Democrats to Press Republicans on Election Security Ahead of Mueller Testimony

Congressional Democrats will ask Republicans to pass legislation to improve election security, ahead of special counsel Robert Mueller’s planned testimony to Congress Wednesday on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

House and Senate Democrats are expected to issue their call Tuesday in a press conference at the Senate, and plan to highlight several House-passed bills and Senate proposals to increase security ahead of the 2020 elections. 
 
Congressional Democrats and Republicans remain at odds over how to address election security issues three years after Russia’s interference. 

Last month, the Democratic-controlled House passed a bill requiring paper ballots at all polling stations. However, almost all House Republicans opposed the measure, arguing that paper ballots are more susceptible to tampering.

Several Republican-controlled Senate committees have been looking into election security issues, and the Judiciary Committee approved two election security bills in May. However, Senate Democrats accuse Republican leadership of blocking votes on the measures.

Election security has become highly politicized following the Mueller investigation, with both parties disagreeing over how to interpret the report’s conclusions into Russia’s  interference. 
 
Democrats are hoping to highlight the issue ahead of Mueller’s anticipated appearance before two House committees. 
 
Mueller has said he will not offer opinions in his congressional testimony beyond what is in the report, which concluded that Trump had not colluded with Russia to help him win the election, even though his campaign had numerous contacts with Russia.

Mueller reached no conclusion about whether Trump obstructed justice by trying to thwart the investigation, in part because of a Justice Department policy prohibiting charges against sitting U.S. presidents. However, Attorney General William Barr and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that no criminal charges were warranted against Trump. 


Democrats to Press Republicans on Election Security Ahead of Mueller Testimony

Congressional Democrats will ask Republicans to pass legislation to improve election security, ahead of special counsel Robert Mueller’s planned testimony to Congress Wednesday on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

House and Senate Democrats are expected to issue their call Tuesday in a press conference at the Senate, and plan to highlight several House-passed bills and Senate proposals to increase security ahead of the 2020 elections. 
 
Congressional Democrats and Republicans remain at odds over how to address election security issues three years after Russia’s interference. 

Last month, the Democratic-controlled House passed a bill requiring paper ballots at all polling stations. However, almost all House Republicans opposed the measure, arguing that paper ballots are more susceptible to tampering.

Several Republican-controlled Senate committees have been looking into election security issues, and the Judiciary Committee approved two election security bills in May. However, Senate Democrats accuse Republican leadership of blocking votes on the measures.

Election security has become highly politicized following the Mueller investigation, with both parties disagreeing over how to interpret the report’s conclusions into Russia’s  interference. 
 
Democrats are hoping to highlight the issue ahead of Mueller’s anticipated appearance before two House committees. 
 
Mueller has said he will not offer opinions in his congressional testimony beyond what is in the report, which concluded that Trump had not colluded with Russia to help him win the election, even though his campaign had numerous contacts with Russia.

Mueller reached no conclusion about whether Trump obstructed justice by trying to thwart the investigation, in part because of a Justice Department policy prohibiting charges against sitting U.S. presidents. However, Attorney General William Barr and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that no criminal charges were warranted against Trump. 


Democrats to Press Republicans on Election Security Ahead of Mueller Testimony

Congressional Democrats will ask Republicans to pass legislation to improve election security, ahead of special counsel Robert Mueller’s planned testimony to Congress Wednesday on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

House and Senate Democrats are expected to issue their call Tuesday in a press conference at the Senate, and plan to highlight several House-passed bills and Senate proposals to increase security ahead of the 2020 elections. 
 
Congressional Democrats and Republicans remain at odds over how to address election security issues three years after Russia’s interference. 

Last month, the Democratic-controlled House passed a bill requiring paper ballots at all polling stations. However, almost all House Republicans opposed the measure, arguing that paper ballots are more susceptible to tampering.

Several Republican-controlled Senate committees have been looking into election security issues, and the Judiciary Committee approved two election security bills in May. However, Senate Democrats accuse Republican leadership of blocking votes on the measures.

Election security has become highly politicized following the Mueller investigation, with both parties disagreeing over how to interpret the report’s conclusions into Russia’s  interference. 
 
Democrats are hoping to highlight the issue ahead of Mueller’s anticipated appearance before two House committees. 
 
Mueller has said he will not offer opinions in his congressional testimony beyond what is in the report, which concluded that Trump had not colluded with Russia to help him win the election, even though his campaign had numerous contacts with Russia.

Mueller reached no conclusion about whether Trump obstructed justice by trying to thwart the investigation, in part because of a Justice Department policy prohibiting charges against sitting U.S. presidents. However, Attorney General William Barr and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that no criminal charges were warranted against Trump. 


House Democrats and Republicans Hope to Steer Mueller’s Testimony

As former special counsel Robert Mueller prepares to testify before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees on Wednesday, one thing appears certain: the veteran prosecutor and former FBI director won’t reveal anything that’s not in his final report to Attorney General William Barr. 

“The report is my testimony,” Mueller declared on May 29 at the Justice Department. 

But Democratic and Republican members of the two panels say that won’t stop them from peppering Mueller with tough questions to extract additional information and insights.  As for millions of Americans tuning in who’ve never read the special counsel’s 448-page report, they’ll be learning directly from Mueller troubling details of how Russia sought to influence the outcome of the 2016 election in favor of candidate Donald Trump and how as president, Trump made repeated efforts to interfere with the investigation. 

As political frenzy builds over one of the most highly anticipated congressional hearings in recent memory, we provide a reminder of the key findings of the report and  speculate on how members of Congress will try to steer the hearing to their advantage. 

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s redacted report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is photographed, April 18, 2019, in Washington.

What the report says: 

—   Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election “in a sweeping and systematic way.” This meddling was carried out through two discrete operations. First, Russian military intelligence officers hacked Democratic computers and networks, stealing private information and later releasing it through the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks with the goal of undermining Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.Second, a Russian entity called Internet Research Agency orchestrated a targeted social media campaign that “favored candidate Trump and disparaged candidate Clinton.”

—  There were “numerous” contacts throughout the campaign between Trump campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government.These contacts included “business connections, offers of assistance to the campaign, invitations for candidate Trump and (Russian President Vladimir) Putin to meet in person, invitations for campaign officials and representatives of the Russian government to meet, and policy positions seeking improved U.S.-Russian relations.”

—   While Moscow sought to influence the election and members of the Trump campaign expected to benefit from the information published by WikiLeaks, investigators found little evidence that the campaign “conspired or coordinated” with Russia to change the outcome of the vote.

—  As part of their obstruction of justice investigation of Trump, Mueller’s team examined a series of 11 actions by the president.These ranged from Trump’s firing of former FBI director James Comey in May 2017 to his subsequent efforts to have Mueller dismissed.

—  Yet the special counsel left undetermined whether any of these actions constituted a crime. In explaining his decision, Mueller cited a long-standing Justice Department policy that says a sitting president can’t be charged with a federal crime. If the president couldn’t be indicted, he further explained, it would be “unfair” to recommend charges against him because he could not defend himself while in office. “Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider,” he wrote.

—  While the special counsel exonerated Trump of any criminal conspiracy with Russia, he said he could not do so with regard to obstruction of justice, writing that “if we had confidence he did not commit a crime, we’d have said so.”

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 24, 2017.

How the Democrats plan to approach the hearing

With Mueller unlikely to go beyond the report, Democrats who control the House say simply getting the special counsel to read from his report will serve the goal of informing the American public about the findings of an “incriminating” investigation. A recent poll found that just 3% of Americans have read the whole report. 

“It’s a pretty damning set of facts,” House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” program on Sunday. “Who better to bring them to life than the man who did the investigation himself?” 

They also see the hearing as an opportunity to showcase “evidence” that Trump obstructed the investigation. If Mueller is unwilling to venture beyond his findings, they’ll simply reference the report by page and paragraph and ask the special counsel to interpret the statement. 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., speaks during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 21, 2019.

“Look at page 344, paragraph two … does that describe obstruction of justice … did you find that the president did that, for example?” House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said on the “Fox News Sunday” program. 

Mueller’s answer is likely to disappoint Democrats.  Nowhere in his report does he characterize any of Trump’s questionable actions as “evidence” of obstruction of justice. 

Some Democrats may also attempt to discredit Barr, who, in consultation with other Justice Department officials, determined that Trump had not obstructed justice. The decision infuriated Democrats. At a recent congressional hearing, Barr was asked whether Mueller agreed with his finding. He said he did not know. 

What about the Republicans? 

Trump’s Republican allies in Congress contend that after a 22-month-long investigation, Mueller found nothing incriminating on Trump and that the case should be closed. But they’ve also made clear they plan to question Mueller over what they say was a flawed investigation with dubious origins. 

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., speaks during a House Judiciary Committee meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, Feb. 7, 2019.

“Remember, the Mueller report is a one-sided report,” Congressman Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“It has not been questioned from the other side. This is our chance to do that.”

Republican supporters of the president have long held that the Mueller investigation was launched on the basis of a largely discredited dossier about Trump’s ties to Russia. They’ve also claimed that the investigation was biased against the president, citing anti-Trump text messages exchanged between two former FBI officials who briefly served on the Mueller team and were romantically involved. 


House Democrats and Republicans Hope to Steer Mueller’s Testimony

As former special counsel Robert Mueller prepares to testify before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees on Wednesday, one thing appears certain: the veteran prosecutor and former FBI director won’t reveal anything that’s not in his final report to Attorney General William Barr. 

“The report is my testimony,” Mueller declared on May 29 at the Justice Department. 

But Democratic and Republican members of the two panels say that won’t stop them from peppering Mueller with tough questions to extract additional information and insights.  As for millions of Americans tuning in who’ve never read the special counsel’s 448-page report, they’ll be learning directly from Mueller troubling details of how Russia sought to influence the outcome of the 2016 election in favor of candidate Donald Trump and how as president, Trump made repeated efforts to interfere with the investigation. 

As political frenzy builds over one of the most highly anticipated congressional hearings in recent memory, we provide a reminder of the key findings of the report and  speculate on how members of Congress will try to steer the hearing to their advantage. 

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s redacted report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is photographed, April 18, 2019, in Washington.

What the report says: 

—   Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election “in a sweeping and systematic way.” This meddling was carried out through two discrete operations. First, Russian military intelligence officers hacked Democratic computers and networks, stealing private information and later releasing it through the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks with the goal of undermining Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.Second, a Russian entity called Internet Research Agency orchestrated a targeted social media campaign that “favored candidate Trump and disparaged candidate Clinton.”

—  There were “numerous” contacts throughout the campaign between Trump campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government.These contacts included “business connections, offers of assistance to the campaign, invitations for candidate Trump and (Russian President Vladimir) Putin to meet in person, invitations for campaign officials and representatives of the Russian government to meet, and policy positions seeking improved U.S.-Russian relations.”

—   While Moscow sought to influence the election and members of the Trump campaign expected to benefit from the information published by WikiLeaks, investigators found little evidence that the campaign “conspired or coordinated” with Russia to change the outcome of the vote.

—  As part of their obstruction of justice investigation of Trump, Mueller’s team examined a series of 11 actions by the president.These ranged from Trump’s firing of former FBI director James Comey in May 2017 to his subsequent efforts to have Mueller dismissed.

—  Yet the special counsel left undetermined whether any of these actions constituted a crime. In explaining his decision, Mueller cited a long-standing Justice Department policy that says a sitting president can’t be charged with a federal crime. If the president couldn’t be indicted, he further explained, it would be “unfair” to recommend charges against him because he could not defend himself while in office. “Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider,” he wrote.

—  While the special counsel exonerated Trump of any criminal conspiracy with Russia, he said he could not do so with regard to obstruction of justice, writing that “if we had confidence he did not commit a crime, we’d have said so.”

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 24, 2017.

How the Democrats plan to approach the hearing

With Mueller unlikely to go beyond the report, Democrats who control the House say simply getting the special counsel to read from his report will serve the goal of informing the American public about the findings of an “incriminating” investigation. A recent poll found that just 3% of Americans have read the whole report. 

“It’s a pretty damning set of facts,” House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” program on Sunday. “Who better to bring them to life than the man who did the investigation himself?” 

They also see the hearing as an opportunity to showcase “evidence” that Trump obstructed the investigation. If Mueller is unwilling to venture beyond his findings, they’ll simply reference the report by page and paragraph and ask the special counsel to interpret the statement. 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., speaks during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 21, 2019.

“Look at page 344, paragraph two … does that describe obstruction of justice … did you find that the president did that, for example?” House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said on the “Fox News Sunday” program. 

Mueller’s answer is likely to disappoint Democrats.  Nowhere in his report does he characterize any of Trump’s questionable actions as “evidence” of obstruction of justice. 

Some Democrats may also attempt to discredit Barr, who, in consultation with other Justice Department officials, determined that Trump had not obstructed justice. The decision infuriated Democrats. At a recent congressional hearing, Barr was asked whether Mueller agreed with his finding. He said he did not know. 

What about the Republicans? 

Trump’s Republican allies in Congress contend that after a 22-month-long investigation, Mueller found nothing incriminating on Trump and that the case should be closed. But they’ve also made clear they plan to question Mueller over what they say was a flawed investigation with dubious origins. 

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., speaks during a House Judiciary Committee meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, Feb. 7, 2019.

“Remember, the Mueller report is a one-sided report,” Congressman Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“It has not been questioned from the other side. This is our chance to do that.”

Republican supporters of the president have long held that the Mueller investigation was launched on the basis of a largely discredited dossier about Trump’s ties to Russia. They’ve also claimed that the investigation was biased against the president, citing anti-Trump text messages exchanged between two former FBI officials who briefly served on the Mueller team and were romantically involved. 


House Democrats and Republicans Hope to Steer Mueller’s Testimony

As former special counsel Robert Mueller prepares to testify before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees on Wednesday, one thing appears certain: the veteran prosecutor and former FBI director won’t reveal anything that’s not in his final report to Attorney General William Barr. 

“The report is my testimony,” Mueller declared on May 29 at the Justice Department. 

But Democratic and Republican members of the two panels say that won’t stop them from peppering Mueller with tough questions to extract additional information and insights.  As for millions of Americans tuning in who’ve never read the special counsel’s 448-page report, they’ll be learning directly from Mueller troubling details of how Russia sought to influence the outcome of the 2016 election in favor of candidate Donald Trump and how as president, Trump made repeated efforts to interfere with the investigation. 

As political frenzy builds over one of the most highly anticipated congressional hearings in recent memory, we provide a reminder of the key findings of the report and  speculate on how members of Congress will try to steer the hearing to their advantage. 

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s redacted report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is photographed, April 18, 2019, in Washington.

What the report says: 

—   Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election “in a sweeping and systematic way.” This meddling was carried out through two discrete operations. First, Russian military intelligence officers hacked Democratic computers and networks, stealing private information and later releasing it through the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks with the goal of undermining Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.Second, a Russian entity called Internet Research Agency orchestrated a targeted social media campaign that “favored candidate Trump and disparaged candidate Clinton.”

—  There were “numerous” contacts throughout the campaign between Trump campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government.These contacts included “business connections, offers of assistance to the campaign, invitations for candidate Trump and (Russian President Vladimir) Putin to meet in person, invitations for campaign officials and representatives of the Russian government to meet, and policy positions seeking improved U.S.-Russian relations.”

—   While Moscow sought to influence the election and members of the Trump campaign expected to benefit from the information published by WikiLeaks, investigators found little evidence that the campaign “conspired or coordinated” with Russia to change the outcome of the vote.

—  As part of their obstruction of justice investigation of Trump, Mueller’s team examined a series of 11 actions by the president.These ranged from Trump’s firing of former FBI director James Comey in May 2017 to his subsequent efforts to have Mueller dismissed.

—  Yet the special counsel left undetermined whether any of these actions constituted a crime. In explaining his decision, Mueller cited a long-standing Justice Department policy that says a sitting president can’t be charged with a federal crime. If the president couldn’t be indicted, he further explained, it would be “unfair” to recommend charges against him because he could not defend himself while in office. “Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider,” he wrote.

—  While the special counsel exonerated Trump of any criminal conspiracy with Russia, he said he could not do so with regard to obstruction of justice, writing that “if we had confidence he did not commit a crime, we’d have said so.”

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 24, 2017.

How the Democrats plan to approach the hearing

With Mueller unlikely to go beyond the report, Democrats who control the House say simply getting the special counsel to read from his report will serve the goal of informing the American public about the findings of an “incriminating” investigation. A recent poll found that just 3% of Americans have read the whole report. 

“It’s a pretty damning set of facts,” House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” program on Sunday. “Who better to bring them to life than the man who did the investigation himself?” 

They also see the hearing as an opportunity to showcase “evidence” that Trump obstructed the investigation. If Mueller is unwilling to venture beyond his findings, they’ll simply reference the report by page and paragraph and ask the special counsel to interpret the statement. 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., speaks during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 21, 2019.

“Look at page 344, paragraph two … does that describe obstruction of justice … did you find that the president did that, for example?” House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said on the “Fox News Sunday” program. 

Mueller’s answer is likely to disappoint Democrats.  Nowhere in his report does he characterize any of Trump’s questionable actions as “evidence” of obstruction of justice. 

Some Democrats may also attempt to discredit Barr, who, in consultation with other Justice Department officials, determined that Trump had not obstructed justice. The decision infuriated Democrats. At a recent congressional hearing, Barr was asked whether Mueller agreed with his finding. He said he did not know. 

What about the Republicans? 

Trump’s Republican allies in Congress contend that after a 22-month-long investigation, Mueller found nothing incriminating on Trump and that the case should be closed. But they’ve also made clear they plan to question Mueller over what they say was a flawed investigation with dubious origins. 

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., speaks during a House Judiciary Committee meeting on Capitol Hill in Washington, Feb. 7, 2019.

“Remember, the Mueller report is a one-sided report,” Congressman Doug Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“It has not been questioned from the other side. This is our chance to do that.”

Republican supporters of the president have long held that the Mueller investigation was launched on the basis of a largely discredited dossier about Trump’s ties to Russia. They’ve also claimed that the investigation was biased against the president, citing anti-Trump text messages exchanged between two former FBI officials who briefly served on the Mueller team and were romantically involved. 


Knight Foundation Funding Studies on Media, Democracy

A foundation that specializes in journalism is pledging nearly $50 million for research in how social media and technology impacts democracy.

The grants announced Monday by the Miami-based Knight Foundation partly respond to the manipulation of tech giants like Facebook and Twitter during the 2016 election. Eleven universities and research institutions are recipients.

Besides trying to get a bead on social media’s impact on election campaigns, the grants include projects on the spread of disinformation and how newsrooms can address polarization in society. The foundation says it is time for society to understand the issues through data and not emotion.

Grants will go to New York University, Carnegie Mellon, George Washington, North Carolina, the University of Washington, Indiana, Stanford, Texas, Wisconsin, Yale and the Data & Society Research Institute.

 


Українські школярі здобули 9 медалей на міжнародних олімпіадах із математики і біології – МОН

Українські школярі здобули шість медалей на Міжнародній учнівській олімпіаді з математики і три медалі – на Міжнародній учнівській олімпіаді з біології, повідомляє Міністерство освіти і науки. Змагання одночасно завершилися 22 липня.

До складу команди, яка представляла Україну на олімпіаді з математики, увійшло шість учнів. Вони вибороли такі медалі:

«Золото» – Федір Юдін, учень 10-го класу ліцею № 208 (Київ); 
«Срібло» – Олександр Войтович, учень 11-го класу Харківського фізико-математичного ліцею № 27;
«Срібло» – Вадим Коваль, учень 11-го класу Українського фізико-математичного ліцею КНУ імені Тараса Шевченка (Київ); 
«Срібло» – Володимир Фединяк, учень 11-го класу Львівського фізико-математичного ліцею-інтернату при ЛНУ імені Івана Франка; 
«Срібло» – Марко Хасін, учень 10-го класу Русанівського ліцею (Київ);
«Бронза» – Олесь Голембовський, учень 11-го класу Ужгородської загальноосвітньої спеціалізованої школи-інтернату з поглибленим вивченням окремих предметів. 

Науковим керівником школярів став професор Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка Богдан Рубльов.

Змагання проходили у місті Бат (Велика Британія). В олімпіаді брали участь 643 учасники зі 116 країн світу.

На олімпіаді з біології у складі української команди було чотири школярі. Серед них призерами стали:

Методій Голлендер, учень 11-го класу Києво-Печерського ліцею № 171 «Лідер» (Київ) – срібна медаль;
Іванна Остапчук, учениця 11-го класу Київської гімназії № 287 – срібна медаль;
Богдана Гур’єва, учениця 11-го класу Технічного ліцею (Київ) – бронзова медаль.

Науковим керівником команди стала заступниця директора Інституту біології Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка Наталія Скрипник.

Участь у цій олімпіаді взяли 300 школярів зі 78 країн світу. Саме ж змагання відбулося у місті Сегед (Угорщина).

Минулого місяця українські учні здобули чотири медалі на Міжнародній олімпіаді з фізики в Ізраїлі.

 


На журналістів казахстанської служби Радіо Свобода напали в Алмати (відео)

Журналісти Радіо Свобода поміж інших зазнали нападу на прес-конференції в найбільшому місті Казахстану, Алмати, 22 липня.

Група з приблизно 20 жінок у спортивному одязі увірвалася на прес-конференцію в штаб-квартирі Казахстанського бюро з прав людини. Ця неурядова правозахисна організація планувала висвітлити долю трьох ув’язнених жінок, яких звинувачують у причетності до забороненої в Казахстані опозиційної групи.

Нападниці викрикували, щоб журналісти не знімали, намагаючись відібрати їхні камери. Серед постраждалих працівників ЗМІ – представники місцевого бюро Радіо Свобода, приватного каналу Almaty TV та приватної новинної агенції KazTAG.

Зокрема учасниці нападу штовхнули репортерку Радіо Свобода Нургул Тапаєву та пошкодили обладнання оператора Токмолди Кусаїнова.

Прес-конференцію організували правозахисні активісти та адвокати, які представляють інтереси трьох жінок, заарештованих в липні цього року за участь у несанкціонованих мітингах – Оксани Шевчук, Жазіри Демеунової та Гульзіпи Жаукерової.

Жінки визнали в суді, що були присутніми на акціях протесту в травні проти президентських виборів у Казахстані та перейменування столиці країни Астани на честь колишнього президента Нурсультана Назарбаєва.

Читайте також: У Казахстані лідера профспілкового руху засудили до 7 років ув’язнення​

Слідчі звинувачують жінок у членства в забороненій політичній партії «Демократичний вибір Казахстану», яку підтримує колишній банкір і підприємець Мухтар Аблязов.

Аблязов з 2009 року проживає за межами Казахстану і є відомим противником політичної еліти в цій країні.

У 2018 році суд у Астані (нині – Нурсултан) заборонив діяльність «Демократичного вибору Казахстану» як екстремістських організації.


Education Key Campaign Issue for Younger Voters, But Not the Only One

Education has been a key issue for Democratic candidates running for president in the 2020 race, especially as they seek the support of younger Americans who have now replaced Baby Boomers as the country’s largest voting bloc. But education is not the only concern for these young voters.  Other social issues are likely to motivate them to go to the polls in 2020.  Sahar Majid has more in this report for VOA narrated by Kathleen Struck. 
 



    $.99* .COM Domain! You be you with us!     Web Hosting $3.95