Texas Weekly Online

Menu
Menu
Facebook Twitter Youtube

Author:

German Christmas market attack suspect to face murder charges

German Christmas market attack suspect to face murder charges

A man accused of driving a car into crowds at a German Christmas market, killing five people and injuring more than 200, has been detained on multiple charges of murder and attempted murder. The Magdeburg police department said in a statement on Sunday the man had been issued a warrant for pre-trial detention on charges of murder on five counts as well as multiple counts of attempted murder and grievous bodily harm. Those killed were a nine-year-old boy and four women aged 52, 45, 75 and 67, the police statement said. Among the wounded, about 40 had serious or critical injuries. Authorities reported that the suspected attacker used emergency exit routes to access the Christmas market grounds, where he accelerated and drove into the crowds, striking more than 200 people in a three-minute rampage. He was arrested at the scene. Simmering tensions The attack on Friday evening in the central city of Magdeburg shocked Germany and reignited simmering tensions around the issue of migration. The suspect, who was named as Taleb A, is a 50-year-old psychiatrist from Saudi Arabia with a history of anti-Islam rhetoric, who has resided in Germany for nearly two decades. Advertisement The motive for the attack remains unclear, but the Magdeburg prosecutor, Horst Nopens, said on Saturday that one possible factor could be what he called the suspect’s frustration with Germany’s handling of Saudi refugees. The suspected attacker had made online death threats against German citizens and had a history of quarrelling with state authorities, leading German media to question whether the government could have done more to prevent the attack. News magazine Der Spiegel, quoting security sources, said the Saudi secret service had warned Germany’s spy agency BND a year ago about a tweet in which Taleb threatened Germany would pay a “price” for its treatment of Saudi refugees. And in August he wrote on social media: “Is there a path to justice in Germany without blowing up a German embassy or randomly slaughtering German citizens?… If anyone knows it, please let me know.” The Die Welt daily reported, also quoting security sources, that German state and federal police had carried out a “risk assessment” on Taleb last year but concluded that he posed “no specific danger”. Emboldening the far right Police reported scuffles and “minor disturbances” during a far-right demonstration in Magdeburg on Saturday night, attended by approximately 2,100 people. Protesters, some wearing black balaclavas, held a large banner reading “remigration”, a term used by far-right supporters advocating for the mass deportation of immigrants and individuals considered not ethnically German. The incident comes before a pivotal election in Germany on February 23, prompting sharp criticism from far-right and far-left parties opposed to the government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Advertisement The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD)’s parliamentary head Bernd Baumann demanded Scholz call a special session of the Bundestag on the “desolate” security situation, arguing that “this is the least that we owe the victims.” Meanwhile, the head of the far-left Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) party, Sahra Wagenknecht, demanded that Interior Minister Nancy Faeser explain “why so many tips and warnings were ignored beforehand”. Scholz has condemned the “terrible, insane” attack, calling for national unity. In the past, the suspect had voiced support on social media platform X for the AfD as well as for United States billionaire Elon Musk, who has backed the AfD. The party has a strong support base in former East Germany, where Magdeburg is located. Its members, including the candidate for chancellor Alice Weidel, planned a rally in Magdeburg on Monday evening. Adblock test (Why?)

Trump set to deliver first rally-styled speech since decisive election win: ‘Biggest conservative movement’

Trump set to deliver first rally-styled speech since decisive election win: ‘Biggest conservative movement’

President-elect Trump is set to take the stage in Phoenix, Arizona, on Sunday to deliver his first rally-styled speech since his decisive win over Vice President Kamala Harris last month.  “We are incredibly honored that President Trump will deliver his first rally-style speech since the election at AmFest 2024 in Phoenix,” Turning Point USA and Turning Point Action chief Charlie Kirk said in a press release. “This was already the largest multi-day event in the movement, and this year will be the biggest we’ve ever hosted, by far.” “When I spoke to the president, he said he’d only do it if we called it a ‘Tribute to Arizona,’ so that’s exactly what we’re doing. President Trump knows the people of Arizona have always been with him, they’re loyal to him and they just delivered the largest win for him of all of the swing states, giving him a 5.5% margin of victory.” Trump is expected to take the stage of the Phoenix Convention Center at 10:30 a.m. local time Sunday, as part of Turning Point’s annual AmericaFest – a four-day event billed as part of the “biggest conservative movement in the country.” LAWMAKERS REACT TO STOPGAP FUNDING AND AVERTING GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN Trump’s address at the event comes just a day after Congress avoided a prolonged government shutdown.  The Senate passed a stopgap spending bill early Saturday morning – after the midnight deadline had passed and the government briefly shut down – and sent the legislation to President Biden for his signature.  PRESIDENT BIDEN SIGNS STOPGAP FUNDING BILL INTO LAW, NARROWLY AVERTING SHUTDOWN Last week, lawmakers had reached an agreement on a short-term spending bill that included more than 1,500 pages of text. Conservatives and Trump allies, spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk, slammed the original and lengthy legislation, as negotiations came down to the wire last week, taking issue with provisions such as increasing lawmakers’ cost of living.  Trump called on Republicans to suspend the debt limit as part of their talks to avert a government shutdown, which has exceeded $36 trillion. The House crafted a new, 116-page bill that included suspending the debt limit for two years until January 2027, roughly $110 billion in disaster relief aid for Americans affected by storms Milton and Helene, as well as a measure to fund rebuilding Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge. WHITE HOUSE PRESSED ON BIDEN REFUSING TO SPEAK PUBLICLY AHEAD OF SHUTDOWN That bill failed 174 to 235, before House lawmakers negotiated and passed another version.  TRUMP-BACKED SPENDING BILL GOES DOWN IN FLAMES AS SHUTDOWN LOOMS The final bill sent to Biden included economic relief for farmers and disaster aid for those affected by recent storms, but it did not include a suspension of the debt ceiling, which Trump had requested.  Trump has not spoken publicly since the bill’s passage, although sources told Fox News that the incoming president is not that happy with the bill.  Ahead of Trump’s speech on Sunday, conservative lawmakers and allies, including Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, upcoming Trump administration “border czar” Tom Homan, comedian Rob Schenider, and Kirk will also take the stage.  AmericaFest kicked off on Dec. 19 in Phoenix and will conclude on Sunday following Trump’s speech. The annual event is billed as one that reenergizes conservative students and voters “​​all while celebrating the greatest country in the world.” Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind, Julia Johnson and Michael Dorgan contributed to this report. 

The biggest Supreme Court decisions of 2024: From presidential immunity to overturning the Chevron doctrine

The biggest Supreme Court decisions of 2024: From presidential immunity to overturning the Chevron doctrine

The U.S. Supreme Court issued several major decisions over the course of 2024.  Its rulings include those that have pushed back on the Biden administration’s attempted change of Title IX protections for transgender students, reversed a 40-year precedent that had supported what conservatives have condemned as the administrative state in Washington, and considered the constitutionality of Republican-controlled state efforts to curtail what they define as liberal Silicon Valley biases online.  The high court also ruled on presidential immunity at a consequential time for current President-elect Trump during the 2024 election – and sided with a Jan. 6 defendant who fought a federal obstruction charge.  Here are the top cases considered by the justices over the past year.  The Supreme Court on Aug. 16, 2024, kept preliminary injunctions preventing the Biden-Harris administration from implementing a new rule that widened the definition of sex discrimination under Title IX to include sexual orientation and gender identity, while litigation over the rule continues. After the Fifth and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeal denied the administration’s request to put a stay on the injunctions, the Department of Education turned to the Supreme Court, arguing that some parts of the rule should be able to take effect. The Supreme Court rejected their request. “Importantly, all Members of the Court today accept that the plaintiffs were entitled to preliminary injunctive relief as to three provisions of the rule, including the central provision that newly defines sex discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity,” the court’s unsigned opinion said, concluding that the Biden administration had not “adequately identified which particular provisions, if any, are sufficiently independent of the enjoined definitional provision and thus might be able to remain in effect.” In April, the Department of Education issued the new rule implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, arguing that expanding the definition of discrimination to include “sexual orientation and gender identity” would protect LGBTQ students. Louisiana led several states in suing the DOE, contending the new rule “violates students’ and employees’ rights to bodily privacy and safety.”  Title IX implemented the long-standing athletics regulation allowing sex-separate teams decades ago, and Republicans contended Biden’s new rule would have significant implications on women- and girls-only spaces and possibly legally back biological males playing in women’s sports. Separate court injunctions blocked the rule from taking effect in 26 states.  LIBERAL SUPREME COURT JUSTICE MAKES ‘CRINGE’ CAMEO PERFORMANCE ON BROADWAY “I’m grateful that the Supreme Court agreed not to block our injunction against this radical rewrite of Title IX,” Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement at the time. “Other than the 19th Amendment guaranteeing our right to vote, Title IX has been the most successful law in history at ensuring equal opportunity for women in education at all levels and in collegiate athletics. This fight isn’t over, but I’ll keep fighting to block this radical agenda that eviscerates Title IX.”  The Supreme Court on July 1, 2024, kept on hold efforts by Texas and Florida to limit how Facebook, TikTok, X, YouTube and other social media platforms regulate content in a ruling that strongly defended the platforms’ free speech rights. Writing for the court, Justice Elena Kagan said the platforms, like newspapers, deserve protection from governments’ intrusion in determining what to include or exclude from their space. “The principle does not change because the curated compilation has gone from the physical to the virtual world,” Kagan wrote in an opinion signed by five justices. All nine justices agreed on the overall outcome. The justices returned the cases to lower courts for further review in broad challenges from trade associations for the companies. While the details vary, both laws aimed to address long-standing conservative complaints that the social media companies were liberal-leaning and censored users based on their viewpoints, especially on the political right.  The Florida and Texas laws were signed by Republican governors in the months following decisions by Facebook and Twitter (now X) to cut then-President Trump off over his posts related to the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Trade associations representing the companies sued in federal court, claiming that the laws violated the platforms’ speech rights. One federal appeals court struck down Florida’s statute while another upheld the Texas law, but both were on hold pending the outcome at the Supreme Court. In a statement made when he signed the Florida measure into law, Gov. Ron DeSantis said it would be “protection against the Silicon Valley elites.” When Gov. Greg Abbott signed the Texas law, he said it was needed to protect free speech in what he termed the new public square. Social media platforms “are a place for healthy public debate where information should be able to flow freely – but there is a dangerous movement by social media companies to silence conservative viewpoints and ideas,” Abbott said. “That is wrong, and we will not allow it in Texas.” NetChoice LLC has sued Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.  “The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded, because neither the Eleventh Circuit nor the Fifth Circuit conducted a proper analysis of the facial First Amendment challenges to Florida and Texas laws regulating large internet platforms. NetChoice’s decision to litigate these cases as facial challenges comes at a cost,” the court wrote. “The Court has made facial challenges hard to win. In the First Amendment context, a plaintiff must show that ‘a substantial number of [the law’s] applications are unconstitutional, judged in relation to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep.’ So far in these cases, no one has paid much attention to that issue.”  The court said its analysis and arguments “focused mainly on how the laws applied to the content-moderation practices that giant social-media platforms use on their best-known services to filter, alter or label their users’ posts, i.e., on how the laws applied to the likes of Facebook’s News Feed and YouTube’s homepage,” but the justices said they