07/02/24 07/02/24 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] amy: from new york, this is democracy now! >> today the decision most certainly means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do. this is a fundamentally new principle and it is a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be

constrained by the law, including the supreme court of the united states. the only limits will be self imposed by the president alone. amy: the supreme court rules for the first time in u.s. history that presidents have brought immunity to prosecution stop really all that ends prospects donald trump could be tried before the november election on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 election. the 63 decision by the court's conservative majority included the three justices appointed by trump. in a scathing dissent, justice sonia sotomayor said, "the president is now a king above the law." we will get response. and 64 years ago this week, patrice lumumba gave an historic speech to mark congo's independence from belgium. >> we shall eradicate and ensure

for everyone the fitting this humidity -- humanity. amy: we will speak with vijay prashad, director of social research. he also recently visited were not intellectual noam chomsky in brazil. noam had a stroke last year. resilient president lula also stopped by. all of that and more, coming up. welcome to democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. the united states supreme court ruled monday that donald trump has immunity from prosecution for official actions taken as president. the 6-to-3 ruling by the court's right-wing majority, including all three justices appointed by trump, was issued on the final day of the supreme court's term

and just four months ahead of november's presidential election. it will further delay trump's criminal trial for leading the january 6 insurrection. the ruling upends more than two centuries of legal precedent, for the first time shielding u.s. presidents from criminal accountability. in a scathing dissent signed by justices elena kagan and ketanji brown jackson, justice sonia sotomayor wrote -- "never in the history of our republic has a president had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. moving forward, however, all former presidents will be cloaked in such immunity." donald trump celebrated the ruling on social media, writing "big win for our constitution and democracy. proud to be an american." president biden denounced the ruling in a five-minute speech from the white house. pres. biden: this nation was founded on the principle that there are no kings in america.

each of us is equal before the law. no one is above the law. not even the president of the united states. but today supreme court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally change. amy: monday's landmark ruling follows a series of high-profile corruption scandals at supreme court and after justices samuel alito and clarence thomas refused to recuse themselves from the case over conflicts of interest. that's sparked some democrats to call for their impeachment. on monday, new york congressmember alexandria ocasio-cortez wrote -- "the supreme court has become consumed by a corruption crisis beyond its control. today's ruling represents an assault on american democracy. it is up to congress to defend our nation from this authoritarian capture. i intend on filing articles of impeachment upon our return." we'll have more on monday's momentous supreme court ruling after headlines. israel's army has ordered a mass

expulsion of palestinians from parts of khan younis, gaza second-largest city, as it prepares another ground invasion. khan younis was already destroyed in a previous israeli assault. the order set off a panicked evacuation of patients from the gaza european hospital, one of the last functioning medical centers in gaza. this comes as the palestinian red crescent society reports at least eight people were killed and over 30 others wounded in renewed strikes on southern gaza. on monday, israel freed the director of gaza's largest medical center after detaining him without charge for seven months. dr. muhammad abu salmiya of al -shifa hospital said after his release that his israeli captors broke his fingers and repeatedly struck him in the head as part of daily torture he and other palestinians endured. >> prisoners are undergoing

extremely harsh conditions from scarcity of food and drink as well as physical torture. the prisoners are facing brutal conditions right now. doctors and nurses and radiation specialists and others were targeted and stuck in prisons being tortured. amy: dr. abu salmiya said prisoners lost an average of 25 kilos, or 55 pounds, of body weight after they were denied adequate food and water. meanwhile, human rights groups are condemning israel's army for using palestinian civilians in gaza and the west bank as human shields during combat. video published by al jazeera shows israeli soldiers attaching body cameras to handcuffed palestinians and forcing them into dangerous combat zones. more video shows soldiers tying a wounded and bleeding palestinian man onto the hood of a military vehicle during a raid on the city of jenin. the euro-mediterranean human rights monitor wrote -- "each of the aforementioned acts

of criminal, brutal, and inhumane behavior constitutes a grave violation of the rules of international humanitarian law, and is a full-fledged war crime." hurricane beryl has strengthened into an extremely dangerous category 5 hurricane after devastating the windward islands in the caribbean. grenada's prime minister said the small island of carriacou had been flattened by the immense storm. a quarter of barbados residents were left without power. meanwhile, at least two people were killed in st. vincent and the grenadines where prime minister ralph gonsalves said 90% of the houses on union island were severely damaged or destroyed. forecasters warn beryl is likely to remain an extremely dangerous major hurricane as it threatens jamaica and the cayman islands ahead of a possible landfall in mexico's yucatán peninsula. it's by far the earliest category 5 storm ever observed in the atlantic and comes as climate scientists predict an extremely active 2024 hurricane season.

pakistan has begun the second phase of a contested campaign to expel thousands of undocumented afghan refugees. some 800,000 afghan refugees are expected to be forcibly returned. another over 500,000 afghans were expelled from pakistan last november after authorities raided their homes and makeshift shelters. many fear having to live under taliban rule and say they have nothing to go back to in afghanistan. meanwhile, taliban representatives have arrived in qatar to participate in u.n.-led talks alongside delegations from over two dozen countries aimed at reintegrating afghanistan into the international community. it is the first time the taliban will be present at such meetings . tin panama, president josé raúl mulino was sworn in monday vowing to block asylum seekers from crossing through the treacherous darien jungle as

they head north to the united states. u.s. homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas was among those who attended the inauguration. mulino announced an agreement with the biden administration to deport migrants who are apprehended in the darien gap while the u.s. helps cover the cost of deportation flights. >> today the number of migrants passing to the darien gap is staggering. plus international criminals use this space. i will appeal to international solidarity in regards of the cause of the problem and i will seek solutions, especially the united states. amy: mulino is panama's former public security minister. venezuela's president nicolás maduro has agreed to resume direct negotiations with the united states as part of ongoing talks to ease u.s. sanctions on venezuela.

maduro spoke from caracas monday. >> for two months, i have received a proposal from the government of the united states to restore conversations and direct dialogue. after mulling it over, i have accepted. next wednesday, conversations with the government of the united states will be started. amy: this comes less than a month before venezuela's presidential election, scheduled for the end of july, in which maduro seeks a third term in office. and here in the united states, most of the deaths that have occurred in the custody of immigration and customs enforcement, or ice, in recent years could have been prevented if detained migrants and asylum seekers were given adequate medical care. that's according to a new report by the aclu and other rights groups which looked at 52 deaths of immigrants held in ice detention centers between 2017 and 2021 and pointed to gross

medical and mental health care neglect by ice as causing preventable deaths, including suicides. the report said -- "ice's current oversight and accountability mechanisms regarding death in detention are critically flawed and do little to prevent future deaths." and those are some of the headlines. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman in new york, joined by democracy now!'s juan gonzález in chicago. hi, juan. juan: hi, amy. welcome to all of our listeners and viewers from around the country and around the world. amy: in an historic decision, the supreme court ruled on monday that presidents have broad immunity from prosecution. the ruling extends the delay in the washington, d.c., criminal case against former president donald trump on charges he plotted to overturn the 2020 presidential election and all but ends prospects he could be tried before the november election. the 6-3 ruling by the court's conservative majority, including

the three justices appointed by trump, marked the first time since the nation's founding that the supreme court has granted any form of presidential immunity from prosecution. in the majority opinion, chief justice john roberts wrote -- "the nature of presidential power entitles a former president to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. and he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. there is no immunity for unofficial acts." in a scathing dissent on behalf of the minority, justice sonia sotomayor warned the ruling would make the president above the law. she wrote -- "the president of the united states is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. when he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority's reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. orders the navy's seal team 6 to

assassinate a political rival? immune. organizes a military coup to hold onto power? immune. takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? immune. immune, immune, immune." soda mayor --sotomayor went on to write, "in every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law." the supreme court did not dismiss the indictment alleging trump illegally schemed to cling to power after he lost the 2020 election, but the ruling still amounts to a major victory for the presumptive republican presidential nominee. trump posted in all capital letters on his social media network shortly after the decision was released -- "big win for our constitution and democracy. proud to be an american!" meanwhile, president biden delivered a nationally televised statement from the white house and criticized the ruling. pres. biden: today's decision almost certainly means there are virtually no limits of what a

president can do. this is a fundamentally new principle. it is a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even come including the supreme court of the united states. the only limits will be self imposed by the president alone. amy: the ruling, which came on the last at the supreme court term, narrowed the case against trump and returned it to the trial court to determine what is left of the indictment. in may, trump became the first former president to be convicted of a felony in a new york court when he was found guilty of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to an adult film star during the 2016 presidential election. citing the supreme court ruling on immunity, trump's lawyers on monday asked the new york judge who presided over the hush money trial to set aside the conviction and delay his sentencing, which is scheduled for next week. for more, we are joined by two guests. donald sherman is the executive

director and chief counsel of citizens of responsibility and ethics in washington, or crew. he is joining us from washington, d.c. and joining us from superior, wisconsin, is lisa graves. executive director of the policy research group true north research. from 2002-2005, she was the chief counsel for nominations for the chairman and then ranking member of the senate judiciary committee. she previously served as deputy assistant attorney general in the department of justice where she was the staff leader of the working group on judicial selection. we welcome you both to democracy now! donald sherman, let's begin with you. first, your overall response to the supreme court's final decision this term? >> it is chilling. as the dissent from justice sotomayor played out, it gives the president of the united states, who ever sits in that

chair, broad sweeping over any criminal acts that person commits. if they are deemed official acts. what is more insidious is the majority goes even farther than trump asked for in suggesting that trump's attempt to have fake collectors submit fake documents to overturn our election could also be an official act that is subject to this broad immunity. so in one fell swoop, this court has essentially left the american people to the whims of the president of the united states. any president of the united states. a particularly mr. trump. we are subject to the whims of whether a president will follow the rule of law and constrain their own power or whether as,

former president trump has suggested, whether they want to be a dictator for a day or longer than that. particularly because the impeachment power is effectively nullified if 33 members or 34 senators don't have the spine to impeach a criminal president while they are in office as we saw in the aftermath of january 6. this decision is consistent with the trend that donald trump's engineered court has consistently followed which are losses or wins, excuse me, wins for corruption, for insurrectionists, and losses for accountability, democracy, and the american people. but this decision is by far the

worst and most dangerous decision undermining the rule of law in the united states. juan: donald sherman, looking back at previous instances where presidents were involved in scandals, i am wondering what you think this court decision might have meant, for instance, for richard nixon's hush-money payments to burglars or white house counsel or even the regular administration during the iran contra, the vers officials there who were indicted as result of criminal acts during the reagan years? >> again, i think this decision gives cover to all manner of presidential sins and criminality.

with respect to nixon, we would not have been able to put the nixon tapes into evidence. so it is not just that there is immunity from prosecution -- again, the court goes above and beyond and limits what evidence your prosecutor can't even put in to prove criminality and removes the intent element, which is essential for proving many crimes. i think whether it is nixon and his illegal activity or iran contra, not only does the decision provide immunity for anything that in this course estimate can be defined as a sort of core presidential act but also it limits the kinds of evidence that can be introduced to prove other -- approved

crimson based on unofficial acts. juan: i would like to bring lisa graves into the conversation from executive director director of the policy research group true north research. your comments on the decision? also if you could comment on how long it took the supreme court to render a verdict in this case, given on how important the case was to the national elections, why they weeded weeks and weeks before finally issuing a decision that the very end of the term? >> thank you for having me on. this decision is the most reckless and dangerous decision ever issued by the u.s. supreme court because it utterly transforms our country and the rule of law to one that is optional for whoever is the president of the united states. this decision is not a legitimate decision, in my view.

it dominates the supreme court in part by apartments by donald trump -- appointments by donald trump at people who should have recused themselves from this case, mainly clarence thomas and samuel alito. but it also represents a glaring example of how out of control this corrupted faction of the supreme court is. that they would take this case late after refusing to take it earlier last year when jack smith's sought review. they took it late. they had it as a last argument for the term. then they sat on it until the very last day. i believe they did so in order to further delay donald trump ring held accountable for his crime. that indictment that was issued by a grand jury of americans looking at the law, the criminal law of the united states, was well pleaded with tremendous and

significant evidence of criminality by donald trump. and then you have the supreme court intervene and slow walk its resolution only to introduce a dramatic to parch or from the very system of our checks and balances to cloak the president and immunity that does not exist in the constitution, never mentioned in the constitution as it defies the language of the constitution that requires the president to be the person who takes an oath to uphold the constitution and ensure our laws are faithfully executed. if a president can claim any legal act he is doing is somehow part of an official act, not only has this court sought to immunize it, but also this faction has asserted the act itself can't even be part of an indictment or evidence. which ignores the law of evidence, basically any evidence of a crime can be admitted to show your criminality. this is not occurring in a

vacuum. this occurs in a very real place where you can see how this court, the roberts court, put its thumb on the scale of justice to favor donald trump despite the way he behaved on january 6 and his efforts to overturn the presidential election and our democracy. you can see that because in the colorado case where a trial court judge in the supreme court of colorado found, based on evidence, that clearly donald trump incited that insurrection and sought to overturn the election if he was barred on being on the ballot in corrado. the supreme court acted quickly to take that case, heard arguments quickly and resolve quickly, because they wanted to ensure donald trump was on the ballot. but when this outlier immunity claim argued by one of the abortion extremists who works for trump claiming even in response to arguments that perhaps the president could get

away with assassinating a political rival by calling it an official act, this court sprung into action in the spring the stop that criminal case from going forward. and to entertain these egregious and outrageous arguments and now with john roberts, with samuel alito, clarence thomas, brett kavanaugh, neil gorsuch giving this outrageous notion the blessing of this faction we stand on more from the rule of law in america and this court must be held accountable. i support every effort to hold it accountable to reform this court and to restore our democracy from the reckless decision of these men to try to destroy the rule of law while claiming they didn't. let me finally say this -- these justices, each of them -- john roberts and the others --

told congress when they were facing their confirmation hearing is that no one was above the law. and yesterday, for donald trump, they were willing to set aside that fundamental principle in american law in our constitution that no president is king and basically get president trump retrospectively king like powers and perhaps prospectively. this comes as trump has been calling for the political prosecution of his enemies and for being in essence a dictator on day one and many other days should he be elected president. this could not be a more dangerous and reckless decision by this faction of the supreme court that truly is out of control. amy: i want to turn to january 2, 2021, donald sherman. president trump repeatedly pressured georgia's republican secretary of state brad raffensperger to change the results of the presidential election in georgia during an

hour-long call. "the washington post" published audio of the stunning conversation in which trump suggested raffensperger announce that officials recalculated votes. raffensperger responded to trump "the data you have is wrong." this is an excerpt of that call. pres. trump: i just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. because we won the state. this is a faulty election result. honestly, it should be tomorrow because you have a big election coming up and because of what you have done to the president -- the people of georgia know this was a scam. and because of what you've done to the president, a lot of people aren't going out to vote. amy: there you have him wanting 11,000 votes found, what he needed to win georgia. donald sherman, would this fall

under this immunity? >> i would argue that it is absolutely outside of this immunity. it is an unofficial act. it is a call place as candidate versus president. amy: but he was president of the united states. >> again, this court has given me no confidence that it would reach the same conclusions. this court -- again, went farther than donald trump's lawyers were willing to go in describing what official and unofficial acts were. as my colleague suggested, in the case in colorado, this court moved expeditiously and bent over backwards despite the plain text of the constitution to find that donald trump -- to allow donald trump to stay on the ballot despite the fact he had engaged in insurrection. i just don't have any confidence

that this court, particularly with his conflicted justices, would reach the conclusion that most reasonable people would that a candidate who happens to be president of the united states on the phone pressuring a state official to find him more votes so that he can stay in power is not an unofficial act and not protected by this immunity. but this court, or as my colleague said, this faction of the court has made clear that they are willing pretty much any abuses of power that donald trump has or will commit as president of the united states. amy: lisa graves, what happens now with the current new york case? everything is so complicated, obviously, by this decision. the prosecutors were supposed to make a recommendation as of

yesterday for the sentence for donald trump. he was just found guilty for dozens of felonies. but they did not submit that recommendation because of this court decision. >> they're going to have to review this decision and see if and how it would apply to any of the charges that donald trump was convicted on. that conduct by donald trump was occurring before he -- predominately before he was elected president. i think it would be extraordinary for this new ruling by the court to give him in essence immunity for actions before he became president. but he certainly took some actions afterwards. again, this is a circumstance where trump in essence has tried to cloak everything he does as

if it were an official act of the president. even that call to georgia. i don't think it was. i think that was an act of a candidate. even then, the fact we have to parse this candidate or president, is it in the so-called perimeter or outer perimeter that john roberts and this faction has created to try to immunize this president? i am hoping the judges below, new york and dcn georgia, they will find a way to ensure that these criminal charges in the criminal convictions in new york in particular stand despite this reckless and outlandish decision by the court. but we will have to see. in the case of d.c., the trial judge is going to have to review every single part of that indictment against this ruling by the faction.

that judicial process i think occurs in one zone. as america people, lifted takes fiercely the fact we have to protect our democracy from any president whom we could not trust to insidiously follow the law. any person who seeks office who would try to use that office to punish their political enemies -- i say this in a personal capacity -- is not fit for this office given the new ground rules that this faction has set. i look forward to the day in which this decision is repudiated and reversed for the reckless and lawless standard that it has that for the president of the united states. and until then, we have to ensure any person elected president does not have that criminal instinct that donald trump has already been convicted of having. juan: i would like to ask donald sherman, the impact of the first

trump presidency and possible second on country's judicial system given as we have mentioned he named three supreme court justices, as well as 231 judges to the lower federal courts -- almost all of them coming from a list created by leonard leo of the right-wing federalist society. what do you suspect would happen in a second trump presidency? >> well, i think this disastrous decision is emblematic of it. again, as we saw during the trump term, many of his most dangerous, ethical, and legal abuses were thwarted by federal judges, including at the supreme court, where there was a sort of 5-4 group that included chief

justice roberts and the four liberals at the time. i that in a second trump term, one, there will be a 6-3 conservative majority that has already demonstrated they don't care about ethics as it applies to themselves and has just given the president of the united states carte blanche to commit crimes. if they are somehow arguably in the president's official capacity. the checks and balances that existed and prevented the worst abuses in the first trump presidency are no longer there. and in fact, the supreme court engineered by trump and leo and the koch network has announced to the world that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution. there is no universe where the

expectations and the threats -- the expectations are worse and the threat are not greater if trump assumes presidency again. or if any person with criminal or dictatorial impulses assumes the presidency in the future. amy: we want to thank you, donald sherman, executive director of crew, citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington. and lisa graves, executive director of true north research. joining as from superior michigan. next up, 64 years ago this week, patrice lumumba gave an historic speech to mark the congo's independence from belgium. we will speak with vijay prashad , director of the tricontinental institute for social research.

bj also just visited the world-renowned intellectual noam chomsky in brazil. nome had a stroke last year. brazilian president lula also stopped by. we will talk about everything from congo to professor chomsky. stay with us. ♪ [music break]

amy: "indépendance cha cha" by le grand kallé. this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. as we have reported, the world-renowned linguist, activist, intellectual noam chomsky was discharged from hospital in brazil in june as he continues to recover from a stroke a year ago that impacted his ability to speak. his wife told brazilian newspaper he still follows the

news and raises his left arm in anger when he sees images of israel's war on gaza. we're going to spend the rest of the hour with vijay prashad, the historian, journalist, and director of the tricontinental institute for social research. author of 40 books, including his 2022 book written with chomsky "the withdrawal: iraq, libya, afghanistan, and the fragility of u.s. power." before we move to this major piece you just wrote on the congo, we are going to ask you about your visit with noam chomsky. your joining us from colombia. you visited noam twice in brazil. noam is down 95 years old. i know his family is very private as noam was. if you can talk about, well, share what you will with us. >> first, it is great to be with

you. what can i say? noam, beloved friend, advisor, confidant, and some ways the one who helped explain what was happening in the world for decades is 95 years old. and when he was 94, he suffered a stroke in june last year. it is difficult for anybody to recover from a stroke if you are 70 or 80, hard to recover from a stroke. when you're 95, it is really hard to recover. but he is an incredible person. his body is really strong. when i went to see him in the hospital in sao paulo last year, he was undergoing physical therapy. i was there with him just about a week, maybe 10 days ago. noam was in pretty interesting shape. he was opening his eyes, briefs by himself. he is not on any kind of life-support. he makes deep eye contact.

he plays with his dog gus, those a ball with his left hand. the right side of his body is unable to move as much as the left. while we were there, one of the days i was there president lula came to visit him. imagine joe biden or any other u.s. high official coming to visit noam chomsky in a hospital. it is impossible to imagine. but noam represents something to people around the world, billions of people. when president lula came come he's said cash they had met before and he said, you are one of the most influential people in my life. he said, the only other person who has influenced me -- he kissed him on the forehead and so on.

noam is 95. we wish him comfort. we wish him joy. we hold him in our hearts. he is perhaps the most important person from the united states to speak about u.s. power. what can i say? so moving to see him there with his eyes open reflecting on what is happening around him. when i told him -- there was a hint of a smile. it meant a lot to me to be able to hold his hand and said there with him for some time. i know twice already, amy, there have been rumors that noam chomsky is dead. i was able to tell him about the obituaries that had already come out. again, he smiled a little bit. juan: if you could, summarize

what you think is the most important legacy that noam has left to the progressive and radical and revolutionary world. >> i mean, it is an incredible contribution that he has made. obviously, he has made a great contribution as a linguist. i cannot be to that. i'm not really able to understand much of those books. but i do know during the vietnam war when noam wrote his incredible text on the responsibility of intellectuals, he really put his finger pointing directly at the was academy at experts who are willing to go out and collaborate with a block of power that was pummeling the victim these people. noam, like a genuine intellectual, with that immense responsibility that he writes about in "the new york review of

books" went to vietnam. he went to cambodia. he directly saw what the was bombing had done. he lectured in a bombed out building in hanoi to professors who have been cut off from developments around the world. when he was asked by them, what is the latest novel like? what is this and that? he had to talk about everything to them. what is important about noam chomsky isn't just this book about israel or that book about colombia or this position or that position, it is that immense ability of a person to stand up against the crimes of his own country, to take on the responsibility of the intellectual and not flinch. i asked him once, noam, how is it possible you are able to take all of this criticism?

incredible amount of criticism that you face? he said, well, i don't pay attention to it. do with the big smile he said, i am arrogant. i thought that was a hilarious statement from to make. if anyone knows noam chomsky, he is the most humble man. there is not an ounce of arrogance. what he meant was, i have a strength of character to stand up and tell them in washington, d.c., listen, i read all your documents. i know what you're saying. this is the contradiction i wanted to reveal about your crimes. and that responsibility of intellectuals articulated in 1967, the year i was born, that essay has affected his entire life. i want -- i hope intellectuals today will technologist this or that argument made by noam, but in example of what an intellectual must be.

must be courageous, must be willing to study everything that the people in power say and write and then talk back to them with confidence and clarity. amy: vijay, we want to thank you for your thoughts on noam. vijay prashad has just visited noam chomsky. he was just released from a hospital in são paulo. he suffered a stroke about a year ago. vijay's director of the tricontinental institute for social research. he is the author of 40 books, including two with noam chomsky. their new book, based on conversations they had before noam's stroke last year, is out this month called "on cuba: reflections on 70 years of revolution and struggle." when he was visiting noam chomsky, the brazilian president

lula stopped by to visit professor chomsky as well. when we come back, we will talk with vijay prashad about the congo, the democratic republic of congo. it was 64 years ago this week that patrice lumumba gave the historic speech marking congo's independence from elgin. back in 20 seconds. ♪ [music break]

amy: this is democracy now!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. it was 64 years ago this past sunday that congo declared independence from brutal belgian rule that began in 1885 when king leopold of belgium created a "personal colony" and brutally forced congolese people to extract rubber, ivory and diamonds. belgium took official control of the colony and continued the extreme resource extraction. in 1960, congo gained independence and elected patrice lumumba, a progressive pan-africanist, as prime minister. this is an excerpt of patrice lumumba's historic speech marking the congo's independence from belgium on june 30, 1960. >> we have seen our land seized in the name of ostensibly just

laws recognition only to the right of mice. we have not forgotten it was never the same for white and black. convenient for the ones to be cruel to the others. experience the atrocious sufferings being persecuted for political convictions and excel from our native land. it was worse than death itself. we have not forgotten. who will ever forget the shootings which killed so many of our brothers or the cells into which we were mercilessly

-- and mercilessly thrown? amy: patrice lumumba speaking 64 years ago this past sunday as he declared independence from belgium. he was assassinated soon after in a plot involving the cia. the u.s. installed and supported the men who ruled high radically for more than 30 years, plundering the nation. even as formal colonialism continued. now focused on mining cobalt, lithium, and more. from where we are joined by vijay prashad, director of the tricontinental institute for social research. his latest article looks at how the democratic republic of congo . thank you for staying with us. why don't you lay out your piece? >> today is actually patrice

lumumba's birthday. he would have been 99 years old. it is important for people to recall he was assassinated by belgian intelligence, his intelligence and british intelligence in collusion with the congolese military when he was only 35 years old. what he said in that landmark speech in 1960 when the congo attained its independence is all tribal rivalries should be muted in the congo needs to use its immense resource wealth, untapped reserves valued at about -- one of the richest countries in the world. use that resource wealth for the good of the people of the congo. patrice lumumba was the ally of a man who in 1965, 5 years after the murder of mr. lumumba, published a book called

"neocolonialism" laying out the argument africa was not going to be allowed to develop because the west, which had colonized the continent after the conference of 1884 -- not after it, but divided of the continent in 1884. argued, look, we're not going to be allowed to develop our own resources because they think they had patrimony over it. it is interesting to look at this specifically. people may not know the material, uranium used in the bombs that were dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki come from the democratic republic of the congo. that mine's control was part of the dispute. the cia worried if patrice lumumba was allowed to remain in power, he might hand over the

uranium to the soviet union. therefore, he had to be -- the question of who controls resources in a place as rich as the democratic republic of the congo is central, whether it was rubber during the time of the belgians and king leopold ii, cobalt, and other very lucrative minerals and metals. control over resources is fundamental. governments -- the state institutions in the drc not permitted to grow to become mature state institutions at all. i was at a border town between uganda and the democratic republic of congo. you could see trucks drive across the border. bribes being paid here and there. people say this has to do with

corruption. corruption isn't a particular problem. it is in the explanation for the problem in the drc. corruption is the symptom of a deeper problem, which is the prevention of the congolese to control their own well. equally, people say well there are trouble wars. this is a fundamentally inaccurate statement. there are 400 different ethnic communities in the congo, 200 plus languages spoken. there is a great deal of difference. the question is the congolese have never been able to put forward a national project around how to unite the people into the proper country. this has always been suborned by external. juan: you mentioned in 1958, two years before congo's

independence, they convene the all african people's conference and it really represented the generation of revolutionary leaders who attended. egypt, guinea, and others. can you talk about that conference and its impact on the independence movement throughout africa? >> it is very important we reflect on, for a moment because just a few days ago, his eldest son died. dr. francis was 89 years old, highly respected scientist and so on. much underrated figure in the african story. he is the person who do the

struggle in the gold coast was able to establish the possibility of african freedom from colonial power and at the same time argued it wasn't just a question of national independence but pan-africanism has to be central. the pan-african consciousness had to produce african unity. the countries had to operate together. if they did not stand together, they would hang independently. that was his specific and important intervention into decolonization. when he brought together these two the conference, it was a pan-african conference. he counseled patrice lumumba when mr. lumumba was coming into power. it was this man who sent people to assist and help the congolese

develop their political institutions and so on. very interesting, in 1965 when he published his book "new colonialism come for the central of the u.s. government reviewed the books. real book review. they said that review to all agencies of the u.s. government. i often say they could against him in 1966 is the only coup that was related to a negative book review. the book review done by the cia. really what was threatening about him was the fact he had this african unity agenda, that it was under his leadership and direction the organization of african unity was created in 1963. the coup against patrice lumumba was in a sense a coup not only because of the resources and the democratic republic of congo,

but political ally ship that patrice lumumba had. together they were going to imagine the possibilities of african unity. english-speaking ghana, french-speaking drc. they would've had a captivating impact on the african continent. coup number one in 1960 and number 2, 1966. i think that is a relationship in that meeting where he brings together from across the continent is really a significant touchstone of the importance of african unity for people like lumumba and a kuma. juan: there's a lot of focus on the congo's mineral wealth, but also having immense agricultural wealth. and of arable land to feed the entire continent and yet his people remain among the poorest

in the world? >> it is a scandal. just the statistics, the fact the congo has over 50% of the population in poverty -- one in six people in the democratic republic of congo in extreme poverty, unable to find food to eat. it is an extraordinary country. people have visited the democratic republic of congo will say it is extraordinary in the sense of its immense wealth, forests, land, and so on. it is like 60 times the size of belgium, which colonized the drc. it is an extraordinary country. but it is never been permitted, to develop his own project. the democratic republic of congo in zambia produced a project to develop an electric car battery but the government of joe biden intervened, subordinated the two of them to something called the

corridor project that said, no, you can't do this alone. zambia and the drc can't do this alone. the united states must be there as a trustee. racist policy continues until now. the corridor project isn't a neutral project of development, it is a project to prevent countries like zambia and the democratic republic of congo from creating their own electric battery industry. in a sense, there is an idea these countries should only produce raw materials. that has to be i think deeply contested. it is not just some right-wing people who have that view. this is the view of the biden administration, the neoliberals around the world. they don't want to allow africa to industrialize. that is a very important legacy of lumumba, this demand and fight that we must be able to produce our own commodity chain. we can't just be the source for

raw materials. amy: vijay, thank you for being with us. patrice lumumba would have been 99 years old today. vijay prashad is the director of the tricontinental institute for social research. this two article is headlined "the congolese fight for their own wealth."