Connect with us

AFRICA

Cohen Pleads Guilty to Fresh Charges and Promises to Work with Mueller on Russian Probe

Published

on

On November 29th, Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former lawyer, pleaded guilty to new charges that he lied about a real-estate deal involving Trump and the Russians back in 2016.

In August, Cohen already pleaded guilty to eight federal charges. The main allegation concerned his payments to two women at Trump’s direction in order to silence them. Back then, he admitted that such payments were illegal and violated campaign finance laws, implicating Trump in his statements. Unrelatedly, he also provided falsified information when applying for bank loans and lied to the government to evade paying taxes.

Cohen’s latest confession put Trump in further disadvantages. He not only claimed that Trump was more involved in a hotel deal in Moscow than he had previously admitted, but also promised to work with Mueller in the Russian probe. No longer want to keep quiet in exchange for a potential presidential pardon, Cohen essentially begged judges not to lock him up.

In his legal filings, his father Maurice Cohen, an 83-year-old Holocaust survivor, tried to invoke sympathy for the disgraced lawyer. According to Maurice, Michael Cohen was “the oxygen in the air that [he] breathe[s].”

“I pray and beg, beg and pray that you won’t take my oxygen away from me,” said the distressed father.

The new development in Cohen’s case shed light on the Trump Organization’s role in a real-estate project in Moscow, a case crucial to Mueller’s ongoing Russia investigation.

In June 2016, Cohen and Felix Sater, Trump’s Russian-born business partner, had a conversation on how to gain Moscow’s approval for the project. After briefing members of the Trump Organization about his interaction with Sater, Cohen discussed the matter with Trump himself at least three times. He also tried to get Trump to travel with him to Russia to advance the project.

In May 2016, when Sater inquired when Trump and Cohen’s Russian trip would take place, Cohen replied that it would happen “once [Trump] becomes the nominee after the convention.” Yet eventually, Cohen decided not to go. He emphasized that ” I did not in fact travel there, nor have I ever been to Russia.”

Cohen admitted that he had attempted to downplay Trump’s role in the project, including their discussions on the subject and Trump’s intention to go to Russia.

“I made the statements to be consistent with Individual 1’s political messaging and to be loyal to Individual 1,” Cohen said in his federal court statement, with individual 1 referring to President Trump. Yet he did not say that he lied because Trump told him to.

Special counsel prosecutor L. Rush Atkinson also emphasized another three lies Cohen had made in front of Congress in order to conceal the true nature of the Moscow project.

First, while he told the Senate and House Intelligence Committee in August 2017 that the project was abandoned in January 2016—“before the Iowa caucus and months before the very first primary”—in fact the project continued until June 2016.

Second, Cohen falsely claimed that he had never spoken to any Russian government employee on the Moscow project. However, it was found that he had had a 20-minute phone conversation with Vladimir Putin’s press secretary in January 2016.

Lastly, in October 2017, Cohen again lied to “give the false impression that the Moscow Project ended before ‘the Iowa caucus and … the very first primary,’ in hopes of limiting the ongoing Russia investigation.” On the same occasion, he denied ever agreeing to take the Russian trip with Trump when he indeed made plans to do so. “This was solely a real estate deal and nothing more. I was doing my job,” he claimed back then.

Trump did not hesitate to respond to Cohen’s latest statements.

“He’s a weak person,” Trump said. “He was convicted with a fairly long-term sentence with things unrelated to the Trump Organization…What he’s trying to do is get a reduced sentence.”

Moscow also gave its input to the case. Putin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told AP that Cohen had contacted the Russian government about the proposed hotel although they never actually carried out the project. “We told them that the presidential administration isn’t involved in construction projects, and if they are interested in making investments we will be glad to see them at St. Petersburg’s economic forum,” said Peskov.

Featured image via AP

AFRICA

The UK paid Rwanda an additional $126 million for the contested migrant plan.

Published

on

As the tab for Britain’s controversial proposal to relocate asylum seekers to the East African nation continues to increase, the United Kingdom paid Rwanda an extra 100 million pounds ($126 million) in April. This was in addition to the 140 million pounds it had already provided Rwanda.

Even though the Rwanda project is at the core of the policy that British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is employing to discourage illegal immigration, there have been no individuals sent to Rwanda as of yet due to legal challenges that have taken place since the initiative was introduced in 2022.

After Sunak’s immigration minister resigned this week, the polarizing policy is now regarded as a danger to Sunak’s leadership, which is anticipated to be challenged in the election that will take place the following year.

According to a letter that the British Ministry of the Interior issued on Thursday, the United Kingdom plans to give Rwanda fifty million pounds in addition to the 240 million pounds it has already provided to the East African nation.

The opposition Labour Party criticized the disclosures regarding the rising cost of a scheme that legal experts warned could collapse. Some parliamentarians within Sunak’s party are also expected to express their disapproval of the idea.

A statement by Yvette Cooper, the shadow interior minister for the Labour Party, on social networking site X, said, “Britain cannot afford more of this costly Tory chaos and farce.”

On Friday, however, the newly appointed minister for legal migration, Tom Pursglove, explained what he called the “investment” of 240 million pounds. He stated that once the Rwanda policy was operational, it would reduce the money spent on hosting asylum-seekers in the United Kingdom.

“When you consider that we are unacceptably spending 8 million pounds a day in the asylum system at the moment, it is a key part of our strategy to bring those costs down,” Pursglove explained to Sky News.

Pursglove stated that the money donated to Rwanda would assist in the country’s economic growth and help get the asylum relationship with the United Kingdom up and running.

There was no connection between the money sent to Rwanda and the treaty that the two nations signed on Tuesday, according to the letter from the Ministry of the Interior.

The treaty aims to respond to a ruling by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, which stated that the deportation plan would contravene local laws based on international human rights standards.

“The Government of Rwanda did not ask for any payment in order for a Treaty to be signed, nor was any offered,” according to the correspondence.

After Robert Jenrick resigned from his position as immigration minister on Wednesday, Sunak made a plea to fellow Conservative parliamentarians on Thursday to come together in support of his Rwanda proposal. He stated that the emergency legislation the government had drafted to get the scheme up and running did not go far enough.

Continue Reading

AFRICA

UK interior minister travels to Rwanda to resurrect asylum plan.

Published

on

On Tuesday, the Minister of the Interior of the United Kingdom, James Cleverly, came to Rwanda to sign a new treaty. This was done to circumvent a court judgment that blocked the government’s contentious policy of transferring asylum seekers to the East African nation.

The Rwandan plan is at the core of the government’s attempt to reduce migration, and it is being closely monitored by other nations who are considered to be considering policies that are comparable to Rwanda’s.

In a decision handed down a month ago, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom stated that such a move would violate international human rights norms embedded in domestic legislation.

Following the decision, the United Kingdom has been making efforts to revise its agreement with Rwanda to incorporate a legally binding treaty that guarantees Rwanda would not remove asylum seekers brought there by the United Kingdom. This is one of the primary concerns of the court.

Several attorneys and charitable organizations have said that it is highly improbable that deportation flights will begin before the election. With a lead of more than ten percentage points in the polls, the opposition Labour Party intends to abandon the Rwanda policy if it is victorious.

A meeting between Cleverly, who arrived in Kigali, the capital of Rwanda, on Tuesday morning, and Vincent Biruta, the country’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, is scheduled to take place to sign the agreement.

“Rwanda cares deeply about the rights of refugees, and I look forward to meeting with counterparts to sign this agreement and further discuss how we work together to tackle the global challenge of illegal migration,” Cleverly says.

The United Kingdom aims to transfer thousands of asylum seekers who came to its beaches without authorization to Rwanda under the plan that was agreed upon the previous year. This discourages migrants from crossing the Channel from Europe in tiny boats.

In exchange, Rwanda has been given an initial payment of 140 million pounds, equivalent to 180 million dollars, along with the promise of additional funds to cover the costs of housing and medical treatment for any deported persons.

THE PRESSURE
A great deal of pressure is being put on Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to reduce net migration, which reached a record high of 745 thousand people in the previous year, with the vast majority of migrants entering through legal channels.

“Stop the boats” is one of the five goals that Sunak has set for his government. The influx of asylum seekers who pay people smugglers for their crossings of the Channel, which frequently take place in boats that are overloaded and not seaworthy, is one of the aims that Sunak has set.

The Supreme Court determined that the Rwanda plan should not be implemented because there was a possibility that refugees who were deported would have their claims incorrectly evaluated or that they would be sent back to their country of origin to suffer persecution.

In the latter part of this week, it is anticipated that the new treaty will be followed by the release of legislation declaring Rwanda a so-called safe nation. This law is intended to prevent legal challenges against the planned deportation flights.

Despite this, this will probably result in a fresh set of political and legal difficulties.

An immigration attorney at Harbottle & Lewis named Sarah Gogan stated that the government’s policy will be challenged due to Rwanda’s history of violations of human rights provisions.

“Rwanda is an unsafe country and this is not a quick fix,” added the politician. “You cannot in a matter of weeks or months reform a country and turn it into one with an impartial judiciary and administrative culture.”

Another “gimmick” was what Yvette Cooper, the spokesperson for the Labour Party’s home affairs department, called the most recent measures proposed by the administration.

Whether or not to design the law in a way that would avoid subsequent legal challenges is still up for debate by the administration.

Several members of the Conservative Party in parliament are putting pressure on the government to incorporate a “notwithstanding” clause into Rwanda’s policy. This clause would disapprove the domestic and international human rights commitments of the United Kingdom regarding Rwanda.

However, some politicians within the ruling party, such as Robert Buckland, have stated that such a move would be “foolish” and undermine the Good Friday Agreement, which is primarily responsible for ending three decades of carnage in Northern Ireland. This is because the European Convention on Human Rights supports the treaty.

Continue Reading

AFRICA

Madagascar leader wins presidential vote, constitutional court says

Published

on

On Friday, the High Constitutional Court of Madagascar certified Andry Rajoelina, the current President of Madagascar, to be the victor of the election a month ago, essentially granting him a third term in office.

Following the dismissal of several challenges submitted against the preliminary results by the electoral board, the court said that Rajoelina collected 58.96% of the votes that were cast.

Florent Rakotoarisoa, the chairman of the High constitutional court, stated that “Andry Rajoelina is elected as the president of the republic of Madagascar and is taking his functions as soon as the swearing (is conducted) comes to an end.”

The rejected challenge was submitted by the politician Siteny Randrianasoloniaiko, who received 14.39% of the vote, according to the court. This was one of the challenges that was denied.

Ten of the thirteen candidates chose not to participate in the election; nevertheless, their names were already on the ballot, so they could still divide the remaining votes. The court reported that the turnout was 46.35 percent.

The election on November 16 was preceded by weeks of demonstrations, during which the opposition accused Rajoelina of having fostered conditions that were unjust to the election.

The charges that the vote was rigged have been refuted by Rajoelina, and the army has issued a warning against any attempts to destabilize the country.

As far as the opposition is concerned, the voter turnout for the election was the lowest it has ever been in the country’s history.

Hajo Andrianainarivelo, a former minister who was one of the candidates who chose to abstain from voting, has committed to fight against what he has described as a lack of respect for the rules of the state and the tyranny of the people.

“The popular fight begins now,” he declared on Thursday referring to the ongoing conflict.

Rajoelina, now 49 years old, initially won power in a coup in 2009. After resigning from his position as the head of a transitional authority in 2014, he went on to win another election in 2018 and regain his position as president.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending