Mahfuz to Umno: Find honourable exit, don't wait to get chased out

Mahfuz to Umno: Find honourable exit, don't wait to get chased out


Published: Nov 9, 2026 10:54 AM


Umno needs to find an honourable exit if it chooses to align with PAS and Perikatan Nasional, and should not wait for Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to "chase" them out of Putrajaya, Amanah vice-president Mahfuz Omar said.

Mahfuz (above) noted that in successive state elections, Umno has consistently chosen to cooperate with PAS-PN while still enjoying power and positions within the government.

The situation is made more awkward when Umno president and Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi openly criticises Anwar's leadership, he said.

"In my view, the time has come for Umno-BN to make a clear decision. If they are more comfortable making PAS and PN their political partners to face Pakatan Harapan, they must be brave enough to accept the implications of that choice.


"Do not continue to ride on power in Putrajaya while building political strength with parties that want to overthrow their own government allies," he said in a statement.

The Amanah leader said Umno must not treat the prime minister "like a host who is forced to chase away a guest, when the guest has long been looking for a new house and inviting others to demolish the house they are living in."

Umno-BN has resumed its cooperation with PAS-PN to face the Malacca state election, after a stint in the Negeri Sembilan polls which saw them successfully capture the state from Harapan.

Umno and PAS leaders previously signalled that the cooperation could extend beyond the Malacca polls into the 16th general election.

Ties between Umno and the government also appear strained after a temporary halt to former premier Najib Abdul Razak's house arrest.

Pot boils over on house arrest issue

Pot boils over on house arrest issue

By Joceline Tan

Sunday, 08 Nov 2026 | 2:36 PM MYT



THE whispers had begun even before the Melaka election took off.

The word going around then was that Umno had managed to raise the RM50mil to pay off the fine so that Datuk Seri Najib Razak could begin his house arrest. In fact, the party had managed to raise RM52mil.


The guessing game went on for several days while Najib’s family feigned ignorance.

Politics is about timing and Umno was waiting for the right timing and that was when the Melaka campaign was in full swing.

They wanted to see how Pakatan Harapan would react and whether DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke would actually resign.

Or to put it bluntly, the aim was to throw Pakatan Harapan’s campaign in the Melaka election into disarray.

“Don’t blame us. We did not ask anyone in DAP to resign, they said it themselves. We only wanted Najib to begin serving his house arrest,” said Umno supreme council member Datuk Seri Alwi Che Ahmad.

The keris (Umno) had outplayed the rocket (DAP).

Despite the fine having been paid, the Attorney-General’s Chamber, immediately deferred the house arrest on grounds that clarification was needed in connection to overlapping cases involving Najib and the way the release order was worded.

The perception was that the Madani government wanted to keep Najib in prison until the Melaka election was over but it was blindsided by the bombshell statement from the national palace.

The statement stressed in unequivocal terms that the conditional pardon decree is clear, explicit, without ambiguity and not connected to any other cases against Najib.

The palace pointed out that Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar who sits on the Pardons Board should be aware of the terms of the conditional pardon.

As such, once the requirements of the conditional pardon are met, any dispute would amount to disobeying the decree of the King.

It was a direct refute, with implications of treason, and it must have sent shivers down the spine of the AG who does not only advise the government but also His Majesty.

Mohd Dusuki has clarified that his decision to defer the house arrest is not about disputing the pardon but concerned the technicalities involved in the overlapping cases.

Unfortunately, the politics surrounding Najib’s house arrest has overshadowed any sort of technical arguments.

A former aide to a minister pointed out that no civil servant, however senior, would dare to act so independently unless instructed by those higher up.

Why did Mohd Dusuki not raise his concerns about overlapping cases during the Pardons Board meeting but waited until when Najib was about to step out of Kajang Prison to jump into action?

It was seen as a knee-jerk reaction or even as attempts to shift the goalposts.

There are calls for Mohd Dusuki to go on leave while an investigation is made into what happened.

The normally placid Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Onn Hafiz Ghazi ramped it up when campaigning in Melaka.

Onn said that the first thought that came to mind when he knew of the AG’s action was “treachery”.

“The Pardons Board has decided, the conditions have been fulfilled, but you still go against the royal decree,” said Onn as his audience called out “Daulat Tuanku”.

A cabinet minister who interacts with Mohd Dusuki finds him to be a decent government servant who follows instructions and who is quite without malice.

“His problem is that he does not know how to read the room,” said the minister.

None of the Pakatan leaders has stood by Mohd Dusuki and it appears that he has been thrown under the bus.

However, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has advised the AG to seek an audience with the King so that he can clarify his actions.

Are the efforts to block Najib from going home worth the mess that has ensued?

Is the Prime Minister so determined to keep Loke in his Cabinet? Would it change the outcome of the Melaka election?

The outcome of the state polls is a foregone conclusion and there are only a handful of seats worth speculating over.

Would it not have been wiser for Pakatan leaders to explain to their base that they tried their best but they have to respect the royal decree and that Najib’s sentence will continue till 2028?

The thing is that Pakatan leaders had pledged to keep Najib in prison and allowing him to go home, even under restrictions, would mean they failed to keep the promise.

An indication of the Chinese outrage was evident in the Chinese Facebook of former Selangor DAP leader Datuk Teng Chang Khim. It was swamped with thousands of critical and even nasty comments.

Meanwhile, Loke is said to have packed his things at his Transport Ministry office.

He is not clinging on and intends to keep his word to resign once Najib goes home.

It is unfortunate that Pakatan leaders not only have to face the Melaka voters over the house arrest issue, but have to defend themselves over accusations of treason.

“The way the house arrest issue was handled leaves a bad impression on the government. It strikes me as self-inflicted. The Madani government is playing a dangerous game if they think they can challenge a royal pardon,” said former minister Datuk Rahman Dahlan.

AG says lack of scrutiny led to errors in Najib’s court documents

AG says lack of scrutiny led to errors in Najib’s court documents


Dusuki Mokhtar says those responsible should have exercised greater care to prevent such errors

Attorney-General Dusuki Mokhtar said there were ‘obvious’ defects in the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s Order of Discharge relating to Najib Razak’s sentence. (Bernama pic)

PETALING JAYA: Attorney-General Dusuki Mokhtar has questioned the care taken in preparing court documents relating to the implementation of Najib Razak’s house arrest order.

In a Berita Harian report, Dusuki said there were “obvious” defects in the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s Order of Discharge relating to the former prime minister’s sentence in the SRC International corruption case.

Dusuki said such issues should not have arisen if those involved had carefully scrutinised every detail.


“This should not have happened if the parties concerned had been thorough,” he said.

“The errors are obvious and have caused unnecessary problems.”


The alleged defects, which have raised questions among legal practitioners, reportedly involve the accuracy of the terminology and legal provisions used in the document.

The document was issued by the Kuala Lumpur High Court after the RM50 million fine imposed on the former Umno president was paid through a solidarity fund launched by the party, paving the way for him to serve the remainder of his prison sentence under house arrest.

However, the Attorney-General’s Chambers subsequently moved to defer the implementation of Najib’s house arrest until a review of the conditional pardon and Order of Discharge was conducted.

It said these two issues involved “complex legal questions” that had implications for the execution of the royal pardon and a court order.


The AGC said its request was not an attempt to dispute the conditional pardon, but to clarify the legal effect of the discharge order.

Its decision drew criticism from Istana Negara, which said any arguments challenging the conditional pardon order for Najib amounted to defying the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s decree.

Istana Negara maintained that the pardon order was clear, explicit and unambiguous, and had no bearing on any other cases faced by Najib.

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has said Dusuki had requested an audience with the king to clarify the legal questions which led him to propose a deferment of Najib’s house arrest pending clarification by the court.

Dusuki declined to comment when asked by Berita Harian about the audience.

The investigative plots will thicken, not weaken, across Washington DC — Phar Kim Beng

The investigative plots will thicken, not weaken, across Washington DC — Phar Kim Beng



Summary

• The aftermath of the 2026 American midterm elections focuses on how Congress will exercise power against President Trump, with Democrats preparing extensive investigations into various aspects of his presidency.
• Proposed investigations aim to scrutinise Trump's financial dealings, cryptocurrency interests, potential market advantages for donors, and technology use in decision-making, raising questions about the interplay between public power and private wealth.
• These investigations will test American institutions' capacity to hold the executive accountable, with implications for American trade policy, diplomatic relations, and the integration of AI in military operations.

First Published: Friday, 06 Nov 2026 4:08 PM MYT


NOVEMBER 6 — The aftermath of the November 2026 American midterm elections is increasingly becoming a question not merely of who controls Congress, but how congressional power will be exercised against President Donald Trump during the remaining two years of his presidency.

The Democrats are preparing for an extensive investigative campaign that could reach into the White House, the President’s family businesses, his Cabinet, his political donors and even the technologies allegedly used in making sensitive national security decisions.



US President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Washington, DC November 5, 2026. — AFP pic



The investigative plots in Washington DC are therefore set to thicken rather than weaken.

What makes this development particularly consequential is the breadth of the proposed investigations.

The emerging congressional agenda goes well beyond the familiar controversies surrounding Trump’s conduct in office.

It encompasses financial transactions, cryptocurrency, preferential access to market-sensitive information, foreign gifts, tariff exemptions and the possible influence of artificial intelligence on presidential decision-making.

These are not necessarily separate controversies. Congressional investigators may seek to determine whether they reveal broader patterns in the relationship between political authority, private financial interests and the exercise of executive power.


Indeed, four committees and multiple Investigative fronts are in gear.

According to the reported preparations, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island is expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee.


While Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut is being positioned to play a central role through the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

In the House of Representatives, Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Robert Garcia of California are expected to assume leading investigative responsibilities through the Judiciary and Oversight committees respectively.

These anticipated appointments depend on the formal organisation of the new Congress.

Nevertheless, the reported recruitment of several dozen additional lawyers and congressional staff suggests that the preparations are institutional rather than merely rhetorical.

The significance is considerable.

Congressional investigations require legal expertise, document examination, financial analysis, witness interviews and the careful preparation of subpoenas.

An investigative committee that possesses sufficient staff can pursue several lines of inquiry simultaneously.

That could substantially complicate the White House’s ability to respond to each investigation separately.

Following the money

One major area of scrutiny concerns Trump’s cryptocurrency dealings and their possible intersection with presidential authority.

The question is not simply whether the President or his family can participate in cryptocurrency ventures.

It is whether private financial interests may have benefited from government decisions, privileged access or relationships with individuals seeking favourable treatment from Washington.

Another proposed investigation concerns Truth Social and allegations that paying customers could obtain earlier access to presidential posts capable of moving financial markets.

If such arrangements are established, investigators would have to examine whether the system created an unfair informational advantage for particular market participants.

The distinction between lawful commercial activity and improper exploitation of public office would be central.

Equally significant are allegations that wealthy donors and politically connected individuals obtained tariff exemptions or other government favours in return for contributions to Trump-aligned political organisations or presidential projects.

These allegations require evidence of an actual connection between contributions and official decisions. Political donations alone do not establish corruption.

Yet the potential scope of congressional scrutiny is substantial because tariff policy affects businesses, consumers, global supply chains and America’s trading partners.

Qatar, foreign influence and presidential gifts

The luxury presidential aircraft donated by Qatar represents another sensitive investigative subject.

The central issues concern the legal treatment of foreign gifts, possible conflicts of interest, national security safeguards and whether the aircraft’s acceptance complied with applicable constitutional and statutory requirements.

A foreign government providing an exceptionally valuable asset to an American administration raises questions that cannot be resolved solely by describing the transaction as a diplomatic gesture.

Investigators may seek records of negotiations, security assessments, ownership arrangements and eventual disposition of the aircraft.

For the Gulf states, including Qatar, these inquiries could become politically delicate.

They would also demonstrate how domestic American congressional oversight can have consequences for foreign governments that maintain close relations with the White House.

Perhaps the most unusual proposed investigation concerns reports that Trump consulted Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence chatbot, Grok, before the January 2026 American operation that captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

The committees are reportedly seeking records of the President’s chatbot usage.

The important distinction is between consulting an AI system and relying upon its output to authorise or shape a military operation.

The former does not automatically establish wrongdoing.

The latter could raise serious questions about intelligence validation, information security, classified material and the chain of command.

If congressional investigators establish that AI-generated information materially influenced operational decisions, the implications would extend well beyond the Trump administration.

They would concern the future relationship between artificial intelligence and presidential war powers.

For Asean and East Asia, where governments are expanding their own military and civilian AI capabilities, this is a question of direct relevance.

Artificial intelligence cannot substitute for accountable human judgment, particularly when the lives of civilians and military personnel are at stake.

Oversight is not the same as conviction though.

There is, however, an important constitutional distinction.

Congressional committees possess substantial investigative authority, but allegations uncovered through hearings do not automatically constitute criminal findings.

The administration and individuals under investigation retain legal rights. Subpoenas can be challenged, executive privilege may be asserted, and disputes can move into the federal courts.

Furthermore, congressional oversight must serve a legitimate legislative purpose rather than merely function as political punishment.

The Democrats will therefore face their own institutional test: whether their investigations can establish verifiable facts and produce meaningful accountability.

Investigative intensity alone is not proof of investigative success.

Nor should congressional investigations be confused with impeachment.

The House can approve articles of impeachment by a simple majority, but conviction and removal of a president require a two-thirds majority of senators present.

That constitutional threshold remains a major distinction between political confrontation and removal from office.

For America’s allies and partners, the investigations could have consequences beyond Washington.

Congressional scrutiny of tariff exemptions may affect confidence in the predictability of American trade policy.

Investigations involving Qatar could complicate diplomatic relationships in the Gulf.

Questions about AI-assisted military decision-making could generate wider debate over the safeguards required before advanced technologies are incorporated into national security operations.

Meanwhile, the White House may have to devote considerable time and legal resources to responding to congressional demands.

This could influence the administration’s capacity to pursue its foreign policy agenda, although the scale of any disruption will depend on the investigations’ findings and the courts’ rulings.

For Malaysia, Asean, Japan, South Korea and China, the practical lesson is that American foreign policy cannot be understood solely through presidential declarations.

Congress, the judiciary, regulatory institutions and domestic political competition also shape the decisions that eventually reach the international arena.

The coming congressional period could therefore become a test of American institutional accountability.

Whether it produces substantive findings, legislative reforms, prolonged litigation or partisan confrontation remains uncertain.

But the number and diversity of the proposed investigations already indicate that the struggle over presidential accountability is entering a more complicated phase.

The investigative plots in Washington DC are not merely about Donald Trump.

They concern the boundaries of presidential authority, the relationship between private wealth and public power, and the capacity of American institutions to scrutinise the executive branch.

Those questions will remain consequential long after the midterm election results themselves have faded from the headlines. 

* Phar Kim Beng, PhD is the Professor of Asean Studies at International Islamic University of Malaysia and Director of Institute of International and Asean Studies (IINTAS).

Apandi questions Attorney-General's position on Najib's house arrest order

Apandi questions Attorney-General's position on Najib's house arrest order


Former attorney-general says the Pardons Board's conditional pardon must be implemented as decided, arguing that all stipulated conditions have been fulfilled

Updated 28 minutes ago · Published on 09 Nov 2026 8:57AM

Former AG says the Federal Constitution was clear on the Pardons Board's powers and procedures, leaving no room for misinterpretation of a decision that had already been made - November 9, 2026



FORMER attorney-general Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali has questioned the Attorney-General's apparent change of position over Datuk Seri Najib Razak's conditional pardon, insisting that the former prime minister's house arrest order must be implemented without deviation.

He said the Federal Constitution was clear on the Pardons Board's powers and procedures, leaving no room for misinterpretation of a decision that had already been made.

Citing Article 42(9) of the Federal Constitution, Mohamed Apandi said the Pardons Board was required to consider any written opinion submitted by the Attorney-General before making its recommendations on a pardon.

"Naturally, the Attorney-General's opinion for the purpose of granting the pardon must have favoured the granting of the pardon.

"So, why does the Attorney-General now appear to be changing his position on the pardon? This situation is highly unreasonable," he said yesterday.

The Legal Affairs Division of the Prime Minister's Department (BHEUU) said in September that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong had granted Najib a conditional pardon allowing him to serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest until Aug 23, 2028, subject to payment of a RM50 million fine.

Najib's lawyer, Muhammad Farhan Shafee, had confirmed that the former prime minister had paid the RM50 million fine imposed in connection with his conviction for misappropriating funds from SRC International Sdn Bhd.

Najib was convicted in July 2020 of misappropriating RM42 million from SRC International and sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment and fined RM210 million. The Federal Court upheld the conviction in August 2022.

On Feb 2, 2024, the Pardons Board Secretariat announced a 50 per cent reduction in his prison sentence, from 12 years to six years, while his fine was reduced from RM210 million to RM50 million.

Mohamed Apandi also backed Sultan Ibrahim's assertion that the Pardons Board's decision contained no ambiguity.

Istana Negara had warned that arguments challenging the conditional pardon order could amount to defiance of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's decree.

He maintained that all conditions stipulated in the pardon had been fulfilled and that its implementation should not be allowed to remain clouded by prolonged uncertainty.

He also invoked Articles 4 and 5 of the Federal Constitution, which respectively establish the Constitution as the supreme law of the country and safeguard the right to personal liberty. - November 9, 2026

Providence Becomes Largest US City to Divest From Israel

Consortium News
Volume 31, Number 308 — Saturday, November 7, 2026


Providence Becomes Largest US City to Divest From Israel


Organizers in Rhode Island’s capital city are celebrating a win for direct democracy as the Palestine solidarity movement marks its first binding municipal divestment law passed by popular vote, Shireen Akram-Boshar reports.

Skyline of Providence, Rhode Island, with a view of Providence River Bridge, 2025. (Quintin Soloviev /Wikimedia Commons/CC BY 4.0)

By Shireen Akram-Boshar
Truthout

On Tuesday, voters in Providence, Rhode Island, overwhelmingly passed an ordinance requiring the city to divest from companies that enable genocide, apartheid, and human rights violations.

The ordinance is the Palestine solidarity movement’s first binding municipal divestment law passed through popular vote, versus voting by elected officials, in the U.S. — and makes Providence the largest U.S. city to vote to divest from Israel.

The ordinance, listed on Providence’s ballot as Question 7, passed by 74.99 percent. It calls on the city to “divest from countries and companies profiting from genocide, apartheid, ethnic cleansing and prolonged military occupation,” and became a ballot question due to a sustained, popular campaign led by the Providence for Palestine Coalition over the past year.

[While the ordinance does not name Israel or restrict itself to any particular government, it is widely seen as a victory for the Israeli boycott movement.]

“Millions of dollars in Providence city funds are invested in companies facilitating and profiting from the Israeli genocide in Gaza, apartheid system in the occupied West Bank, and ongoing assault on Lebanon and Iran,” Jewish Voice for Peace-Rhode Island said in a press release.


“In addition, Providence has a 20-year history of investing millions in Israel Bonds, which function as direct, no-strings-attached loans to the Israeli government and military.”

Jackie Goldman, a Jewish Voice for Peace organizer and city councilor elect, told Truthout that the ordinance is “the first constituent-led ballot initiative, which is both unique and replicable.”

“It was regular people who said, ‘we are going to create this ordinance, we are going to get enough signatures to get this on the ballot, we are not waiting for our elected officials to do something, we are going to do that work ourselves to make it happen,’” Goldman said.

[U.S. cities that since 2024 have passed some sort of divestment initiative through elected officials, include Hayward and Richmond in California; Portland and Belfast in Maine; Hamtramck and Dearborn in Michigan; Medford, Massachusetts, and most recently, in late October, Cambridge, Massachusetts.]

Goldman said that the ballot initiative evolved from a campaign led by Jewish Voice for Peace-Rhode Island to push Providence to divest from Israel Bonds. When allied city councilors introduced a similar divestment ordinance, it stalled out due to opposition from the outgoing mayor, Democrat Brett Smiley, who is a staunch supporter of Israel.

Eli Gerzon

@eligerzon

·

Follow

Divestment win in Providence, RI! This comes a week after divestment win in Cambridge, MA! The people of the US want to stop sending money to commit genocide against Palestinians -- our politicians disagree. These campaigns are way to get heard: let's keep it up!

2:32 PM · Nov 4, 2026

56

Reply

Copy link

Goldman is also the first openly trans person to be elected to the Providence City Council. Speaking on the phone with Truthout while canvassing on Tuesday, Goldman repeatedly turned to speak to local residents and explain the importance of Question 7, both in English and in Spanish.

“As it was stalling out, we said, ‘how do we take this into our own hands, and get this on the ballot?’” Goldman said. “And so we talked with some of the folks from Pittsburgh who had done a ballot referendum, and also looked through the various rules in the Providence city charter, and decided to go the ballot initiative way.” Organizers also looked to the example of Somerville, Massachusetts, the first U.S. city to vote to divest from Israel last year.

In Providence, residents must collect 1,000 signatures to put an ordinance before city council — if the council does not pass the ordinance, it can be put on the ballot by collecting around 5,000 additional signatures. The Providence for Palestine coalition — which includes Jewish Voice for Peace-RI, the Democratic Socialists of America-RI, AFT Local 6516, American Muslims for Palestine MA/RI, and Reclaim RI — decided to go to the ballot rather than lobby council members, and ended up collecting over 10,000 signatures, more than double those required.

Adit Sabnis, a graduate student organizer at Brown University in AFT Local 6516, said that organizers at Brown and within Jewish Voice for Peace had “tried to find ways of divesting,” but “our leaders weren’t listening.” So they asked, “how can we take this power and put it into our own hands? How can we make the decision on this, rather than outsourcing it to them?” The coalition decided that “if the leaders won’t listen to us, we’re going to take it straight to the people.”

Brown University Gaza Solidarity Encampment, Providence, R.I., April 2024. (Kenneth C. Zirkel, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0)

“What I think is unique is that I have not seen a lot of constituent-led ballot initiatives to try to fundamentally change how cities work. That being said, I know that a lot of city charters have mechanisms like this that will allow for [people in various cities across the U.S.] to be able to do direct democracy,” Goldman said.

“This is so important for the fact that we are in this moment where our elected officials are so often bought by corporate power” or otherwise facing pressure to ignore popular will, Goldman added.

While the outgoing mayor was a staunch supporter of Israel, the primaries brought forward several democratic socialist candidates for council, as well as for mayor. Sabnis explained that the divestment coalition coordinated with the David Morales mayoral campaign to canvass citywide. Throughout the process, the coalition “tried to find ways where we could bring regular people like us to show that we can really make a difference.”

Morales in 2025. (Rhode Island State Assembly /Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain)

Morales, a democratic socialist, won the election and will now become Providence’s youngest mayor, at age 28.

“This time, we have a majority city council as well as a mayor who are on board with divesting, which means that we will actually enforce this legislation,” Goldman said.

The local divestment campaign dovetailed with a citywide mobilization for rent stabilization, both policy priorities that the outgoing mayor blocked from becoming law and that the wave of progressive candidates made central to their platforms.

“I think it is very clear that the people of Providence want something new and want something different,” Goldman said. “While divestment and some of the issues like rent stabilization are maybe separate, it is similar in that a lot of people are not happy with how the status quo is going.”

The divestment initiative energized the campaigns of local candidates, strengthened Providence’s organizing movements, and demonstrated that there are ways to mobilize for change beyond electing individuals, Goldman added.

Activists in Providence have managed to connect local struggles with Palestine solidarity organizing. Palestinian community organizer and American Muslims for Palestine member Reem Said-Awad told Truthout that the coalition tied the fight for Palestine to Black Lives Matter and the struggle against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Over the past three years, more mainstream mobilizations in Providence like No Kings also began speaking about Palestine, she said.

“Things do change, if you are persistent,” Said-Awad said. “Even though we don’t have as many people on the streets right now, people are actively doing things behind the scenes. Awareness is there. Now it’s time for action.”

Sabnis said that the campaign for divestment has been met with an outpouring of support from Providence residents.

“Based on our leaders and politicians, it was very easy over the last two or three years to be very hopeless, and feel like we couldn’t do anything about [the genocide in Gaza],” Sabnis said. “I think the No. 1 thing we saw when we started going out in the community and collecting these signatures is that people were so happy and so thankful that we were organizing around this, but also just thrilled that they could actually do something meaningful for Palestine.”

“So often in the U.S., we’re told that the only way to make our voices heard is to ask elected leaders, and to beg them to abide by some semblance of a moral code,” Sabnis went on. “And so the fact that 10,000 people in Providence, if not more, could … take it all into their own hands, and say, ‘we’re going to reclaim our power. We’re no longer going to ask our leaders to do it if they’re not going to listen to us’ — to me, I think it’s emblematic of how democracy should be.”

Trump's new press officers

 

Nury Vittachi

 

Favorites ·S͏p͏t͏o͏s͏r͏o͏d͏n͏e͏6͏i͏2͏2͏c͏m͏u͏t͏1͏3͏m͏1͏m͏l͏8͏7͏4͏0͏l͏4͏u͏5͏5͏0͏g͏1͏9͏0͏2͏6͏3͏c͏a͏f͏t͏7͏1͏c͏9͏m͏h͏4͏1͏m͏0͏7͏l͏f͏l͏h͏ ·

Donald Trump invited “violent fighter and warrior” Dana White to be White House press secretary—and asked him to bring his assistants. There used to be a gap between official presidential announcements and wacko absurdist jokes, but the two categories are now indistinguishable