Donald Trump claims he will be arrested Tuesday in Manhattan probe, calls for protests

USA Today

Donald Trump claims he will be arrested Tuesday in Manhattan probe, calls for protests

Ella Lee, Josh Meyer, David Jackson and Kevin Johnson – March 18, 2023

Former U.S. President Donald Trump leaves the stage after speaking during an event at his Mar-a-Lago home

Former President Donald Trump said he expects to be arrested Tuesday in connection with a Manhattan district attorney investigation and called on his supporters to protest, even as uncertainty remained about whether any legal action was actually imminent.

Trump’s advisers Tuesday made clear they had no specific knowledge of the timing of any possible indictment, even as the former president made the comments on Truth Social, the social media network he founded.

Trump is under investigation for a $130,000 payment he made just before the 2016 election to silence adult film star Stormy Daniels about an earlier affair. The former president has denied wrongdoing, and federal investigators ended their own inquiry into the payments in 2019.

An indictment of Trump would send the U.S. political world into unprecedented territory – not just the first indictment of a former president, but one who is in the midst of again running for the White House. And his calls for protest also echoed similar statements by the former president ahead of Jan. 6.

Trump attorney Joe Tacopina confirmed that Trump’s reference to the timing of any possible charge is not based on any contact from Manhattan district attorney’s office.

“No one tells us anything, which is very frustrating,” Tacopina said in an email to USA Today. “President Trump is basing his response on press reports, and the fact that this is a political prosecution and the DA leaks things to the press instead of communicating to the lawyers as they should.”

Danielle Filson, a spokesperson for Manhattan’s District Attorney’s office, declined to comment on the former president’s statement.

Testimony from former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, who arranged for the payment and already has been convicted and served prison time, could help bring the first charges in history against a former president.

On Truth Social Saturday, Trump urged his supporters to “Protest, take our nation back!”

“The far & away leading Republican candidate & former president of the United States of America, will be arrested on Tuesday of next week,” he wrote in all caps.

A Trump spokesperson speaking on background told USA TODAY that there has been “no notification” of a possible Trump indictment other than news media reports and “leaks from the Justice Dept. and the DA’s office.”

Manhattan prosecutors on Wednesday met with Daniels. She thanked her attorney in a tweet for “helping me in our continuing fight for truth and justice.”

Laurence Tribe, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, said Trump’s looming indictment in New York is uncharted waters.

“There really is no precedent for indicting a former president,” Tribe said. “It’s anyone’s guess exactly what would happen.”

Experts say Trump arrest unlikely

Trump says he’ll still run for president again if he’s indicted in any of the current investigations into his conduct. His first rally of the 2024 presidential race is scheduled for March 25 in Waco, Texas.

An indictment is not the same as an arrest; it’s a formal charge of a crime, while an arrest is when a person is taken into custody. An arrest of Trump is not likely, said former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti.

“Typically defendants are not arrested in cases like this one when they’re represented by counsel,” he said.

Barbara McQuade, a former federal prosecutor and University of Michigan law professor, said a self-surrender is more likely in cases like Trump’s.

“Unless he is a risk of flight or danger to the community, self surrender seems typical in this kind of case,” she said. “He would be booked and have his fingerprints and mugshot taken, and then likely released on bond.”

Tribe said it’s likely that Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg will offer Trump a more anonymous way to turn himself in, though it’s unlikely the former president would accept such routes.

“I’m sure he wishes there were an escalator he could descend in order to self-surrender,” he said. “It’s his standard technique to turn everything into publicity, and they will undoubtedly raise a lot of money surrounding his self-surrender.”

Trump’s call for protests raise concerns

While Trump’s spokesperson acknowledged there has been “no notification” related to the timing of possible criminal charges, the former president’s call for protests drew the concern of law enforcement involved in preparing for such an event.

The appeal for demonstrations, said one official familiar with the arrangements, may immediately require a larger security footprint in New York and more agents assigned to shadow the movements of the former president.

The official, who is not authorized to comment publicly on the matter, also was not aware of a definitive time for any possible prosecution announcement.

Cohen, the former Trump lawyer who testified against him, said Trump’s call to action for his supporters echoes those ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack.

“Donald’s post is eerily similar to his battle cry prior to the January 6th insurrection; including calling for protest,” Cohen told USA TODAY. “By doing so, Donald is hoping to rile his base, witness another violent clash on his behalf and profit from it by soliciting contributions.”

With Trump facing possible criminal charges, W. Ralph Basham, a former Secret Service director, said the prospect raises unprecedented questions for the Secret Service and the boundaries of the agency’s obligation to provide lifetime protection for the former president. Basham, who served during the George H.W. Bush administration, said he was unaware of any provision that would allow the agency to drop its protection obligation, even if a protectee was sentenced to a prison term. “We are in uncharted territory here,” Basham said. “I’m sure the attorneys are scrambling to find answers to those questions.”

“I’m not aware of anything… that would preclude them (Secret Service agents) from escorting a former president to a detention center in the event of a conviction and prison sentence,” Basham said, adding that the agency would then have to consider “establishing a presence” at a detention center for the duration of any sentence. “I just don’t know,” he said. “The lawyers are going to have to figure this out.”

Meet Michael Cohen: Who is the liar and felon who might help convict his former boss, Donald Trump?

Trump being treated ‘like an ordinary citizen’

While a future Trump indictment would be historic, perhaps even greater in significance is that the justice system is working as it should, Tribe said.

“He’s being treated the way he should be treated, like an ordinary citizen,” he said. “Having a mugshot being fingerprinted, having to stand in front of a judge and answer, ‘Do you plead guilty or not guilty?’

“The same thing happens to other ordinary citizens,” he continued.

I moved to Alabama To Fight Trump. I Thought It’d Be Temporary — Here’s Why I Decided To Stay.

HuffPost

I Moved To Alabama To Fight Trump. I Thought It’d Be Temporary — Here’s Why I Decided To Stay.

Ellen Gomory – March 18, 2023

The author at The Nick, a local bar, in Birmingham, Alabama.
The author at The Nick, a local bar, in Birmingham, Alabama.

In July of 2018, I arrived in Huntsville, Alabama, sight unseen.

My 2009 Honda Accord was packed to the brim with the contents of my Bushwick, New York, apartment, which had started to feel like a distant memory somewhere in the rolling, monotonous beauty of the Smokies. The trunk held garbage bags stuffed with clothing and liquor boxes filled with books. In the backseat was bedding, framed art and a coffee table my uncle made in the 1980s. My plan was to stay for five months ― through the end of the midterm elections ― and then return to the life I had been living in Brooklyn for the better part of a decade.

I had only been down to Alabama once before, several months prior, to volunteer at the Equal Justice Initiative’s opening of its museum dedicated to victims of lynching. It was there that I met Alabama’s Democratic House minority leader, who offered me a job working on the midterms. It was also there, in the Red Roof Inn on Zelda Road, that I picked up a mean case of bedbugs, which left itchy welts across my face and arms that took weeks to disappear.

Now I was headed to meet Alice, a volunteer on the campaign who had offered to put me up for a few nights and rent me an apartment at one of the properties she owned in downtown Huntsville. The rent was $400 per month for a large one bedroom ― less than half of what I had paid for my portion of the dilapidated two-bedroom I’d been renting in Brooklyn.

Alice and her wife lived about 20 minutes outside of Huntsville in Harvest, an unincorporated rural community. Driving around Huntsville, which I had been told would soon be the largest city in Alabama, I wondered Where’s the city part? The sight of cotton fields sent chills down my spine, and by the time I arrived at Alice’s, I was fundamentally questioning my decision to move.

I was not a professional campaign worker. In fact, this was my first job in politics. Until Donald Trump was elected president in 2016, I had been working in book publishing, teaching yoga and generally enjoying the many privileges that my whiteness allowed me. Like so many New York City liberals, that election had been a wakeup call, and I’d committed myself to doing more, to educating myself, to fighting for the rights I’d naively thought were guaranteed.

I’d read myriad think pieces about how we needed to spend more time in those parts of the country that had voted for Trump. But if Hillary Clinton couldn’t even be bothered to go to Wisconsin, did I really need to uproot my life and move to Alabama?

The scene in Harvest, Alabama, outside of Huntsville.
The scene in Harvest, Alabama, outside of Huntsville.

Growing up in New Jersey, I knew about as much about the South as I did about Timbuktu. When I applied to Tulane University, my grandmother, a die-hard New Yorker, said without a hint of sarcasm, “But you know you can’t get a decent education below the Mason-Dixon line.” The bedbugs were surprising to no one ― my decision to move was a shock.

With some trepidation, I let myself into Alice’s house using her keypad and waited for her to come home. The campaign was in full swing, so I occupied the afternoon with calls, fundraising emails and drafting the paperwork for a 501(c)3 tax-exempt organization.

When Alice arrived, we greeted each other cautiously. We’d spoken many times on the phone, mostly about campaign-related business, and her low voice, thick accent and easy demeanor immediately put me at ease. She was understandably more skeptical of me. What was a girl from New Jersey with no prior work experience in politics doing down here in Alabama?

Over dinner and bourbon, we got to know each other. I told her about my family, the guy I was dating and my desire to find more meaningful work. Alice shared her struggle to lift herself out of rural poverty and become the vice president of a major tech company, and the difficulties she’d faced in coming out. We began to develop a friendship.

As part of my Alabama education, Alice pulled out a white board to explain the state’s deepest political divide. On one side she wrote “Alabama.” On the other side she wrote “Auburn,” with a line dividing the two. Under Alabama, she wrote “Roll Tide”; under Auburn, “War Eagle.”

“I don’t get it,” I said. “Why is one team called ‘Alabama’ if both teams are in Alabama? And why is Auburn’s chant ‘War Eagle’ if their mascot is the tigers?”

Alice looked at me like I had two heads.

“What’s not to get?” She asked. “I think you’ve had too much bourbon.”

Football as religion was just one of many cultural discoveries I made over those first months in Alabama, the majority of which could be easily packaged into an early-aughts rom-com. Meat and three’s, Jason Isbell and chatting with people in line at the grocery store were all foreign concepts, and I reveled in their discovery. Well, everything except football.

Alice was my first friend, but I quickly made more, and before long Alabama began to feel like home.

The author on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, where voting rights protesters marched on Bloody Sunday in 1965.
The author on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, where voting rights protesters marched on Bloody Sunday in 1965.

The campaign was busy, but the work felt meaningful. We hoped to capitalize on Doug Jones’ historic Senate win and break the Republican supermajority in the state house ahead of the census and redistricting. Since state lawmakers are responsible for drawing up voting districts, it was crucial that we win in districts across the state where Democrats had not only lost but in many cases had not even run a candidate for many years. Given the state’s history of civil rights organizing and voter suppression, the task felt especially vital.

During the campaign, I visited New York frequently, on both personal and fundraising trips. Each time I came up, I was surprised by how little I missed the city and how eager I was to return to Alabama. The energy and schlep of the city that had energized me throughout my 20s felt draining, and the disdain with which so many Northeasterners treated my new home felt frustrating.

At a fundraising event in lower Manhattan, I told the host about my recent move. He simply responded, “I’m sorry.”

Almost no one I knew had ever visited Alabama, and most seemed to think that the state was populated by illiterate Trump supporters who didn’t wear shoes.  The grace that well-meaning liberals offered the Midwest did not extend to a state whose reputation had been solidified during the civil rights movement. Most people I spoke with still associated Alabama with Gov. George Wallace’s proclamation of “segregation forever” and Bull Connor’s assault on peaceful protesters with dogs and fire hoses.

Though Alabama’s brutal, racist history is very much alive and undeniably woven into the fabric of the state, it is far from unique to Alabama. I was consistently surprised by the smugness with which Northeasterners talked about Alabama without any apparent awareness of our own region’s history of racism or, more strikingly, the state’s equally potent history of activism. In sneering at the state as a whole, people seemed not to realize that they were also sneering at activists, organizers and everyday people working to make the best with what little resources they might have.

The joke that Alabamians are shoeless and illiterate is much less funny when you consider the state’s history of racism and lack of job opportunities or public school funding.

Yard signs at one of Sen. Doug Jones’ COVID-19 drive-in rallies.
Yard signs at one of Sen. Doug Jones’ COVID-19 drive-in rallies.

Following a brutal midterm loss, I decided to stay in Alabama and work for the state House Democratic Caucus. When the session ended, I went to work for Terri Sewell, our sole Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives, and then on Doug Jones’ second Senate race. I moved to Birmingham, fell in love and bought a house. I got engaged, started teaching yoga again and completed a master’s program in journalism at the University of Alabama. Before long, 4½ years had passed and I had built a life for myself.

To my friends and family up North, my decision to stay was even more confusing than my initial decision to leave. Then, I had been on a mission with a clear goal and end date. Now, I was just… living?

Gradually, more friends and family came down to visit and started to understand the appeal. The pace down here is slower, the food is excellent and history is everywhere. Politically and culturally, the state is still deeply conservative, but I found a group of friends (largely through political work) whose progressive ideals align with my own. We joke that the only time Alabama makes positive national news is for football, but within challenge and struggle, there is also beauty and culture. Social justice and equity work become more potent in the face of clear and vocal enemies.

As a country, we are still mired in the work of consensus building. We are still deeply and fundamentally divided. Partially, I believe the issue is one of exposure. The echo chambers of social media and online news are further isolating and entrenching people in their beliefs and, despite the commitments many of us made to understanding those with opposing viewpoints, it’s easier to hand-wring with likeminded friends.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) recently made headlines for proposing a “national divorce” between red and blue states. Though pundits were quick to ridicule her, it’s a sentiment I’ve often heard in casual conversation with Northern friends on the left. “If the South is going to hold us back from meaningful climate and social progress, why not just let them secede?”

The answer, in simple terms, is that separation hurts those with the least. If creating a fairer, more equitable society is truly what we as progressives care about, then we have a responsibility not to pull away but to lean in.

We’ve seen what leaning in has done in Georgia, but it took Stacey Abrams and many other organizers and activists well over a decade to implement the internal structures that have turned Georgia purple. And still the fight continues. There is still so much important work to be done and so many people fighting to hold on to the ugliness of the past. Dismissing Alabama or the South as a whole does nothing to advance that work; it only confirms to people down here that they have been left behind.

A photo the author took of Rep. John Lewis in Selma, Alabama, a few weeks before he died.
A photo the author took of Rep. John Lewis in Selma, Alabama, a few weeks before he died.

Ellen Gomory is a New Jersey native living in Birmingham, Alabama. She is passionate about storytelling, progressive politics, the Real Housewives and her pug, Eloise. 

Trump deregulated railways and banks. He blames Biden for the fallout

The Guardian

Trump deregulated railways and banks. He blames Biden for the fallout

David Smith in Washington – March 18, 2023

<span>Photograph: Scott Olson/Getty Images</span>
Photograph: Scott Olson/Getty Images

When a fiery train derailment took place on the Ohio-Pennsylvania border last month, Donald Trump saw an opportunity. The former US president visited East Palestine, accused Joe Biden of ignoring the community – “Get over here!” – and distributed self-branded water before dropping in at a local McDonald’s.

Related: Levels of carcinogenic chemical near Ohio derailment site far above safe limit

Then, when the Silicon Valley Bank last week became the second biggest bank to fail in US history, Trump again lost no time in making political capital. He predicted that Biden would go down as “the Herbert Hoover of the modrrn [sic] age” and predicted a worse economic crash than the Great Depression.

Yet it was Trump himself who, as US president, rolled back regulations intended to make railways safer and banks more secure. Critics said his attacks on the Biden administration offered a preview of a disingenuous presidential election campaign to come and, not for the first time in Trump’s career, displayed a shameless double standard.

“Hypocrisy, thy name is Donald Trump and he sets new standards in a whole bunch of regrettable ways,” said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. “For his true believers, they’re going to take Trump’s word for it and, even if they don’t, it doesn’t affect their support of him.”

The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank on 10 March and of New York’s Signature Bank two days later sent shockwaves through the global banking industry and revived bitter memories of the financial crisis that plunged the US into recession about 15 years ago.

Fearing contagion in the banking sector, the government moved to protect all the banks’ deposits, even those that exceeded the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation $250,000 limit for each individual account. The cost ran into hundreds of billions of dollars.

Trump with crates of Trump water in East Palestine after a train derailed in Ohio.
Trump with crates of Trump water in East Palestine after a train derailed in Ohio. Photograph: Alan Freed/Reuters

The drama reverberated in Washington, where Trump’s criticism was followed by that of Republicans and conservative media, seeking to blame Biden-driven inflation or, improbably, to Silicon Valley Bank’s socially aware “woke” agenda. Opponents saw this as a crude attempt to deflect from the bank’s risky investments in the bond market and more systemic problems in the sector.

The 2008 financial crisis, triggered by reckless lending in the housing market, led to tough bank regulations during Barack Obama’s presidency. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Act aimed to ensure that Americans’ money was safe, in part by setting up annual “stress tests” that examine how banks would perform under future economic downturns.

But when Trump won election in 2016, the writing was on the wall. Biden, then outgoing vice-president, warned against efforts to undo banking regulations, telling an audience at Georgetown University: “We can’t go back to the days when financial companies take massive risks with the knowledge that a taxpayer bailout is around the corner when they fail.”

But in 2018, with Trump in the White House, Congress slashed some of those protections. Republicans – and some Democrats – voted to raise the minimum threshold for banks subject to the stress tests: those with less than $250bn in assets were no longer required to take part. Many big lenders, including Silicon Valley Bank, were freed from the tightest regulatory scrutiny.

Sabato commented: “The worst example is the bank situation because that is directly tied to Trump and his administration and changes made in bank regulations in 2018. Yes, some Democrats voted for it, but it was overwhelmingly supported by Republicans and by Trump who heralded it as the real solution to future bank woes.

The minority of Democrats who supported the 2018 law have denied that it can be directly tied to this month’s bank failures, although Bernie Sanders, an independent senator from Vermont, was adamant: “Let’s be clear. The failure of Silicon Valley Bank is a direct result of an absurd 2018 bank deregulation bill signed by Donald Trump that I strongly opposed.”

You do need government to regulate finance … but that point cannot be made if you’ve got Donald Trump inventing reality

Larry Jacobs

Sherrod Brown, a Democratic senator for Ohio who introduced bipartisan legislation to improve rail safety protocols, drew a parallel between the banks’ collapse to rail industry deregulation lobbying that contributed to the East Palestine train disaster. “We see aggressive lobbying like this from banks as well,” he said.

Trump repealed several Barack Obama-era US Department of Transportation rules meant to improve rail safety, including one that required high-hazard cargo trains to use electronically controlled pneumatic brake technology by 2023. This rule would not have applied to the Norfolk Southern train in East Palestine – where roughly 5,000 residents had to evacuate for days – as it was not classified as a high-hazard cargo train.

But the debate around the railway accident and bank failures points to a perennial divide between Democrats, who insist that some regulation is vital to a functioning capitalism, and Republicans, who have long claimed to believe in small government. Steve Bannon, an influential far-right podcaster and former White House chief strategist, framed the Trump agenda as “the deconstruction of the administrative state”.

Antjuan Seawright, a Democratic strategist, said: “The Republican party has gotten by for many years on this idea that less is better. However, we’re now learning in this country that, as America continues to mature, in some cases more is better, and more has to be how we get to better. Otherwise the mistakes can spin out of control and cause generations of people long-term damage.”

A Norfolk Southern freight train that derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, on fire on 4 February 2023.
A Norfolk Southern freight train that derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, on fire on 4 February 2023. Photograph: Gene J Puskar/AP

Biden called on Congress to allow regulators to impose tougher penalties on the executives of failed banks while Warren and other Democrats introduced legislation to undo the 2018 law and restore the Dodd-Frank regulations. It is likely to meet stiff opposition from the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and even some moderate Democrats.

Biden has also insisted that no taxpayer money will be used to resolve the current crisis, keen to avoid any perception that average Americans are “bailing out” the two banks in a way similar to the unpopular bailouts of the biggest financial firms in 2008.

But Republicans running for the 2024 presidential nomination are already contending that customers will ultimately bear the costs of the government’s actions even if taxpayer funds were not directly used. Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, said: “Joe Biden is pretending this isn’t a bailout. It is.”

Another potential 2024 contender, Senator Tim Scott, the top Republican on the Senate banking committee, also criticised what he called a “culture of government intervention”, arguing that it incentivises banks to continue risky behavior if they know federal agencies will ultimately rescue them.

Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, said: “This is familiar ideological territory. The battle lines between liberalism and a fake conservatism appear to be playing out here. But the tragedy of the situation is that the liberals are right.

It’s not new that the Republicans will deregulate an industry and then it collapses … look at American political and economic history of the last 50 years

Wendy Schiller

“You do need government to regulate finance and, when you don’t, you get mischief making and bank failures but that point cannot be made if you’ve got Donald Trump inventing reality. He’s demonstrated that facts and position taking don’t matter. It’s an extraordinary political strategy but it’s even more devastating to our whole political system and our media that this could be allowed.”

This poses a huge messaging challenge for Democrats, who after the 2008 financial crisis came up against the Tea Party, a populist movement feeding off economic and racial resentments. Long and winding explanations about the negative impacts of Trump era deregulation are a hard sell compared to the former president’s sloganeering in East Palestine.

Wendy Schiller, a political science professor at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, said: “Once again we see that Trump is taking advantage of the Achilles’ heel of the Democratic party by telling voters that the Democrats like big government because it bails out industries and it never provides a bailout for the little guy.”

Democrats’ efforts to point out that Trump was responsible for deregulation are unlikely to cut through, Schiller added.

“Any time it takes more than 10 seconds to explain something, you’re done in politics. This is why Trump has catchy phrases, sound bytes. He understands that all voters see is that rich people made a bad investment and then more rich people are making sure that their money’s available to them within three days, coming off the heels of all the closures during Covid, lost business, lost income, people struggling, inflation.

“Democrats don’t want to call it a bailout but it is a bailout. The high visibility of this bailout smothers anything else the Democrats are doing for the average voter. It’s a perfect issue for the Republicans. It’s not new that the Republicans will deregulate an industry and then it collapses and the Democrats have to save it. Look at American political and economic history of the last 50 years: this is exactly what happens.

Russia tries to boost its flagging army by changing conscription age range

The Telegraph

Russia tries to boost its flagging army by changing conscription age range

James Kilner – March 18, 2023

Vladimir Putin
Vladimir Putin

The Kremlin wants to shift the age of army conscripts to boost the number of combat personnel under its command to 1.5 million.

The age bracket for conscription will be moved from 17-27 to 21-30 in order to close a loophole used by students to avoid conscription, according to the British Ministry of Defence (MoD).

“Many 18 to 21-year-old men currently claim exemption from the draft due to being in higher education,” it said.

The Russian parliament introduced a Bill covering these changes earlier this week. The MoD said it was “likely to be passed” by the start of next year.

Under current Russian law, conscripts are banned from being deployed overseas. However, by illegally annexing Crimea in 2014 – along with Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia last September – Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, can claim that they are defending Russia.

Bid to expand army

Russia’s ministry of defence has said it wants to increase the size of combat personnel under its command from 1.15 million to 1.5 million.

Putin was forced to order the first mobilisation in Russia since the Second World War in September to shore up his front line, which was in danger of collapse. Many of the 325,000 men called up were sent straight to fight in Ukraine without decent equipment or training.

Conscription is carried out twice a year in Russia, recruiting around 125,000 men for 12 months through each draft. But it is treated as a duty and a sort of finishing school. Conscripts are there to serve but not to be thrown into battle.

Even if conscripts are not sent to fight in Ukraine, the MoD said that expanding conscription would still help the Russian war effort in Ukraine.

“Extra conscripts will free up a greater proportion of professional soldiers to fight,” it said.

Reports from inside Russia have said that a low-level mobilisation is ongoing for the army, especially in regional cities.

The Kremlin’s Wagner mercenary group has also switched to openly recruiting in 42 cities across Russia.

Yevgeny Prigozhin, the Wagner chief, said that he hoped to recruit an extra 30,000 fighters by May.

Slovakia Will Send Entire Fleet of MiG-29 Jets to Ukraine

Bloomberg

Slovakia Will Send Entire Fleet of MiG-29 Jets to Ukraine

Daniel Hornak – March 17, 2023

(Bloomberg) — Slovakia will send its entire fleet of Soviet-era fighter jets to Ukraine to boost its defense against Russian forces, government officials said.

The eastern NATO member state will send all 13 of its MiG-29 jets – grounded since last August and in various states of readiness – at an unspecified date, Defense Minister Jaroslav Nad told reporters in Bratislava on Friday.

The announcement comes a day after Poland said it will send four Soviet-era fighter jets to Ukraine in the coming days. Both nations are responding to pleas from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who has persistently demanded warplanes since the first days of the war as essential to driving back the Russian invasion.

The deliveries would cross a threshold in sending firepower to Kyiv, as many western allies have drawn the line at delivering fighter jets, citing the risk of being drawn into a direct confrontation with Moscow.

And while the aging aircraft don’t meet the standard of more modern F-16s or similar models Kyiv has craved most, MiG shipments could add to Ukraine’s fleet with operational jets or spare parts for its own damaged stock.

Officials didn’t specify when the jets, which have been grounded since a maintenance agreement with Russia was terminated last year, will be transferred to Ukraine, citing security reasons. Slovakia is awaiting the delivery of new US-made F-16 warplanes.

The nation will also send part of its Kub air-defense system to Ukraine. In return, it will receive about $700 million worth of US military equipment and $200 million from European Union funds, Nad told reporters.

Read More: Poland to Send Four Soviet-Era Jets to Kyiv in Coming Days

Last month, Nad said that Ukraine would be able to add as many as eight new planes to its fleet from Slovak hardware.

The Kremlin dismissed the plan of Slovakia and Poland on Friday, saying the fighter jets won’t be a game changer.

“You get the feeling that these countries are just getting rid of old, unneeded equipment,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, according to Tass. “You don’t need to be a military expert to say that this won’t affect” the war, he added, saying that they will be “subject to destruction” by Russian forces.

The administration has been a staunch ally of Ukraine despite public opposition that has risen over the past few months of political turmoil. Prime Minister Eduard Heger defended the decision to send the jets, saying they were “not dragging Slovakia into the war.”

With assistance from Peter Laca.

(Updates with reaction from Russia from ninth paragraph.)

Russia loses 15 of its so-called ‘invincible’ T-90M tanks in Ukraine, GS reports

The New Voice of Ukraine

Russia loses 15 of its so-called ‘invincible’ T-90M tanks in Ukraine, GS reports

March 17, 2023

15 Russian T-90M Proryv tanks have already been destroyed in Ukraine
15 Russian T-90M Proryv tanks have already been destroyed in Ukraine

Like much of its expensive, top-of-the-line military equipment, Russia’s occupying forces have chosen to keep its T-90M tanks – the most technologically-advanced they possess – from combat actions.

They turned out to be not so “unbeatable” or “perfect” as Russia pretended, Rudyk said.

“As of today, the Russian Armed Forces have lost 15 T-90Ms in Ukraine. We are talking only about those cases that have indisputable evidence in the form of photo and video footage. It is likely that the occupiers have lost many more of them,” the Military Media Center reported Rudyk as saying.

Read also: Russia loses half of its modern tank fleet in Ukraine

The first record of a T-90 M Breakthrough tank being destroyed was in Kharkiv Oblast on May 4, 2022. Ukraine’s Territorial Defense Forces eliminated the vehicle with a Carl Gustav rifle in Staryi Saltiv.

An inspection of the incapacitated tank revealed that the T-90M is “the upper limit of what the Russian military-industrial complex has been able to squeeze out of Soviet developments.” According to Rudyk, Russia not only does not produce electronics for it, but also tries to conceal information about the origin of some components.

Read also: Russia lost more troops in Ukraine than in all conflicts since WWII

“Sometimes the situation reaches the point of absurdity — Russia simply passes it off as its own development. The much-hyped Kalyna fire control system has only Russian markings,” Rudyk said.

Russian mass manufacturing of these tanks now has turned into piece-by-piece production due to the sanctions. Therefore, Russia, suffering heavy losses and trying to break through the Ukrainian defense, is forced to decommission old and “naked” T-62 and T-72 tanks.

Russia has lost 3,504 tanks since the start of the large-scale war against Ukraine, including 12 over the past 24 hours, according to the latest General Staff’s update.

First Republic, SVB, Credit Suisse: The latest banks in trouble and why

The Washington Post

First Republic, SVB, Credit Suisse: The latest banks in trouble and why

Ellen Francis – March 17, 2023

Signage is displayed on an ATM outside of a First Republic Bank branch in Manhattan Beach, California, on March 13, 2023. (Photo by Patrick T. Fallon / AFP) (Photo by PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images) (PATRICK T. FALLON via Getty Images)

First Republic Bank is the fourth bank to face a crisis in the past week, as banking and government officials try to dispel fears of a wider financial meltdown.

Here’s a recap of some of the latest troubled banks, and what this could mean.

– – –

What is First Republic Bank and why did it need rescuing?

It’s a San Francisco lender founded in 1985 that specializes in private banking and wealth management. Its shares plunged earlier this week, raising the specter of a third major U.S. bank implosion in days.

This is why 11 of the largest banks in the United States stepped in with an announcement on Thursday that they would deposit a total of $30 billion into their smaller peer. The bid to stabilize First Republic Bank was coordinated partly by federal officials, The Washington Post reported, and it came on the same day that Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen told lawmakers that the U.S. “banking system is sound.”

The intervention, seen as one of the most sweeping in modern U.S. banking history, highlighted concerns in Washington and on Wall Street after the failures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank last week.

– – –

How did Silicon Valley Bank’s failure spark fears of a global financial crisis?

Financial regulators closed Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), which catered to venture capitalists and start-ups, about a week ago, making it the second-biggest bank failure in U.S. history.

Depositors had rushed to withdraw their money after the firm filed a notice that it was selling billions in assets to shore up its finances. The bank was tightly linked to the tech industry, which is beset by layoffs.

Such a rapid collapse – the first major U.S. banking scare since the crisis that sparked the Great Recession – sent shock waves through the financial system, and it prompted fears that money needed to pay tech workers could be lost or frozen.

That’s because bank deposits in the United States are only insured by the federal government for up to $250,000. At SVB, more than 90 percent of depositors had accounts over that limit – many of them exceeding it by millions of dollars. Businesses couldn’t pay workers if their accounts were frozen or, worse, if SVB hadn’t actually had enough money to cover withdrawals from uninsured accounts.

So last weekend, U.S. officials announced plans to guarantee deposits and to create a new central bank lending program, maintaining assurances that the situation is different from the financial crisis of 2008. The Biden administration also said taxpayers will bear no cost for the backstop, although critics note that the deposit insurance is funded by fees levied on banks, which could, in turn, raise costs for customers.

The Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission have launched investigations into the SVB collapse and the actions of its senior executives, as questions also emerged about regulators missing warning signs.

– – –

Is this connected to the Signature Bank collapse?

Regulators closed Signature Bank, a New York-based financial institution crucial to the cryptocurrency industry, last weekend after a deposit run.

The demise of an institution also enmeshed in the tech industry was prompted in part by the fallout after SVB, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) told a news conference.

Signature Bank served many clients deeply involved in cryptocurrency, which had a sharp drop in value last year, while other depositors included law and real estate firms. Officials extended the same deposit protections to its customers.

– – –

What happened with Credit Suisse this week?

A giant European bank with assets spanning the globe, Credit Suisse had disclosed “material weaknesses” in its financial reporting, before announcing this week it would borrow up to $53.7 billion from Switzerland’s central bank to reinforce its finances.

Credit Suisse’s troubles predated SVB’s collapse, and they’re not caused by the same factors that brought down the U.S. banks. But the failure of SVB spooked markets, and the Swiss bank’s announcements made investors fearful of a broader contagion.

The liquidity lifeline to Credit Suisse from the Swiss central bank – which Reuters described as the first one taken by a major global bank since 2008 – appeared to calm European markets in the immediate aftermath of the announcement.

The Washington Post’s Jeff Stein, Pranshu Verma and Adela Suliman contributed to this report.

U.S. grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later

Reuters

U.S. grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later

Arshad Mohammed and Jonathan Landay – March 16, 2023

U.S. grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – From an empowered Iran and eroded U.S. influence to the cost of keeping U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria to combat Islamic State fighters, the United States still contends with the consequences of invading Iraq 20 years ago, current and former officials say.

Then-U.S. President George W. Bush’s 2003 decision to oust Saddam Hussein by force, the way limited U.S. troop numbers enabled ethnic strife and the eventual 2011 U.S. pullout have all greatly complicated U.S. policy in the Middle East, they said.

The end of Saddam’s minority Sunni rule and replacement with a Shi’ite majority government in Iraq freed Iran to deepen its influence across the Levant, especially in Syria, where Iranian forces and Shi’ite militias helped Bashar al-Assad crush a Sunni uprising and stay in power.

The 2011 withdrawal of the U.S. troops from Iraq left a vacuum that Islamic State (ISIS) militants filled, seizing roughly a third of Iraq and Syria and fanning fears among Gulf Arab states that they could not rely on the United States.

Having withdrawn, former U.S. President Barack Obama in 2014 sent troops back to Iraq, where about 2,500 remain, and in 2015 he deployed to Syria, where about 900 troops are on the ground. U.S. forces in both countries combat Islamic State militants, who are also active from North Africa to Afghanistan.

“Our inability, unwillingness, to put the hammer down in terms of security in the country allowed chaos to ensue, which gave rise to ISIS,” said former deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage, faulting the U.S. failure to secure Iraq.

Armitage, who served under Republican Bush when the United States invaded Iraq, said the U.S. invasion “might be as big a strategic error” as Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, which helped bring about Germany’s World War Two defeat.

MASSIVE COSTS

The costs of U.S. involvement in Iraq and Syria are massive.

According to estimates published this week by the “Costs of War” project at Brown University, the U.S. price tag to date for the wars in Iraq and Syria comes to $1.79 trillion, including Pentagon and State Department spending, veterans’ care and the interest on debt financing the conflicts. Including projected veterans’ care through 2050, this rises to $2.89 trillion.

The project puts U.S. military deaths in Iraq and Syria over the past 20 years at 4,599 and estimates total deaths, including Iraqi and Syrian civilians, military, police, opposition fighters, media and others at 550,000 to 584,000. This includes only those killed as a direct result of war but not estimated indirect deaths from disease, displacement or starvation.

U.S. credibility also suffered from Bush’s decision to invade based on bogus, exaggerated and ultimately erroneous intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

John Bolton, a war advocate who served under Bush, said even though Washington made mistakes – by failing to deploy enough troops and administering Iraq instead of quickly handing over to Iraqis – he believed removing Saddam justified the costs.

“It was worth it because the decision was not simply: ‘Does Saddam pose a WMD threat in 2003?'” he said. “Another question was: ‘Would he pose a WMD threat five years later?’ To which I think the answer clearly was ‘yes.'”

“The worst mistake made after the overthrow of Saddam … was withdrawing in 2011,” he added, saying he believed Obama wanted to pull out and used the inability to get guarantees of immunity for U.S. forces from Iraq’s parliament “as an excuse.”

‘ALARM BELLS RINGING … IN THE GULF’

Ryan Crocker, who served as U.S. ambassador in Iraq, said the 2003 invasion did not immediately undermine U.S. influence in the Gulf but the 2011 withdrawal helped push Arab states to start hedging their bets.

In the latest example of waning U.S. influence, Iran and Saudi Arabia agreed on Friday to re-establish relations after years of hostility in a deal brokered by China.

“We just decided we didn’t want to do this stuff anymore,” Crocker said, referring to the U.S. unwillingness to keep spending blood and treasure securing Iraq. “That began … with President Obama declaring … he was going to pull all forces out.”

“These were U.S. decisions not forced by a collapsing economy, not forced by demonstrators in the street,” he said. “Our leadership just decided we didn’t want to do it any more. And that started the alarm bells ringing … in the Gulf.”

Jim Steinberg, a deputy secretary of state under Obama, said the war raised deep questions about Washington’s willingness to act unilaterally and its steadfastness as a partner.

“The net result … has been bad for U.S. leverage, bad for U.S. influence, bad for our ability to partner with countries in the region,” he said.

A debate still rages among former officials over Obama’s decision to withdraw, tracking a timeline laid out by the Bush administration and reflecting a U.S. inability to secure immunities for U.S. troops backed by the Iraqi parliament.

Bolton’s belief that removing Saddam was worth the eventual cost is not held by many current and former officials.

Asked the first word that came to mind about the invasion and its aftermath, Armitage replied “FUBAR,” a military acronym which, politely, stands for “Fouled up beyond all recognition.”

“Disaster,” said Larry Wilkerson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff.

“Unnecessary,” said Steinberg.

(This story has been refiled to fix the spelling of former U.S. President Barack Obama’s name in paragraph 5)

(Reporting By Arshad Mohammed and Jonathan Landay; Additional reporting by Idrees Ali; Editing by William Maclean)

A Study of 12,000 People Found That Taking This One Supplement May Lower Your Dementia Risk by 40%

Parade

A Study of 12,000 People Found That Taking This One Supplement May Lower Your Dementia Risk by 40%

Beth Ann Mayer – March 16, 2023

Here’s why you should discuss it with your doctor.

Could one supplement be a tool in your dementia-fighting toolbox?

It depends on who you ask, but a new, large study found that it might. The research was conducted by British and Canadian researchers and published in Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring in March

Researchers followed 12,388 people around 71 years old for about a decade and found those who took a vitamin D supplement had a 40 percent lower chance of developing dementia than those who did not.

However, experts stress caution about the results. “It is important to note that this study is an observational study, not an intervention, so it cannot establish causation,” said Dr. Claire Sexton, DPhil, the senior director of scientific programs and outreach at the Alzheimer’s Association, in an emailed statement. “Also, a significant limitation to the study is that neither vitamin D levels at baseline and follow-up, nor dose and duration of supplementation, were available or analyzed.”

Sexton says further research is needed. Experts, including one of the study’s authors, discussed the research and the importance of discussing supplements with your doctor.

Related: 50 Inspiring Menopause Jokes

About the Study

Principal investigator Dr. Zahinoor Ismail, MD, FRCPC, treats patients with clinical dementia and researches early identification and prevention. He wanted to look into the effects of using vitamin D in advance of dementia.

“The genesis of the project came when I was reading some literature and saw there were potential vitamin D effects on behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer’s,” says Dr. Ismail, a professor at the University of Calgary.

Researchers collected data from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC) database in the U.S. Participants were dementia-free (normal cognition) or had mild cognitive impairment at baseline and had an average age of 71.2 years old. Most participants (80 percent) were white.

Researchers tracked patients for about 10 years. Of the 12,388 patients, 2,700 developed dementia. Researchers discovered vitamin D habits differed among participants. The dementia risk in patients who had taken vitamin D was 15 percent compared to 26 percent in patients who never had taken supplements.

Researchers accounted for age, gender, race, education and depression, and ultimately concluded that vitamin D supplementation could lower dementia by 40 percent compared to no exposure. Why might this finding be?

“Vitamin D can help prevent or clear the abnormal proteins that cause Alzheimer’s Disease,” Dr. Ismail says.

The impact of vitamin D supplementation was more pronounced in women participants.  Dr. Ismail says they found that supplementation was associated with a 50 percent lower dementia risk in females but only 25 percent among males.

“We postulated that it is related to perimenopause and menopause…in those periods, there is a loss of estrogen,” Dr. Ismail says. “Estrogen activates vitamin D.”

The benefits of vitamin D supplementation were also greater in participants who had normal cognition versus those who entered the study with mild cognitive impairment. “The earlier the intervention the better when it comes to prevention,” Dr. Ismail says.

While the study design has its flaws, one expert feels the information has importance.

“Understanding the relationship between vitamin D and Alzheimer’s disease, or other diseases potentially causing dementia, is important because it may be possible that with optimizing vitamin D levels we could potentially have some control over our risk for development of dementia,” says Dr. Marzena Gieniusz, MD, the medical director of the Alzheimer’s and Dementia Care Program at Northwell Health, New York.

Related: The Absolute Best Food for Brain Health

What To Understand About the Study’s Limitations

As Dr. Sexton Said—and Dr. Ismail agrees—the study design calls for a caveat.

“The big caveat is that it’s not a randomized control trial,” Dr. Ismail says.

If the study were a randomized control trial (RCT), one group would get vitamin D, and another would receive a placebo. Researchers would compare at a follow-up, explains Dr. Nikhil Palekar, MD, the director of the Stony Brook Center of Excellence for Alzheimer’s Disease and the director of the Alzheimer’s Disease Clinical Trials Program with Stony Brook Medicine.

“It’s interesting,” Dr. Palekar says. “They have a large [sample size]. People with exposure to vitamin D had 40 percent lower rates of dementia. It’s an amazing number. The problem is that they didn’t look at other stuff that patients were on. They could have been taking other supplements that may have helped. They didn’t look at what dose they were on. They didn’t look at how often or how long people took vitamin D—a month? A year? Five years?”

In other words, “It sounds impressive, but there are lots of caveats,” says Dr. Palekar.

Related: Great Blue Light-Blocking Glasses

Dr. Ismail notes that it’s challenging—and not exactly feasible—to conduct a randomized trial that involved giving someone a vitamin D placebo for a decade. He cited ethics (“The research ethics board wouldn’t support this”) and feasibility (“I don’t think anyone would consistently take a drug for 10 years knowing that it might be a placebo”).

“We are left gathering evidence and making recommendations based on shorter RCTs, on longer organizational cohorts with large samples like ours, and ensuring there is a biological plausibility,” he says.

Talk to Your Provider

In her statement, Dr. Sexton emphasized speaking to a provider before starting any supplementation, including vitamin D.

“Always talk to your health care provider before starting supplements or other dietary interventions, and let them know which ones you are already taking,” Dr. Sexton says.

Dr. Ismail agrees, noting that vitamin D is fat-soluble and can be toxic or affect bone health at a high level. Further, providers can run bloodwork to give customized recommendations for dosing. Your doctor also understands your medication history, including any other vitamins, supplements or medications you are on (and if they don’t, tell them).

“[Vitamin D supplements] can potentially interact with other supplements and over-the-counter medications, as well as certain prescription medications,” Dr. Gieniusz says. “Just like prescription medications, supplements can have side effects and can sometimes cause more harm than good in the setting of certain medical conditions.”

Next up: Are You Getting Enough Vitamin D? 

Strange activity and number of Russian ships in Black Sea

Ukrayinska Pravda

Strange activity and number of Russian ships in Black Sea

Ukrainska Pravda – March 16, 2023

Ukrainian defenders have noted an atypical Russian activity in the Black Sea; Russians have deployed 20 ships and a large number of units of the auxiliary fleet ships there.

Source: Nataliia Humeniuk, Head of the Joint Press Centre for Operational Command Pivden (South), during the national 24/7 broadcast on 16 March

Quote: “We are carefully monitoring the naval group in the Black Sea and the actions of the enemy.

Atypical activity and number of ship groups were recorded. There are currently 20 units in the Black Sea, including 4 missile carriers, one of them is underwater; the total salvo is 28 missiles that can be equipped for launch.”

Details: Also, according to Humeniuk, many units of the auxiliary fleet were recorded at sea.

All the ships are scattered, so maybe the Russians want to find the wreckage of the American drone they talked about earlier.

Humeniuk noted that the occupiers are trying to “cover the naval operations in the Black Sea as much as possible and are trying to hide their actions” from the Ukrainian defenders, but careful observation gives results, and the defenders see and understand Russia’s steps ahead.

Background:

  • The US Air Force issued a statement on 14 March, which said that a Russian Su-27 fighter jet damaged an American MQ-9 Reaper reconnaissance and strike UAV over the Black Sea during an interception, as a result of which the drone had to be sunk.
  • The US National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications, John Kirby, noted that while Russian intercepts of US aircraft over the Black Sea are not uncommon, Tuesday’s episode was unique regarding how “dangerous, unprofessional and reckless” Russia’s actions were.
  • The Ministry of Defence of Russia stated on Tuesday evening that their Su-27 fighter jets had nothing to do with the crash of the MQ-9 Reaper American UAV in the Black Sea. In addition, they said it approached annexed Crimea and was flying in violation.
  • The US Department of Defense, in turn, said it was working to declassify visual information related to the incident in the international airspace over the Black Sea.
  • NBC News reported that the highest levels of the Kremlin approved the aggressive actions of Russian military fighter jets against a U.S. military drone over the Black Sea.