So here we are again. A deeply controversial, ultraconservative nominee is confirmed to the Supreme Court. There was a pitched battle; the fight was long, bruising, and hard. We’ve reached a moment of reflection and some exhaustion; it’s also the moment when traditionally, progressives have packed up their tents and gone home. So will it be any different this time? It can be, and it should. We are in a political climate that is already transformed, after another year of relentless Trumpism, from the one in which Neil Gorsuch got his successful shot at the high court. Not only that, but the battle over Brett Kavanaugh has plumbed a deep well of anger and pain that was waiting to come to the surface. Thousands of people marched and demonstrated in opposition to Kavanaugh. That his candidacy coincided with a maturing #MeToo movement certainly helped. But the outpouring was a lot like another mass uprising we saw right after Donald Trump’s election, the Women’s March, and it is similarly inspiring. I now believe that for a new generation of voters—especially women—the Senate’s catastrophic handling of this nomination and its contempt for Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s act of national witness is a defining moment, when business as usual will no longer do. For 40 years, the right wing has sent its voters to the polls with the federal courts as a priority. It also built a machine for manufacturing and marketing the kind of nominee exemplified by Brett Kavanaugh: conventionally credentialed, politically connected, and partisan to the core. Progressives will never have an appetite for cookie-cutter nominees or the conformity-imposing systems that build them. But we have the power as voters to make the courts an issue and a matter of real accountability and electability for senators, this year, in 2020 and beyond. We can also refuse to let the sham confirmation process for Kavanaugh be normalized. We can demand that the next Congress subpoena the vast bulk of Kavanaugh’s White House records that Senate Republicans refused to request. Similarly, since Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell would not let the FBI do its job in investigating Kavanaugh, others will have to step up to learn the truth about allegations of his sexual misconduct. Congress should hold hearings to which the many, many witnesses the FBI never interviewed can be called to testify. It should probe Kavanaugh’s misleading and untruthful statements, and find out exactly how the president handcuffed the FBI. What is discovered may not lead Kavanaugh to recuse himself from a case, or cause his removal from the Court. But it’s the right thing to do for the American people, and for the survivors whose stories were swept under the rug. Survivors of sexual abuse also need to know that this kind of disaster can’t happen again. A procedure must be put in place to help senators handle explosive allegations against nominees with respect, fairness, and thoroughness. And the presidential vetting process for all courts clearly needs to be overhauled. Supreme Court battles undoubtedly grab the most headlines, but as advocates we need to show that all courts count. A tidal wave of dyed-in the-wool conservative judges has been flowing into the federal courts for more than a year now. Some of these lower-court nominees are not just conservative; they are inhumane in ways that we rarely see. One circuit-court nominee wrote ardently in favor of the death penalty for minors. He argued against providing immigrant detainees with sleeping mats, because too few people could then be packed into a room. These views should be anathema in 21st-century America—and every person should think about them when they step into the voting booth next month. So yes, this is no time to pack up the tents. Kavanaugh has helped us to see all too clearly what the stakes are for women, for workers, for racial equity, LGBTQ Americans, and the environment when the right captures our courts—and those stakes are far too high. We have arrived at this clarity through a painful process, but we have arrived, and with a midterm election right around the corner. And that’s just the beginning. Source: https://hashtaghighways.com/2018/10/08/kavanaugh-is-confirmed-now-what-2/ from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/kavanaugh-is-confirmed-now-what/
0 Comments
Republican leaders of the Senate refused to organize a confirmation process that might have allowed senators to provide honest advice and consent regarding Donald Trump’s nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to serve on the Supreme Court. This failure of duty, orchestrated with deliberate intent by Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley, has resulted in a narrow 50-48 confirmation vote for Kavanaugh—a vote that will be remembered as one of the most dishonorable decisions in the long history of an often-blameworthy institution. McConnell and Grassley—a pair of White House hirelings who were assisted in their infamy by blank-stare partisans such as Jeff Flake and Susan Collins—upended the constitutionally defined provisions for the oversight of presidential nominations for the high-court bench. By Saturday evening, Kavanaugh had been sworn in as a justice whose championship of expanded executive authority threatens to further erode the separation of powers as outlined by the Constitution. But this does not mean the system of checks and balances must continue to give Kavanaugh a pass. He is no longer under the protection of the Senate, and that means that Justice Kavanaugh can and should face the accountability moment that was denied by McConnell’s debasement of the confirmation process. The measure of that debasement is found in the confirmation of Kavanaugh, a man whom former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has dismissed as unfit to sit on the high court. The reasons for keeping Kavanaugh, a veteran political operative and determined judicial activist, off the Court were outlined by dissenting members of the Senate during the debate that preceded Saturday’s extraordinary vote, and by thousands of protesters who rallied around the Supreme Court Building and the Capitol. Those protests continued through the confirmation vote, which was interrupted by a woman who cried “Shame!’ from the Senate gallery as Vice President Mike Pence completed the charade. Some of the arguments against Kavanaugh were political. Some were practical. Some were moral. Many of them intersected in the message from a group of women, angered with the failure of the Senate to take seriously allegations of sexual abuse against the nominee, who unfurled a banner that read survivors vote: november is coming. Posters denouncing Kavanaugh’s “Pattern of Lies” reminded everyone of the corruption of the confirmation process by a Republican majority that refused to address the nominee’s deliberate dishonesty in testimony under oath to the Judiciary Committee. That dishonesty must not be dismissed by responsible members of the Congress. No matter what Trump, Pence, McConnell, and Grassley claim, and no matter what cautious Democratic strategists might suggest, Congress cannot ignore credible evidence that Kavanaugh lied while under oath. The list of the justice’s documented lies continues to grow. It is more than sufficient to merit an investigation into Kavanaugh’s lawless behavior by the House Judiciary Committee. That investigation has already been discussed by the man who will chair the committee if Democrats win the House in November, New York Congressman Jerry Nadler. Nadler explains that, with “the Senate having failed to do its proper constitutionally mandated job of advise and consent, we are going to have to do something to provide a check and balance, to protect the rule of law and to protect the legitimacy of one of our most important institutions.” One of the ablest arbiters of constitutional issues in the Congress, Nadler proposes the dutiful examination of the Kavanaugh nomination that was thwarted by Senate leaders. “We can’t have a justice on the Supreme Court for the next several decades who will be deciding questions of liberty, and life, and death, and all kinds of things for the entire American people who has been credibly accused of sexual assaults, who has been credibly accused of various other things, including perjury. This has got to be thoroughly investigated,” he said last Sunday, as McConnell was rushing the confirmation process to its conclusion. While Nadler said that he hoped the Senate would do its job, he concluded: “If he is on the Supreme Court and the Senate hasn’t investigated, then the House will have to.” Nadler is not proposing Kavanaugh’s impeachment. But it should be understood that any honest investigation into this man’s lies under oath—and into a host of other issues that were raised but never really examined during the confirmation process—has the potential to become an impeachment inquiry. California Congressman Ted Lieu, a former military prosecutor who now serves on the House Judiciary Committee, argued during the confirmation process that “Based on the numerous allegations of sexual assault against Judge Brett Kavanaugh…the House Judiciary Committee must immediately start an investigation into Judge Kavanaugh to see if he should be impeached.” Constitutional lawyer John Bonifaz said as it became clear that Kavanaugh would be confirmed, “[There] will be a campaign to impeach him. He does not belong on the nation’s highest court or on any court.” Proposing to investigate and impeach Kavanaugh is not sour grapes or political gamesmanship. It is an indication of respect for the system of checks and balances. Talk about the need to hold Kavanaugh to account is not a casual suggestion made in the heat of the moment. This is a reminder of a responsibility that extends from the oath that members of the House and the Senate swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic [and] that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.” The Constitution gives the House, as the chamber closest to the people, the authority to initiate impeachment proceedings. This is done when warranted by evidence of wrongdoing that affronts the Constitution and the processes by which its provisions are exercised. Lying under oath to the Congress represents a classic impeachable offense, as the accountability group Free Speech for People noted in a recent “Call on Congress to Launch an Impeachment Investigation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh” Deliberately deceiving the Judiciary Committee is not merely impeachable because of the dishonesty itself but also because the lies disrupt the advice-and-consent duty that the Senate is required to perform. The details of Kavanaugh’s lies have already been outlined at great length. The senior member of the Senate, Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy, has described lies Kavanaugh told the committee regarding his use of stolen documents to manipulate the confirmation process for Bush’s judicial nominees. Former Judiciary Committee member Russ Feingold (D-WI) has argued that “Taking all his testimony together, we see a clear pattern emerge: Brett Kavanaugh has never appeared under oath before the U.S. Senate without lying.” Kavanaugh’s college roommate announced after the nominee testified that he had not been a heavy drinker (an assertion made as part of a broader effort to discredit abuse allegations) to say that Kavanaugh had lied under oath. “Not only did I know he wasn’t telling the truth, I knew that he knew he wasn’t telling the truth,” explained James Roche. Yet, McConnell has made no effort to examine allegations that Kavanaugh was deliberately dishonest. The issue of Kavanaugh’s credibility was not examined by the Senate because McConnell and Grassley refused to allow a serious review of the nominee’s record, or to demand a full FBI background check. This rejection of the system of checks and balances created a constitutional crisis. It is a crisis the founders of the American experiment anticipated. “The Framers of the US Constitution understood that corruption in the process of obtaining a federal office is an impeachable offense,” note the constitutional advocates with Free Speech for People. “In the constitutional debates over the impeachment power, George Mason asked rhetorically: ‘Shall the man who has practised corruption & by that means procured his appointment in the first instance, be suffered to escape punishment, by repeating his guilt?’” Source: https://hashtaghighways.com/2018/10/08/brett-kavanaugh-has-lied-his-way-onto-the-supreme-court-2/ from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/brett-kavanaugh-has-lied-his-way-onto-the-supreme-court/ Peter Kuper
A morally corrupt process gives a new lifetime appointment.
The post Kavanaugh’s Covfefe appeared first on The Nation. Source: https://hashtaghighways.com/2018/10/08/kavanaughs-covfefe/ from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/kavanaughs-covfefe/
Image: Chesnot/Getty Images
Tesla has released its first Autopilot safety report on Thursday, following promises from CEO Elon Musk in May that the company would do so quarterly after highly-publicised crashes involving its cars. The one-page report claims that in the third quarter of 2018, there has been one accident or crash-like event for every 3.34 million miles for Tesla cars driven with Autopilot. Without Autopilot engaged, Tesla registered one accident or crash-like event for every 1.92 million miles driven. Tesla compared their findings to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, whose latest data shows “an automobile crash every 492,000 miles,” — this doesn’t include near-misses that Tesla has recorded in its report. That’s the extent of the detail, however, with no other information available on the types of accidents which occured or the reasons for the accidents/near-misses involving Tesla drivers who used autopilot. Tesla said it designed a new method to record data from its vehicles, allowing it to “gather the most critical fleet-wide statistics from the exact moment a crash-related event is detected by our system.” “While there are still some unique cases in which crash data may not be available to us through this channel, we believe this system currently provides the best framework for safety reporting on an ongoing basis,” Tesla’s report added. The publishing of the company’s first safety report coincides with Consumer Reports’ first ranking of automated driving systems, in which Cadillac’s Super-Cruise was rated at the top, excelling at keeping the driver engaged through eye-tracking technology. Tesla’s Autopilot came in second, where it scored highly on ease of use and capabilities, but fell on ensuring the driver is paying attention. Autopilot prompts drivers to apply pressure or hold onto the steering wheel to make sure of this, which the publication notes isn’t enough. “This is an insufficient way of measuring driver attention, and it provides little assurance that the driver is even awake,” Consumer Reports’ Patrick Olsen writes. “Because of the impressive ability of Tesla’s Autopilot to keep the vehicle centered in its lane, it’s easy for drivers to become overreliant on it.” Tesla’s Q3 of 2018 also saw the manufacturer produce 80,142 vehicles, 50 percent higher than its numbers in Q2 of the same year. Read more: https://mashable.com/article/tesla-first-safety-report/ from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/teslas-first-safety-report-has-good-news-for-autopilot-but-is-lacking-in-detail/ MADRID (Reuters) – A Spanish doctor accused of stealing and selling a baby during the dictatorship is guilty of all charges but cannot be punished due to the statute of limitations, a Madrid court said on Monday. Ines Madrigal, who alleges she was one of Spain’s “stolen babies” and has taken former doctor Eduardo Vela to court for falsifying her birth certificate to give her to her adoptive mother, walks out of the court after receiving the verdict in Madrid, Spain, October 8, 2018. REUTERS/Sergio Perez The court said 85-year-old Spanish gynecologist Eduardo Vela was responsible for the abduction of a child, faking a birth and falsifying official documents but was absolved after the baby reached adulthood in 1987. The lawyer of the woman at the center of the case, Ines Madrigal, told reporters outside the court they would appeal against the decision. The statute of limitations imposes deadlines on courts to complete legal proceedings. Madrigal, who was told by her mother at 18 that she was adopted, accused Vela of forging her 1969 birth certificate to show her adoptive mother, now dead, as her biological parent. Vela, who had denied the charges, was the first person prosecuted over the “stolen babies” scandal that affected thousands during General Francisco Franco’s rule. Many of the cases date back to the right-wing dictatorship of 1939-75 when campaigners say officials took babies from “unsuitable” mothers – often communist or leftists – and gave them to families with connections to the regime. A decade ago, a Spanish judge recorded the cases of about 30,000 Spanish children taken at birth during Franco’s rule. (Corrects dates of dictatorship in seventh para.) Reporting by Sergio Perez; Writing by Paul Day; Editing by Jesus Aguado and Ed Osmond
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/spain-rules-stolen-baby-doctor-guilty-but-he-cannot-be-punished/ STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – Americans William Nordhaus and Paul Romer, pioneers in adapting economic theory to take better account of environmental issues and technological progress, shared the 2018 Nobel Economics Prize on Monday. Per Stromberg, Goran K. Hansson and Per Krusell annonce the laureates of the Nobel Prize in Economics during a press conference at the The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm, Sweden, October 8, 2018. The prize is devided between William D. Nordhaus and Pau M. Romer. Henrik Montgomery/ TT News Agency/via REUTERS In an award that turned the spotlight on the global debate over risks associated with climate change, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said the laureates’ work helped answer fundamental questions on how to promote long-term sustainable growth and enhance human welfare. The prize took Romer, of New York University’s Stern School of Business, by surprise. “I got two phone calls this morning, and I didn’t answer either one because I thought it was some spam call, so I wasn’t expecting the prize,” he said, while welcoming the chance to expand on his theory. “I think … many people think that protecting he environment will be so costly and so hard that they just want to ignore (this)…,” he told a news conference via phone link. “(But) we can absolutely make substantial progress protecting the environment and do it without giving up the chance to sustain growth.” Romer, of New York University’s Stern School of Business, had shown how economic forces govern the willingness of firms to produce new ideas and innovations, laying the foundations for a new model for development, known as endogenous growth theory. Nordhaus, of Yale University, was the first person to create a quantitative model that described the interplay between the economy and the climate. “Their findings have significantly broadened the scope of economic analysis by constructing models that explain how the market economy interacts with nature and knowledge,” the academy said in statement. Hours before the award, the United Nations panel on climate changed warned of the risks of more frequent heat waves, floods and drought in some regions as well as the loss of species without a radical rethink in how societies operate. Monday’s award of the last of the 2018 Nobels also took place less than a month after the 10th anniversary of the collapse of investment bank Lehman Brothers. That triggered an economic crisis from which the world’s financial system is arguably still recovering. STILL IN CRISIS MODE?Worth 9 million Swedish crowns ($1 million), the economics prize was established in 1968. It was not part of the original group of five awards set out in Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel’s 1895 will. “This year’s Laureates do not deliver conclusive answers, but their findings have brought us considerably closer to answering the question of how we can achieve sustained and sustainable global economic growth,” the Academy said. Romer’s career has also taken him outside the academic world. While on leave from the Stern School, he served as chief economist and senior vice president at the World Bank until early this year. Nordhaus, whose research has included economic history, is also known to have authored a study that before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq predicted that costs for a war would reach as high as $2 trillion. Ten years after the financial crisis erupted, interest rates remain at or close to record lows in many major economies including Sweden, where they have languished below zero since early 2015. The Nobel prizes for physiology or medicine, physics, chemistry and peace were awarded last week. Proceedings have been overshadowed by the absence of the literature prize, postponed to give the Swedish Academy time to restore public trust after a sexual assault scandal. Nobel laureates graphic tmsnrt.rs/2y6ATVW Reporting by Simon Johnson, Niklas Pollard; Additional reporting by Daniel Dickson, Helena Soderpalm and Anna Ringstrom in Stockholm; editing by John Stonestreet
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Source: https://hashtaghighways.com/2018/10/08/economics-of-climate-change-win-nobel-prize-for-u-s-duo/ from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/economics-of-climate-change-win-nobel-prize-for-u-s-duo/ LAHORE, Pakistan (Reuters) – Two former prime ministers of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif and Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, facing allegations of treason appeared before a court along with a prominent journalist on Monday in a hearing to determine whether the case should go to trial. The hearing was adjourned until Oct. 22. The case related to an interview Sharif gave to the English daily Dawn in which he was quoted as suggesting the Pakistani state played a role in the militant attack on the Indian city of Mumbai that killed 166 people in 2008. India has repeatedly accused Pakistan intelligence agency of helping the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group carry out the attack. Pakistan has denied any state involvement, but its inaction against LeT leaders remains a major stumbling block to improving relations between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. Dawn assistant editor Cyril Almeida, who conducted the interview, had faced arrest if he failed to appear before the court and had been barred from leaving the country. Both the arrest orders and travel restrictions were removed on Monday. “The court removed his name from the (exit control list), withdrew his arrest warrant and directed us to submit a reply on Oct. 22,” Almeida’s lawyer Ahmad Rauf told Reuters, while surrounded by activists protesting threats to media freedom in Pakistan. Sharif was removed from office last year by the Supreme Court over corruption allegation and was sentenced earlier this year to 10 years in prison. Abbasi replaced his party leader as prime minister before an election earlier this year brought former cricket star Imran Khan to power. Sharif has denied wrongdoing and accused the military of using the courts to orchestrate his removal and destabilise his Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz party to pave the way for Khan’s election victory. Both the military and Khan deny that. The inclusion of Almeida in the treason complaint has heightened concern over media freedom in Pakistan. A report released by the Washington-based Committee to Protect Journalists last month said the military had established “lines of control” to pressure the media and journalists in Pakistan, and those who pushed back faced arrest, intimidation, and violence. The military, which has ruled Pakistan for nearly half its history, denies any pressure on the media. Writing by Saad Sayeed; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/two-pakistani-former-pms-journalist-face-court-in-treason-case/ ROME (Reuters) – Italy’s Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini on Monday dubbed European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and Economics Commissioner Pierre Moscovici as enemies of Europe. FILE PHOTO: Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini speaks during a meeting in Milan, Italy, August 28, 2018. REUTERS/Massimo Pinca/File Photo “The enemies of Europe are those sealed in the bunker of Brussels. It’s Juncker and Moscovici who have brought fear and job insecurity to Europe,” Salvini said during a joint press conference with French far-right leader Marine Le Pen. Reporting by Massimiliano Di Giorgio, writing by Steve Scherer
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/italys-salvini-says-moscovici-juncker-are-real-enemies-of-europe/ BEIJING/PARIS (Reuters) – China said on Monday it was investigating former Interpol chief Meng Hongwei for bribery and other violations, days after French authorities said the Chinese official had been reported missing by his wife. On Sunday, Interpol, the France-based global police coordination body, said that Meng had resigned as its president. China said had said on Sunday that Meng, who is also a vice minister for public security in China, was under investigation. On Monday, the Ministry of Public Security specified that the probe was focused on suspected bribery. “The investigation against Meng Hongwei taking bribes and suspected violations of law is very timely, absolutely correct and rather wise,” the ministry said in a statement said on its website. The ministry said it will also investigate and punish people who took bribes along with Meng. “The investigation of Meng Hongwei fully shows there is no privilege and no exception in front of the law, and anyone who violates the law must be severely punished,” the ministry said. Officials “should never be allowed to negotiate terms and ‘prices’ with the Communist Party,” the ministry said. Under President Xi Jinping, China has been engaged in a sweeping crackdown on official corruption. France’s Interior Ministry said on Friday that Meng’s family had not heard from him since Sept. 25, and French authorities said his wife was under police protection after receiving threats. Meng, 64, became president of the global police cooperation agency in late 2016 amid a broader effort by China to secure leadership posts in international organizations, prompting concern at the time from rights groups that Beijing might try to leverage his position to pursue dissidents abroad. Presidents of Interpol are seconded from their national administrations and remain in their home post while representing the international policing body. “The president heads the executive committee which meets on average four times a year and sets the strategic orientation for the organization,” an Interpol source said on Monday, when asked if Meng spent most of his time in France or China. “The president by virtue of the fact that he or her retains a national post, by virtue of that you would expect him or her to spend some of their time back home. But there is an office for the Interpol president, there are resources at his or her disposal: office, staff etc.,” the Interpol source said. The source declined to say whether it was typical for an Interpol president to bring his family to France, or whether Interpol provided housing for its president. China’s foreign ministry said on Monday that China would continue to provide support for Interpol’s work. Reporting by Tony Munroe and Stella Qiu in BEIJING and Richard Lough in PARIS; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/china-says-ex-interpol-chief-focus-of-bribery-probe-back-home/ JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) – South African Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene has asked President Cyril Ramaphosa to remove him after he admitted to visiting the home of the Gupta brothers, friends of scandal-plagued former leader Jacob Zuma, Business Day said on Monday, sending the rand lower. FILE PHOTO: Nhlanhla Nene is sworn in as Minister of Finance in Cape Town, South Africa, February 27, 2018. REUTERS/Sumaya Hisham/File Photo Nene has become a divisive figure after testimony he gave at an inquiry into allegations of corruption by the Guptas, in which he admitted to the previously undisclosed visits. He made a public apology about the matter on Friday. Zuma and the Guptas, who face numerous allegations of using their friendship for mutual self-enrichment, have consistently denied any wrongdoing. Business Day cited unidentified government sources as saying that Nene made the request to Ramaphosa at the weekend. Nene did not answer calls for comment. “Government sources said Nene approached Ramaphosa after the highly negative public reaction to his apology to South Africans on Friday for the meetings with the Gupta family when he served under Zuma,” the South African newspaper said. It said the issue was likely to be raised at a meeting of the ruling African National Congress party later on Monday. The rand fell more than one percent on the report. Treasury spokesman Jabulani Sikhakhane referred Reuters to the presidency for comment. Ramaphosa’s spokeswoman Khusela Diko did not respond to phone calls. Nene is a key ally of Ramaphosa, who reappointed him finance minister in a cabinet reshuffle shortly after he became president earlier this year. Ramaphosa has made clean governance and the kick-starting of an economy mired in recession top priorities. Several ministers and government officials have been implicated in the widening graft scandals around the Guptas. One common theme that has emerged is visits to the family’s sprawling Johannesburg property, which is why there has been public anger regarding Nene’s revelations. Nene has also been praised by commentators for standing up to Zuma. He told the inquiry he was fired by Zuma in December 2015 for blocking deals that would have benefited the Guptas, particularly a $100 billion nuclear power deal with Russia that could have crippled Africa’s most developed economy. But Nene’s opponents say he was involved in corrupt deals with the Guptas when he was deputy finance minister and head of the state pension fund. He denies ever helping the Guptas. Opposition parties have called for his resignation. Reporting by Ed Stoddard, Alexander Winning and Olivia Kumwenda-Mtambo; Editing by Joe Brock
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
from https://garkomedia1.wordpress.com/2018/10/08/paper-says-south-africas-finance-minister-asked-to-be-sacked-rand-falls/ |
AuthorHi I am Nichole Estrada, I am 26 years old. I love online shopping and my favourite online stores are Amazon & Ebay. ArchivesNo Archives Categories |