South Korean and U.S. officials broke off talks on Tuesday aimed at settling the cost burden for Seoul of hosting the U.S. military, South Korea’s Foreign Ministry said, amid a public backlash over a U.S. demand for a sharp increase in the bill.

Officials had resumed a planned two-day negotiation on Monday, trying to narrow a $4 billion gap in what they believe South Korea should contribute for the cost of stationing U.S. troops in the country for next year.

“Our position is that it should be within the mutually acceptable Special Measures Agreement (SMA) framework that has been agreed upon by South Korea and the U.S. for the past 28 years,” South Korea’s Foreign Ministry said, referring to the cost-sharing deal’s official name.

“The U.S. believes that the share of defense spending should be increased significantly by creating a new category,” the ministry said in a statement.

Negotiators left the table after only about one hour of discussions while the talks were scheduled throughout the day, South Korean media reported, citing unnamed foreign ministry officials.

South Korean lawmakers have said U.S. officials had demanded up to $5 billion a year, more than five times the 1.04 trillion won ($896 million) Seoul agreed to pay this year for hosting the 28,500 troops.

U.S. officials have not publicly confirmed the number, but Trump has previously said the U.S. military presence in and around South Korea was “$5 billion worth of protection.”

The negotiations are taking place as U.S. efforts to reach an agreement with North Korea over its nuclear and missile programs appear stalled, ahead of a year-end deadline from Pyongyang for the U.S. to shift its approach.

Lee Hye-hoon, head of South Korea’s parliamentary intelligence committee, said in a radio interview on Tuesday the U.S. ambassador to South Korea talked to her at length earlier this month about how Seoul had been only paying one-fifth what it should have been paying for the cost of stationing U.S. troops.

Under South Korean law, the military cost-sharing deal must be approved by parliament.

Ruling party lawmakers have said this week they will “refuse to ratify any excessive outcome of the current negotiations” that deviate from the established principle and structure of the agreements for about 30 years.

Trump has long railed against what he says are inadequate contributions from allies towards defense costs. The United States is due to begin separate negotiations for new defense cost-sharing deals with Japan, Germany and NATO next year.

…

The union representing U.S. diplomats said on Monday it has raised tens of thousands of dollars in the last week alone to help defray the legal costs of foreign service officers who have testified in U.S. President Donald Trump’s impeachment inquiry.

The American Foreign Service Association (AFSA) also issued a statement defending U.S. diplomats after Trump criticized several of those who have appeared before Congress and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said nothing specific in their support.

“These patriots go abroad to every corner of the world and serve the interests of the American people,” AFSA President Eric Rubin said in a statement. “They do so with integrity and have no partisan or hidden agenda.”

“We should honor the service of each and every one of them.”

Separately, Rubin said: “We have raised tens of thousands of dollars in the past week alone” in the union’s Legal Defense Fund to help defray lawyers’ bills. He did not provide details.

One person caught up in the inquiry said he had already run up a legal bill of more than $25,000.

Neither the State Department nor the White House responded to requests for comment. A State Department spokesperson has previously said the agency planned to provide legal assistance to employees called to testify but did not give details.

Trump lashed out on Sunday at Jennifer Williams, a U.S. diplomat and foreign policy aide to Vice President Mike Pence who has testified that some of Trump’s comments on a July 25 phone call with his Ukrainian counterpart were “inappropriate.”

The call is at the heart of the Democratic-led House of Representatives’ inquiry into whether Republican Trump misused U.S. foreign policy to undermine former Democratic Vice President Joe Biden, a potential opponent in the 2020 election.

Writing on Twitter, Trump accused Williams of being a “Never Trumper” who should “work out a better presidential attack.”

Trump has denied wrongdoing and branded the probe a witch hunt aimed at hurting his re-election chances.

Asked on Monday why he had not spoken in support of his employees, Pompeo said he would talk about U.S. policy toward Ukraine but not about the impeachment inquiry.

Pressed, he said nothing specific: “I always defend State Department employees. It’s the greatest diplomatic corps in the history of the world. Very proud of the team.”

Asked if he shared Trump’s view, expressed on Twitter, that “everywhere (former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine) Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” Pompeo replied: “I’ll defer to the White House about particular statements.”

…

Elizabeth Warren’s proposal to gradually move the country to a government-funded health care system has further inflamed the debate over “Medicare for All,” likely ensuring the issue will play a significant role in this week’s Democratic presidential debate.

The Massachusetts senator announced Friday that her administration would immediately build on existing laws, including the Affordable Care Act, to expand access to health care while taking up to three years to fully implement Medicare for All. That attempt to thread the political needle has roiled her more moderate rivals, who say she’s waffling, while worrying some on the left, who see Warren’s commitment to a single-payer system wavering.

The divide could complicate plans by Democrats to turn health care into a winning issue in 2020. The party successfully took back control of the House last year by championing programs that ensure that people with preexisting medical conditions keep their insurance coverage while arguing that Republicans want to weaken such provisions. But the Medicare for All debate is more delicate as advocates including Warren grapple with concerns that a new government-run system won’t provide the same quality of coverage as private insurance – and would be prohibitively expensive.

“The Medicare for All proposal has turned out to be a real deal-breaker in who gets the Democratic nomination,” said Robert Blendon, a Harvard University School of Public Health professor whose teaching responsibilities include courses on political strategy in health policy and public opinion polling. “This is not just another issue.’’

Warren’s transition plan indicates she’d use her first 100 days as president to expand existing public health insurance options. That is closer to what has been supported by former Vice President Joe Biden and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana. Both Democratic presidential candidates have criticized Medicare for All for wiping out private insurance – something they say many Americans aren’t ready for.

Warren insists she’s simply working to expand health insurance in the short term to people who don’t have it while remaining committed to the full plan in the long run.

“My commitment to Medicare for All is all the way,” Warren said while campaigning in Iowa over the weekend.

Still, the transition signified a step toward pragmatism and an acknowledgement that the government has ways to expand health insurance coverage before embracing a universal system – something that would be difficult for any president to get through Congress. Consider that current entitlements, such as Social Security and Medicare, were phased in over years, not all at once.

“If she’s looked at it and decides the sensible thing to do in order to not cause too much disruption in employment situations and within the medical system is to gear up over three years, she’s probably right,” said Cindy Wolf, a customer service and shipping manager who attended the California state Democratic Convention on Saturday in Long Beach.

Still, the move may prove politically problematic for a candidate who has long decried others settling for consultant-driven campaigns seeking incremental changes at the expense of big ideas.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is the original architect of Medicare for All and has made fighting for it the centerpiece of his 2020 White House bid. He tweeted following the release of Warren’s transition plan: “In my first week as president, we will introduce Medicare for All legislation.’’

Campaigning in Nevada on Monday, California Sen. Kamala Harris said, “I believe that government should not be in a position of taking away people’s choice.”

“Especially on one of the most intimate and personal decisions people can make,” Harris said, “which is about how to address their health care needs.’’

The criticism from others was far sharper. Top Biden adviser Kate Bedingfield dismissed Warren’s plan as “trying to muddy the waters” by offering “a full program of flips and twists.” Buttigieg spokeswoman Lis Smith said it was a “transparently political attempt to paper over a very serious policy problem.’’

It’s easy to see the issue spilling into Wednesday’s debate because Warren rode a steady summer climb in the polls to become one of the primary field’s front-runners – but no longer seems to be rising. Polls recently show her support stabilizing, though not dipping, as focus on her Medicare for All ideas intensifies.

The last two debates featured Warren failing to answer direct questions on whether she would be forced to raise middle class taxes to pay for the universal health care system she envisions. That set up a plan released two-plus weeks ago in which Warren vowed to generate $20-plus trillion in new government revenue without increasing taxes on the middle class – but that’s been decried by critics who accuse Warren of underestimating how much Medicare for All would really cost.

And, though Warren never promised to begin working toward Medicare for All on Day 1 of her administration, the release of the transition plan, which spelled out that the process will take years, has unsettled some.

Una Lee Jost, a lawyer who was holding “Bernie” signs in Chinese and English at the California Democratic Convention, called any lengthy transition to Medicare for All “a serious concern.’’

“We should have implemented this decades ago,” she said.

…

Hundreds of students from a New Delhi university faced off Monday with police, who stopped their march toward Parliament to protest increased student housing fees.
                   
The students from Jawaharlal Nehru University chanted slogans and attempted to cross police barricades. Police detained several students during the march.
                   
The Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union said in a statement that the students were attacked by the police during the protest.
                   
“The police used brutal force to disrupt our peaceful march and several students have been injured,” the statement said.
                   
The students wanted to appeal to lawmakers to intervene in their university’s decision to hike the fees, which they have been protesting for more than two weeks. Last week, hundreds of protesting students clashed with the police during the university’s graduation ceremony.
                   
Rent for a single-bedroom was increased to the equivalent of more than $8 per month from less than $1 per month. The security deposit more than doubled to more than $160.
                   
Many students said they fear the fee structure would make education inaccessible to underprivileged students.
                   
“I am the first from my family to study at a university. By raising housing fees, the university administration is putting a price on affordable education,” said Jyoti Sharma, a student at the march.
                   
Students held signs at the march reading “Save public education” and “Ensure affordable hostels for all.”
                   
Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Sitaram Yechury offered his support to the protesting students.
                   
“A peaceful protest march to Parliament against the unprecedented fee hikes is being forcibly stopped by the police. Strongly condemn this denial of basic democratic right to protest,” he tweeted.
                   
The students marched despite the university saying it would partially roll back the fees.
                   
“The students will not pay the increased fee,” said Ashutosh Verma, a student.

…

China on Monday called on the U.S. military to stop flexing its muscles in the South China Sea
and to avoid adding “new uncertainties” over Taiwan, during high-level talks that underscored tension between the world’s two largest economies.

The remarks by Chinese Defence Minister Wei Fenghe to U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper, recounted by a Chinese spokesman, came just two weeks after a top White House official denounced Chinese “intimidation” in the busy waterway.

It also came a day after Esper publicly accused Beijing of “increasingly resorting to coercion and intimidation to advance its strategic objectives” in the region.

During closed-door talks on the sidelines of a gathering of defense ministers in Bangkok, Wei urged Esper to “stop flexing muscles in the South China Sea and to not provoke and escalate
tensions in the South China Sea”, the spokesman, Wu Qian, said.

China claims almost all the energy-rich waters of the South China Sea, where it has established military outposts on artificial islands. However, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims to parts of the sea.

The United States accuses China of militarizing the South China Sea and trying to intimidate Asian neighbors who might want to exploit its extensive oil and gas reserves.

The U.S. Navy regularly vexes China by conducting what it calls “freedom of navigation” operations by ships close to some of the islands China occupies, asserting freedom of access to international waterways.

Asked specifically what Wei sought for the United States to do differently, and whether that included halting such freedom of navigation operations, Wu said: “We (call on) the U.S. side
to stop intervening in the South China Sea and stop military provocation in the South China Sea.”

In a statement, Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said Esper, in his meeting with Wei, noted China’s “perpetual reluctance” to adhere to international norms.

“Secretary Esper pointedly reiterated that the United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows – and we will encourage and protect the rights of other sovereign nations to do the same,” Hoffman said.

Chinese carrier transit

Despite warm words exchanged in front of reporters, Wei and Esper also discussed thorny issues, including Chinese-ruled Hong Kong, which has seen months of anti-government protests.
They also talked about democratic Taiwan, which is claimed by China as a wayward province and is the Communist Party’s most sensitive and important territorial issue.

Fenghe underscored to Esper China’s position that it would “not tolerate any Taiwan independence incident”, Wu said, adding that it opposed any official or military contact with Taiwan. China has in the past threatened to attack if Taiwan, set to hold a presidential election next year, moves towards independence.

“The Chinese side also requires the U.S. side to carefully handle the Taiwan related-issue and to not add new uncertainties to the Strait,” Wu said.

The exchange came a day after news that China sailed a carrier group into the sensitive Taiwan Strait, led by its first domestically built aircraft carrier.

…

Nigeria’s Oscar Committee is urging the country’s filmmakers to use more native languages in their productions.  This, after the U.S. Academy Awards disqualified a Nigerian entry in the International Feature Film category because the movie used too much English.  While some in Nigeria’s Hollywood – known as Nollywood – support the idea of more native languages in films, others argue that non-English films limit their audience reach. 

Nollywood filmmaker Desmond Utomwen is aiming for a U.S. Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Award, popularly known as an Oscar, by producing a film in a native Nigerian language.

“It’s actually a Hausa-based film, so it’s a language film, it’s not English.  I’ve done a couple of them in English but, that’s actually my first film in Hausa,’ he says.

Most Nigerian filmmakers make English-language movies to reach a larger audience globally but also inside Nigeria, where the former British colony made English the official language.

Filmmaker Darlington Abuda has been in the industry for years.

“In Nigeria, if I do a purely language film, I have made my film a regional film,” Abuda says.  “It will not get the appeal and audience traction that it needs in the other parts of the country.”

But that tide may be slowly turning after the Academy Awards this month disqualified Nigeria’s first entry in the International Feature Film category.

Only 11 minutes of Genevieve Nnaji’s “Lion Heart” – the first Nollywood film by Netflix – was in the native Igbo language.  To qualify for the international feature award, at least 50 percent of a film’s dialogue must be in a language other than English.

While the rejection was roundly criticized in Nigeria, C.J. Obasi, a member of a Nigerian Oscar committee which was set up five years ago, is optimistic.

“If you look at the bigger picture you realize that it’s a victory in that we made a submission for the first time ever,” Obasi says.  “What that does is that it re-positions the hearts and minds of filmmakers as to how we are going to tell our stories moving forward.”

Nigeria’s Oscar Selection Committee says the rejection should motivate Nollywood filmmakers to create more movies in the country’s over 500 native languages.

But convincing Nigerian filmmakers to turn away from English – the language that ties the country together and with the world – will remain a challenge.

And, for some Nollywood filmmakers like Jim Iyke, the language used is not the point.

“If someone sits in their living room and decide where my movie should be, and what platform or what awards I should get, that is on them,” Iyke says. ” I’ve done my job.  I’ve fed the artist in me.”

While Lion Heart won’t make the February Academy Awards, being rejected and having the backing of Netflix are already drawing more international attention to Nollywood — and what Nigerian filmmakers will produce next.

…

Over the past five months, millions have marched through Hong Kong, demanding democratic reform in the semi-autonomous Chinese territory. Next Sunday (November 24), Hong Kongers will finally get a chance to express their opinion, albeit in a limited way, by casting votes. If the vote goes ahead as planned, pro-democracy forces are hoping for a big win, as VOA’s William Gallo reports.

…

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg holds a clear lead among Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa, the state that will hold the first nominating contest in February, a new Des Moines Register/CNN/Mediacom opinion poll showed on Saturday.

Buttigieg’s support climbed to 25%, a 16-point increase since the previous survey in September, CNN reported.

It said there was a close three-way battle for second with Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren at 16%, and former Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders each at 15%.

Since September, Warren dropped six percentage points and Biden slipped five points, while Sanders gained four points, CNN said.

Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, told the network the news was encouraging and his campaign felt growing momentum in the farm state, but there was “still a lot of work to do” in increasing his name recognition there.

Buttigieg also led Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa in a Monmouth University poll released on Tuesday.

A New York Times/Sienna poll released earlier this month also showed Buttigieg’s support surging in Iowa, but still behind Warren and Sanders. Nationally, he does not fare nearly as well, averaging around 8% in polls.

Buttigieg’s campaign is betting a strong finish in the Iowa caucus on Feb. 3 will help quell questions about whether he is ready for the big stage, and persuade reluctant black and Hispanic voters to give him a second look.

Buttigieg, 37, has invested heavily in Iowa from the start.

His campaign has more than 100 staffers and 20 offices in the state, among the most of any candidate.

Buttigieg finished the third quarter with $23.4 million in campaign cash on hand, ranking third behind Warren and Sanders at $25.7 million and $33.7 million, respectively. Biden had $8.9 million, forcing his campaign to abandon a promise to reject support from political action committees.

…

Impeachment hearings targeting U.S. President Donald Trump are heading into a second week, with key witnesses set to testify about how he pushed Ukraine to investigate one of his chief 2020 Democratic challengers, former Vice President Joe Biden, while temporarily withholding military aid Kyiv wanted.

Eight more current and former government officials will appear before the House Intelligence Committee for nationally televised sessions, with a central figure, Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, set to appear Wednesday.

In amended behind-closed-doors testimony, Sondland, a million-dollar Trump political donor before being tapped by Trump for the EU posting in Brussels, said that he had warned an aide to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in early September that it would not get the U.S. military assistance it wanted unless the Kyiv leader publicly committed to opening the investigation of Biden.

It was a reciprocal, quid pro quo deal that Trump has denied occurred but is central to the efforts of Democratic lawmakers to impeach the country’s 45th president. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and ridiculed the impeachment effort as a sham proceeding. Trump eventually released the $391 million in military aid on Sept. 11 without Ukraine launching a Biden investigation.

Other figures linked to the impeachment inquiry have corroborated Sondland’s testimony. In a transcript of private testimony released Saturday, Tim Morrison, a White House national security aide, said late last month that Sondland had spoken with Trump about a half dozen times in recent months and had talked with a top Ukraine official about winning release of the military assistance Kyiv wanted to help fight pro-Russian separatists in the eastern part of the country in exchange for investigations that benefited Trump politically.

“His mandate from the president was to go make deals,” Morrison said of Sondland. 

Morrison is set to testify publicly before the impeachment panel on Tuesday, alongside Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special envoy to Ukraine who, as others have, testified that Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer named by him to oversee Ukraine affairs, was the driving force to get Kyiv to open the politically tinged investigation to help the U.S. leader.

Late last week, David Holmes, an aide to William Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Kyiv, told impeachment investigations in private testimony that he overheard a July 26 cell phone conversation between Trump and Sondland at a Kyiv restaurant in which the president inquired whether Zelenskiy was going to pursue the investigations of Biden, his son Hunter Biden’s work for a Ukrainian natural gas company and a debunked theory that Ukraine had meddled in the 2016 election that Trump won.  U.S. intelligence community concluded Russia was behind the election meddling. 

Holmes said Sondland in the cell phone call assured Trump that Zelenskiy “loves your ass.”

“So, he’s gonna do the investigation?” Holmes quoted Trump as asking. Sondland, according to Holmes, replied, “He’s gonna do it,” while adding that Zelenskiy will do “anything you ask him to.”

Holmes said he later asked Sondland if Trump cared about Ukraine, with the envoy replying that Trump did not “give a s**t about Ukraine.”

“I asked why not, and Ambassador Sondland stated that the president only cares about ‘big stuff,’” Holmes testified, according to a transcript posted by CNN. “I noted that there was ‘big stuff’ going on in Ukraine, like a war with Russia, and Ambassador Sondland replied that he meant ‘big stuff’ that benefits the president, like the ‘Biden investigation.”’

Before Sondland revised his testimony to say there had been a quid pro quo — the military aid for the Biden investigation — Trump had called Sondland a “great American.” But after Sondland changed his testimony, Trump said, “I hardly know the gentleman.”

On Tuesday, the House Intelligence panel is also set to hear from Jennifer Williams, a foreign affairs aide to Vice President Mike Pence, and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, director for European affairs at the National Security Council. Both of them listened in on Trump’s July 25 call with Zelenskiy asking the Ukrainian leader for “a favor,” the investigations of the Bidens.

Both Williams and Vindman have voiced concerns about Trump’s request. It is against U.S. campaign finance law to solicit foreign assistance for help in a U.S. election.

Aside from Sondland, the Intelligence panel is also hearing Wednesday from Laura Cooper, a Defense Department official, and David Hale, the undersecretary of State for political affairs. Fiona Hill, the former National Security Council senior director for Europe and Russia, is testifying Thursday.

Political analysts in Washington say the Trump impeachment drama could last for several months. If Trump is impeached by a simple majority in the House, perhaps by the end of the year as appears possible, a trial would be held in January in the Republican-majority Senate, where a two-thirds vote would be needed for his conviction and removal from office.

The time frame could bump up against the first Democratic party presidential nominating contests starting in February, when voters will begin casting ballots on who they want to oppose Trump when he seeks a second four-year term in the November 2020 national election. Six Democratic senators are among those running for the party’s presidential nomination, but could be forced to stay in Washington to sit as jurors in the 100-member Senate as it decides Trump’s fate, rather than campaign full-time for the presidency. 

Trump’s removal from office remains unlikely, with at least 20 Republicans needed to turn against him and vote for his conviction. 

To date, while a small number of Republicans have criticized Trump for his actions on Ukraine, no Republican senator has called for his removal from office through impeachment, a drastic action that has never occurred in U.S. history.  

…

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson says all Conservative Party candidates in the upcoming election have pledged to back his Brexit deal. 

“All 635 Conservative candidates standing at this election — every single one of them — has pledged to me that if elected they will vote in Parliament to pass my Brexit deal so we can end the uncertainty and finally leave the EU,” Johnson told London’s Telegraph newspaper in an interview published late on Saturday. 

“I am offering a pact with the people: If you vote Conservative you can be 100% sure a majority Conservative government will unblock Parliament and get Brexit done,” he said. 

The December 12 election was called to end three years of disagreement over Brexit that has sapped investors’ faith in the stability of the world’s fifth-largest economy and damaged Britain’s standing since it voted in a 2016 referendum to leave the European Union. 

Johnson, 55, hopes to win a majority to push through the last-minute Brexit deal he struck with the EU last month after the bloc granted a third delay to the divorce that was originally supposed to take place March 29. Voters in a 2016 referendum narrowly voted in favor of leaving the EU. 

Johnson’s Conservatives lead Labour by sizable margins, four polls published Saturday show. 

A YouGov poll showed support for the Conservatives at 45%, the highest level since 2017, compared with Labour at 28%, unchanged. The pro-European Union Liberal Democrats were at 15%, and the Brexit Party was at 4%, unchanged. 

A separate poll for SavantaComRes also said support for the Conservatives was the highest since 2017, at 41%. Labour’s support was at 33%. 

The Conservatives have a 16-point lead over Labour, according to an opinion poll published by Opinium Research, and a poll by the Mail on Sunday said Johnson’s party had a 15-point lead over Labour. 

…

A federal judge on Saturday ordered that a German citizen arrested on her return to the country on suspicion of being a member of Islamic State should remain in custody, prosecutors said. 
 
Authorities said the suspect, identified only as Nasim A., left Germany for Syria in 2014, married a fighter and moved with him to Iraq. There she was paid to maintain an IS-controlled house and carried a weapon. 
 
She and her husband later moved to Syria, where she also maintained a house, prosecutors said. Kurdish security forces arrested her in early 2019. 
 
The woman was arrested Friday evening in Frankfurt upon her return to Germany. 
 
The judge determined Saturday that she remain in detention because of “suspicion of being a member of a terrorist organization in a foreign country,” prosecutors said. 

…

A recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court has upended a long-standing legal roadblock that has given the gun industry far-reaching immunity from lawsuits in the aftermath of mass killings. 
 
The court this week allowed families of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook school massacre to sue the maker of the AR-15 used in the attack. The case against Remington will now proceed in the Connecticut courts. 
 
Remington is widely expected to win the case, but critics of the gun industry are eyeing what they see as a significant outcome even in the face of defeat: getting the gunmaker to open its books about how it markets firearms. 
 
Lawyers for the plaintiffs are certain to request that Remington turn over volumes of documents as part of the discovery phase. Those materials might include company emails, memos, business plans and corporate strategies, or anything that might suggest the company purposely marketed the firearm that may have compelled the shooter to use the weapon to carry out the slaughter. 

Message to gun companies
 
The plaintiffs also believe the ruling will put gun companies on notice about how they conduct business, knowing they could wind up in the courts in similar fashion. 
 
“If the industry wakes up and understands their conduct behind closed doors is not protected, then the industry itself … will take steps to try to help the massive problem we have instead of do nothing and sit by and cash the checks,” said Joshua Koskoff, the Connecticut attorney who represents a survivor and relatives of nine victims who died at the Newtown, Connecticut, school on December 14, 2012.  

The case hinges on Connecticut state consumer law that challenges how the firearm used by the Newtown shooter — a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle — was marketed, with plaintiffs alleging Remington purposely used advertisements that targeted younger, at-risk males. One of Remington’s ads features the rifle against a plain backdrop and the phrase: “Consider Your Man Card Reissued.” 
 
Remington did not respond to requests for comment after the U.S. Supreme Court denied its efforts to quash the lawsuit. 
 
Larry Keane, senior vice president and legal counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which represents gunmakers, said he expected Remington to  ultimately prevail and that it was unfair to blame the gunmaker for Adam Lanza’s crime. 
 
“Adam Lanza alone is the responsible person. Not Remington,” he said. 
 
2005 law

Suing the firearms industry has never been easy, and it was made even harder after Congress enacted the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005. The law backed by the National Rifle Association gave broad immunity to the gun industry. 
 
The plaintiffs’ chances of succeeding in this case are slim — a sentiment shared by the Connecticut Supreme Court, which said they face a “Herculean task” to prevail. 

Judges and juries generally have a tough time blaming anyone but the shooter for the crime, said Timothy D. Lytton, professor at Georgia State University’s College of Law and author of “Suing the Gun Industry: A Battle at the Crossroads of Gun Control and Mass Torts.”  

Add into the mix that Lanza himself didn’t own the firearm; he stole it from his mother after killing her in the home they shared, then went to the elementary school in Newtown, where he killed 20 children and six adults. 
 
“It makes it harder for juries to connect the dots. It’s a significant hurdle in all of these cases. It’s very rare that you have a very close time frame between the marketing of a weapon and a mass shooting,” Lytton said. 
 
Lanza’s mother purchased the Bushmaster AR-platform rifle in 2010 from a Connecticut gun shop. It’s unclear if she or her son were influenced by or had seen Remington’s advertising. 

Tough times for industry
 
Still, it’s been a tough few years for the industry. Sales plummeted with the election of President Donald Trump, and gun-control advocates have outspent perhaps his most loyal supporter: the NRA. With slumping sales, some companies, including Remington, have faced bankruptcy. And in the wake of high-profile mass shootings, corporate America has begun pushing back against the industry. 
 
AR-platform long guns have been a particular bone of contention for gun-control advocates who believe the firearms — once banned for a decade in the U.S. — are especially attractive to mass shooters for their ease of use and their ability to carry large-capacity magazines. 
 
While handguns remain used more often in mass shootings, ARs have been involved in some of the deadliest shootings, including when a gunman fired on a crowd of concertgoers outside his hotel room in Las Vegas in 2017, killing 58 people and wounding hundreds. 
 
The AR-15, its design based on the military M-16, has become one of the most popular firearms in the U.S. in recent decades. It’s lightweight, easy to customize and able to carry extended magazines, and its sales took off once the ban expired in 2004. There are now an estimated 16 million AR-platform long guns in the U.S. 

‘Embarrassing’ information
 
Robert J. Spitzer, chairman of political science at the State University of New York at Cortland and a longtime watcher of gun politics, said a case against Remington could cause “pretty embarrassing information” to come out. 

“And it is certainly possible [plaintiffs] will find memos or other documents that may significantly support their case that Remington was manifestly irresponsible in the way they marketed their guns,” he said. 

Even if embarrassing information isn’t uncovered, he said, it could have a long-lasting impact on the industry and, more specifically, Remington. Considered the oldest gunmaker in the United States, Remington — founded in New York in 1816 and now based in Madison, North Carolina — only emerged from bankruptcy in 2018. 
 
“They’re obviously in a precarious financial situation and this suit is certainly not helpful to them trying to restore their financial health,” Spitzer said. 

…

The Hong Kong government is probably considering measures to strengthen its crackdown on anti-government protesters after Chinese President Xi Jinping issued a direct warning, urging the city to “end violence and restore order,” analysts say.

Stepping up the suppression, however, may backfire, fueling tensions in the city and further hurting its economy if protesters refuse to back down, they add.

Xi told a summit in Brazil Thursday that “persistent radical and violent crimes have seriously trampled on the basic principle of ‘one country, two systems’ scheme” in Hong Kong, the state news agency People’s Daily reported.

Xi’s warning

“Stopping the violence and restoring order is Hong Kong’s most urgent task at present,” he said.

Xi also expressed support for the city’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, the Hong Kong police, and its judiciary in punishing what he called “violent criminals.”

“The Chinese government is unwavering in safeguarding its sovereignty, security and developmental interests, implementing the ‘one country, two systems’ scheme and deterring any interference by foreign forces in Hong Kong affairs,” he added.

While a reiteration of Beijing’s long-held stance, Xi’s remarks are effectively a direct order for Lam to get tough and end the city’s five months of political unrest, said Sang Pu, a critic and Hong Kong commentator.

“This [stance] was reiterated by Xi Jinping in his statement in Brazil and this Brazil statement makes sure that suppression overrides and prevails everything else. And this suppression will not go away very easily,” Sang said.

On Friday, protesters continued to paralyze parts of Hong Kong for a fifth day, forcing schools to close and blocking some main roads, as university students barricaded campuses and authorities struggled to calm the violence.

Lam also condemned an “attack” in London on Hong Kong Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng during a confrontation with protesters, during which Cheng suffered “serious bodily harm,” according to Hong Kong government statement. Lam said the incident was barbaric and violated the principles of a civilized society, the Hong Kong government said.

More emergency measures?

Sang said he believes Lam is considering emergency measures such as curfews or cutting off the Internet, as Xi’s statement followed a short-lived tweet by China’s tightly censored Global Times, saying that the city government was expected to announce a curfew this weekend.

The tweet was quickly deleted as by editor-in-chief Hu Xijin because there wasn’t sufficient information to back it up.

Media speculation was rife in Hong Kong that a meeting of ministers chaired by Lam late Wednesday was devoted to discussing emergency measures including the curfew. That led the city government to issue a press statement Thursday to clarify what it calls “rumors … totally unfounded.”

Sang said he believes the deleted tweet was meant to test the level of tolerance or fear for curfews among Hong Kongers while Lam gauges pressure from the outside world in deciding her next move.

Were Lam to step up the suppression against protesters, the city’s political crisis would worsen, as protesters would not back down, Sang said.

“Even if they’re tired, even this battle will not be the winning battle, they will still stride on because actually they have no other choices,” he said.

The reason is, he said “that if they now step back and then forgo any resistance anymore, the real suppression will come.”

“Many people including me myself and many other Hong Kongers will be arrested at home and even disappear suddenly,” he said.

Escalation to hurt economy

The city’s political crisis appears to be deteriorating as internal conflicts aren’t easy to resolve, but any further escalation of tensions will badly hurt the city’s economy, said Liao Qun, chief economist at China CITIC Bank International.

Hong Kong “has already slipped into a recession in the third quarter and I expect to see another negative growth in the fourth quarter,” he said.

The recession will continue if the unrest fails to cool, he said, “However, if things cool down, we may begin to see a mild rebound.”

The economist warned that the city’s economy would take another hit if legislation under consideration in the U.S. Congress to impose sanctions on those responsible for human rights violations in Hong Kong were to become law, but that would not force China to change how it rules Hong Kong, said Shi Yinhong, an international relations professor at Beijing’s Renmin University.

The act, he said, “will definitely have a serious adverse impact on the China-U.S. relations, the Chinese economy and Hong Kong’s financial stability.”

“No matter how large an impact there is, the People’s Republic of China government’s determination to safeguard its sovereignty over Hong Kong and the city’s stability won’t waver,” he said.

Shi added that Beijing will firmly support the Hong Kong government’s decisions to solve its political crisis even if Lam decides to invoke her emergency powers.

…

Student protesters are barricading themselves at universities across Hong Kong, stockpiling makeshift weapons and turning campuses into what look like war zones. It marks a dangerous new phase in Hong Kong’s 5-month-old anti-government protests.

Hong Kong Polytechnic University now looks something more like a fortress. Hundreds of students have hunkered down, laying bricks to obstruct police vehicles they are certain eventually will arrive, and setting up multiple levels of security checkpoints. Inside, students arm themselves with whatever they can, including arrows, bricks and molotov cocktails.

Hong Kong has seen 24 weeks of protests, but what is taking place here is new. Students barricading themselves in at universities, preparing for extended confrontations. It’s the start of what could be a dangerous new phase of anti-government protests.”

WATCH: Inside Campus Fortresses, Hong Kong Students Prep for Battle

Inside Campus Fortresses, Hong Kong Students Prep for Battle video player.

Embed

Copy

Link

Students don’t want to give their names. But this protester is eager to defend the aggressive tactics.

“We have seen the police brutality in Hong Kong … how can we tolerate that?”

This is going on in at least five Hong Kong campuses. Many schools canceled class for the semester. At the Chinese University of Hong Kong, police moved in earlier this week, prompting a night of clashes that looked more like battles for territory. Police later accused the students of turning the campuses into “weapons factories.”

But this protester says that’s unfair.

“The violence between us and the police is imbalanced. You can see that. We just use the things we have, just only some bottles or some plastic. But the police have the gun, have the tear gas. So the violence between us and the police is totally unbalanced.”

In the downtime, the students test their weapons, which sometimes don’t work. A light moment that masks the gravity of what they’re doing.

“All the protesters are scared. Because maybe we will die. But we think if we don’t stand up this day, all the freedom in Hong Kong will lose. So there is no way to [go] back for us.”

These are student protesters who know they’ll probably lose, but who nonetheless are prepared to fight.

…

Millions of Americans have been watching the U.S. House of Representatives impeachment inquiry hearings into President Donald Trump. Mike O’Sullivan reports from Los Angeles, some voters support the process and others agree with Trump that it’s politically motivated.
 

…

Washington’s defense cost-sharing demand could hurt the U.S.-South Korean alliance, said a former military general, suggesting the demand seems to stem from “a new paradigm” the Trump administration has adopted.

Bernard Champoux, a retired three-star general who served as commander of the Eighth Army in South Korea during the Obama administration, said he is “concerned about the impact” the increased cost-sharing demand “will have on the alliance.”

The U.S. has been asking South Korea to pay more for keeping about 28,500 American troops in South Korea in the cost-sharing deal set to expire at the end of this year.

In the last round of negotiations for the Special Measures Agreement (SMA) held in October in Honolulu, Washington asked Seoul to pay about $5 billion for next year, an amount that is more than five times the $924 million Seoul agreed to shoulder for this year.

New cost-sharing paradigm

Champoux said the U.S. demand for the increased defense cost-sharing stems from a “new paradigm” adopted by the Trump administration.

Champoux said the increased cost-sharing demand “is not a negotiating tactic because this is the result of a new paradigm.” He continued, “It’s perhaps consistent with the way this administration has looked at the burden sharing of all our allies, to include Japan and the NATO allies.”

As a way of pushing his “American First” policy, a slogan Trump used in his presidential campaign, Trump has given a priority to U.S. national economic interests in broad-ranging foreign policy issues including trade and military alliances.

The approach had Trump declaring the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), America’s military alliance with North American and European countries, was “obsolete” and costing too much in January, only to roll back to say, “It’s no longer obsolete” in April.

For years before he entered the political arena, Trump had complained that U.S. allies did not pay the U.S. enough for bases and troops used in their defense and, earlier this year, pushed for the “Cost Plus 50” plan.

Under the plan, the U.S. could ask countries hosting American forces such as South Korea, Japan and Germany to pay five to six times as much as they currently pay or an additional 50 percent of current amounts.

“Wealthy, wealthy countries that we’re protecting are all under notice,” said Trump in January.

Trump has backed away from pushing the plan, and it is uncertain whether it will become official U.S. policy, but the idea is being played out in Washington’s defense cost-sharing negotiations with Seoul.

Mark Milley, chair of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the American public needs an explanation of how much it costs for U.S. forces to defend wealthy countries like South Korea and Japan. He made the remark while en route to Tokyo on Sunday. He arrived in Seoul on Wednesday and met with South Korean General Park Han-Ki for the Annual Military Committee Meeting.

“The average American looking at the forward deployed U.S. troops in South Korea and Japan asks some fundamental questions: Why are they needed there? How much does it cost? These are very rich and wealthy countries, why can’t they defend themselves?” Milley said.

He continued, “It is incumbent on us … to make sure we adequately explain how the U.S. military is a stabilizing force in Northeast Asia.”

Ahead of Milley’s trip, Randall Schriver, assistant defense secretary for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs, said the U.S. allies “have to be willing to pick up a larger share of the burden, as the president has emphasized globally, not just related to South Korea.”

Champoux says Washington’s steep increase in Seoul’s burden of defense cost could impact the alliance in a way that could benefit its adversaries.

“Our adversaries would love there to be an issue or challenge that drives a wedge in the alliance,” Champoux said.

David Maxwell, a former U.S. Special Forces colonel and current fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said, “Of course, Korean people are asking why should they pay more.” He continued, “We are heading for a train wreck.”

On Wednesday, North Korea, one of the adversaries considered by the U.S., expressed anger over the planned joint military drills between the U.S. and South Korea scheduled for December saying they are “hostile” to North Korea. It vowed to respond with “force in kind,” through a statement carried by its official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

North Korea’s statement came as U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Wednesday while traveling to Seoul that he is open to the possibility of adjusting the joint drills to provide space for diplomacy.

In Seoul, Esper will be attending the 51st U.S.-ROK Security Consultative Meeting on Friday where he is expected to discuss with South Korea a host of important alliance issues, including the defense cost-sharing deal and an intelligence-sharing pact set to expire this month, which Seoul announced in August that it will terminate with Tokyo against the U.S. urges.

After the 44th Military Committee Meeting in Seoul on Thursday, Milley said the U.S. remains ready to use “the full range of U.S. military capabilities” to respond to “any attacks on the Korean Peninsula” according to a joint statement.

VOA Korean reporter Christy Lee contributed to this report

…

The impeachment inquiry involving President Donald Trump moved into an important new phase this week — public hearings. Opposition Democrats believe Trump abused his power by pressuring Ukraine to investigate a political rival, Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden. They hope the hearings will sway public opinion to support their case against the president, just as Republicans are counting on an aggressive defense to move the public to oppose impeachment. VOA national correspondent Jim Malone has more on the political stakes in the impeachment battle from Washington.

…

A day of testimony in the impeachment inquiry targeting U.S. President Donald Trump changed no minds in Washington, with his critics convinced as ever that he abused his office by pushing Ukraine for political investigations of Democrats in the U.S. and his staunchest allies unwavering in their opinion that he did nothing wrong.

Trump declared on Twitter, “This Impeachment Hoax is such a bad precedent and sooo bad for our Country!”

….that the House Democrats have done since she’s become Speaker, other than chase Donald Trump.” This Impeachment Hoax is such a bad precedent and sooo bad for our Country!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 14, 2019

But Speaker Nancy Pelosi, leader of the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives, said that Trump’s actions amounted to bribery — temporarily withholding $391 million in military aid to Ukraine while pushing for an investigation of one of his chief 2020 Democratic challengers, former Vice President Joe Biden.

“The bribe is to grant or withhold military assistance in return for a public statement of a fake investigation into the elections. That’s bribery,” Pelosi said at a news conference. “What the president has admitted to and says it’s perfect, I say it’s perfectly wrong. It’s bribery.”

Trump called Wednesday’s testimony from two career U.S. diplomats detailing his efforts to get Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open the investigation of Biden “a joke.” The U.S. leader delighted in retweeting comments from supporters, including Congressman Mark Meadows’s assessment that the hearing was “a MAJOR setback for the unfounded impeachment fantasy.”

But Democratic Congressman Jerrold Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee that could soon push for Trump’s impeachment, called the day’s testimony “pretty damning.” However, Nadler said he would remain open-minded “for the moment” on whether articles of impeachment should be written.  

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway told CNN, “The president was very placid. I’ll tell you why. There was nothing new yesterday.”

She dismissed the importance of the day’s major news from the first of several days of the public impeachment inquiry, only the fourth against a U.S. president in the country’s 243-year history.

William Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, testified that an aide of his overheard a cell phone conversation at a Kyiv restaurant on July 26 in which Trump asked Gordon Sondland, a million-dollar Trump political donor and now the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, about whether Ukraine was opening “the investigations” he wanted about Biden, his son Hunter Biden’s work for a Ukrainian natural gas company and a debunked theory that Ukraine meddled in the 2016 election Trump won. The U.S. intelligence community concluded Russia was behind the election meddling.

The overheard conversation occurred a day after Trump from the White House asked Zelenskiy in a half-hour call for “a favor” — the investigations of the Bidens — at a time when he was blocking release of $391 million in military aid to Ukraine that it needed to help fight pro-Russian separatists in the eastern part of the country.

Taylor said his aide, David Holmes, told him that Sondland said he believed Trump was more concerned about the investigations of the Bidens, which Trump personal attorney Rudy Giuliani was pursuing, than anything else in Ukraine.

Democratic Congresswoman Jackie Speier, a member of the House Intelligence Committee conducting the impeachment inquiry, called the previously undisclosed phone conversation “so explosive.”

But Trump adviser Conway said, “You’re calling that evidence, respectfully. In a real court of law we’d not be referring to something as evidence that is, oh, someone on my staff recalled overhearing a conversation between someone else and the president where they think they heard the president use the word investigations. This is not what due process and the rule of law in our great democracy allows.”

Trump said he knew “nothing” about the alleged Kyiv call from Sondland.

Impeachment investigators are interviewing Holmes, the Taylor aide, on Friday, while Sondland is set to testify before the impeachment inquiry next Wednesday. Sondland has already testified for hours in private behind closed doors, telling investigators that he told an aide to Zelenskiy that Ukraine would not get the military assistance unless the Ukrainian leader promised publicly that it would initiate the Biden investigations.

Trump at one point called Sondland a “‘great American,” but after he revised his testimony to say there were conditions on the Ukraine aid, Trump contended, “I hardly know the gentleman.”

Trump has denied a quid pro quo with Zelenskiy – release of the military aid in exchange for the Biden investigations – and described his July 25 call with Zelenskiy as “perfect.” After a 55-day delay, Trump released the military assistance on Sept. 11 without Ukraine undertaking the Biden investigations.

Trump’s Republican supporters say the fact that he released the aid without Ukraine investigating the Bidens is prime evidence there was no quid pro quo. They also pointed to the testimony from Taylor and George Kent, the State Department’s top Ukraine overseer, that they have had no personal interactions with Trump during the months that the Ukraine drama has played out.

Trump called the diplomats “NEVER TRUMPERS,” but both denied the characterization and cited their long service in the diplomatic corps under both Republican and Democratic presidents.

The House Intelligence Committee is now turning its attention to Friday’s testimony from Marie Yovanovitch, a former U.S. ambassador to Kyiv who was ousted from her posting earlier this year by the Trump administration months before her tour of duty was set to end.

Her dismissal, according to career diplomats who watched helplessly as it unfolded, came after Giuliani, Trump’s personal attorney he had assigned to oversee Ukraine affairs outside normal State Department channels, pushed for her removal, viewing her as an impediment to getting Ukraine to undertake the Biden investigations.

Trump called Yovanovitch “bad news” in his July call with Zelenskiy.

Next week, the impeachment panel is calling eight more witnesses, including two on Tuesday who listened in as Trump talked with Zelenskiy — Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who serves as director for European affairs on the White House’s National Security Council, and Jennifer Williams, a foreign affairs aide to Vice President Mike Pence.

Political analysts in Washington say the Trump impeachment drama could last for several months. If Trump is impeached by a simple majority in the House, perhaps by the end of the year as appears possible, a trial would be held in January in the Republican-majority Senate, where a two-thirds vote would be needed for his conviction and removal from office.

The time frame could bump up against the first Democratic party presidential nominating contests starting in February, when voters will begin voting on who they want to oppose Trump when he seeks a second four-year term in the November 2020 national election. Six Democratic senators are among those running for the party’s presidential nomination, but could be forced to stay in Washington to sit as jurors in the 100-member Senate as it decides Trump’s fate, rather than campaign full-time for the presidency.

Trump’s removal remains unlikely, with at least 20 Republicans needed to turn against him and vote for his conviction. To date, while a small number of Republicans have criticized Trump for his actions on Ukraine, no Republican senator has called for his removal from office via impeachment, a drastic action that has never occurred in U.S. history.

…

A band of GOP senators rebuffed Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s effort to depict anti-Islamic State Kurd forces as terrorists in a contentious Oval Office meeting, as the White House allies took a far harder line against Erdogan than did President Donald Trump.
                   
Participants said Erdogan played a propaganda video for Republican senators attending Wednesday’s meeting, drawing a rebuke from Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham and others.
                   
Graham said Thursday that he asked Erdogan, “do you want me to get the Kurds to play a video about what your forces have done?”
                   
The lawmakers also told Erdogan that he is risking economic sanctions by going ahead with a new Russian anti-aircraft missile system.
                   
The exchange behind the scenes was far more confrontational than the reception Trump gave Erdogan in public.

…

Several more witnesses scheduled to testify in the House impeachment hearings over the next week are expected to say they too worried about President Donald Trump’s push for Ukraine to investigate Democrats as the U.S. withheld military aid from the country.

What’s ahead on the impeachment schedule:

More witnesses

The House intelligence committee, which is conducting the impeachment hearings, has set a packed schedule of open hearings over the next week.

On Friday, lawmakers will hear from former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who was ousted in May at Trump’s direction. She told lawmakers in a closed-door deposition last month that there was a “concerted campaign” against her as Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani pushed for probes of Democrat Joe Biden and other political opponents.

Eight more witnesses will testify next week, some in back-to-back hearings on the same day. Among them will be Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council official who said he raised concerns in the White House about Trump’s push for investigations; Gordon Sondland, Trump’s European Union ambassador, who spoke to the president about the Ukraine policy; and Fiona Hill, a former Russia adviser to the White House who told lawmakers about national security adviser John Bolton’s concerns about Ukraine.

All witnesses testifying this week and next have already spoken to investigators in closed depositions, some of them for 10 hours or more.

Back behind closed doors

Though those private depositions are largely done, Democrats have scheduled two more for this week — at the same time they are conducting the open hearings.

Democrats have scheduled a closed-door session with David Holmes, the political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, for Friday. An official familiar with the matter said Holmes is the person Taylor referred to in his testimony on Wednesday when he said an aide had overheard a conversation between Sondland and Trump in July about Ukraine conducting investigations.

They have also scheduled a Saturday deposition with Mark Sandy, an official at the Office of Management and Budget. Sandy is one of several OMB officials who have been invited by the committee to appear as lawmakers try to find out more about the military aid that was withheld. So far, none of those officials has shown up for their depositions as Trump has instructed his administration not to cooperate.

While the open hearings are being conducted by the intelligence panel, the closed-door hearings have been held by the intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform committees.

Headed to judiciary

The public hearings are expected to last at least another week. After that, the three committees will submit a report to the Judiciary panel, which will oversee the impeachment process.

Judiciary is expected to hold its own hearings and, eventually, vote on articles of impeachment. Democrats say they are still deciding whether to write them.

Next would come a floor vote, and if articles of impeachment are approved by the House, there would then be a Senate trial.

House Democrats are hoping to finish the process by the end of the year. A Senate trial, if called for, would likely come in 2020.

…

Microsoft is bringing holograms to the office. The company recently started shipping its 2nd version of HoloLens, a headset that allows users to touch and interact with 3D holograms in everyday settings. Various industries have begun experimenting with the new computing device and VOA’s Tina Trinh had a chance to check it out.

…

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services naturalized 833,000 people — an 11-year high in new oaths of citizenship — in fiscal 2019, which ended Sept. 30. This fiscal year, USCIS administered the Oath of Allegiance to 60 of America’s newest citizens, from 51 countries, during a special naturalizing ceremony Tuesday at Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian. Saqib Ul Islam talked to some of the new citizens about how they feel and what they are looking forward to as a U.S. citizen.
 

…

Former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is telling allies that he will join the 2020 presidential race, according to two people familiar with his plans. An official announcement is expected before Friday, the filing deadline for the New Hampshire primary. 
 
His move injects a new layer of uncertainty into the contest less than three months before the first votes. Patrick, a popular two-term Democratic governor with a moderate bearing and close ties to former President Barack Obama, is starting late but with a compelling life story and political resume. 
 
The two people with knowledge of Patrick’s plans spoke to The Associated Press on Wednesday on condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.  

In addition to Patrick, Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of New York City, has taken steps toward launching a last-minute presidential campaign, filing candidate papers in Alabama and Arkansas. 

Uncertainty among Democrats

The moves reflect uncertainty about the direction of the Democratic contest. Joe Biden entered the race as the front-runner and maintains significant support from black voters, whose backing is critical in a Democratic primary. But he’s facing spirited challenges from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, progressives whose calls for fundamental economic change have alarmed moderates and wealthy donors. 
 
Patrick’s candidacy faces a significant hurdle to raise enormous amounts of money quickly and to build an organization in the traditional early voting states that most of his rivals have focused on for the past year. And he’ll have to pivot to the expensive and logistically daunting Super Tuesday contests, when voters in more than a dozen states and territories head to the polls. 
 
Bloomberg’s team has said it will skip the early states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina to focus on the Super Tuesday roster. 
 
If Patrick gains traction, he could pull together multiple Democratic constituencies. A former managing director for Bain Capital, he has close ties to Wall Street donors. And as the first black governor of Massachusetts, Patrick could present himself as a historic boundary breaker who could dent Biden’s support among African Americans.  

Patrick has remained active in politics since his term as governor ended in 2015. 
 
During the 2018 midterm elections, he traveled across the country in support of Democratic candidates, a move that helped raise his national profile. He also campaigned for Doug Jones during Alabama’s contentious 2017 special election for U.S. Senate. 

‘Not for me’
 
By December, however, Patrick cooled to the idea of a White House campaign. 

“After a lot of conversation, reflection and prayer, I’ve decided that a 2020 campaign for president is not for me,” Patrick posted on his Facebook page at the time. He said he and his wife worried that the “cruelty of our elections process would ultimately splash back on people whom Diane and I love, but who hadn’t signed up for the journey.” 
 
For years, Patrick had been on an upward swing in Democratic politics, having served two terms as governor. He was the country’s second black elected governor since Reconstruction. 
 
In 2012, he gave a rousing speech in defense of Obama at the National Democratic Convention, urging fellow party members to “grow a backbone” and fight for their ideals. Obama at the time was being challenged by former Republican Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney — Patrick’s predecessor in the governor’s office. 
 
Patrick grew up in Chicago, Obama’s adopted home. Both men have campaigned for each other. 
 
Patrick has also tried to position himself over the years as slightly more moderate than some on the Democratic left. 
 
After Donald Trump’s election, Patrick’s initial criticism of the Republican president was somewhat less pointed than that from others in his party. He said he was “old-fashioned in the sense that I think nobody should cheer for failure. We need our presidents to succeed,” but said he was particularly concerned about what he described as Trump’s belittling of those with opposing points of view. 

Chides party

Patrick also urged the party at the time to look in the mirror, saying the outcome of the 2016 election was less about Donald Trump winning than Democrats and our nominee letting him do so.'' <br />
 <br />
Last year, some of Patrick's supporters and close advisers launched the Reason to Believe political action committee,a grass-roots organization dedicated to advancing a positive, progressive vision for our nation in 2018 and 2020.” 
 
The PAC held meetups across the country, including in early presidential primary states, and was seen as a possible vehicle to help support a Patrick candidacy. It was formally dissolved earlier this year. 
 
Early in his career, Patrick served as assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Clinton administration and later worked as an executive at Texaco and Coca-Cola. Since leaving the governor’s office, Patrick has worked as a managing director for Bain Capital — a company co-founded by Romney. 

Record as governor

Patrick’s record as governor is mixed. His successes include helping oversee the 2006 health care law signed by Romney that would go on to serve as a blueprint for Obama’s 2010 health law. 
 
Also considered a success was a 2008 initiative pushed by Patrick that committed Massachusetts to spending $1 billion over 10 years to jump-start the state’s life sciences sector. 
 
There were also rough patches, including turmoil at the state Department of Children and Families following the deaths of three children. 
 
Patrick was also forced to publicly apologize for a disastrous effort to transition to the federal health care law during which the state’s website performed so poorly it created a backlog of more than 50,000 paper applications. 

…

The fate of about 800,000 young, undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as children is in the hands of nine U.S. Supreme Court justices. The court will decide if the Trump administration has the right to end the program, called DACA, which protects the young immigrants, known as dreamers, from deportation. For most of them, the United States is the only home they have ever known, and they are protesting losing their protected status. VOA’s Zlatica Hoke reports the U.S. high court heard arguments for both sides on Tuesday.

…

Exiled Bolivian president Evo Morales arrived Tuesday in Mexico, which granted him asylum after he resigned the presidency on Sunday and fled his country.  Mike O’Sullivan reports, Bolivian opposition leaders say they are working to ensure a peaceful transition despite continuing tensions.

…

Seven people are dead after a car bomb detonated outside of government offices in the Afghan capital of Kabul Wednesday.

Officials say seven others were wounded in the bombing, which was centered near the interior ministry headquarters.

So far, there has been no claim of responsibility for the attack, which came a day after the Afghan government released three high-ranking Taliban leaders in exchange for two Westerners, an American and Australian, who have been held hostage by the Islamic insurgent group since 2016. 

…

An airstrike carried out by American forces in eastern Afghanistan has mistakenly killed at least four Afghan soldiers and injured six others.

A provincial police spokesman said the overnight incident occurred in the troubled Logar province during clashes between Afghan security forces and Taliban insurgents.

Shahpoor Ahamadzai told VOA the fighting erupted Monday night after insurgents assaulted a security outpost near the provincial capital of Pul-e-Alam.

The Taliban attack prompted the Afghan National Army (ANA) to call in U.S. air support, which resulted in the “friendly fire” incident, Ahmadzai explained.

A U.S. military spokesman told VOA it was aware of reports an American airstrike conducted in support of Afghan forces may have resulted in ANA casualties.

“U.S. and Afghan forces are working closely together to develop a shared understanding of this event. A joint investigation is ongoing,” the spokesman said.

Separately, the provincial police confirmed a U.S. convoy was struck by a suicide car bomber near a foreign military base just outside Pul-e-Alam.

A U.S. military spokesman confirmed the attack, saying it only killed the assailant driving the vehicle.

“No U.S. or Coalition service members were wounded or killed in the attack. We are investigating the incident,” the spokesman added.

There were no claims of responsible from the Taliban, which often claims attacks against U.S. and NATO forces stationed in Afghanistan.  

…

Exiled Cambodian opposition leader Sam Rainsy said Tuesday the European Union’s assessment of whether to suspend trade privileges for his country will add momentum to efforts to restore democracy despite a government crackdown.

The EU finalized a preliminary report Tuesday that Sam Rainsy said would be the basis for suspending trade privileges for Cambodia. The EU announced earlier this year that it would begin a monitoring process to decide on the ending of preferential duty-free and quota-free imports from the Southeast Asian nation. It said it acted on concerns that Cambodia was limiting human and labor rights.
 
The EU did not immediately make the report public but said it had been sent to the Cambodian authorities.
 
The report comes amid several developments that have shaken the Cambodian political scene.
 
Sam Rainsy made a well-publicized trip in which he vowed to return to his homeland to spark a popular movement to unseat long-serving authoritarian Prime Minister Hun Sen. Cambodia’s government had said he and other exiled colleagues were unwelcome, and managed to hinder them from entering on Saturday, their intended date.
 
However, as Sam Rainsy found himself stuck in Malaysia, a Cambodian court announced Sunday that it was releasing from house arrest Kem Sokha, his co-leader in the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party, who had been detained without trial for more than two years on a treason charge widely seen as specious. It retained the charge against him and barred him from political activity.
 
The release of Kem Sokha suggested that Hun Sen, whose hard line included detaining scores of opposition supporters accused of supporting Sam Rainsy’s return plan, may be seeking to assuage his critics — especially the EU — by projecting an image of compromise.
 
The possibility of the EU junking Cambodia’s trade privileges is perhaps the greatest leverage the opposition holds over the situation, as an economic downturn could erode the support Hun Sen has earned with Cambodia’s economic growth.
 
“If they don’t want Cambodia to face an economic crisis, with hundreds of thousands of workers losing their jobs, they must restore democracy,” Sam Rainsy told a news conference outside Malaysia’s Parliament building after meeting a group of Malaysian lawmakers.
 
The EU initiated its move after Hun Sen’s ruling party won a sweeping victory in 2018 elections. The EU and others said the polls were not free and fair because the Cambodia National Rescue Party — the sole credible opposition force — was dissolved in 2017 by Cambodia’s Supreme Court, which is seen as being under the government’s influence.
 
Sam Rainsy insisted Tuesday that the timing was now right for peaceful resistance to topple Hun Sen’s government due to the “unique combination of internal pressure and external pressure.”
 
Phnom Penh’s release of Kem Sokha from house arrest was an indication of mounting pressure on the government, he said.
 
Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sar Kheng said Sunday on his Facebook page that Sam Rainsy was now allowed to enter Cambodia but would have to face a raft of charges and standing convictions. Sam Rainsy did not say Tuesday when he might make the journey.
 
“I will stay in the region because the situation can change very quickly, and I will go back to Cambodia,” he said.
      

…

One brother is considered a shoo-in for the job of Sri Lanka’s president in elections this weekend and another is eyeing the prime minister’s post when that election becomes due early next year.

Two other brothers are political strategists for their Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna party and one of them is considering a shot at becoming the speaker in parliament. Three men of the family’s next generation are also in politics.

The Rajapaksas, best known for the brutal defeat of separatist Tamil rebels and then drawing Sri Lanka into China’s orbit when the West and India shunned the Indian Ocean island, are back at the centre of the nation’s deeply divisive politics and it is stoking fear.

While there are no formal opinion polls, former defense secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa is the hot favorite to win the presidential election this Saturday. His chief opponent Sajith Premadasa, a government minister, is seen to be trailing.

Gotabaya led the operations against the Tamil Tigers when his elder brother Mahinda Rajapaksa was president. Gotabaya has faced lawsuits in Sri Lanka and in the United States over allegations of staged killings of Tamil separatists, critics and journalists during the war.

Both brothers deny the allegations as part of a Western conspiracy to interfere in the island nation of 22 million that sits astride vital shipping lanes and has long been a tinder-box of tensions between the dominant Sinhalese Buddhists and minority ethnic Tamils.

In recent months, Sinhalese hardliners have also targeted the tiny Muslim community.

Mahinda lost the 2015 presidential election to a Cabinet colleague who turned against him — Maithripala Sirisena. After his ouster, the family’s fortunes fell into decline.

But Easter Sunday bombings on hotels and churches, in which more than 250 people were killed, derailed Sirisena’s presidency, and he has announced he will not contest this year.

The attacks, claimed by Islamic State, have rekindled support for the Rajapaksas and their brand of Sinhalese nationalism.

Mahinda is barred from running for president again, and is on the stump for Gotabaya, bringing an affable touch to the campaign against the rather gruff manner of his brother, more known for his military machismo.

Another brother, Basil, handles the party finances and striking deals with rival groups while a fourth brother and former speaker, Chamal, campaigns in the family borough in the south of the island.

Family prospect

Mahinda, who is currently leader of the opposition in parliament, is the obvious choice for prime minister when parliamentary elections are held early next year, said Keheliya Rambukwella, spokesman for the Gotabaya campaign.

Chamal Rajapaksa would be the choice for parliament speaker, a position he has previously held, political experts say. In all, seven members of the family are involved in politics, and some of the others could also end up in parliament.

“We are going to see family rule again, and all the excesses that came up with it the last time,” said Health Minister Rajitha Senarathne, who is opposed to the Rajapaksas. “They will suppress all dissent.”

In a front page editorial, the state-run Sunday Observer said it was “afraid” of a Gotabaya presidency and appealed to voters to make the “right choice.”

“A wrong choice will send the country hurtling toward authoritarianism and iron-fisted rule,” it said.

Gotabaya’s spokesman dismissed warnings of family rule, saying the candidate was quite clear merit will be only consideration for top political jobs.

“When Gotabaya comes to power he will appoint people with qualification to the positions, irrespective of their ties to him,” Rambukwella said.

On the campaign, Gotabaya has been uncompromising about the need to strengthen security, repeatedly raising the circumstances that led to the Easter Sunday attacks.

At a campaign rally in Wellawaye in central Sri Lanka Gotabaya said during his time as defense secretary, he had raised special military and intelligence units to tackle extremism, drug trafficking networks and the underworld. These cells had since been weakened, he said.

“There can be no higher priority than national security,” he said.

…

Ugandan police said Monday that in an operation around Kampala’s city center, they arrested 120 people suspected to have been using narcotics. However, members of the LGBT community say it was a health meeting that police interrupted.

Patrick Onyango, the Kampala Metropolitan Police spokesperson, tells VOA they received intelligence information that the site of the raid — The Ram Bar — is used as a massage parlor during day and for smoking opium and shisha during the night.

Both products are outlawed in the Tobacco Control Act 2015 and people found guilty of using them are liable for a fine of $130 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months.

“We are charging them under the Tobacco Control Act,” said Onyango. “We have started the process of screening and recording statements from them. There are those we shall give police bonds, students, and those who claim that they are innocent. They were just there for a dance and they were not participating in the smoking.”

At the Central Police Station in Kampala, friends and members of the local LGBT community move around, seemingly worried. Among them is Sean Mugisha a paralegal who is trying to secure bail for the arrested members.

Mugisha tells VOA that Ram Bar is the only safe place that the LGBT community has in Kampala.

“But most importantly it is a center for most outreaches.,” he said. “All these guys who give health care services, when they want to do outreaches for the community, it’s one of those venues that they have been accessing.  So, last night there was an arrest. I consistently got calls. I decided to come and follow up what is here.”

Frank Mugisha, the executive director Sexual Minorities Uganda, says the arrests Monday are based on trumped up charges by the police.

“We don’t know what will happen next. I think we are still looking at the worst. I think its totally aimed at intimidation of the LGBT Community,” he said. “The police is coming up with trumped up charges. I don’t think all 120 people were publicly smoking. So, we are waiting for court tomorrow and see what happens.”

This is the second time in less than a month that Ugandan police have raided a place frequented by members of the LGBT community. Last month 16 members of the LGBT Community were arrested but later released on police bond.

…