-size-fits-all answers — on how entertainment can fit in during these shocking after-hours. Personal choices remain that way.

But whatever the response, there may be some comfort is not seeing these activities as separate. Asking the too-soon question may be, in a sense, asking the wrong question. Maybe entertainment shouldn’t be treated as a distinct refuge to which we tentatively crawl back when it is safe to do so and after we sheepishly check to make sure no one is looking. Maybe it’s something that can and should be part of the understanding of the attacks in the first place.

In its purest form, entertainment is built into the process — part of a post-attack rebuttal that allows us to stand up for a life of choice and freedom, sure, but also a way we’ve been understanding the tragedy all along, comprehending those who plot to kill, and the humanity they would seek to destroy.

©2015 Los Angeles Times. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Photo: Shinya Suzuki via Flickr

Putin Resists Western Offensive As Testy G20 Closes

Putin Resists Western Offensive As Testy G20 Closes

Brisbane (Australia) — A weary Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday shrugged off a new barrage of Western fire over Ukraine at a G20 summit where the world’s most powerful leaders vowed to heat up the cooling global economy.

Host Tony Abbott insisted that everyone including Putin — who left the Brisbane summit early — was on board the G20 campaign to enact reforms that could infuse more than two trillion dollars into the world economy.

“I’m happy to be on a unity ticket with Vladimir Putin on that subject,” the Australian prime minister told a news conference after the two-day talks, during which the two leaders put aside days of sniping to share a photograph with cuddly koalas.

Nevertheless, Abbott insisted that he had had “very robust” discussions with Putin in recent days and described the July downing of a Malaysia Airlines plane over Ukraine as “one of the most terrible atrocities of recent times”.

Putin flew out of Brisbane shortly before the summit formally ended but denied any snub to Abbott, saying it would take 18 hours to fly home via Vladivostok in Russia’s far east.

“Then we need to get home and return to work on Monday. There’s a need to sleep at least four to five hours,” said Putin, a judo black belt who prides himself on his stamina.

And the Russian strongman played down the testy exchanges seen in Brisbane, when at one point Canada’s leader expressed reluctance to shake his hand.

In general at the G20, Putin said, “some of our views do not coincide, but the discussions were complete, constructive and very helpful”.

– Going after tax cheats –

The G20 leaders backed efforts to close loopholes between different tax regimes that allow some multinationals to get away with paying only a pittance on their profits.

Luxembourg is accused of having connived with such companies to the detriment of their home countries’ treasuries for years when Jean-Claude Juncker, now the European Commission president, was its prime minister.

The G20 endorsed a “common reporting standard” so that companies cannot arbitrage differences between tax regimes, stressing: “Profits should be taxed where economic activities deriving the profits are performed and where value is created.”

The Financial Transparency Coalition, a campaign group, welcomed the G20’s emphasis on “the ravaging effects tax evasion, avoidance, and money laundering have on our economies”.

But it urged tougher rules to make public who owns companies and where they are based — a stipulation that has stirred discomfort in China, where the issue of communist leaders’ personal wealth is a political livewire.

The G20 countries, which represent 85 percent of global economic output, committed to structural reforms that would lift their combined economic growth by at least 2.1 percent by 2018.

That amounts to more than two trillion dollars, although economists are skeptical that many of the G20 members have the stomach for such reforms when growth is already slipping in some key countries, including China and Germany.

– ‘Trench warfare’ –

International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde welcomed Sunday’s pledge while stressing: “Implementation is now critical, with a strong accountability framework to monitor progress, supported by the IMF.”

Oxfam said the focus on growth should be allied with a focus on reducing yawning levels of inequality around the world, “to ensure the bottom 40 percent benefit more than the top 10 percent”.

The G20 declaration also endorsed “strong and effective action” on climate change despite attempts to prevent its mention by Abbott, who wanted the focus to remain on the economy.

One European diplomat likened the G20 negotiations with Abbott to “trench warfare”, but the pro-climate lobby was confident of victory after Obama breathed new life into global discussions on greenhouse emissions with a surprise pact with China last week.

Real warfare remains the fear in Ukraine, where the West alleges that Russia is aiding and abetting rebels in the former Soviet satellite’s east.

In Brisbane, Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron hammered home the West’s determination to curb Russian meddling in Ukraine, which the U.S. president said violated international principles.

“One of those principles is that you don’t invade other countries or finance proxies and support them in ways that break up a country that has mechanisms for democratic elections,” he said.

Cameron said the West would maintain its campaign of sanctions for years if need be, because the alternative was allowing the Ukraine crisis to develop into “some permanent frozen conflict on the continent of Europe”.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who held lengthy talks with Putin far into the night in Brisbane, said after the G20 that it was “important to take advantage of every opportunity to talk”.

But she stressed: “There is a close agreement among Europeans about Ukraine and Russia.”

AFP Photo/Steve Holland

Want more political news and analysis? Sign up for our daily email newsletter! 

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World