Tag Archives: Peril

Statement by Principals of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee – Civilians in Gaza in extreme peril while the world watches on: Ten requirements to avoid an even worse catastrophe – IASC

  1. Statement by Principals of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee – Civilians in Gaza in extreme peril while the world watches on: Ten requirements to avoid an even worse catastrophe IASC
  2. Israel’s war on Gaza live: Gaza Strip now a ‘death zone’, says WHO chief | Israel War on Gaza News Al Jazeera English
  3. Latest Israel-Hamas war news and Gaza conflict updates The Washington Post
  4. Statement by Principals of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC): Civilians in Gaza in extreme peril while the world watches on World Health Organization (WHO)
  5. Gaza has become a ‘death zone’, warns UN health chief UN News

Read original article here

‘Our world is in peril’: At UN, leaders push for solutions

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The world’s problems seized the spotlight Tuesday as the U.N. General Assembly’s yearly meeting of world leaders opened with dire assessments of a planet beset by escalating crises and conflicts that an aging international order seems increasingly ill-equipped to tackle.

After two years when many leaders weighed in by video because of the coronavirus pandemic, now presidents, premiers, monarchs and foreign ministers have gathered almost entirely in person for diplomacy’s premier global event.

But the tone is far from celebratory. Instead, it’s the blare of a tense and worried world.

“We are gridlocked in colossal global dysfunction,” Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said, adding that “our world is in peril — and paralyzed.”

He and others pointed to conflicts ranging from Russia’s six-month-old war in Ukraine to the decades-long dispute between Israel and the Palestinians. Speakers worried about a changing climate, spiking fuel prices, food shortages, economic inequality, migration, disinformation, discrimination, hate speech, public health and more.

Priorities varied, as did prescriptions for curing the humanity’s ills. But in a forum dedicated to the idea of bringing the world together, many leaders sounded a common theme: The globe needs cooperation, dialogue and trust, now more than ever.

“We live in an era of uncertainty and shocks,” Chilean President Gabriel Boric said. “It is clear nowadays that no country, large or small, humble or powerful, can save itself on its own.”

Or, as Guterres put it, “Let’s work as one, as a coalition of the world, as united nations.”

It’s rarely that easy. As Guterres himself noted, geopolitical divisions are undermining the work of the U.N. Security Council, international law, people’s trust in democratic institutions, and most forms of international cooperation.

“The divergence between developed and developing countries, between North and South, between the privileged and the rest, is becoming more dangerous by the day,” the secretary-general said. “It is at the root of the geopolitical tensions and lack of trust that poison every area of global cooperation, from vaccines to sanctions to trade.”

While appeals to preserve large-scale international cooperation — or multilateralism, in diplomatic parlance — abound, so do different ideas about the balance between working together and standing up for oneself, and about whether an “international order” set up after World War II needs reordering.

“We want a multilateralism that is open and respectful of our differences,” Senegalese President Macky Sall said. He added that the U.N. can win all countries’ support only “on the basis of shared ideals, and not local values erected as universal norms.”

After the pandemic forced an entirely virtual meeting in 2020 and a hybrid one last year, delegates reflecting the world’s countries and cultures are once again filling the halls of the United Nations headquarters this week. Before the meeting began, leaders and ministers wearing masks wandered the assembly hall, chatting individually and in groups.

It was a sign that that despite the fragmented state of the international community, the United Nations remains the key gathering place for global leaders. Nearly 150 heads of state and government have signed on to speak during the nearly weeklong “General Debate,” a high number that illustrates the gathering’s distinction as a place to deliver their views and meet privately to discuss various challenges — and, they hope, make some progress.

Guterres made sure to start out by sounding a note of hope. He showed a photo of the first U.N.-chartered ship carrying grain from Ukraine — part of a deal between Ukraine and Russia that the U.N. and Turkey helped broker — to the Horn of Africa, where millions of people are on the edge of famine It is, he said, an example of promise “in a world teeming with turmoil.”

Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine topped the agenda for many speakers.

The conflict has become the largest war in Europe since World War II and has opened fissures among major powers in a way not seen since the Cold War. It also has raised fears of a nuclear catastrophe at a large power plant in Ukraine’s now Russia-occupied southeast.

Meanwhile, the loss of important grain and fertilizer exports from Ukraine and Russia has triggered a food crisis, especially in developing countries, and inflation and a rising cost of living in many nations.

As Jordan’s King Abdullah II noted, well-off countries that are having unfamiliar experiences of scarcity “are discovering a truth that people in developing countries have known for a long time: For countries to thrive, affordable food must get to every family’s table.”

Leaders in many countries are trying to prevent a wider war and restore peace in Europe. Diplomats, though, aren’t expecting any breakthroughs this week.

In an impassioned speech to the assembly, French President Emmanuel Macron said no country can stand on the sidelines in the face of Russia’s aggression. He accused those who remain silent of being “in a way complicit with a new cause of imperialism” that is trampling on the current world order and is making peace impossible.

Slovakian President Zuzana Caputova’s country has long depended on Russia for oil and gas. But Slovakia has provided military aid to neighbor Ukraine, she noted.

“We, the members of the U.N., need to clearly side with victim over aggressor,” she said.

Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro called for an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine, protection of civilians and “the maintenance of all channels of dialogue between the parties.” But he opposed what he called “one-sided or unilateral” Western sanctions, saying they have harmed economic recovery and have threatened human rights of vulnerable populations.

Neither Ukraine nor Russia has yet had its turn to speak. The assembly has agreed to allow Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to speak by video, over objections from Russia and a few of its allies.

Zelenskyy’s speech is expected Wednesday, as is an in-person address from U.S. President Joe Biden. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is due to take the rostrum Saturday.

___

Edith M. Lederer, chief U.N. correspondent for The Associated Press, contributed to this report. For more AP coverage of the U.N. General Assembly, visit https://apnews.com/hub/united-nations-general-assembly

Read original article here

Ukraine claws back some territory; nuclear plant in peril

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Ukrainian forces on Friday claimed new success in their counteroffensive against Russian forces in the country’s east, taking control of a sizeable village and pushing toward an important transport junction. The United States’ top diplomat and the head of NATO noted the advances, but cautioned that the war is likely to drag on for months.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy commended the military for its gains in the east, saying in a nightly video address that Ukrainian troops have reclaimed more than 30 settlements in the Kharkiv region since the start of the counteroffensive there this week.

“We are gradually taking control over more settlements, returning the Ukrainian flag and protection for our people.” Zelenskyy said.

Ukraine’s military said it also launched new attacks on Russian pontoon bridges used to bring supplies across the Dnieper River to Kherson, one of the largest Russian-occupied cities, and the adjacent region. Ukrainian artillery and rocket strikes have left all regular bridges across the river unusable, the military’s southern command said.

Anxiety increased about Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, which was operating in emergency mode Friday for the fifth straight day due to the war. That prompted the head of the U.N. atomic watchdog to call for the establishment of an immediate safety zone around the plant to prevent a nuclear accident.

The six-reactor Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant came under the control of Russian forces early in the war but is being operated by Ukrainian staff. The plant and surrounding areas have been repeatedly hit by shelling that Russia and Ukraine blame on each other. The last power line connecting the plant to the Ukrainian electricity grid was cut Monday, leaving the plant without an outside source of electricity. It is receiving power for its own safety systems from the only reactor — out of six total — that remains operational.

In other advances, the Ukrainian military said it took control of the village of Volokhiv Yar in the Kharkiv region and aimed to advance toward strategically valuable town of Kupiansk, which would cut off Russian forces from key supply routes.

Pro-Russian authorities in the Kupiansk district announced that civilians were being evacuated toward the Russian-held region of Luhansk.

“The initial signs are positive and we see Ukraine making real, demonstrable progress in a deliberate way,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in Brussels, a day after visiting Kyiv.

“But this is likely to go on for some significant period of time,” he said. “There are a huge number of Russian forces in Ukraine and unfortunately, tragically, horrifically, President (Vladimir) Putin has demonstrated that he will throw a lot of people into this at huge cost to Russia.”

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, who met with Blinken, said the war is “entering a critical phase.”

The gains “are modest and only the first successes of the counteroffensive of the Ukrainian army, but they are important both in terms of seizing the military initiative and raising the spirit of Ukrainian soldiers,” Mykola Sunhurovskyi, a military analyst at the Razumkov Center in Kyiv, told The Associated Press.

Energoatom, Ukraine’s state nuclear operator, said Friday that repairs to outside electric lines at the Zaporizhzhia plant are impossible because of the shelling and that operating the plant in what is called an “island” status carries “the risk of violating radiation and fire safety standards.”

“Only the withdrawal of the Russians from the plant and the creation of a security zone around it can normalize the situation at the Zaporizhzhia NPP. Only then will the world be able to exhale,” Petro Kotin, the head of Energoatom, told Ukrainian TV.

Earlier, Kotin told The Associated Press the plant’s only operating reactor “can be stopped completely” at any moment and as a consequence, the only power source would be a diesel generator.

There are 20 generators on site and enough diesel fuel for 10 days. After that, about 200 tons of diesel fuel would be needed daily for the generators, which he said is “impossible” to get while the plant is occupied by Russian forces.

Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Friday that there was little likelihood of reestablishing reliable offsite power lines to the plant.

“This is an unsustainable situation and is becoming increasingly precarious,” Grossi said, calling for an “immediate cessation of all shelling in the entire area” and the establishment of a nuclear safety and security protection zone.

“This is the only way to ensure that we do not face a nuclear accident,” he said.

Fighting continued Friday elsewhere in Ukraine.

Russian planes bombed the hospital in the town of Velika Pysarivka, on the border with Russia, said Dmytro Zhyvytskyi, governor of the Sumy region. He said the building was destroyed and there were an unknown number of casualties.

In the Donetsk region in the east — one of two that Russia declared to be sovereign states at the outset of the war — eight people were killed in the city of Bakhmut over the past day and the city is without water and electricity for the fourth straight day, said governor Pavlo Kyrylenko.

Four people were killed in shelling in the Kharkiv region, two of them in the city of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest, according to governor Oleh Syniehubov. The shelling of the city continued Friday afternoon, Mayor Ihor Terekhov said, wounding 10 people, including three children.

Ukraine this week claimed to have regained control of more than 20 settlements in the Kharkiv region, including the small city of Balakliya. Social media posts showed weeping, smiling Balakliya residents embracing Ukrainian soldiers.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Friday refused to comment on the alleged retaking of Balakliya, redirecting all such questions to the Russian Defense Ministry.

But Vitaly Ganchev, the Russian-installed official in the Kharkiv region, confirmed Friday that “Balakliya, in effect, is not under our control.” Ganchev said “tough battles” were continuing in the city.

Helicopters and fighter jets streaked over the rolling plains of the Donetsk region, with the jets heading toward Izium, near where Ukrainian forces have been carrying out a counteroffensive in the Kharkiv region. The jets fired flares and black smoke billowed in the distance.

Associated Press writer Elena Becatoros in the Donetsk region, Ukraine, and Frank Jordans in Berlin contributed to this report.

___

Follow all AP stories on the war in Ukraine at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine.

Read original article here

Mar-a-Lago search showed legal peril of Trump documents, national security probe

Placeholder while article actions load

As FBI agents pulled up to Donald Trump’s Florida club Monday morning to conduct a search for top-secret government documents — approved by a federal judge and requested by the attorney general of the United States — the former president was by chance already huddled with his lawyers in Trump Tower in New York, a thousand miles to the north.

They were supposed to be preparing Trump to be deposed later in the week in an entirely different matter, a civil probe of Trump’s family business. But the session was interrupted by a phone call informing the former president of the extraordinary events unfolding at his Mar-a-Lago Club, said Ron Fischetti, his New York attorney.

Trump and his close allies quickly became transfixed by the events unfolding in Palm Beach, people familiar with the day said. Some monitored the agents via CCTV security cameras as they searched Trump’s office and personal quarters and a first-floor storage facility, another of his lawyers, Christina Bobb, told Fox News. Distracted, Trump kept jumping on the phone, Fischetti said, trying to figure out why the agents, casually dressed in khakis and polo shirts to cause less of a scene, were roaming the seaside facility he had tried to brand “the winter White House,” which was mostly closed for the summer.

So distressing was the search that the usually loquacious Trump team stayed mum for much of the day — until 6:51 p.m., when Trump himself confirmed the raid in a bombastic statement that declared it unjustified and politically motivated. “They even broke into my safe!” he announced.

The court-authorized search was a remarkable moment even for Trump, who has been under investigation by state and federal prosecutors nearly continuously since he swore the oath of office in 2017. What began as a low-level dispute over the Trump White House’s chaotic and haphazard record-keeping had morphed into a deeply serious probe of whether the ex-president had endangered national security by hoarding highly classified documents, some potentially related to nuclear weapons.

FBI searched Trump’s home to look for nuclear documents and other items, sources say

The past week’s events — which began with the raid and continued with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s rare move Thursday to publicly defend the FBI against partisan criticism and misinformation, take personal responsibility for the search and announce he wanted the warrant unsealed by a court — marked a turning point in the Justice Department’s posture toward Trump.

Garland had vowed to erect a sturdy wall between politics and law enforcement, and he had faced grinding criticism from Trump’s critics that he had been too cautious in holding the former president to account. Now he was the face of a law enforcement action that threatened to further cleave the nation, as some of Trump’s allies likened the FBI’s search to a political persecution more common in a “banana republic” or even under Nazi rule.

For Trump, the episode opened a new chapter in his tormented relationship with legal authorities, confirming that his vulnerabilities expanded beyond the better publicized and ongoing probes into his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his personal business.

According to the search warrant, agents at Mar-a-Lago were seeking evidence of three potential violations of federal statutes: a section of the Espionage Act that makes it a crime to possess or share national defense secrets without authorization, a law against destroying or concealing documents to thwart an investigation, and a law against stealing, destroying or mutilating government records.

Government officials had worried as Trump left office that he presented what experts considered the perfect profile of a security risk: He was a disgruntled former employee, with access to sensitive government secrets, dead set on tearing down what he believed was a deep state out to get him. But Trump had spent years nurturing a growing distrust among his most fervent supporters of the agencies charged with monitoring those risks, the FBI and Justice Department.

Justice Department officials have declined to comment on the documents probe or provide details about its findings, citing general privacy protocols for ongoing investigations. Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich did not address questions for this article but shared a statement attacking “this unprecedented and unnecessary raid,” blaming the Biden administration and accusing the media of “suggestive leaks, anonymous sources and no hard facts.”

Immediately after the search, Trump seemed to believe the FBI had played into his hands. Instead of exhibiting any concern, two people who spoke to him Monday evening both reported that Trump was “upbeat,” convinced the Justice Department had overreached and would cause Republicans to rally to his cause and help him regain the presidency in 2024.

“He feels it’s a political coup for him,” said one friend, who spoke to Trump repeatedly during the week. Like many others interviewed for this article, the person spoke on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the criminal probe.

By Friday, however, the unsealed court records showed agents had seized 11 sets of classified documents, among other things. Republicans’ howls of protest became somewhat more muted, and people around Trump said his buoyant mood at times turned dark.

A simmering investigation

The fight over documents taken from the White House when Trump left office had been brewing for well over a year. “This has been like a pot of water that very slowly simmers, and now it’s making that noise where it hits the hot burner,” said a person involved with the dispute.

In the spring of 2021, the National Archives and Records Administration, the government agency charged by law with maintaining the papers of former presidents, alerted Trump’s team to a problem. In going through materials transferred from the White House in the chaotic final days of Trump’s presidency, officials had noticed that certain high-profile documents were missing. Trump’s correspondence with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that he had termed “love letters.” A National Weather Service map of Hurricane Dorian, which Trump had famously marked up with a black Sharpie pen to extend to Alabama.

Under the Presidential Records Act, the items belonged to the American people. The Archives asked for them back.

People familiar with those initial conversations said Trump was hesitant to return the documents, dragging his feet for months as officials grew peeved and eventually threatened to alert Congress or the Justice Department to his reticence.

On Jan. 17 of this year, Trump relented, allowing a contractor for the Archives to load up 15 boxes at Mar-a-Lago and truck them north to a facility in Maryland. The boxes contained some of the notable items of the Trump presidency that Archives officials had sought.

15 boxes: Inside the long, strange trip of Trump’s classified records

But as Archives officials sifted through the recovered documents, they began to suspect some records were still missing. They also realized some of the returned material was clearly classified, including highly sensitive signals intelligence — intercepted electronic communications such as emails and phone calls of foreign leaders.

All of this raised a distressing possibility: Might there still be classified records tucked away at Trump’s private Florida club?

Although presidents have unrestricted power to declassify America’s secrets, they lose that power as soon as they leave office.

By February, Archives officials had formally referred the matter to the Justice Department.

The agency was already deeply engaged in one of the largest criminal investigations in the nation’s history: a sprawling exploration of the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, inspired by Trump’s rhetoric about his election loss.

Hundreds had been charged with storming the Capitol or helping to plan the insurrection. But Garland was under enormous pressure to also examine Trump’s role in fueling the riot, as well as the campaign by the former president and his advisers to overturn the certified results. Now the attorney general faced a new dilemma: what to do about the missing documents.

Before, During, After: A Washington Post investigation of the Jan. 6 attack

Garland — a former appeals court judge determined to avoid his predecessors’ missteps in politically fraught cases — refused to tip his hand over how the department might treat the 45th president.

“We follow the facts and the law wherever they lead. That’s all I can say,” he told reporters who asked about Trump at an April briefing about an unrelated matter. “It’s our long-standing norm to not comment on ongoing investigations. The best way to undermine investigations is to say things out of court about how they are going.”

In picking Garland, President Biden had insisted he was making a choice that would restore the department’s independence, a marked departure from the Trump administration, in which officials were largely expected to show fealty to the president — and publicly criticized when they didn’t.

“You won’t work for me,” Biden told his nominee. “You are not the President or the Vice President’s lawyers. Your loyalty is not to me. It’s to the law, the Constitution, the people of this nation to guarantee justice.”

Jamie Gorelick, a deputy attorney general under President Bill Clinton who brought Garland on as her chief aide and considers him a personal friend, said she was confident that he was not swayed by the public criticism.

“That would not motivate him one bit,” she said. “He is by the book. He would not take into account politics. He just wouldn’t.”

At first, Archives officials believed the FBI wasn’t taking the documents issue seriously and grew frustrated, according to people familiar with the document dispute.

But agents had interviewed Trump’s current and former advisers, asking them how the boxes taken to Mar-a-Lago were packed, what material was in them, who was responsible for the packing and what might still be at the Florida club, according to a person who was questioned.

“They interviewed almost everyone who worked for him,” a Trump adviser said.

Then, the Justice Department slapped Trump with a grand jury subpoena.

Bobb, a Trump lawyer, said Trump’s legal team embarked on a thorough review of all the presidential material still at Mar-a-Lago, including what she told The Washington Post were two dozen to three dozen boxes of documents held in a storage room on the first floor of the club, below areas open to the public. She told Fox News’s Laura Ingraham that the lawyers had identified all the documents they believed could be considered government property. “We turned over everything that we found,” she said.

But as discussions progressed, some law enforcement officials came to suspect Trump’s representatives were not being truthful at times — and that despite the months of conversations, Trump was still holding on to documents and other items that properly belonged with the Archives.

Guarding national secrets

A Trump adviser said the former president’s reluctance to relinquish the records stems from his belief that many items created during his term — photos, notes, even a model of Air Force One built to show off a new paint job he had commissioned — are now his personal property, despite a law dating to the 1970s that decreed otherwise.

“He gave them what he believed was theirs,” the adviser said.

“He gets his back up every time they asked him for something,” said another Trump adviser. “He didn’t give them the documents because he didn’t want to. He doesn’t like those people. He doesn’t trust those people.”

The Trump search warrant focuses on classified information. What you need to know.

John F. Kelly, Trump’s former chief of staff, said the former president had long exhibited a lack of respect for the strict rules for document handling sacred to the intelligence community, which is in the business of guarding the country’s national security.

“His sense was that the people who are in the intel business are incompetent, and he knew better,” Kelly said. “He didn’t believe in the classification system.”

Former national security adviser John Bolton said “almost nothing would surprise me about what’s in the documents at Mar-a-Lago.” He recalled that Trump would at times ask to keep the highly classified visual aids, pictures, charts and graphs prepared to augment his presidential daily brief, a document presented to him each day about key pressing issues, which he did not typically read.

“People were nervous enough about his lack of concern for classification matters that the briefers typically said, ‘Well, we need to take it back,’ ” Bolton said. “He’d usually give it back — but sometimes he wouldn’t give it back.”

Advisers said they also regularly saw Trump destroy documents, both in the White House and at Mar-a-Lago.

‘He never stopped ripping things up’: Inside Trump’s relentless document destruction habits

Though Trump has styled the Florida facility as a presidential home, and it is secured by the Secret Service, law enforcement knew that it was hardly the kind of hardened government installation suited to house secret documents.

In addition to Trump’s private quarters, the club includes a dining room, pool, tennis courts and spa, all accessible to its several hundred members during the winter months. A ballroom can be booked for weddings, galas and other events. The perils of securing the facility were been made clear in 2019, when a Chinese national, carrying phones and other electronic devices, was arrested after getting past a reception area by saying she was headed to the pool.

In early June, a small knot of federal investigators arrived at Mar-a-Lago to discuss the document issue with Trump’s lawyers. It was clear they believed their mission was serious the team was headed by Jay Bratt, chief of counterintelligence and export control, the division of the Justice Department that leads investigations into leaks of government secrets.

Trump greeted the officials and offered a show of cooperation, said Bobb, who attended the meeting along with another lawyer for the former president, Evan Corcoran. “He pointed to the attorneys there and said, ‘anything they need, make sure they do it,’ ” she told Fox News.

Bobb told The Post that the group toured the storage facility, opening boxes and flipping through the records inside. She said Justice Department officials indicated they did not believe the storage unit was properly secured, so Trump officials added a lock to the facility.

Federal officials also obtained security camera footage of Mar-a-Lago around that time, according to people familiar with the situation.

Trump maintained that his lawyers had established a “very good” rapport with federal investigators. “They could have had whatever they wanted, if we had it,” he said in a statement Friday.

On Sunday, the day before the search, Earl Steinberg went for an hour-long walk with Garland near their homes in suburban Maryland. The two men have been friends since early childhood, rooming together at Harvard University. Steinberg said he was best man at Garland’s wedding.

As they strolled, Garland “showed absolutely no hint that something stressful was about to happen. None. Zero,” Steinberg said. He added that “there is no way” the attorney general would have sought a search warrant “without having major concern about there being something dangerous” in the documents he believed might reside at Mar-a-Lago.

“He is somebody who weighs every potentially relevant consideration,” said Steinberg, who made clear he was speaking generally about Garland’s approach and never discussed the search warrant with him. “He would have considered public reaction, and the fact that this would be viewed as an extreme action that would have required an unassailable justification. That is, if anybody knew the facts he knew, they would have thought it appropriate to do what he did.”

Two days earlier, on Friday, a federal magistrate judge in West Palm Beach had approved the search warrant. That meant the judge had reviewed a sealed filing describing steps taken in the investigation so far and found there was probable cause that evidence of a crime would be located at the 17-acre club property.

When agents arrived Monday morning, Trump’s team scrambled to respond.

“Who’s in Florida?” Corcoran, one of the president’s lawyers, asked others, explaining that the FBI was currently at the former president’s house, a person familiar with the matter said. The team quickly dispatched Bobb, who lives in the Sunshine State and had assisted Rudy Giuliani in questioning the results of the 2020 election, then spent time as a host on the pro-Trump media outlet One America News.

When she arrived, Bobb said, she asked to be allowed to observe the agents, but was refused. Instead, she said, she stood on a driveway in the swampy heat for more than eight hours as the search proceeded.

At 6:19 p.m., Bobb signed off on a three-page receipt describing the records that had been taken away: 11 sets of classified documents, several of them top secret; information about the president of France. At the top of the list was an executive grant of clemency for Roger Stone, a longtime Trump friend and political adviser who was convicted by a jury of seeking to impede a congressional investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

People close to Trump said the search caught them all by surprise, at a time when Trump and his lawyers had been more focused on the New York probe of Trump Organization business practices and state and federal investigations of the efforts to reverse the 2020 election.

Trump and his team quickly began speculating that the FBI had been tipped by a disloyal insider, particularly given how many of his advisers have been interviewed by authorities about the document issue. “There were two days of crazy talk in Trump world about who was the mole, who was the informant,” one adviser said. “Fingers were pointed at all sorts of people.”

Bobb became the face of Trump’s legal pushback, booking time on Fox and other conservative media outlets. But behind the scenes, Trump’s allies initiated a hunt for new attorneys who might be more experienced with the complex battle with the Justice Department they knew was about to begin.

There was a growing realization, in the words of one close adviser, that the former president could be in for a “big fight for a long time.”

It was a familiar predicament for Trump, who has changed lawyers repeatedly since 2016 and has at times had trouble finding high-powered counsel to take up his cause.

Jon Sale, a prominent Florida defense attorney who had been part of the Watergate prosecutorial team, confirmed he was asked this week to represent Trump — and declined. He called the request a “privilege” but said that because of “other professional commitments,” he did not have the time to provide the kind of lawyering he believed Trump will need.

As the week progressed, Trump grew angrier, at times screaming profanities to advisers about the FBI and how they were out to “get him,” people who were in contact with him said.

Many Republicans echoed his outrage, accusing the Justice Department — without providing evidenceof infringing on the rights of a former president and targeting a possible 2024 rival to Biden.

On Wednesday, Trump sat for his deposition before New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), who is probing his pre-presidential business dealings. He cited the Mar-a-Lago search as he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 400 times.

For years, Trump had mocked others who took the Fifth, arguing it was a sign of guilt. “If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” he taunted his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, in 2016. But now he leaned on the FBI’s actions in Florida to change his tune, insisting he was being targeted by prosecutors and therefore should keep his mouth shut.

In the face of Trump’s accusations, the Justice Department at first maintained its traditional silence.

But the temperature was rising on the right, with online message boards filled with Trump supporters pledging violence and even civil war over the FBI’s actions. On Thursday morning, a man in body armor was killed by police after trying unsuccessfully to breach an FBI field office in Cincinnati. He left behind a long trail of posts supporting Trump on the former president’s social media platform, Truth Social, including a “call to arms” issued shortly after Trump revealed the Mar-a-Lago raid.

“Be ready to kill the enemy,” he posted on Tuesday. “Kill [the FBI] on sight.”

With Trump’s lawyers already talking about the search warrant, and many Republicans attacking the FBI’s motives, Garland found a way to stick to Justice Department rules and still defend the FBI and prosecutors. Justice Department lawyers filed court papers seeking to unseal the Trump search warrant. And Garland issued a rare public statement saying he personally had approved the court-authorized search and denounced threats of violence to law enforcement.

In doing so, the often cautious former judge took a major step — staking his reputation on what will likely be the issue that defines his tenure as attorney general.

“Upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly without fear or favor,” he said. “Under my watch, that is precisely what the Justice Department is doing.”

The White House told reporters they learned of Garland’s plan to speak not from the Justice Department, but from news reports.

When released on Friday, the search warrant underscored the seriousness of the FBI search. Agents wrote that they were seeking evidence of violations of three different statutes. A Washington Post report that the FBI was seeking documents related to nuclear weapons had also sent a ripple through Trump’s support network.

The former president kept up a steady stream of angry online statements, mixing outright denials with near-admissions that he had indeed been holding sensitive material about nuclear weapons.

“President Barack Hussein Obama kept 33 million pages of documents, much of them classified,” Trump said in a statement Friday that was quickly debunked by the National Archives, which said it controls all of Obama’s papers.

Trump went on to speculate baselessly: “How many of them pertained to nuclear?” he asked. “Word is, lots!”

Nowhere in the statement did he address whether he had done the same.

Shane Harris, Spencer S. Hsu, Shayna Jacobs, Ellen Nakashima, Tyler Pager, Perry Stein and Cleve R. Wootson Jr. contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Jets’ season already in peril after Zach Wilson’s injury

PHILADELPHIA — All that was ever going to matter for the Jets this season was the quarterback. 

Zach Wilson was all that mattered. Everything revolved around his progress. 

In his second season after a rough rookie year, Wilson was the linchpin to anything the Jets were hoping to accomplish in 2022. 

Sure, there were a few dozen other Jets being evaluated Friday night in their preseason opener against the Eagles at Lincoln Financial Field — a thoroughly-inconsequential 24-21 Jets comeback win. 

But Wilson was the only player who really mattered. 

Everyone was waiting to see at least small signs of improvement from him between Year One and Year Two, and Friday night was poised to provide an early glimpse. 

But now, after the concerning non-contact injury Wilson sustained to his right knee on his ninth play from scrimmage, Wilson’s Year Two may be over before it began — though sources told The Post the Jets are hopeful his injury will only cause him to miss weeks rather than months. 

Nevertheless, a Jets season that already carried with it more questions than an SAT exam is in doubt, if not outright peril. 

Zach Wilson is treated on the field after injuring his knee.
Chris Szagola/CSM/Shutterstock

After the game, head coach Robert Saleh was careful not to be overly optimistic. 

“I’m always concerned until you get the final evaluation,” said Saleh, who added the ACL is still intact based on first tests but said the MRI exam will tell the story. “We’ve walked off the field with very positive thoughts, and it’s been opposite. We’ve walked off the field with bad initial readings and it’s been the opposite. I’m just going to let it play out and we’ll see [Saturday]. 

“I just want to let it all play out and I’ll keep saying my nightly prayers and let’s see what happens.’’ 

Despite the fact that Wilson was in the locker room after the game (but not when reporters were admitted), the Jets inexplicably declined to make him available. 

Last season, when Wilson injured his PCL in a game at New England, he was made available to speak to reporters. Clearly, the fact the team shielded him from reporters was a sure sign that the news is not good. 

“He’s in good spirits. He’s fine,’’ Saleh said, putting on a brave face to it all. “A little frustrated, obviously, but he’s as good as you can be in the situation.’’ 

The Jets’ 2022 season flashed before their disbelieving eyes with 4:02 remaining in the first quarter when Wilson got up limping after a scramble and eventually fell to the turf as team trainers rushed to his aid. 

That kind of sequence — the player able to walk for a moment before realizing the knee is too loose to continue — more often than not signals a torn ACL. 

Robert Saleh watches as Zach Wilson is tended to after injuring his knee.
AP

That would be the worst-case scenario. A Jets case scenario. Here we go again. The Jets are in crisis yet again. 

Wilson had just completed a crisp 10-yard slant pass to Elijah Moore on third down when, on a first-and-10 from the Jets 42-yard line, he was flushed from the pocket to his right by Eagles defenders Tarron Jackson and Jordan Davis. 

He outran both of them and was staring down Eagles rookie linebacker Nakobe Dean in the open field near the right sideline. Instead of just cruising out of bounds to live to play another down, Wilson tried to juke Dean with an inside move to gain a few extra (meaningless) yards. 

Zach Wilson is taken off the field after injuring his knee.
AP

Sometimes, great athletic ability, which Wilson possesses, can be a curse. 

Something bad happened inside his right knee joint when he made that move and Wilson’s night — and possibly his season — was over. 

When Saleh was asked whether Wilson should have simply run out of bounds, he quickly responded, “A hundred percent.’’ 

Within minutes, Twitter was alive with medical experts diagnosing Wilson’s injury after simply watching it on TV. 

Zach Wilson throws a pass during the Jets’ first drive.
USA TODAY Sports

There, too, were armchair general managers flooding social media projecting next-step quarterback ideas for Jets GM Joe Douglas in the event Wilson’s injury is, indeed, season-ending. Jimmy Garoppolo’s name began trending. One snide Twitter jokester even suggested the Jets acquire Sam Darnold for a second go-round in green. 

Asked what the next step is if this is, indeed, season ending, Saleh said: “Can we wait until after we get the MRI results before we start talking about that? I don’t want to put that negative juice in there.’’ 

When asked about 37-year-old backup quarterback Joe Flacco, Saleh said: “You guys know how I feel about Joe. He’s a phenomenal football player. He’s having a great camp and he’s got a lot of juice left in the tank.’’ 

Saleh said before the game the plan was to play Wilson and the rest of the starters for a series or two. 

“If they put together a good first series, we’ll call it a day,’’ Saleh said. “If not, we’ll just go out there and try to get a certain number of plays.’’ 

The first series, of course, was an abject failure with Wilson intercepted on his fifth play from scrimmage. Then Wilson made it through just four plays in second series — possibly the final four plays of his 2022 season. 

Now, the Jets only can hope that isn’t the case.

Read original article here

Uber leak: Company policies and promises put South African drivers in peril

The company enticed drivers in the developing nation with lucrative subsidies, then undermined these workers with policies that made their jobs more perilous, documents in the newly unearthed Uber Files show

(Lucy Naland/Washington Post illustration; Samantha Reinders for The Washington Post; Morne De Klerk/Getty; Uber screenshots; iStock)

CAPE TOWN, South Africa — He had been a cop, a factory worker and a taxi driver, but at 44, Shaun Cupido had yet to find a path to prosperity. Murderous gangs ruled Manenberg, the apartheid-built township where he had spent his whole life, and he was sick of having to remind his three children to lie down and cover their heads every time they heard the pop of bullets.

Then, in 2017, Cupido found a job he thought might finally change his fortunes. Uber promised to let South Africans make their own hours and be their own bosses. He rented a car, began ferrying tourists around Cape Town’s waterfront shopping districts and cliffside resorts, and for a while, the money was good. He started to dream of building his own business operating a fleet of cars for the ride-hailing company.

But little by little, he said, Uber made changes to its service that lowered his pay and raised his risks. The company recruited new drivers to the city, flooding the streets with competitors and cutting Cupido’s daily number of customers in half. Trying to make up the difference, he logged 12-hour days and began driving in the sprawling slums of the Cape Flats, where many drivers were afraid to go.

“Hustling,” as he called it, grew even riskier after Uber began letting passengers in South Africa pay in cash as part of an effort to boost ridership. Cupido heard about drivers getting robbed and attacked, but he trusted his instincts for danger.

He folded a stack of bills inside his wallet and kept working long hours, unaware he was driving straight into an ambush.

In its bid to upend global transportation and make its investors rich, Uber sold drivers like Cupido on a vision of upward mobility. Years later, some drivers say they are worse off than when they started because Uber made policy decisions that deprived them of their ability to earn a living and heightened the risks of driving in some parts of the world.

The Uber Files is a rare look inside years of Uber’s internal deliberations made possible by more than 124,000 records that were obtained by the Guardian and shared with more than 40 news organizations, including The Washington Post. The joint investigation, coordinated by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, provides insights into how the company viewed its drivers.

Read takeaways from the Uber Files investigation

Emails, presentations and text messages from 2013 to 2017 show Uber officials, led by then-chief executive Travis Kalanick, carrying out a business plan that proved to gradually undermine their own drivers. Top executives advised local managers around the world to spend millions of dollars on lucrative incentives for new drivers and then steadily raise Uber’s commission, depriving those drivers of income and increasing the money that flowed to Uber, the documents show.

In public, Uber repeated a message that its service empowered people to become “entrepreneurs.” In private email exchanges, company officials referred to drivers as a mass of “supply” whose low pay and minimal job protections were necessary for Uber to profit.

The documents, taken together with interviews of four former Uber managers and 20 current and former drivers, show that Uber created working conditions it knew would result in many drivers barely scraping by. Uber incentivized more drivers to sign up than were necessary, shrank driver earnings and built a system that rewarded workers for undertaking routes and schedules that put them at risk of harm in locations plagued by violence, the documents and interviews show.

In written responses to questions from The Post, Uber spokesman Gus Glover said drivers have found good economic opportunities using its app, even as their earnings fluctuate “as a normal part of business.” Because drivers may freely choose to work for different app-based services, Glover said, it is “fundamental that we endeavour to create conditions to retain drivers on the platform.”

Glover did not respond to questions about Cupido or any of the specific information contained in the Uber Files.

In a statement, Devon Spurgeon, a spokeswoman for Kalanick, said the Uber co-founder helped pioneer a new business model. “To do this required a change of the status quo, as Uber became a serious competitor in an industry where competition had been historically outlawed,” Spurgeon said. “As a natural and foreseeable result, entrenched industry interests all over the world fought to prevent the much-needed development of the transportation industry.”

She did not answer questions about Uber’s treatment of drivers, its business in South Africa or its rollout of cash payments.

The challenges for drivers are particularly pronounced in countries like South Africa, where extreme levels of unemployment and inequality give Uber access to a deep pool of laborers willing to endure challenging work with few benefits. One in three working-aged South Africans are unemployed — the highest jobless rate in the world among countries tracked by the World Bank.

“The vast majority of workers can’t walk away and go to another job because there is no other job,” said Darcy du Toit, a lawyer and emeritus professor at the University of the Western Cape, who researches labor conditions in the digital economy and helped a group of drivers challenge Uber for worker rights in a South African court.

Uber says it now has 20,000 drivers throughout South Africa, including delivery drivers for Uber Eats. Some say they struggle to make minimum wage, now equivalent to about $1.40 an hour, after sharing a portion of their earnings with Uber and rental car companies, and paying for expenses like gas. Some say they have been robbed by criminals, hassled during periodic government crackdowns against Uber and targeted by rival taxi operators who attack drivers to defend their turf.

In 2016 and 2017, Uber drivers in South Africa were burned when their cars were set on fire, both men victims of suspected attacks by taxi businesses, according to news reports. One died from his injuries, according to the reports.

“The Uber platform became a platform of crime, a platform of fear,” said Derick Ongansie, 66, a former Uber driver who helped organize driver protests and one of the drivers who mounted a legal challenge against the company. “Once you get into that vehicle, you either fear that the traffic cop is going to pull you over and impound your vehicle, or you fear the criminal.”

South Africa is one of the violent-crime capitals of the world, and workers in its volatile transportation sector had been targets of theft and violence long before Uber arrived in the country. The Post did not find data showing Uber caused a rise in crime in South Africa. However, the company’s policy decisions, such as enabling cash payments after previously rejecting the idea as less safe, exposed some workers — including many first-time drivers — to a level of risk they say they had not envisioned.

Stephan Swart, a former manager for Uber in South Africa who says he was briefed on internal management decisions about drivers from 2015 to 2018, said Uber knew requiring drivers to keep cash would make them more vulnerable to robberies. Uber rolled out the policy anyway, he said, because managers believed it would appeal to millions of South Africans who lacked credit or debit cards, boosting rides in the country by as much as 30 percent, and helping Uber compete with other forms of transportation, such as traditional taxis, that accept cash.

Uber did not respond to Swart’s claim but said the company has taken steps to improve driver safety in South Africa, including giving them the ability to reject cash transactions, more upfront information in the app about passenger destinations and a button that drivers can press to call emergency security services.

“Safety is and has always been a top priority for us, and we have invested heavily over the years in technology to help keep drivers and riders safe,” Frans Hiemstra, Uber’s general manager in sub-Saharan Africa, said in an emailed statement.

One night in 2019, Cupido was carrying about 700 South African rand, or roughly $50, when his phone buzzed with the name of his next passenger: Nadine.

Two men got in his car, saying their friend Nadine had ordered the ride. After a short drive, an argument ensued, and one of the passengers bludgeoned him in the head repeatedly with the handle of a knife. As blood streamed down his face, Cupido escaped the car and collapsed in the yard of a woman who saw him and called for help. The two men drove off with his rental car.

Lying in a hospital bed with stitches in his head, Cupido realized he was too scared to ever drive for a living again. He spent a month recovering from his attack, then took the first job he could find, working the graveyard shift at a factory downtown. “I just lost everything,” he said.

Uber, despite promising to help, refused to even pay for the pair of glasses Cupido broke during the attack, he said.

The company declined to answer questions about this incident, but it said all Uber drivers in South Africa are covered under its insurance program, which reimburses drivers for emergency medical treatments and lost earning opportunities.

The Washington Post’s Douglas MacMillan on how Uber undermined drivers in South Africa with policies that made the jobs more perilous. (Video: Douglas MacMillan, Jason Aldag/The Washington Post)

When Uber came to South Africa in 2013, nearly two decades after the end of apartheid, it entered a society still profoundly divided by race, class and the economic prospects of its citizens.

By then, the company had raised over $300 million from investors and begun using that money to recruit an army of drivers in dozens of cities. Uber believed that when it put more cars on the road, it would reduce the average wait time for passengers, thereby generating more dedicated Uber customers.

Uber told some local businesses it aimed to have 10,000 cars on the road in Cape Town, a number some believed the market could not sustain, according to Yazeed Orrie, a former leader of a South African taxi industry council that met with Uber soon after the company arrived in the city.

“We said, ‘No, it’s not going to happen. We’ll all be out of business,’ ” said David Drummond, a taxi business owner and another former member of the industry council. “Instead of doing 10 trips a day, we’ll do one trip a day. It’s not sustainable.”

Uber’s Glover denied that the company stated an intention to bring 10,000 cars to Cape Town when it arrived in the city.

Uber recruited its first drivers in Cape Town, a city of roughly 4 million people, by approaching taxis and offering the drivers cash payments equivalent to roughly $400 to join the app, according to Swart. Cape Town’s earliest Uber drivers were also rewarded with about $4 per trip in driver subsidies, an incentive that managers saw as “aggressive” but necessary to build the city’s initial supply, according to an internal presentation given to Uber’s regional managers in January 2015.

One of the locals who signed on was Ongansie, a former trucker, who became an Uber driver in 2014. “The money was too good,” he said. “We’d do 3,000 rand a day just driving around.” That was about $290 a day before expenses.

Uber has long promised drivers they will make good money. In a 2014 submission to the South African government, part of the Uber Files, the company said it “not only creates more jobs for more people, it creates better paying jobs.” In public statements, Uber executives sometimes pointed to a body of academic research by economists — some affiliated with Uber — whose work showed that Uber helps drivers become more productive and thus make higher hourly wages than traditional taxi drivers.

Another group of independent academic researchers has argued this research often failed to account for one of the company’s key advantages over taxis: a mountain of outside financing it was willing to spend sweetening driver earnings and lowering prices for riders. Over time, Uber pulled back these subsidies, increased its commission and multiplied the number of drivers on the platform — altering the financial picture for drivers who came to rely on the app, documents and interviews show.

“That happened all the time. You’d lure the drivers in with subsidies, and over time you cut back on that,” said one former senior Uber executive interviewed by The Post. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal company matters.

Uber’s Glover told The Post that incentives and referrals are a common way for companies to grow their business. “As the market has matured we have adjusted these incentives accordingly,” he said.

By the end of 2015, Uber had tapered off most subsidies for drivers in South Africa, but new drivers were still signing up in droves, company emails and interviews show. Uber implemented a waiting list for new drivers in the country, which helped it limit the number of cars on the road and the negative impact on driver earnings, said Swart and one other former Uber manager in South Africa, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal company matters.

Citing the strong driver numbers, the pricing team in Uber’s San Francisco headquarters sent emails to regional managers overseeing the Middle East and Africa operations in December 2015, saying it looked like a good time to raise the company’s commission to 25 percent of every ride, up from 20 percent.

The regional managers pushed back, warning that taking from drivers could backfire. These managers argued that “if we push partners to 25% we are putting pressure on [drivers’] earnings and the risk is that this will end up with protests again and union formation around our drivers,” Joanne Kubba, a public policy manager for Uber’s Middle East and Africa operations, wrote in one email.

Kubba declined to answer questions about this exchange.

Uber raised the commission, helping South Africa become one of the company’s most lucrative markets. Despite losing money in its global business for much of its existence, Uber became profitable in Johannesburg 14 months after launching there — its fastest city outside the United States to turn a profit, according to a 2015 management presentation. Another document shows Uber turned a profit in Cape Town by March 2015, within two years of launching.

As Kubba predicted, driver protests became a regular feature of life in Cape Town. Crowds of drivers swarmed Uber’s local offices in the downtown waterfront. But because Uber’s senior leaders refused to raise drivers’ pay, there was little the local managers felt they could do, according to Swart, who at the time oversaw driver recruitment.

Once a year, Swart helped organize “engagement days” for drivers, where Uber served hot dogs and held question-and-answer sessions. “We would do these phony baloney sort of events to prove that we look out for the drivers,” Swart said in a recent interview, his first about his experience at the company. “We would listen to drivers and hear their concerns, but you often felt like, ‘Yes, we hear it, but what can we really do about it?’ ”

Swart now runs Lularides, a start-up helping unemployed South Africans find work at app-based delivery companies.

Glover, the Uber spokesman, said the company regularly meets with drivers to hear their concerns. Driver earnings “are affected by factors such as seasonality and the macroeconomic environment (cost of living, fuel etc),” he said in an email. “We closely monitor these changes and review prices accordingly to ensure that driver economics remain healthy.”

In his third year driving with Uber, Ongansie, the former trucker, says he made about one-third as much in earnings as his first year. After expenses — including gas, insurance, cellphone data and car maintenance — his hourly pay often came out to less than $1 an hour.

Some drivers say they had no choice but to keep driving because they were locked into costly rental car agreements. Uber partnered with WesBank, a local bank that offered financing for car rentals to South African Uber drivers based on the number of kilometers they drove, even when no passenger was inside the vehicle, according to WesBank.

At an event announcing the partnership, Alon Lits, Uber’s then-general manager for sub-Saharan Africa, described the rental agreement as “a stepping stone” for drivers. “It becomes an ecosystem for drivers to work towards self employment and ownership,” he said in a video of the event posted online by WesBank. WesBank later scrapped the partnership because, after Uber began accepting cash payments, many drivers failed to pay off their loans, according to Chris de Kock, who stepped down as chief executive of WesBank in June.

“It could be that the business case for drivers did not allow enough to cover all expenses,” de Kock said in an email, adding that he didn’t remember enough about the specifics of Uber driver earnings, so he “cannot say for sure.”

Glover did not respond to specific questions about the WesBank partnership, but he said Uber has worked with a number of financial institutions to give drivers access to vehicles at affordable rates. “It is important that these financial offers work for drivers, and we have therefore reviewed and changed the offers when they have not,” he said.

Lits, who left Uber in 2020, declined to comment.

Robberies, hijackings, murder

When Elize Faivelowitz’s phone rings, it usually means something bad has happened to an Uber driver in Cape Town.

The owner of Prodriver Placements, an independent business that manages a fleet of Uber cars and a team of drivers, Faivelowitz gets frequent calls informing her that her cars have been impounded by the city, that her drivers have been assaulted or robbed, or, occasionally, something worse.

“This is a dangerous business,” said Faivelowitz, 51. “You will possibly get hijacked, and you can get murdered.”

As ride-hailing became a ubiquitous mode of transportation in South Africa, it also became a source of opportunity for criminals. When gang members in the unruly Cape Flats discovered they could bring a car containing cash to their doorstep with the touch of a button, they began robbing ride-hailing drivers on a daily basis, according to Dail Andrews, a state advocate who this year won the convictions of two gang members of murdering a driver with a brick during a 2019 robbery.

And when Uber cars began siphoning customers from the local industry of minibus taxi operators, those companies launched a campaign of violent intimidation, kidnapping Uber drivers, holding them for ransom, and, in multiple instances, burning ride-hailing cars with the drivers inside, according to news reports and interviews.

Makhosandile Tumana, a spokesman for the South African National Taxi Council, which represents minibus operators, denied that the industry is responsible for any attacks against Uber drivers.

Timothee Nduwimana, a 32-year-old Uber driver in Cape Town, said taxi drivers held him hostage earlier this year when he was picking up passengers during a taxi driver strike. The taxi drivers took Nduwimana from his vehicle and held him somewhere private, he said, warning him they would burn his car if his boss — the person from whom he rented the car — didn’t send the equivalent of about $300.

“They started to slap me. Then, when the boss heard how I was crying, he sent the money,” Nduwimana said.

Uber drivers all over the world have faced vicious attacks. At least 50 workers for app-based ride and food delivery services have been killed in the United States in past five years, according to Gig Workers Rising, a driver advocacy group. In countries including France, Switzerland, Belgium and Portugal, Uber’s executives tried to exploit incidents of violence against drivers in the company’s efforts to publicly discredit the taxi industry, documents show.

Timothee Nduwimana says he has been robbed, forcibly removed and slapped while driving for Uber in Cape Town, South Africa. (Video: Douglas MacMillan/The Washington Post)

In its responses to The Post, Uber acknowledged past mistakes in its treatment of drivers but said no one at the company wanted violence against Uber drivers. In markets such as South Africa and Brazil, where there is a history of violence, Uber developed extra features designed to ensure the safety of riders and drivers, the company said.

Uber declined to comment on Nduwimana’s story or on the Gig Workers Rising report.

Uber leveraged violent attacks against its drivers to pressure politicians

In 2016, Uber began requiring some drivers to accept cash for payment in a few countries including South Africa, where, according to the World Bank, roughly 40 percent of adults lacked credit or debit cards. Two people who were senior executives at the time said the strategy sparked an internal debate about the wisdom of making drivers potential targets of crime in places where robberies were common. Both former Uber executives spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal company matters.

The policy contradicted Uber’s marketing and lobbying messages, which had said for years Uber was safer than traditional taxis because it used no cash. Less than two years before launching cash payments, Uber had even lobbied the South African government to ban cash payments from inside ride-hailing services, according to a draft of the proposed rules Uber executives circulated in October 2014.

“Unlike traditional taxi and charter/shuttle operators who are required to carry large sums of cash, Uber drivers operate on a cashless system and are therefore at far less risk of robbery,” the draft proposal said. Prohibiting cash would “ensure that drivers are safer,” the document said.

Drivers again protested, demanding the company remove cash payments from the app, according to interviews and news reports. In 2017, Uber made cash optional for drivers. But many drivers, including Cupido, continued to use the cash feature, because it helped them find more daily trips and gave them some money to use at the gas pump.

As part of an effort to stop criminals from creating fake, untraceable accounts, Uber in 2017 began requiring all passengers with no credit cards to verify themselves using social media profiles, the company said. But Teresa Munchick, a former Uber driver who helped lead a driver advocacy group in South Africa, said this measure was ineffective, because she and other drivers continued to see riders with obviously fake names.

After Uber launched cash as a payment option in Sao Paulo, Brazil, in 2016, attacks or robberies involving Uber drivers in the city rose tenfold — from an average of 13 a month to 141 a month — according to a Reuters report, which cited data obtained from a public information request.

In his responses, Glover said Uber’s “original model” focused on card payments, but as the business grew, “we introduced cash payments in order to be inclusive and offer mobility options to as many people as possible.”

Uber acknowledged in its most recent annual filing with securities regulators that the use of cash with its services “can increase safety and security risks for Drivers and riders, including potential robbery, assault, violent or fatal attacks, and other criminal acts.” Cash-paid trips accounted for seven percent of all money spent on Uber rides and goods last year, the filing said.

Glover said Uber improved its verification process last year, when it started requiring passengers to upload a photo of themselves the first time they take a trip using cash. Uber declined to comment on the Reuters findings. At the time of the report, the company said it had seen a rise in safety incidents but was unsure whether that was the result of added dangers or the surge in business that resulted from the introduction of cash payments in the country.

A driver uprising is gathering momentum around the globe. Uber drivers are demanding better pay and job protections, arguing the company illegally classified them as independent contractors to avoid giving them benefits. In recent court rulings in Britain, Switzerland and France, drivers have prevailed.

But in South Africa, little has changed. In 2017, the country’s labor tribunal found a group of former Uber drivers were “economically dependent on the ability to drive for Uber” and were therefore Uber employees. But the next year, following a legal challenge by Uber, the ruling was overturned because of a technicality. The drivers had signed contracts with Uber BV, the company’s Netherlands-based holding company, but had lodged their complaint with Uber SA, its South African subsidiary — invalidating the tribunal’s ruling.

“Uber, like other major platforms, litigate with vast resources to defend their business model,” said du Toit, one of the lawyers who worked on the case. “This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for most workers to challenge them in the courts.”

As the coronavirus pandemic dried up tourism and gas prices climbed, many drivers found it even harder to make a living. This March, drivers in Johannesburg and Durban shut off their ride-hailing apps for three days to protest for better pay, calling on ride-hailing companies to reduce their cut to 10 percent. Uber kept its commission unchanged at 25 percent.

An annual study of 12 app-based platforms for drivers and other tradespeople in South Africa by Fairwork, a joint research project of the University of Oxford and the Berlin Social Science Center, found Uber’s treatment of workers ranked lower than that of six other companies operating in the region. Uber, unlike some other companies, did not guarantee workers the local minimum wage, did not provide clear and transparent terms of their employment and did not give them the freedom to collectively bargain.

Glover said Uber increased the cost of fares in December 2021 and again in March 2022 to reflect the rising price of fuel. Uber did not comment on the Fairwork study.

Recently, Cupido returned to the place where he was assaulted, a quiet suburban street where kids played in the yard of a nearby elementary school. For three years, he had replayed the incident in his head, wondering whether he could have done something to avoid the attack and processing the trauma with his wife, his kids and a therapist.

Being there, he said, made the pain come rushing back. “It brings back the agony.”

The threat of gang violence still hangs over Cupido’s community of Manenberg like storm systems. On days when it looks clear, he walks his 13-year-old son home from school. On days when the neighborhood erupts with shooting, he drives to school in his car.

Cupido has given up on his dream of entrepreneurship. He’s resigned to live in Manenberg, working nights at the factory, coaching soccer for the local youth and trying, as best he can, to keep his kids out of danger.

Jessica Contrera, Alice Crites and Aaron C. Davis in Washington, and Joseph Menn in San Francisco contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Elon Musk’s deal to buy Twitter is in peril

Elon Musk’s deal to buy Twitter is in serious jeopardy, three people familiar with the matter say, as Musk’s camp concluded that Twitter’s figures on spam accounts are not verifiable.

Musk’s team has stopped engaging in certain discussions around funding for the $44 billion deal, including with a party named as a likely backer, one of the people said. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the ongoing discussions.

Talks with investors have cooled in recent weeks as Musk’s camp has raised doubts about the recent data “fire hose” — a trove of data sold to corporate customers — they received from Twitter. Musk’s team’s doubts about the spam figures signal they believe they do not have enough information to evaluate Twitter’s prospects as a business, the people said.

Now that Musk’s team has concluded it cannot verify Twitter’s figures on spam accounts, one of the people said, it is expected to take potentially drastic action. The person said it was likely a change in direction from Musk’s team would come soon, though they did not say exactly what they thought that change would be.

The spam accounts are not the only reason Musk might try to wriggle out of the deal. Twitter’s share price has fallen TK% since his takeover bid in April, leading to the impression that he is overpaying. And Musk also runs two other major companies, Tesla and SpaceX, along with some start-ups.

But the terms of the deal mean it wouldn’t be easy for Musk to walk away. The deal carries a $1 billion break up fee. And legal experts expect a giant legal battle if Musk tries to pull out. Twitter, which initially fought Musk’s takeover bid, would be a much weaker company if the deal falls apart than when Musk first bought a stake, and experts expect Twitter to fight to get it done. Twitter could attempt to force Musk to go through with the purchase if his reason for scuttling it is not based on the company’s fundamental business.

Elon Musk lines up growing list of investors to take over Twitter

Twitter accepted a $44 billion takeover offer from Elon Musk on April 25. Why did he want to buy the social media giant? (Video: Hadley Green, Julie Yoon/The Washington Post)

Twitter spokesperson Brian Poliakoff declined to comment, but referred to a statement the company made in June.

“Twitter has and will continue to cooperatively share information with Mr. Musk to consummate the transaction in accordance with the terms of the merger agreement,” Twitter said in the June statement. “We believe this agreement is in the best interest of all shareholders. We intend to close the transaction and enforce the merger agreement at the agreed price and terms.”

In reversal, Twitter plans to comply with Musk’s demands for data

Musk shook up the social media world earlier this year with his unprecedented offer to take the company private, arguing he would be able to grow Twitter and make it more open and, in his mind, politically neutral. He said he would let former president Donald Trump back on the service and argued its content moderation practices infringed on free speech. Musk waived his right to take a deeper look at the company’s finances when he signed the deal.

But soon after, questions arose about whether he would actually follow through. A global sell-off in tech stocks deeply cut into his personal net worth, which he had leveraged to get commitments for the debt he needed to buy Twitter.

At Financial Times Future of the Car summit on May 10, the Tesla CEO said permanently banning then-President Donald Trump from Twitter was “flat-out stupid.” (Video: Financial Times)

Musk’s enthusiasm for following through with the deal has been under question since at least May, when he said the deal was “on hold” until he could ascertain whether Twitter’s claim that fewer than 5 percent of accounts are bots or spam was accurate. He accused Twitter of withholding information, while the company said it was acting in good faith and providing everything the deal’s terms required it to.

“Twitter has not been cooperative,” said a person familiar with the discussions, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the talks.

Focusing on bots plays into Musk’s hand, lowering Twitter’s stock price and potentially helping him force Twitter to renegotiate the deal at a lower price.

The debate over bots on Twitter isn’t new, and has been a big part of the public conversation around the company for years. Musk himself faces many spam bots in replies to his tweets. Twitter has long said around 5 percent of its accounts are bots or spam, while outside researchers have sometimes said the number could be much higher. Because of how quickly the tactics for creating and concealing the nature of fake accounts change, it is difficult for even experts to make strong pronouncements on who is right.

Twitter has been defending its process for measuring unwanted accounts, including in a news briefing on Thursday morning.

Twitter said that every three months, it takes a sample of the “Monetizable Average Daily Users,” the base of users which the company feels comfortable charging advertisers to reach. It analyzes that sample by hand to determine if they are fake or not. It said it has always been comfortable that the total comes under the 5 percent threshold.

Twitter does not ban all bots, which include accounts that post otter pictures on the hour or the temperature in a specific location. Instead, it looks for indicators that suggest fake or coordinated spam activity, such as the mass creation of accounts or coordination among humans to artificially amplify a specific tweet, set of tweets or topic.

The terms of the briefing precluded any of the experts being quoted directly or cited by name.

TK//can you build out the end here with some background about how twitter is in a weaker position now than before April? it apparently announced today that it laid off 1/3 of its talent team. and it has been just chaos for three months now. etc.//

Read original article here

Why Russian Invasion Peril Is Driving Oil Prices Near $100

The threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine is shaking up a fragile global oil market, pushing prices closer to $100 a barrel as traders calculate that supplies will struggle to cushion the effect from any significant disruption in Russian fossil fuel exports.

Demand for oil has outpaced production growth as economies slowly rebound from the worst of the pandemic, leaving the market with a small buffer to mitigate an oil-supply shock. Russia is the world’s third-largest oil producer, and if a conflict in Ukraine leads to a substantial decrease in the flow of Russian barrels to market, it would be perilous for the tight balance between supply and demand.

Those dynamics have led traders in recent days to price in a sizable geopolitical risk premium, according to analysts. Crude oil prices, which haven’t topped $100 a barrel since 2014, jumped to an eight-year high on Ukraine concerns Friday.

Prices fell slightly in early trading Monday, with Brent crude, the global benchmark in energy markets, down 0.3% at $94.07 a barrel but still near its highest level since 2014.

“We are setting up for a period of turbulence,” said Jason Bordoff, founding director of Columbia University’s Center for Global Energy Policy. “The threat is more pronounced when energy markets are tight.”

Concerns about a potential Russian invasion are adding to what has been a volatile stretch for stocks amid concerns about higher inflation and rising bond yields. Russia also is a sizable exporter of other commodities, including wheat, which could impact prices in the event of military conflict, analysts and consultants say.

A sharp rise in prices for natural gas and oil could have ripple effects on the prices of gasoline.



Photo:

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

For now, analysts say a major disruption appears unlikely, as the Biden administration hasn’t signaled that retaliatory measures will include sanctions against Russia’s energy industry. Russia, in turn, relies heavily on revenue from its fossil-fuel exports, making it unlikely to shut the spigot in its own act of retaliation, say analysts.

But the White House has said no punishment is off the table, and war can lead to unpredictable outcomes. The U.S. warned Friday that a Russian military invasion could happen at any moment, with tens of thousands of casualties. Russia, which has massed some 130,000 troops along Ukraine’s borders, denies it intends to invade its neighbor.

The stakes for the rest of the world are high. A sharp rise in prices for natural gas and oil could have ripple effects on the prices of gasoline and many consumer goods, potentially driving inflation higher.

In a press conference, President Biden said the U.S. would stop Nord Stream 2 – a pipeline to transport natural gas from Russia to Germany – if Moscow invades Ukraine. The German chancellor expressed support but didn’t explicitly say the project would be halted. Photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Russia plays an outsize role in global commodity markets. It exports about 5 million barrels a day of crude, roughly 12% of global trade, and around 2.5 million barrels a day of petroleum products, about 10% of global trade, according to investment bank Cowen. About 60% of Russia’s oil exports go to Europe, and another 30% go to China.

The tension over Ukraine comes as the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies including Russia, known collectively as OPEC+, pledged to carefully put more barrels back on the market as demand rebounds, but has fallen short of its oil-production targets.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are the only OPEC+ producers that appear to have significant spare production capacity.



Photo:

Amr Nabil/Associated Press

The group last year agreed to lift output by 400,000 barrels a day each month. But so far it is more than 1 million barrels a day shy of its target, said

Andy Lipow,

an oil analyst and president of Lipow Oil Associates in Houston.

“The market now questions the ability of OPEC+ to restore production to the pre-pandemic levels,” Mr. Lipow said.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are the only two OPEC+ producers that appear to have significant amounts of spare production capacity, Mr. Lipow added.

IHS Markit

expects global oil demand to grow by between 3.8 million barrels and 4 million barrels a day from January to December, with another leg of strong growth expected after the Omicron variant of coronavirus subsides.

Meanwhile, though American frackers are dispatching more drilling rigs in response to high prices, any substantial increase in their oil production is still months away. Shale companies have pledged to limit production growth and return more cash to shareholders, potentially limiting their ability to fill any supply gap. Energy consulting firm Wood Mackenzie last week projected oil production from the contiguous U.S. would increase by 240,000 barrels a day by the end of 2022.

For now, the most likely energy disruption would be to Russia’s exports of natural gas, say analysts. Russia exports around 23 billion cubic feet of gas a day, about 25% of global trade, and 85% of that gas goes to Europe, according to Cowen. In particular, Russia’s flow of natural gas to Europe through a pipeline network in Ukraine could be disrupted during a conflict. The network transports about 4 billion cubic feet a day at full capacity to Europe but is currently flowing at about 50%, according to Cowen.

Russian natural gas flows to Europe have been running lower than usual in recent months. If Russia further reduces natural gas flows to Europe or U.S. sanctions limit them, European companies would struggle to replace the supplies. European gas prices have recently reached records and, as a result, the market already is directing much of the spare supply of liquefied natural gas to Europe. Most operational LNG facilities in the world’s largest exporters—the U.S., Qatar and Australia—are running at full capacity, and there is little new supply to add.

Russia would pay a heavy price if its sale of fossil-fuel exports is reduced. Approximately half of Russia’s federal budget is tied to oil and gas, according to investment bank Raymond James. President Biden said the Russian-built Nord Stream 2 natural-gas pipeline to Germany would be suspended if Russia invades Ukraine, which alone would result in an $11 billion write-down for state-owned energy company

Gazprom,

the bank said.

A reduction of natural gas also could have ripple effects in oil markets as stiff competition and higher prices for gas could force some power plants and others that run on gas to use oil instead, ultimately leading to higher oil prices, say analysts.

Even if the U.S. doesn’t target Russia’s energy industry, other sanctions could still have knock-on effects on commodity markets. Sanctions on financial institutions, for example, may make funding energy operations more difficult, said

Matthew Reed,

an analyst at Washington-based consulting firm Foreign Reports.

Mr. Reed said some are concerned that a second round of sanctions, if the first fails to deter Russia, would directly target energy supplies.

“The real risk here isn’t necessarily the first round of sanctions,” Mr. Reed said. “It’s the second round that comes after, if everyone realizes the first was a waste of time.”

Write to Christopher M. Matthews at christopher.matthews@wsj.com and Collin Eaton at collin.eaton@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Read original article here

‘Peril,’ by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, reports Gen. Mark A. Milley called a Chinese general twice to pledge the US wouldn’t strike – The Washington Post

  1. ‘Peril,’ by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, reports Gen. Mark A. Milley called a Chinese general twice to pledge the US wouldn’t strike The Washington Post
  2. Woodward/Costa book: Worried Trump could ‘go rogue,’ Milley took top-secret action to protect nuclear weapons CNN
  3. Book on Trump Describes General’s Efforts to Reassure China The New York Times
  4. A top US general said ‘I agree with you on everything’ when Nancy Pelosi called Trump ‘crazy’ after the Capitol riot: book Yahoo! Voices
  5. Top General Hatched Secret Plan in Case Trump Went ‘Rogue’ With Nukes, Book Says The Daily Beast
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Lalibela, Ethiopia: UN fears revered Christian and tourist site is in peril

(CNN) — They’re one greatest cultural and religious treasures not only in Ethiopia but also in Africa and in Christendom: the ancient rock-hewn churches of Lalibela.

In a statement released Friday, UNESCO called for “the respect of all relevant obligations under international law in ensuring the protection of … this precious site by refraining from any act that may expose it to damage, and by taking all necessary precautions to prevent any attempts of looting and pillaging cultural properties located in the area.”

UNESCO stated, “Lalibela is a place of pilgrimage, devotion and peace: it should not be a place for instigating violence and conflict.”

History and unusual architecture of Lalibela

The 11 medieval monolithic cave churches of this 13th-century “New Jerusalem” are in a mountainous region in northern Ethiopia, UNESCO said. They joined the World Heritage List in 1978 and are about 645 kilometers (about 400 miles) from the capital of Addis Ababa.

The structures were commissioned by King Lalibela of the Zagwe Dynasty, which ruled much of the country back in the 12th century. Nearly impossible to see at a distance, the impressive feat provided a safe space for Christians to hide from Muslim expansion from the north at the time.
Christianity here goes back many more centuries, though. It dates to the 4th century in this region, and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church is one of the oldest Christian organizations in the world.

The churches were hewn from monolithic blocks below ground level, according to UNESCO. These blocks were further chiseled out, forming windows and doors.

The famous churches have been built in a variety of styles.

Some of them were chiseled into the face of the rock, while others stand as isolated blocks, such as the church of Saint George, constructed in the shape of the cross.

A complex and extensive system of drainage ditches, tunnels and subterranean passageways connects the underground structures.

Following the faithful

In 2016, photographer Tariq Zaidi followed the pilgrim route in and around Lalibela.

He recalled the majesty of the architecture and beauty of the region, but most of all its people.

“They’re very poor, very humble,” he told CNN then. “They come for the pilgrimage hopefully once in their life if they can afford it. Many people have walked across the country, with almost nothing with them.”

Zaidi described the local community coming out to help pilgrims, feeding them and even helping to wash their feet.

“It’s very beautiful, poetic — even romantic — in a way very few things in our world are,” Zaidi said. “They all support each other.”

CNN’s Sara Dean and Forrest Brown contributed from current reporting, and Errol Barnett and Thomas Page contributed from previous CNN Travel articles.

Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site