Advertisement
Live

Immunity offer from Michael Flynn greeted with skepticism

Share

Here’s our look at the Trump administration and the rest of Washington:

Adam Schiff views documents White House says back Trump surveillance claim

(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) traveled to the White House Friday to view documents President Trump has said partially vindicate his claim that his predecessor ordered surveillance of him during the campaign.

In a statement, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said he was told they were “precisely the same materials” viewed previously by the committee’s chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), which Schiff said should now be shared with the full panel membership.

“Nothing I could see today warranted a departure from the normal review procedures,” Schiff said, adding that he could not discuss the contents of the documents, which remain classified.

Nunes was shown the documents last week by White House officials surreptitiously, then announced to reporters the next day that he needed urgently to go to the White House to brief Trump about them.

Schiff, in his statement, said that “the White House has yet to explain why senior White House staff apparently shared these materials with but one member of either [Intelligence] committee, only for their contents to be briefed back to the White House.”

Schiff also had a brief but “cordial” meeting with Trump during his time at the White House, a spokesman said.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters earlier Friday that other Democrats have been invited to the White House to view the materials, which he said would “shed light” on their investigation.

Both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees are conducting separate reviews of Russian interference into the 2016 election; Trump has asked each panel to also probe his own claim that his predecessor engaged in wire tapping of his phones at Trump Tower during the campaign, an assertion that has been denied by Nunes as well as the heads of the FBI and intelligence agencies.

Share

Mnuchin regrets plugging ‘The Lego Batman Movie,’ pledges to ‘exercise greater caution’ in the future

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Friday told a top government ethics official he should not have publicly plugged “The Lego Batman Movie” — a film in which he has a financial stake — and promised to “exercise greater caution” in the future.

“I take very seriously my ethical responsibilities as a presidential appointee and the head of the Department of the Treasury,” Mnuchin wrote to Walter Shaub, director of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.

On Monday, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asked Shaub to determine whether Mnuchin had committed an ethics violation last week when he discussed the movie during an event hosted by the Axios news website that aired on C-SPAN2.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Rep. Adam Schiff says it’s too early to consider an immunity deal for Michael Flynn

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee says it’s too early to consider an immunity deal for President Trump’s former national security advisor.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) says that Michael Flynn even discussing possible immunity in exchange for protection from prosecution is a “grave and momentous” step because of the seniority of his former position.

Schiff says the House Intelligence Committee is interested in hearing Flynn’s story, but there would have to be coordination with the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Justice Department on the terms.

The House and Senate intelligence committees and the FBI are investigating Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. The investigation includes scrutiny of Flynn’s ties with Russia.

Read More

Share

Trump administration admonishes California chief justice over claim that agents are ‘stalking’ immigrants

U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions
(Mark Wilson / Getty Images)

The Trump administration on Friday fired back at California’s top judge, disputing her characterization this month that federal immigration agents were “stalking” courthouses to make arrests.

In a letter to Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, leaders of Trump’s Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security objected to her description of federal agents’ conduct.

“As the chief judicial officer of the state of California, your characterization of federal law enforcement is particularly troubling,” wrote Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, objecting to Cantil-Sakauye’s use of the word “stalking.”

They said agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) were using courthouses to arrest immigrants in the U.S. illegally, in part, because California and some of its local jurisdictions prohibit their officials from cooperating with federal agencies in detaining such immigrants under most conditions.

Sessions and Kelly told California’s top judge that she should consider taking her concerns to Gov. Jerry Brown and the cities and counties that limit local law enforcement’s involvement with immigration agents.

Cantil-Sakauye, a former prosecutor who rose through the judicial ranks as an appointee of Republican governors, said through a spokesman that she appreciated the Trump administration’s “admission that they are in state courthouses making federal arrests.”

“Making arrests at courthouses, in my view, undermines public safety because victims and witnesses will fear coming to courthouses to help enforce the law,” she said Friday.

She expressed disappointment that courthouses, given local and state public safety concerns, were not listed as sensitive areas offlimits to agents. Federal policy lists schools, churches and hospitals as “sensitive areas.”

The letter from the Justice Department officials defended the arrests of immigrants at courthouses.

By apprehending suspects after they have passed through security screening at courthouses, federal agents are less likely to encounter anyone who is armed, the letter said.

“The arrest of individuals by ICE officers and agents is predicated on investigation and targeting of specific persons who have been identified by ICE and other law enforcement agencies as subject to arrest,” they wrote.

Cantil-Sakauye had asked the Trump administration on March 16 to stop immigration agents from seeking immigrants at the state’s courthouses.

“Courthouses should not be used as bait in the necessary enforcement of our country’s immigration laws,” she wrote in a letter to Sessions and Kelly.

Her letter did not say which courthouses had been the location of such “stalking,” but judges and lawyers in Southern California have complained of seeing immigration agents posted near courts.

She said she feared the practice would erode public trust in the state courts.

Sessions and Kelly urged Cantil-Sakauye to speak to Brown and other officials “who have enacted policies that occasionally necessitate ICE officers and agents to make arrests at courthouses and other public places.”

Share
Advertisement

Back in the spotlight, Hillary Clinton takes aim at Trump’s budget

Hillary Clinton stepped back into the spotlight this week after laying relatively low since the election, and she had some advice for President Trump: Tear up the White House budget plan.

Clinton was at the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security to bestow an award named in her honor to Colombian leaders who helped bring an end to war in that country and elevate the role of women in the peace process.

She spoke of the progress the world has made in advancing women’s rights since she spoke forcefully on the issue two decades ago when the U.N. gathered world leaders to address it in Beijing. But she warned that progress is threatened by Trump.

“We are seeing signals of a shift that should alarm us all,” Clinton said. “This administration’s proposed cuts to international health, development and diplomacy would be a blow to women and children and a grave mistake for our country.”

Clinton then raised the letter signed by 120 former generals and admirals beseeching the Trump administration not to make the cuts.

“These distinguished men and women who have served in uniform recognize that turning our back on diplomacy won’t make our country safer. It will undermine our security and our standing in the world.”

A lot has changed since Clinton was on the campaign trail, but some things about her style on the stump haven’t. She pulled out a favorite line from last year as she began to talk about a study that backed up her point about the damage Trump’s budget plan could do.

“Here I go again,” Clinton said to whooping and cheering from an audience of mostly female students, “talking about research evidence and facts.”

Share

Seeking a way forward, Trump increasingly finds himself at odds with his own party

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press )

President Trump won his office in spite of the best efforts of some in his party.

Now, the tenuous nature of the bonds between Trump and the GOP are increasingly on public display as the president openly feuds with conservatives and White House officials debate whether to reach out to Democrats in order to restart his domestic agenda.

The latest and strongest evidence came Thursday as Trump escalated his political battle against the members of the House Freedom Caucus, the conservative lawmakers who helped block the healthcare bill he backed.

Early in the morning, he said on Twitter that the caucus would “hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don’t get on the team.”

“We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!” he added.

It was an extraordinary message, suggesting that Trump might try to back challengers in primaries against lawmakers of his own party — something few presidents have tried, none with much success.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Tillerson tells NATO allies to pay more, do more to fight terrorism

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Friday promised NATO allies that the United States will stand by their side but also expected them to spend more on defense and do more to fight terrorism.

Tillerson participated in a day of discussions with foreign ministers from the 27 other NATO member nations, his first with the full roster of allies, who were sent scrambling last week to accommodate the top U.S. diplomat after he said he could not attend the meeting originally planned for early April.

“The United States is committed to ensuring NATO has the capabilities to support our collective defense. We understand that a threat against one of us is a threat against all of us,” Tillerson said.

But, he added, “as President Trump has made clear, it is no longer sustainable for the U.S. to maintain a disproportionate share of NATO’s defense expenditures.”

The United States is amping up pressure on NATO members to increase their defense spending to 2% of gross domestic product, in line with a 2014 agreement among the alliance’s 28 member countries to meet the target by 2024.

Only five NATO countries meet the 2% threshold. The U.S. spends 3.61% of its GDP on defense, more than any other member of the alliance.

Tillerson said that if countries have not met the 2% spending goal by the end of the year, they should at least have a concrete plan “that clearly articulates how, with annual milestone progress commitments, the pledge will be fulfilled.”

Pressure to meet that strict deadline is likely to upset some allies.

German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel told reporters before Friday’s meeting that he thinks it would be “completely unrealistic” for Germany to bring its military defense spending up to 2% of GDP.

“I don’t know any politician in Germany who thinks that this would be reachable or desirable,” Gabriel said.

Germany is increasing its military spending this year to $39 billion, or 1.2% of its GDP. Gabriel rejected the Trump administration’s focus on military expenditures, arguing that humanitarian aid and Germany’s spending to take in refugees should be considered part of the defense budget.

Tillerson also called on allies to take a greater role in the fight against terrorism.

“NATO can and should do more,” he said. “Fighting terrorism is the top national security priority for the United States, as it should be for all of us.”

Tillerson’s earlier announcement that he would skip the meeting struck a nerve among the alliance members, coming at a sensitive time when tensions between the Trump administration and NATO allies have soared.

The schedule change caused an awkward protocol shuffle, with a handful of foreign ministers unable to make it to Brussels. What was supposed to be a two-day meeting was compressed into half of a day.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg tried to cast optimism on the last-minute schedule change, calling it “a sign of the strong transatlantic unity and flexibility of our alliance that we were able to find a date.”

The foreign ministers’ meeting is crucial because it lays the groundwork for a NATO summit with heads of state in May, which will be President Trump’s first overseas trip since taking office.

Tillerson’s day of talks at NATO headquarters in Brussels follows visits from Defense Secretary James Mattis and Vice President Mike Pence, who attempted to dispel fears that the Trump administration will seek to loosen ties with the alliance.

Trump called NATO “obsolete” in an interview published days before his inauguration. He later insisted, during German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s visit to the White House earlier this month, that the U.S. will maintain its “strong commitment” to the alliance.

Tillerson arrived in Brussels on Friday morning after meeting Thursday in Ankara, Turkey, with that country’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu to discuss terrorism and Syria, though the leaders failed to reach an agreement on how to combat Islamic State.

Share

Trump weighs in on Michael Flynn’s request for immunity

President Trump’s former national security advisor, retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, is seeking immunity from prosecution in return for testifying to the House and Senate intelligence committees, a congressional aide said. The development was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

“Gen. Flynn certainly had a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit,” his lawyer, Robert Kelner, said in a statement. “No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch-hunt environment without assurances from unfair prosecution.”

On Friday morning, Trump tweeted his support for Flynn’s request.

Flynn was ousted as Trump’s national security advisor last month after news reports disclosed that he had misled Vice President Mike Pence about phone conversations with Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S.

The calls were picked up by U.S. surveillance targeting the Russian envoy, and a description of the contents was leaked to the Washington Post after the Justice Department warned the White House that Flynn could be subject to blackmail.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Former national security advisor Michael Flynn seeks immunity

President Trump’s former national security advisor, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, has been seeking immunity from prosecution in return for testifying to the House and Senate intelligence committees, a congressional official confirmed Thursday.

The negotiations were first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

In a statement, Flynn’s lawyer, Robert Kelner, said “Gen. Flynn certainly had a story to tell and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit.”

“No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch-hunt environment without assurances from unfair prosecution.”

Trump fired Flynn three weeks into the new administration after news reports disclosed that he had lied to White House colleagues, including Vice President Mike Pence, about his contacts with Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S.

In December, Flynn had telephone conversations with Kislyak in which he discussed sanctions that the Obama administration had recently imposed on Russia to punish Moscow for its interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Flynn denied to Pence and other officials that he had discussed the sanctions with Kislyak.

So far, the committees, which are investigating Russian interference and whether anyone close to Trump colluded with Moscow, have not taken Flynn up on his offer, the Journal reported.

Share

Trump administration appeals Hawaii judge’s order against travel ban

The Department of Justice has appealed a Hawaii court order that brought President Trump’s travel ban to a national halt.

The government has argued that the president was well within his authority to restrict travel from six Muslim-majority countries and put a pause on refugee resettlement.

The appeal Thursday to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals came a day after U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson in Honolulu refused to dismiss his temporary block of the travel ban that he issued on March 15.

With the appeal, the government is now fighting to reinstate the travel ban in two appeals courts on opposite ends of the country. That increases the likelihood that one of the cases will make it to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Earlier this month, the Department of Justice appealed a Maryland district judge’s order against the travel ban to the U.S. 4th District Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va.

Both rulings in Hawaii and Maryland said Trump’s executive order discriminated against Muslims. Watson and U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang in Maryland cited Trump’s campaign promises to suspend Muslim travel to the U.S. as proof of his order’s anti-Muslim bias.

The Hawaii ruling is broader than the Maryland one. It blocks a 90-day pause on travel to the U.S. from nationals of six majority-Muslim countries and a 120-day moratorium on new refugee resettlement. The Maryland ruling only halted the ban on travel into the U.S. by citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The 9th Circuit, which has jurisdiction over nine Western states, is the same court where a panel of three judges denied a government request last month to reverse ruling against the first travel ban by a federal judge in Washington state.

Trump, in turn, lambasted the “bad court” and signed a new executive order on travel on March 6 that was modified in an attempt to survive court challenges.

Share
Advertisement

Senate heads for ‘nuclear option’ if Democrats filibuster Gorsuch nomination

One of the Senate’s most serious jobs – confirming the president’s choice for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court – has devolved into a game of political chicken.

Senators are heading toward an institution-defining showdown next week as Democrats promise to try to block President Trump’s nominee, Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, with a filibuster, a rarely seen maneuver for high court appointments.

Republicans are threatening to respond by changing long-standing Senate rules to circumvent the 60 votes that would be needed to overcome a filibuster. Instead they would allow confirmation with a simple majority.

The outcome has the potential to not only shape the future of the Supreme Court — which has been without a full bench since the sudden death of Justice Antonin Scalia last year — it also could crush one final vestige of bipartisanship in the Senate, altering the upper chamber for years to come.

The battle over the Supreme Court seat was always expected to be a partisan affair in today’s heated political climate. But the polemics intensified after the Republican majority denied President Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, a confirmation hearing ahead of last year’s presidential election.

Read More

Share

Scalia’s seat has been vacant longer than any Supreme Court justice’s in nearly 50 years

(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

It’s been more than 400 days since Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s death left his seat vacant. With Republicans having blocked a vote on then-President Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, and with Senate Democrats now making plans to filibuster President Trump’s nominee, Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, it could take even longer to replace Scalia.

It’s not unheard of for a justice’s seat to remain empty for a considerable amount of time. Pew Research Center did the math and found that the longest gap was 841 days, in the mid-1840s, from the time of Henry Baldwin’s death to his replacement Robert Grier’s confirmation.

But the last time in recent history that a vacancy’s duration in this range occurred was after Abe Fortas resigned in 1969. It took 391 days to fill that seat, an interval that ended in 1970 when Harry Blackmun – the justice who authored the court’s landmark opinion in Roe vs. Wade – was confirmed. Blackmun was President Nixon’s third pick to fill that seat.

The second-longest vacancy in recent years occurred in 1988. It took 237 days to fill Lewis Powell’s seat after he retired, with Anthony Kennedy succeeding him.

It’s been 58 days and counting since Trump nominated Gorsuch. Here’s how his waiting time from nomination to confirmation stacks up against the current justices:

  • Elena Kagan: 87 days
  • Sonia Sotomayor: 66 days
  • Samuel A. Alito Jr.: 82 days
  • John G. Roberts Jr.: 23 days
  • Stephen G. Breyer: 73 days
  • Ruth Bader Ginsburg: 50 days
  • Clarence Thomas: 99 days
  • Anthony M. Kennedy: 65 days

If Gorsuch is confirmed soon, he won’t start considering cases until the court’s new term in October.

And if he’s not confirmed? Trump would nominate another successor to Scalia – there’s no limit on how many times he can do that. Until Scalia’s seat is filled, lower courts’ decisions serve as tie-breakers.

Share
Advertisement

Sens. Manchin and Heitkamp become first Democrats to announce support for Gorsuch

Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota became the first Democrats to say they will vote for Judge Neil Gorsuch and not support the effort to filibuster his confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Their announcements came as no surprise. Both are centrists who have to run for reelection next year in states that voted overwhelmingly for Trump.

“After considering his record, watching his testimony in front of the Judiciary Committee and meeting with him twice, I will vote to confirm him to be the ninth justice on the Supreme Court,” Manchin said. “I have found him to be an honest and thoughtful man.... I have not found any reasons why this jurist should not be a Supreme Court justice.”

Heitkamp said she was impressed with Gorsuch’s record as a judge. “This vote does not diminish how disturbed I am by what the Republicans did to Judge [Merrick] Garland,” referring to the GOP-led Senate’s refusal last year to consider President Obama’s choice to fill the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia. “But I was taught that two wrongs don’t make a right,” she said.

The Republican majority in the Senate needs six more Democrats to join with them if they hope to stop the expected filibuster of President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.

It takes 60 votes to end the debate under the Senate’s current rules. But the 52 Republicans may vote to simply eliminate this requirement if the Democrats stand firm against Gorsuch.

On Monday, the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to approve Gorsuch on a party line vote and send the nomination to the Senate floor. A final vote is expected April 7.

Share

White House invites lawmakers to see intelligence material after New York Times report

The White House has invited House and Senate intelligence committee chairs to review documents that it says were recently discovered by national security staff that could help determine whether information gathered about American citizens was mishandled.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer would not say whether these are the same documents that Rep. Devin Nunes, the Tulare Republican who chairs the House intelligence committee, said he reviewed last week.

Nunes has refused to identify his sources. Some saw his disclosure as an attempt to give credence to President Trump’s widely refuted claim that President Obama had ordered wiretaps on his phone during the campaign. Nunes said the material he reviewed suggested that intelligence agencies had incidentally collected information about Trump or his associates. He has declined to be more specific or share the information with the committee.

But the New York Times reported Thursday, citing unnamed sources, that two White House officials helped Nunes get access to the documents. And now the same information may be provided to other members of the Intelligence committee.

In a letter to the bipartisan group of intelligence leaders sent Thursday, White House Counsel Donald McGhan said administration lawyers would supervise the review “given the sensitivity of the documents” to “protect the extremely sensitive intelligence sources and methods.”

The letter calls on the committee to investigate the possibility that classified information was inappropriately gathered and handled and whether civil liberties of American citizens were violated.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters that he welcomed the chance to review the materials, though he said he would be obligated to share them with the rest of his committee.

More troubling to Schiff, he said, was the “cloak and dagger stuff” and “circuitous route” that the White House national security staff appears to have used to disseminate the materials in that secret meeting with Nunes. Schiff said White House staff may have been trying to “launder information through the committee,” rather than simply providing it directly to the president.

“If that was designed to hide the origin of the materials, that raises profound questions about just what the White House is doing,” Schiff said. “We need to get to the bottom of whether this was some sort of stratagem by the White House.”

In a letter to McGhan, Schiff said answering the White House’s questions would require asking intelligence agencies how the information in the documents was gathered.

“I hope you will confirm to the committee whether these materials are the same as those first shared with” Nunes, Schiff wrote.

2:11: This story was updated with staff reporting

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s team: A network of ties to Russia

The FBI is investigating possible coordination between people associated with the Trump campaign and Russian authorities during the 2016 election. The U.S. intelligence community has said it is confident that the Russian government directed hacking operations and “intended to interfere with the U.S. election process.”

Take a look at how some high-profile people have been drawn into the investigation. See the graphic »

Share

Former RNC official is first to depart senior West Wing staff

A former top Republican National Committee official and ally of White House chief of staff Reince Priebus will depart her West Wing post in the first significant shake-up of President Trump’s senior staff.

Politico first reported that Katie Walsh, the deputy White House chief of staff, will leave to take on an advisory position with political groups that were formed to support the president’s agenda from the outside.

Walsh had served as chief of staff at the RNC when Priebus was party chair. At the White House, she served in a similar capacity under Priebus, tasked with overseeing the senior staff and the scheduling operation.

Though White House officials denied the move was a signal of disharmony within the senior ranks, her departure spoke to issues dogging the new administration — a top-heavy operation in the West Wing and also the inability of the president to sustain the kind of grassroots support for his agenda that proved key to his electoral win.

“It was abundantly clear we didn’t have air cover when it came to the calls coming into lawmakers, and nobody can fix this problem like Katie Walsh,” Priebus told reporters later, according to Time.

Share
Advertisement

Putin: ‘Read my lips,’ there was no Russian meddling in U.S. vote

Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Finnish President Sauli Niinisto during the International Arctic Forum in Arkhangelsk, Russia, on Thursday.
(Sergei Karpukhim / AFP/Getty Images)

Calling the accusations “lies,” Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday denied that Moscow meddled in last year’s U.S. elections.

Read my lips, no,” Putin said during a panel moderated by CNBC, according to a report on the news agency’s website.

“All those things are fictional, illusory and provocations, lies,” the Russian president said. “All these are used for domestic American political agendas. The anti-Russian card is played by different political forces inside the United States to trade on that and consolidate their positions inside.

Putin’s comments came as the Senate Intelligence Committee was set to begin a hearing entitled “Disinformation: A Primer in Russian Active Measures and Influence Campaigns,” which will focus on understanding the method of Russia’s active disinformation campaign and assess the extent of Moscow’s interference.

FBI Director James Comey confirmed earlier this month that his agency was investigating Russia’s intrusion into the 2016 poll and whether there was any collusion between Moscow and President Trump’s campaign.

Read More

Share

Trump levels extraordinary threat against GOP conservatives; Ryan says he understands president’s frustration

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan commiserated with President Trump Thursday after the president launched a Twitter assault on the group of rebellious Republicans known as the Freedom Caucus.

“I understand the frustration, I share the frustration,” Ryan told reporters Thursday, when asked to respond to Trump’s threat to campaign against fellow Republicans.

Freedom Caucus members, who back limited government and have defined themselves in opposition to the Washington establishment, have been a major headache for GOP leaders. Ever since the Republicans took control of the House in 2010, conservative refusal to back key bills to fund government agencies has forced GOP leaders to negotiate with Democrats for the votes they need.

Freedom Caucus members helped lead the charge against former Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio).

The caucus was blamed by many Republicans last week for torpedoing the leadership’s plan, backed by Trump, to make significant changes to Obamacare.

Still, Trump’s threat to “fight them” in the 2018 elections was an extraordinary step. Trump had previously made electoral threats against wayward members of his party, but Thursday’s tweet was especially direct, threatening to treat them the same way as Democrats.

Freedom Caucus members have begun pushing back aggressively. A spokeswoman for the group argued on Twitter that Trump did not have his facts right and that Republican moderates were equally responsible for sinking the healthcare bill.

Finding Trump supporters to challenge Republicans in a primary would be hard and could further thrust the GOP into civil war.

Trump, despite low poll numbers nationally, remains popular in core Republican districts. Many members of Congress, however, ran ahead of him in their districts in the last election.

The president has also suggested he might be open to cutting deals with Democrats, something the White House has discussed but not followed through on. That would also be difficult, given the rancor on the left.

Ryan said Thursday that the best path is for Republicans to come together on healthcare and other issues

“About 90% of our conference is for this bill to repeal and replace Obamcare, and about 10% are not. And that’s not enough to pass a bill,” he said.

“What I am encouraging our members to do is to keep talking with each other until we can get the consensus to pass this bill. But it’s very understandable that the president is frustrated that we haven’t gotten to where we need to go, because this is something that we all said we would do.”

Share
Advertisement

Pence casts tie-breaking vote to advance bill that would let states withhold federal funds from Planned Parenthood

Republicans needed Vice President Mike Pence to cast a tie-breaking vote Thursday in the Senate to advance legislation that rolls back rules preventing states from withholding certain federal funds to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.

With opposition from two Republican women, Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Republicans did not have enough votes with their slim 52-seat majority to advance the bill.

Pence, a longtime opponent of abortion, arrived to cast the vote breaking the 50-50 tie — and will be expected to do so later Thursday on final passage.

“We just saw a historic moment,” said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) “It is a sad day for the United States Senate.”

The measure rolls back a regulation finalized at the end of President Obama’s administration that explicitly prevented states from denying federal Title X family planning funds to clinics, like Planned Parenthood, that also provide abortion services.

Under longstanding practice, no federal funds can be used for abortions, but federal family planning money can flow to the clinics to provide other healthcare services.

Some Republican-led state governments had been moving in recent years to choke off Title X funds from any clinics that offered abortion service. The Obama rule sought to prohibit such practices.

The bill Thursday, sponsored by Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), has already cleared the House.

It is part of a series of bills being passed by Congress under the so-called Congressional Review Act, which allows federal regulations put in place during the final days of the previous administration to be undone by simple majority passage.

Passage by the Senate later Thursday would send it to the White House for President Trump’s signature.

Share

Senate committee narrowly approves Acosta’s nomination to be Labor secretary

(Manuel Balce Ceneta / AP)

A Senate committee on Thursday narrowly approved R. Alexander Acosta to be Labor secretary, moving to fill one of President Trump’s few remaining vacant Cabinet posts.

The nomination of Acosta, a law school dean and former Justice Department official, was approved by a 12-11 vote by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. All of the panel’s Republicans supported the nomination; all of the Democrats were opposed.

If confirmed in a full Senate vote, which is expected soon, Acosta will be the only Latino in Trump’s Cabinet. A date for the final vote hasn’t been set.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Follow the money and the trail of ‘dead Russians,’ expert urges senators

(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

The Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Thursday into Russian efforts to influence the November elections has been a long history lesson, tracing Moscow’s decades-long efforts to use misinformation to undermine democracies.

But Clinton Watts, of the Center for Cyber and Homeland Security at George Washington University, provided a roadmap to better understanding the Kremlin’s efforts. He urged senators and the U.S. government to follow the money to figure out how misinformation websites and social media outlets are being funded.

While the Russians conducted their hacking in the Internet’s shadows, their efforts to influence the election was hardly a secret, he said.

“You can hack stuff and be covert, but you can’t influence and be covert,” he said. “You have to ultimately show your hand. And that’s why we have been able to discover it online.”

The second way to trace Russian influence was more ominous: “Follow the trail of dead Russians,” he said.

“There have been more dead Russians in the past three months that are tied to this investigation,” he added. “They are dropping dead, even in Western countries.”

Watts didn’t finish the thought but was likely referring to a spate of deaths of high-profile Russians, some of which appeared to be assassinations although others appear to have been from natural causes.

With the daytime execution of a Russian politician in Ukraine last week, at least eight Russian politicians, activists, ambassadors and a former intelligence official have died since the U.S. election.

Share

Russia has stepped up efforts to influence elections, experts tell Senate panel

(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

Moscow has stepped up its interference in U.S. and European elections, using social media, hacking and other tools to undermine public confidence and to raise doubts about the U.S as an ally, Russia experts told the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

The committee was taking testimony from experts in Russian propaganda and intelligence operations as part of its investigation into Moscow’s meddling in the 2016 election.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the top Democrat on the panel, emphasized that in addition to examining the broad topic of Russian efforts to influence the election, the panel also must seek to answer whether President Trump’s campaign had contact with Russian officials last year, noting the the FBI has opened its own probe.

“I will not prejudge the outcome of our investigation. We are seeking to determine if there is an actual fire, but there is clearly a lot of smoke,” Warner said.

Dr. Eugene Rumer, Director of the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the panel that Russian President Vladimir Putin probably viewed Moscow’s meddling in the U.S. election as an “unqualified success.”

Share
Advertisement

Trump levels extraordinary threat to ‘fight’ GOP right wing in 2018 elections

President Trump lobbed an electoral threat against hard right members of his party Thursday, saying on Twitter that he would fight them in the 2018 election if they did not “get on the team.”

The Freedom Caucus salvo came less than a week after the group of about 30 Republican House members was blamed for derailing the GOP healthcare bill, despite efforts from Trump to negotiate with them.

Trump had previously made electoral threats to wayward members of his party, but Thursday’s tweet was especially direct, threatening to cast them in the same light as Democrats.

Rep. Justin Amash, a Michigan Republican in the caucus, was not happy. “No shame,” he wrote in a rebuttal.

Like Trump, Freedom Caucus members consider themselves anti-establishment, and many were strong supporters during the election. But they are more ideologically focused on smaller government and have a history of bucking party leadership. Thursday’s tweet was the second time Trump accused them of helping Democrats.

Here’s a detailed look at Trump’s relationship with the caucus.

The Freedom Caucus roars back to relevance to challenge Trump’s agenda and strategy >>

Share

Tillerson meets Turkish officials to seek support for battle against Islamic State in Syria

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Thursday met for more than two hours with Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, as they hoped to shore up troubled relations between their nations.

Making his first trip to Turkey, Tillerson became the highest-ranking Trump administration official to hold a face-to-face session with Erdogan, an increasingly authoritarian leader who is also a NATO member and key ally in the fight against Islamic State in Syria.

The meeting went longer than planned. Turkey and the United States disagree sharply on how to combat Islamic State: Washington supports Kurdish militias that Erdogan regards as an arm of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which Turkey and the U.S. consider a terrorist organization.

“Trying to fight against Daesh through terrorist organizations such as ... extensions of the PKK, would be like shooting yourself in the foot,” Erdogan’s senior advisor, Ibrahim Kalin, said ahead of Thursday’s meeting. Daesh is a pejorative Arabic acronym for Islamic State.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Hawaii judge extends national halt on Trump’s travel ban

Donald Trump in San Diego in May.
(John Gastaldo / San Diego Union-Tribune))

The Hawaii federal judge who brought President Trump’s revised travel ban to a national halt this month extended his order blocking the ban’s enforcement.

The move Wednesday sets the stage for the Justice Department to appeal to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the ruling.

U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson’s original order halting the travel ban was issued March 15, a day before the ban was to go into effect, in the form of a temporary restraining order.

At a hearing in Honolulu on Wednesday, federal lawyers asked Watson to either dismiss that order or narrow the restrictions to apply to fewer parts of the travel ban.

Instead, Watson said he would turn the order into a preliminary injunction, which has the effect of extending his order blocking the travel ban for a longer period.

Watson said he would keep intact the restrictions on the travel ban -- a block of its 90-day moratorium on travel to the U.S. from nationals of six majority-Muslim countries and its 120-day pause on new refugee resettlement.

If the Justice Department appeals the case, it will be heard in the same court that upheld a national halt to Trump’s first travel ban last month after a Seattle federal judge ruled against it.

The administration has already appealed to the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals a Maryland judge’s more limited March 16 ruling that stopped enforcement of the travel order’s country-specific ban.

Both the Hawaii and Maryland judges found Trump’s executive order to discriminate against Muslims. They used the president’s campaign statements promising to suspend Muslim travel to the U.S. as evidence of the order’s anti-Muslim bias.

Government lawyers have argued that the president is not singling out Muslims but instead acting within his power to restrict immigration and safeguard national security while better vetting procedures are developed to prevent potential terrorists from entering the U.S.

Trump has said he’ll take the case over the travel ban to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Share

Ivanka Trump gets formal White House role, with ethics obligations but no pay

(Brendan Smialowski / AFP-Getty Images)

Ivanka Trump is taking on a more formal White House role — with a title but not a paycheck — a move intended to quell ethics concerns raised about her status in her father’s administration.

In a statement, the White House noted that the president’s elder daughter already had an “unprecedented role” in the administration different from that of previous presidential children.

She now will take the title of special advisor to the president, and therefore assume the same responsibility to abide by ethics standards that other federal employees have, the statement said. The decision demonstrates the administration’s “commitment to ethics, transparency and compliance,” the administration said.

Although Ivanka Trump already had a West Wing office — as does her husband, senior advisor Jared Kushner — she now will have “increased opportunities to lead initiatives driving real policy benefits for the American public that would not have been available to her previously,” a White House spokesman said.

The announcement came on a day when President Trump sought to promote his administration’s commitment to empowering women. He delivered remarks at an East Room event that included other top women in his Cabinet, including U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley and Small Business Administration head Linda McMahon.

Ivanka Trump held a roundtable with female business owners earlier, Press Secretary Sean Spicer said.

Earlier Wednesday, leading Senate Democrats sent a letter to the Office of Government Ethics raising concerns about the “increasing, albeit unspecified” position Ivanka Trump had held and the potential conflicts of interest that her government position might trigger with her personal businesses, including a retail clothing brand.

The letter from Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tom Carper (D-Del.) asked the agency whether Trump would be required to divest herself of personal assets or if she could be required to recuse herself from certain functions.

Trump’s new position was first reported by the New York Times. In a statement to the paper, Trump said she was acting in response to ethics concerns, but noted she already had been voluntarily complying with “all ethics rules.”

Share
Advertisement

Russia inquiry ‘one of the biggest’ congressional probes in decade, senators say

Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), right, and Mark Warner (D-Va.).
(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

The Senate Intelligence Committee’s probe into Russian involvement in the 2016 U.S. presidential election will be “one of the biggest investigations” in years and has already involved an “unprecedented” level of cooperation between Congress and U.S. spy agencies, the panel’s chairman said Wednesday.

At a Capitol Hill news conference, the committee chairman, Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, and its ranking Democrat, Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, emphasized the bipartisan nature of the panel’s efforts, drawing a determined, though unstated, contrast with the partisan dysfunction of a parallel investigation in the House.

“The committee will go wherever the intelligence leads us,” Burr said.

And he pointedly refused to endorse White House statements that investigators inevitably will find that there was no collusion between President Trump’s campaign and the Russians.

“It would be crazy to try to draw any conclusions” at this point, Burr said. “We know that our challenge is to answer that question to the American people,” Burr said, referring to the issue of Trump’s involvement.

Warner said he had “confidence in Richard Burr” to run a fair investigation and produce a bipartisan conclusion.

Warner said Americans should “not lose sight of what the investigation is about: An outside foreign adversary effectively tried to hijack” the election and “favor one candidate over the other.”

“They didn’t do it because it was in the best interest of the American people,” he said. “[Russian President] Vladimir Putin’s goal is a weaker United States.”

The Russian action “should be a concern of all Americans regardless of party affiliation,” he added.

The committee staff already has reviewed thousands of pages of intelligence documents and has begun scheduling interviews with a list of 20 preliminary witnesses, who will be questioned in private before the panel holds public hearings, Burr said.

He strongly implied that one of the potential witnesses is retired Gen. Michael Flynn, who was fired from his post as national security advisor to Trump after the disclosure that he had misled Vice President Mike Pence and others about his contacts with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S.

“You would think less of us” if the committee had not talked with Flynn, Burr told reporters.

The witnesses, including Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and advisor, will be questioned when the committee is ready, he said.

Share

Justice Department watchdog finds DEA cash seizure program may pose risk to civil liberties

A Ukiah, Calif., police officer works with a dog to search for drugs or cash in a motorist's car on May 14, 2014.
A Ukiah, Calif., police officer works with a dog to search for drugs or cash in a motorist’s car on May 14, 2014.
(Francine Orr/ Los Angeles Times)

The way the Drug Enforcement Administration seizes cash and other assets may pose a risk to civil liberties, the Justice Department’s internal watchdog reported Wednesday.

The Justice Department’s inspector general also determined that the agency does not measure or track how its asset seizure activities advance criminal investigations.

Over the last decade, more than $28 billion has been seized through the department’s asset forfeiture program.

The effort and others in states have generated intense controversy in recent years, with critics contending that many seizures are unfair because some who lose their assets are never charged with crimes.

Law enforcement officials, however, say that seizing property and cash is a key tool in disrupting criminal organizations and compensating the victims of crimes.

Former Atty. Gen. Eric Holder in 2015 limited how state and local authorities can obtain seized funds by working with federal agents.

In its report released Wednesday, the inspector general examined 100 cases in which the DEA seized cash. Eighty-five of the cases involved interdiction at transportation hubs, such as airports or parcel centers. Nearly 80 of those seizures resulted from the direct observation of agents or local police. The inspector general and the Justice Department have raised concerns in the past about such stops and searches, in part, due to the potential for racial profiling.

Of the 100 cases, the DEA could verify that only 44 advanced ongoing investigations, led to a new investigation, or resulted in an arrest or prosecution, the inspector general found.

“When seizure and administrative forfeitures do not ultimately advance an investigation or prosecution, law enforcement creates the appearance, and risks the reality, that it is more interested in seizing and forfeiting cash than advancing an investigation or prosecution,” the report said.

The inspector general also found that the Justice Department does not provide enough training or require state and local officers working on federal task forces to be trained on asset forfeiture policies.

The Justice Department responded in a letter to the inspector general that its analysis was flawed and its sample “significantly underreported” the amount of seized funds that are ultimately returned.

In a statement, Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said, “Asset forfeiture is a powerful and effective law enforcement tool, allowing the department to compensate victims, deprive criminals of the proceeds of their crimes, remove the tools of crime from criminal organizations, and deter crime.”

“The department believes that the ongoing public debate about asset forfeiture is healthy,” she added, “but as outlined in our formal response, we strongly disagree with large swaths of this report and its flawed methodology that failed to address the essential role asset forfeiture plays combating some of the most sophisticated criminal actors and organizations, including terrorist financiers, cyber criminals, fraudsters, human traffickers, and drug cartels.”

9:23 a.m.: This story was updated with Justice Department comment.

Share
Advertisement

Hoax. Con job. Chinese plot. Trump tweets have bashed climate science for years

President Trump signs an executive order Tuesday to rescind Obama administration policies on climate change.
President Trump signs an executive order Tuesday to rescind Obama administration policies on climate change.
(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

As President Trump moved to halt federal efforts against global warming on Tuesday, he avoided an important phrase: climate change.

It was the same story during his campaign for president; Trump rarely mentioned it.

When he pledged in May to withdraw the United States from the Paris treaty, a pact among nearly every nation on Earth to reduce the carbon emissions that cause global warming, it was one of the few occasions when Trump broached the topic.

Trump’s muted approach made political sense. To reject science is to risk alienating millions of moderate voters who support action to stop global warming.

But before Trump started running for president, he often bluntly attacked climate science. Some highlights from his Twitter feed:

Read More

Share

Supreme Court rules in favor of merchants who want to advertise credit card fees

Supreme Court rules on swipe fees
(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press))

Merchants may soon have the right to tell customers that they will pay a surcharge if they use a credit card rather than pay with cash.

The Supreme Court cast doubt Wednesday on laws in California, New York, Florida and seven other states that make it illegal for sellers to “impose a surcharge” on credit card sales.

In a 8-0 decision, the justices said these laws “regulate speech” and may be challenged as violations of the 1st Amendment.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said these laws do not prevent merchants from offering a discount for those who pay cash. Rather, they simply forbid disclosing that a posted price includes a surcharge of 2% to 3% for using a credit or debit card.

“Merchants want to pass the fees along only to their customers who choose to use credit cards,” he said. “They also want to make clear that they are not the bad guys -- that the credit card companies, not the merchants, are responsible for the higher prices.”

But the ruling Wednesday was only a partial victory for the five New York businesses, including a hair salon and an ice cream parlor in Brooklyn, that sued to challenge the ban on advertising or disclosing “surcharges” for using credit cards.

The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York had upheld the law on the grounds it was a price regulation, not a speech restriction.

Roberts and the high court disagreed. “What the law does is regulate how sellers may communicate their prices,” he said. “A merchant who wants to charge $10 for cash and $10.30 for credit may not convey that price any way he pleases. He is not free to say ‘$10, with a 3% credit card surcharge.’”

But the justices did not strike down the state laws, instead sending the case back to the New York court to decide whether this “speech regulation” could be justified. Sometimes, laws are used to regulate the words of commercial transactions to prevent buyers from being fooled or confused.

Until recently, the major credit card companies had imposed contract restrictions that prevented merchants from disclosing surcharges. But those provisions have challenged and knocked down.

That in turn led to new legal challenges against the state laws which forbid sellers from disclosing these surcharges.

The case decided Wednesday was Expressions Hair Design vs. Schneiderman.

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s poll numbers are low. But the people who put him in office say it’s not time to judge him — yet

It’s been five months since the euphoria of a Donald Trump rally at the local arena brought optimism to this former Democratic stronghold. The snow from a long winter has begun melting into the rocky soil, and the digital sign in a torn-up parking lot blinks hopefully: “Warm days are coming.”

President Trump has yet to deliver jobs or the repeal of Obamacare. But here, in an area crucial to his unexpected election victory, many residents are more frustrated with what they see as obstruction and a rush to judgment than they are with Trump.

Give him six months to prove himself, said an information technology supervisor. Give him a year, said a service manager. Give him four years, said a retired print shop owner.

“Give the man a chance,” said Crystal Matthews, a 59-year-old hospital employee. “They’re just going to fight him tooth and nail, the whole way.”

Read More

Share

To fight woman’s defamation claim, Trump cites the Bill Clinton-Paula Jones case – which the president lost

President Trump is citing Bill Clinton’s famous sexual harassment battle in his effort to block a California woman’s lawsuit claiming Trump lied about groping her in the Beverly Hills Hotel in 2007.

Problem is, Clinton lost that bid for legal immunity when the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 1997 that the chief executive is not shielded from responding to a civil suit regarding his private behavior.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

House sends Trump bill to kill landmark broadband privacy regulations

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) sponsored the repeal bill.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

The House voted Tuesday to kill landmark privacy restrictions for Internet service providers and sent the bill to the White House, which indicated President Trump would sign it and invalidate the rules before they go into effect.

The measure, approved largely along party lines, repeals tough new Federal Communications Commission regulations that would require broadband companies to get explicit customer permission before using or sharing most of their personal information.

The data include health information, website browsing history, app usage and the geographic information from mobile devices. The rules also tighten data security requirements.

Republicans, along with AT&T Inc., Charter Communications Inc., Comcast Corp. and other providers of high-speed Internet service, strongly opposed the rules. They argued that the restrictions are tougher than those for websites and social networks that also collect and use the highly valuable consumer data, which companies use to target advertising.

Read More

Share

U.S. commander says there’s a ‘fair chance’ that coalition airstrike is responsible for civilian casualties in Mosul

Rescuers are still recovering bodies from a suspected U.S. airstrike in the Iraqi city of Mosul.
(Marcus Yam / Los Angeles Times)

The top U.S. general commanding the fight against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria said that the U.S.-led coalition was probably responsible for a blast that killed more than 200 people.

“If we did it, and I would say there’s at least a fair chance that we did, it was an unintentional accident of war and we will transparently report it to you,” Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend told reporters Tuesday via teleconference from Baghdad.

He made the comments in response to witness reports that an airstrike by the U.S.-led coalition leveled a large apartment block and killed scores of civilians, including women and children, in west Mosul’s Jadidah neighborhood on March 17.

“My initial assessment is that we probably had a role in these casualties,” Townsend said.

But investigators are still trying to determine whether other factors -- possibly including repeated airstrikes in the neighborhood or an explosive device accidentally or deliberately planted near the building -- could have led to its collapse.

“The fact that the whole building collapsed contradicts our involvement,” Townsend said. “The munition that we used should not have collapsed an entire building. So that’s one of those things we’re trying to figure out in the investigative process.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Gov. Jerry Brown calls Trump energy plan a ‘colossal mistake’ that will galvanize climate change activists

Gov. Jerry Brown.
(Gregory Bull / Associated Press)

California Gov. Jerry Brown warned that President Trump has just made a “colossal mistake” in gutting the federal government’s effort to combat climate change, which will ignite a response Trump is unprepared to handle.

“It defies science itself,” Brown said in a call to The Times shortly after Trump signed an executive order that aims to bring an abrupt halt to the United States’ leadership on global warming. “Erasing climate change may take place in Donald Trump‘s mind, but nowhere else.”

“Yes, there is going to be a counter-movement,” Brown vowed, predicting Trump’s actions will mobilize environmentalists in a way President Obama never could. “I have met with many heads of state, ambassadors. This is a growing movement. President Trump’s outrageous move will galvanize the contrary force. Things have been a bit tepid [in climate activism]. But this conflict, this sharpening of the contradiction, will energize those who believe climate change is an existential threat.”

Brown and other big-state governors and mayors are moving swiftly to fill the global leadership vacuum Trump created with Tuesday’s directive, which stops short of officially pulling the U.S. out of the Paris climate accord of 2015.

“I see Washington declining in influence, but the momentum being maintained by California and other states aligned with China and those who are willing to do something,” said Brown, who will be traveling to China soon for meetings on climate. “There is a growing activism on the part of millions of people who will not stand by and let Donald Trump effectively tear up the Paris agreement and destroy America’s climate leadership and jeopardize the health and well being of so many people.”

In the face of Trump’s retreat on climate, Brown said California will step up its own efforts to push others toward clean energy. “We are not fully meeting the challenge of climate change yet,” he said. “We are doubling down on our commitment. We are reaching out to other states in America and throughout the world and other countries …. We have plenty of fuel to build this movement.”

“This is real,” Brown said of the threat created by climate change. “The nations of the world have recognized it in Paris … I will continue doing my best to work with and rouse the world community, whatever the politicians in Washington do or don’t do.”

Share

Trump orders government to dismantle Obama’s climate change policies

President Trump ordered an abrupt halt to America’s crusade against climate change. (March 29, 2017) (Sign up for our free video newsletter here http://bit.ly/2n6VKPR)

President Trump on Tuesday ordered the federal government to retreat from the battle against climate change launched by President Obama, issuing a directive aimed at dismantling the core policies that have made the U.S. a global leader in curbing emissions.

The plan unveiled by Trump reflects an about-face for the U.S. on energy, and it puts into jeopardy the nation’s ability to meet the obligations it agreed to under the global warming pact signed in Paris with 194 other nations. It would shelve the landmark Clean Power Plan that mandates electricity companies reduce their emissions. It seeks to dislodge consideration of climate throughout the federal government, where it has been a factor in every relevant decision in recent years.

“My administration is putting an end to the war on coal,” Trump said. “I am taking historic steps to lift the restrictions on American energy to reverse government intrusions and to cancel job killing regulations.”

Under the order, the government will abandon the “social cost of carbon” that regulators had painstakingly calculated and begun factoring into their decision on permit applications and rulemaking. Restrictions on methane releases at oil and gas drilling facilities would be eased.

Agencies will also stop contemplating climate impacts as they launch into new projects, and restrictions on coal leasing and fracking on federal lands will be lifted.

The directive, for which progressive states and environmentalists have been preparing for months, is certain to set off years of litigation and conflicts between Washington and state capitols.

Some of the most far-reaching policies Trump is seeking to bring to a halt cannot be canceled unilaterally and require lengthy administrative proceedings. But others he can end with the stroke of his pen.

Smoke rises from the Colstrip Steam Electric Station, a coal-burning power plant in Colstrip, Mont., on July 1, 2103.
(Matt Brown / Associated Press)
Share
Advertisement

A trade war is brewing inside the White House between rival camps

Soon after President Trump took office, an executive order was quietly drafted to suspend talks with China on an obscure but potentially far-reaching treaty about bilateral investment.

After eight years and two dozen rounds of negotiations, the treaty terms were almost in final form. Pulling out after so much time and effort would send a clear message that the Trump administration meant to take a new and tougher approach to China.

But the executive order never even got to the president’s desk. It was quietly shelved, according to sources inside and outside the White House, at the behest of former Goldman Sachs President Gary Cohn, now Trump’s top economic advisor.

Killing the order was a small victory for a White House faction that supports free trade and the global economy. But it was only an opening skirmish in what promises to be a long and bitter struggle over trade policy that so far is being waged behind the scenes in the Trump administration.

Read More

Share

Supreme Court reverses death sentence for Texas inmate who could not tell time or name the days of the week

The Supreme Court set aside a death sentence on Tuesday for a Texas inmate who as a 13-year-old could not tell time or name the days of the week, concluding he should not be executed in light of his mental disability.

In a 5-3 decision, the justices reversed the Texas state appeals court that had restored a death sentence given to Bobby James Moore, a 57-year old prisoner who shot and killed a store clerk in a botched robbery in 1980.

At issue was whether Moore had a mental disability that would make his execution “cruel and unusual punishment” under the 8th Amendment. The justices banned states from executing prisoners with a mental disability, but they left states some flexibility to set the standards.

But three years ago, the justices faulted Florida authorities for relying almost entirely on I.Q. scores.

In the Texas case decided Tuesday, the justices said state judges had ignored ample evidence that Moore had severe mental disability as a child. That evidence was not overcome by the fact that he had adapted well in prison, they said.

“At 13, Moore lacked the basic understanding of the days of the week, the months of the year and the seasons; he could scarcely tell time or comprehend the standards of measure,” said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. “After failing every subject in the ninth grade, Moore dropped out of high school. Cast out of his home, he survived on the streets, eating from trash cans, even after two bouts of food poisoning.”

After fatally shooting the clerk in the 1980 robbery, he was sentenced to death.

The Texas courts reexamined his sentence after the high court abolished capital punishment in 2002 for defendants with a mental disability. A state judge listened to experts and set aside Moore’s death sentence, But the state’s criminal appeals court disagreed. Its judges said Moore had demonstrated “adaptive strength” by living on the streets and carrying out a robbery, and therefore did not qualify as having a severe mental impairment.

Ginsburg said the state judges had relied on an outdated understanding of mental disability, and her opinion in Moore vs. Texas said the state court must reconsidere its decision. Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan agreed.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. dissented. While he agreed the state’s authorities may have used outdated standards, Moore had I.Q. scores ranging from 69 to 79 that show he did not have the “significantly sub-average intellectual functioning” that would exempt him from the death penalty. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito agreed.

Share
Advertisement

The Freedom Caucus roars back to relevance to challenge Trump’s agenda and strategy

When House Speaker Paul D. Ryan pulled the plug on the GOP’s Obamacare overhaul, lawmakers spilled out of the Capitol basement, angry, frustrated and stunned.

But Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), leader of the conservative and rebellious House Freedom Caucus that led the fight against the bill, was uncharacteristically quiet, downplaying his political victory and mulling over the next move.

After coming together to battle President Obama and becoming a driving force in the Republican Party, this 30-member-plus bloc of deficit hawks and right-flank conservatives had appeared for a while to be pushed aside by the movement that swept President Trump into office.

But after helping defeat the GOP healthcare overhaul, the Freedom Caucus has roared back to relevance as a political power in the Trump era. It has reasserted itself as not just a renegade assemblage of mostly back-bench lawmakers, but as a core block of votes that Trump will need to push past the healthcare debacle to tax reform, budget battles and other issues.

“These guys saved the Republicans,” said Adam Brandon, president of FreedomWorks, a group that organized a North Carolina rally on Monday in honor of Meadows. “As beaten and battered as they are, we’ve got a group that’s willing to take the hard decisions. If you’re going to drain the swamp, these are the guys who are going to do it.”

Read More

Share

White House stopped Yates testimony about Russian meddling in presidential election, lawyer says

A lawyer for former Deputy Atty. Gen. Sally Yates said in letters last week that the Trump administration had moved to squelch her testimony in a hearing about Russian meddling in the presidential election.

In the letters, attorney David O’Neil said he understood the Justice Department was invoking “further constraints” on testimony she could provide at a House Intelligence Committee hearing that had been scheduled for Tuesday. He said the department’s position was that all actions she took as deputy attorney general were “client confidences” that could not be disclosed without written approval.

The Washington Post first reported the letters. A person familiar with the situation confirmed them as authentic to the Associated Press.

The White House called the Post story “entirely false.”

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and part of Trump’s transition team, last week announced that the committee was canceling the planned public hearing with Yates and two former Obama administration intelligence officials — the former director of national intelligence, James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Adam Schiff calls on Devin Nunes to recuse himself from Russia investigation

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank) on Monday urged fellow Californian Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) to remove himself from their investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Before late last week, Schiff had gone out of his way not to be critical of Nunes throughout the fledgling investigation. They have held the top positions on the House Intelligence Committee for two years, and have served in Congress together for more than a decade.

“This is not a recommendation I make lightly, as the Chairman and I have worked together well for several years; and I take this step with the knowledge of the solemn responsibility we have on the Intelligence Committee to provide oversight on all intelligence matters, not just to conduct the investigation,” Schiff said in a statement.

Nunes last week surprised many when he told reporters that conversations between Trump and his transition team may have been accidentally picked up during legal intelligence gathering. Nunes briefed the media and President Trump before informing his committee.

Read More

Share

Did Mnuchin cross an ethical line in plugging ‘The Lego Batman Movie’? A senator wants to know

(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

A Democratic senator wants to know if Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin committed an ethics violation when he publicly plugged “The Lego Batman Movie,” a film in which he has a financial stake.

A former Hollywood financier, Mnuchin was asked at the end of a question-and-answer session on Friday hosted by the Axios news website to name a movie people should see.

“Well, I’m not allowed to promote anything that I’m involved in. So I just want to have the legal disclosure, you’ve asked me the question and I am not promoting any product,” Mnuchin said at the event, which aired on C-SPAN2.

“But you should send all your kids to ‘Lego Batman,’ ” he said.

The crowd laughed.

But Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, wasn’t amused. He’s asking the U.S. Office of Government Ethics to look into the comments.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Venezuela hits back in showdown with OAS, U.S. over democracy

The Venezuelan foreign minister had harsh words Monday for the regional organization that is considering sanctioning her country for its failure to hold democratic elections.

Delcy Rodriguez, the foreign minister, accused the Organization of American States of wanting not to punish Venezuela but to destroy it.

Rodriguez appeared at an OAS panel convened in Washington. D.C., after the United States and 13 other of the hemisphere’s nations united to demand the leftist Venezuelan government free political prisoners and set a date for long-overdue elections.

Failure to do so, the 14 countries warned, could trigger a decision to suspend Venezuela from the 69-year-old regional body.

OAS Secretary-General Luis Almagro, a former Uruguayan foreign minister, has been especially critical of Venezuela’s embattled government. He noted that President Nicolas Maduro canceled both a referendum that could have recalled his government and later regional elections, after the opposition made huge gains in parliamentary voting in 2015.

In addition, thousands of people have been arrested for their political beliefs, Almagro said, including opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez, who has been in jail for three years.

But Rodriguez, in a speech to the OAS panel, said Venezuela’s “revolution” continues strong. She accused Almagro of being a stooge of the U.S. government, a “lying mercenary who is a traitor to everything a Latin American diplomat should represent.”

“He lacks independence when he voluntarily bows to the wishes of the most powerful nation of this organization -- and becomes its spokesman,” Rodriguez said.

Although the OAS has often been accused of pro-Washington tendencies, 13 nations in addition to the United States have joined to condemn Venezuela, a significant shift in Latin America away from populist regimes. Other leftist-ruled countries, like Bolivia, have said they will support Venezuela.

Rodriguez said the accusations against her government were “unilateral,” unjustified and biased. She called on the OAS to suspend discussion of Venezuela, but another session was scheduled to proceed on Tuesday -- the same day Maduro’s Socialist Party is planning big “anti-imperialism” marches at home.

All of the countries most critical of Venezuela, including the United States, say suspension of the oil-rich, Caribbean country from the OAS should be a measure of last resort.

Despite its oil wealth, Venezuela is in the throes of an economic and humanitarian disaster, with severe shortages of food and medicine and skyrocketing inflation and homicide rates.

Share

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions criticizes ‘sanctuary cities’ but offers no new policies

Decrying the safety risk posed when cities don’t cooperate with federal immigration authorities, Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions repeated previous statements that the Trump administration would seek to deny so-called sanctuary cities some federal grant fun

Decrying the safety risk posed when cities don’t cooperate with federal immigration authorities, Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions repeated previous statements that the Trump administration would seek to deny so-called sanctuary cities some federal grant funds, but offered no new policies.

Despite his high-profile appearance at the White House briefing room, Sessions merely reiterated Obama administration policy related to immigration. Justice Department officials said any new measures would be “weeks or months” in the future.

The Obama administration issued instructions last July that required any cities applying for Justice Department grant programs be in compliance with federal law requiring cooperation between local, state and federal agencies with requests from the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Sessions noted that any jurisdiction applying for grants from his department would have to certify that compliance. The Justice Department already has been requiring that, which indicates that police and sheriff departments which currently have Justice Department grants already have been asserting that they are meeting the requirements of federal law.

Although many cities have policies that they, or critics, characterize using the label “sanctuary,” those policies do not necessarily mean they are violating the law.

Sessions did say that the Justice Department could in the future institute additional requirements, but announced none.

“Fundamentally, we intend to use all the lawful authority we have to make sure that our state and local officials, who are so important to law enforcement, are in sync with the federal government,” he said.

He did offer a warning to jurisdictions considering adopting “sanctuary” status. The California legislature is considering a proposal to institute the designation statewide; Sessions, though, singled out Maryland for a similar proposal.

“That would be such a mistake,” Sessions said, while noting Maryland’s Republican governor opposes the change proposed by the heavily-Democratic legislature.

Sessions cited a high-profile case in San Francisco where a 32-year-old woman was killed by man who had been previously deported multiple times despite a request by immigration authorities to continue his detention to illustrate the administration’s case against such policies.

“Countless Americans would be alive today and countless loved ones would not be grieving today if these policies of sanctuary cities were ended,” Sessions claimed.

Share
Advertisement

Devin Nunes plot thickens, as his spokesman concedes he met source for surveillance claim at White House

The day before the House Intelligence Committee chairman revealed that conversations by Trump transition officials may have been inadvertently picked up by U.S. surveillance, he met with the source of the information at the White House, his spokesman said Monday

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), went to the White House because there was a facility there for reviewing classified information, said Jack Langer, a spokesman for Nunes, who has refused to divulge the identity of his source.

“Chairman Nunes met with his source at the White House grounds in order to have proximity to a secure location where he could view the information provided by the source,” Langer said.

The latest news added another twist to a bizarre series of events last week:

On Monday, FBI Director James Comey testified before Nunes’ committee that his investigators were looking at possible “coordination” during the presidential campaign between Russian officials and people close to Preisdent Trump.

Tuesday night, Nunes went to the White House where someone showed him documents related to U.S. intelligence surveillance, according to his statement.

On Wednesday, Nunes announced to reporters that he had seen evidence indicating that people close to Trump had been subjects of surveillance during the transition. He then went to the White House, saying that he needed to brief Trump about the revelations.

On Thursday, Nunes apologized to committee members for not having shown the evidence to them before briefing the president.

Later that day, his spokesman conceded that Nunes did not know “for sure” that any Trump aides had actually been subject to surveillance, just that their names had appeared in intelligence reports, which could have resulted from other people talking about them.

That sequence of events could buttress Democrats’ claims that the episode last week was a White House ploy to shift attention away from the FBI investigation.

Democrats already have been saying Nunes should be disqualified from heading an inquiry into whether Trump’s aides had improper contacts with Russia.

Nunes’ statement left several questions unanswered. One is why he would have had to go to the White House unless his source worked there, because members of Congress have access to a secure facility at the U.S. Capitol.

Asked to explain Nunes’ actions, Langer said in an email, “The information comprised executive branch documents that have not been provided to Congress. Because of classification rules, the source could not simply put the documents in a backpack and walk them over to the House Intelligence Committee space. “

He added: “The White House grounds was the best location to safeguard the proper chain of custody and classification of these documents, so the Chairman could view them in a legal way.”

Last week, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer had dismissed speculation that the White House had supplied Nunes with the information, saying that the suggestion did not pass the “smell test.” He added, however, that he did not for sure what Nunes had told Trump or where his information came from.

After Nunes apologized to members of his committee Thursday and promised to “thoroughly investigate” the surveillance, several lawmakers said Nunes had promised to provide them the surveillance information he had received. That has not occurred yet.

In his first statement last week, Nunes said he was concerned that some Trump transition officials’ identities might have been improperly revealed in intelligence reports, despite rules requiring them to be kept confidential in most cases.

“The Chairman is extremely concerned by the possible improper unmasking of names of U.S. citizens, and he began looking into this issue even before President Trump tweeted his assertion that Trump Tower had been wiretapped,” Langer said.

Whether any officials’ names actually were unmasked is unclear. The ranking Democrat on the committee, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) has questioned Nunes’ assertions about improper unmasking. But Schiff noted that he has not seen the documents Nunes claims to have seen.

Schiff had no comment on the news that Nunes had seen the documents at the White House.

UPDATES

10:20 a.m.: This article was updated with staff reporting.

This article was originally published as an Associated Press report at 9:06 a.m.

Share

Venezuela in showdown with OAS, U.S. over political prisoners

The besieged leftist government of Venezuela is under mounting pressure after the United States and 13 of the hemisphere’s other leading nations demanded the release of political prisoners and other pro-democracy concessions.

The Organization of American States, the region’s main collective body, has threatened to suspend Venezuela because of what it called the autocratic repression imposed by President Nicolas Maduro.

Maduro’s foreign minister, Delcy Rodriguez, will appear Monday before an OAS panel in Washington to plead her government’s case. This comes after members of the Venezuelan delegation stormed out of OAS meetings last week, according to diplomats.

OAS Secretary-General Luis Almagro, in a report on Venezuela, noted that Maduro canceled both a referendum that could have recalled his government and later regional elections, after the opposition made huge gains in parliamentary voting in 2015. A Maduro-controlled Supreme Court then stripped the parliament of much of its power.

In addition, thousands of people have been arrested for their political beliefs, Almagro said, including opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez, who has been in jail for three years.

The OAS is demanding Venezuela hold elections or risk suspension from the group, a drastic measure. The last time a country was suspended was when the military and right-wing politicians staged a coup against the elected president in Honduras in 2009.

Under OAS regulations, a country can be suspended when the “democratic order” is “altered.”

Venezuela is in the throes of a devastating economic and humanitarian crisis. The oil-rich country has among the highest homicide and inflation rates in the world and suffers from severe shortages of food and medicine.

The Maduro government angrily condemned the OAS actions as “imperialist interference” and vowed to resist. Adan Chavez, brother of the late Hugo Chavez, the socialist strongman who set Venezuela on its revolutionary path, claimed the OAS was plotting a coup against Maduro.

Maduro views much of his opposition as right-wing oligarchs who have long repressed the poor.

Although the OAS has often been accused of pro-Washington tendencies, it is significant that 13 nations in addition to the United States are united in condemning Venezuela. This marks a shift away from populist regimes in much of Latin America.

The Trump administration, which has shown little interest in Latin America beyond Mexico, did issue instructions to diplomats to find ways through the OAS to put pressure on Venezuela, according to people familiar with the matter.

Those instructions came despite parallel administration plans to slash funds to the OAS and other multilateral institutions like the United Nations.

Trump recently spoke by telephone to the presidents of Chile and Brazil and in both cases discussed Venezuela, the White House said. And he met at the White House with Lilian Tintori, the wife of Lopez, the jailed opposition leader, as she lobbied for her husband’s freedom.

The Treasury Department earlier this year slapped sanctions on Venezuela’s vice president, Tareck El Aissami, alleging he was a major drug trafficker, charges he denied.

“We’re not pushing for Venezuela’s expulsion from the OAS at this time,” State Department spokesman Mark Toner said late last week.

“However, we do think the OAS is the appropriate venue to deal with the ongoing situation in Venezuela,” he said. “Elections are essential to securing accountability, and the Venezuelan people deserve a voice in creating solutions to the myriad economic, political, and social and humanitarian challenges that they face.”

Share
Advertisement

Trump takes to Twitter to blame GOP hard-liners over healthcare failure

(Mandel Ngan / AFP-Getty Images)

President Trump on Sunday blamed fellow Republicans and two influential conservative advocacy groups for last week’s failure of the GOP healthcare plan.

The president had said on Friday that it was the fault of Democrats that House Speaker Paul D. Ryan pulled the measure from consideration rather than putting it forth for a floor showdown that the GOP leadership would have lost.

In a Sunday morning tweet, the president appeared to shift culpability to the House Freedom Caucus, a conservative group of GOP lawmakers who were key to depriving Trump and his camp of the votes needed for passage.

“Democrats are smiling” over the bill’s failure, Trump declared on Twitter. The Freedom Caucus, he said, had “saved” President Obama’s Affordable Care Act with the help of Heritage Action and the Club for Growth, two organizations that had opposed the GOP measure.

The chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), declined to engage in any sparring with the White House, instead predicting that a Trump-led Republican effort to overhaul Obama’s signature healthcare legislation eventually would move ahead.

“At the end of the day, the most valuable player will be President Trump,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Meadows also insisted there had been “no conversation” about any attempt to force out Ryan, who is being blamed for failing to marshal sufficient support for the measure he had spearheaded.

Trump so far has refrained from public criticism of the speaker, but — again on Twitter — he specifically urged followers to watch a Fox News segment on Saturday night, featuring commentator Jeanine Pirro excoriating Ryan and calling for him to be ousted.

That gave rise to speculation that Trump would seek to force the speaker to take the fall for the debacle.

Read More

Share

After the GOP healthcare bill fizzles, Trump blames the Democrats and says he ‘learned a lot about loyalty’

President Trump addresses the cancellation of a vote Friday on the GOP’s plan to overhaul the Affordable Care Act.

After failing to land a deal on the healthcare bill, President Trump on Friday blamed Democrats, even though the GOP controls Congress and the White House, and made few overtures across the aisle when pushing the bill.

“When you get no votes from the other side -- meaning Democrats -- it is really a difficult situation,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office after a revolt by Republican lawmakers forced House leaders to stop a vote in their bid to overhaul the Affordable Care Act.

Trump insisted that the current healthcare law, commonly known as Obamacare, will collapse under its own weight, and then Democrats will want to make a deal with the White House.

“I truly believe the Democrats will come to us,” Trump said.

In the meantime, Trump is moving his attention to pushing through a tax reform bill, he said.

“We will probably be going really hard for the big tax cuts and tax reform -- that’s next,” he said.

Trump, who has spent decades negotiating real estate deals and seeing many of them fall through, seemed sanguine discussing the effort he put into getting a healthcare reform bill passed.

“This was an interesting period of time,” Trump said. “We learned a lot about loyalty and we learned a lot about the vote-getting process.”

Trump stopped short of blaming House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and avoided singling out the group of conservative Republican lawmakers, who dug in their heels in opposition.

Lawmakers in the House Freedom Caucus that largely stood against the bill are “very good people” and “friends of mind,” he said.

“I was disappointed because we could have had it,” he said. “I’m a little surprised,” he said.

When asked by a reporter if he would reach out now to Democrats for ideas on how to get a deal, Trump said, “No, I think we need to let Obamacare go its way for a little while. Then we’ll see how things go.”

Share
Advertisement

Tillerson will meet with NATO counterparts, after all

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will meet with NATO allies next week in Brussels, a move that could quell controversy over his earlier decision to skip a long-planned summit of the transatlantic alliance.

The State Department said Friday that Tillerson added a stop at NATO headquarters in Brussels to a previously scheduled trip to the Turkish capital of Ankara.

Tillerson will be in Ankara on Thursday to meet with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and other senior Turkish officials to discuss the fight against Islamic State militants in Syria and to “reaffirm Turkey’s important role in ensuring regional stability,” the State Department said.

The next day, he will go to NATO, the State Department said. NATO officials were attempting to put together a session with the other 27 allied nations.

Earlier this week, news that Tillerson would miss the NATO ministerial meeting set for April 5-6, roiled the alliance. Administration officials said Tillerson would have to be in Washington to attend President Trump’s first face-to-face meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping on April 6-7.

At the same time, Tillerson’s aides announced he would be traveling to Moscow the following week.

Criticism was swift from European allies but also from several former American diplomats and key U.S. lawmakers, who said the decision raised questions about the Trump administration’s commitment to NATO.

During his campaign, Trump called the alliance “obsolete,” although more recently he has voiced support for it while also demanding members spend more money on defense.

In response, Tillerson’s aides said they were exchanging possible alternative dates with NATO to attempt to arrange a meeting in which all parties could participate. It was not yet clear if next Friday’s meeting will take the place of the April 5-6 session, which as of late Friday remained on NATO’s formal calendar.

Diplomats considered the ministerial meeting as especially important because it will lay the groundwork for a May 25 NATO summit of heads of state and government, which Trump has said he will attend.

Share

Charter promises Trump something new ($25-billion investment) and something old (20,000 jobs)

Charter Communications Chief Executive Thomas Rutledge.
(Mandel Ngan / AFP/Getty Images)

The chief executive of Charter Communications committed in a meeting with President Trump on Friday to invest $25 billion on broadband infrastructure while joining a trend of business leaders touting previously announced job creation at the White House.

In the case of Charter — Southern California’s dominant cable-TV and Internet service provider — Chief Executive Thomas Rutledge said he expected to hire 20,000 new U.S. employees over the next four years.

Charter had made the hiring promise in 2015 when it was purchasing Time Warner Cable. The new development was the time period in which it will occur.

Nevertheless, Trump indicated the job creation was triggered by his election.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Threats made against Hawaii judge who ruled against travel ban

(George Lee / The Star-Advertiser via AP)

The Hawaii federal judge who brought President Trump’s revised travel ban to a national halt last week has become the target of threats.

U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson has received the threats since his March 15 ruling, according to FBI spokeswoman Michele Ernst.

Ernst said the FBI is ready to assist but declined to provide more information.

The U.S. Marshals Service also said it would not give details.

“The U.S. Marshals Service is responsible for the protection of federal judicial officials, including judges and prosecutors, and we take that responsibility very seriously,” the agency said in a statement.

“While we do not discuss our specific security measures, we continuously review the security measures in place for all federal judges and take appropriate steps to provide additional protection when it is warranted.”

Watson, a judge in the U.S. District Court of Hawaii in Honolulu, issued a scathing 43-page opinion against the travel ban the day before it was to go into effect.

He wrote that, despite the ban’s “stated secular purpose,” Trump’s own words marked the executive order as a fulfillment of the president’s campaign promise to temporarily bar Muslims from coming to the U.S. “The illogic of the government’s contention is palpable,” Watson said.

In response, Trump said Watson’s ruling was “terrible” and “makes us look weak.”

Trump has vowed to take the travel ban case to the U.S. Supreme Court. An appeal of a separate Maryland federal judge’s ruling against the travel ban is currently pending in the U.S. 4th District Court of Appeals.

Share

House GOP gives up on healthcare bill as Trump suffers first legislative defeat

Unable to muster enough support from his own party, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan again postponed a vote Friday on the GOP’s plan to overhaul the Affordable Care Act.

The move came at the request of President Trump, who just Thursday night issued an ultimatum that lawmakers should hold the vote regardless of the outcome.

It was the second time House GOP leaders had to delay a final reckoning on the measure to avoid an embarrassing defeat.

Republicans could afford to lose no more than21 or 22 votes from their own members, but defections appeared at times to exceed 30.

The conservative House Freedom Caucus wanted Trump and Ryan to go further and faster in unwinding Obamacare rules and taxes. Centrist Republicans were worried the GOP plan would leave too many Americans without health insurance.

Share
Advertisement

White House sounds resigned to defeat of GOP healthcare reform plan

(Michael Reynolds / EPA)

Hours before President Trump faced his first big legislative test, the White House sounded resigned to the possibility that a GOP plan to overhaul the Affordable Care Act could be defeated.

“At the end of the day, this isn’t a dictatorship and we’ve got to expect members to vote the way they will vote,” White House spokesman Sean Spicer said.

“There is no question that the president and his team have left everything on the field,” Spicer told reporters in the West Wing. “At some point you can only do so much.”

The president asked House Speaker Paul D. Ryan to meet him at the White House and the two discussed where the vote count stands.

“We’ve seen the whip count. We know where the vote count stands. We don’t need a live vote to tell us where the votes are,” Spicer said.

While the White House was not giving up hope that the bill could pass, Spicer’s comments hinted that it didn’t look good.

He said the president doesn’t want to drag out discussions on the healthcare bill because he wants to move on to other issues such as tax reform, immigration and funding the border wall.

Several high-profile Republicans, including House Appropriations Committee Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen, signaled they would vote against the measure, fueling growing doubts about whether it will win enough votes to pass.

Trump surrogate Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.) said he “can’t guarantee” the GOP bill has the votes. He said he was “very disappointed” in party members who were not on board.

Share

Virginia federal judge rules in favor of Trump’s revised travel ban

Unike federal judges before him, a judge in Virginia on Friday ruled in favor of President Trump’s revised travel ban in a case brought by Muslims who said the president’s executive order illegally discriminated against their religion by restricting travel from six majority-Muslim countries.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga of the Eastern District Court of Virginia in Alexandria wrote that the plaintiffs, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and other Muslim community leaders from across the country, probably would not prevail in their suit.

Trenga said the travel ban likely “falls within the bounds” of Trump’s authority as president, and he rejected a request to halt the order.

Trenga’s ruling doesn’t have an immediate effect on the ban, which was put on hold by federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland last week. But it gives ammunition to government lawyers arguing for the ban across several U.S. courts where cases against it are pending.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

What we learned about Neil Gorsuch during his Supreme Court confirmation hearing

Confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominees act out a peculiar Washington ritual in which inquisitive senators gather before TV cameras to hear an aspiring justice politely refuse to answer their questions on all the pressing legal issues of the day.

To no one’s surprise, Judge Neil M. Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee, portrayed himself as an earnest, idealistic jurist who did not want to “tip his hand” by voicing his views. Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. followed the same script on their way to confirmation, as does virtually every nominee.

But three days of testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee revealed some of Gorsuch’s thinking and gave hints as to what kind of justice he could be.

Gorsuch, 49, appears to be a strict “textualist” who believes in following the exact words of a law, even if doing so leads to a seemingly unfair or undesired result.

But he may not be as much of a true “originalist” as the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who advocated following the meaning of the Constitution as it was understood at the time it was written.

Read More

Share

Tensions rise in House Intelligence Committee probe; former Trump advisers offer to testify

Tensions between the two leaders of the House investigation into links between the Trump campaign and Russia escalated Friday as the committee announced it would soon question President Trump’s former campaign chairman.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters at a news conference that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who has worked as a lobbyist for a Russian businessman and for a pro-Russian Ukrainian politician, had volunteered to be interviewed by the committee.

He said the panel would consult with Manafort’s attorney on whether he would testify in public or private.

But Nunes also announced that the committee was canceling a planned public hearing with former Acting Atty. Gen. Sally Yates and two former Obama administration intelligence officials -- the former director of national intelligence, James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan.

The decision to cancel the hearing prompted the panel’s top Democrat to accuse Nunes of seeking to avoid further bad publicity for the White House after a tumultuous week.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) said in a separate news conference that he “strongly objected” to the cancellation of the hearing, calling it a “dodge” by Nunes to aid the White House.

Nunes apologized to the committee Thursday after abruptly announcing publicly that he had received information that Trump transition officials were inadvertently picked up on surveillance by U.S. intelligence agencies and then briefing Trump on the information before sharing it with fellow panel members.

Calling Nunes’ actions a “dead of the night” maneuver, Schiff suggested that the chairman’s decisions had been aimed at buttressing Trump’s debunked claim that President Obama had wiretapped him.

“That effort to defend the indefensible has led us down this terrible rabbit hole and threatens the only investigation that is authorized in the House,” Schiff said.

Schiff did not say that Democrats would pull out of the investigation, but said it was for Speaker Paul D. Ryan to decide if Nunes should continue as chairman of the intelligence panel.

In addition to Manafort, two other Trump associates said they were willing to answer questions from the committee.

Carter Page, a Manhattan energy consultant with business ties to Russia who served as a campaign foreign policy adviser to Trump, sent a letter to the committee March 23 volunteering to testify. Page provided The Times a copy of the message.

Page was one of several Trump associates cited by Schiff and other Democrats at the committee’s hearing last Monday. He was also was named in a unverified dossier about Trump ties to Russia compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, that was given to the FBI.

“I would eagerly welcome the chance to speak with the Committee to help finally set the record straight following the false evidence, illegal activities as well as other lies distributed by certain politically-motivated suspects in coordination with the Obama Administration, which defamed me and other Americans,” Page said in his letter.

Separately, Roger Stone, a political consultant who once advised Trump, said he wanted to answer questions. Stone has admitted having contacts last summer with a pro-Russian hacker accused by the FBI of being involved in the cyber attack on the Democratic National Committee.

“I have been anxious to testify for some time,” Stone said in an interview. “My name was dragged through the mud in a public session, and I should be permitted to rebut that in a public session. They don’t even have to subpoena me. I have volunteered to testify, and I would prefer that testimony to be in public.”

12:15 p.m.: This post was updated with statements by Roger Stone and Carter Page.

Share
Advertisement

Speaker Ryan rushes to the White House for a last-minute meeting with Trump

(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

Hours away from a crucial healthcare vote, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) rushed Friday to the White House for a meeting with President Trump.

As Ryan met the president in the West Wing, the GOP effort to overturn the Affordable Care Act was in jeopardy. A number of key House Republicans said during the day they would vote “no” on the final passage of the bill. Ryan’s visit to the White House lasted about an hour.

Ryan has struggled to keep his coalition of fiscal hawks and more centrist conservatives together to repeal and replace Obamacare, as the current law is called.

As support for the bill seemed to waver Thursday, Trump issued an ultimatum that lawmakers must pass the bill or he would move on to other issues, such as tax reform.

Trump “left everything on the field” in the effort to pass the bill, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said in his daily press briefing. “We’ve done everything,” he said.

Spicer insisted that White House officials continued to believe that the bill might pass. The vote is currently scheduled for roughly 3:30 p.m. EDT.

This post was updated with Sean Spicer’s comments and corrected the length of Ryan’s visit to the White House.

Share

Watch live: House debates legislation to repeal Obamacare

Share
Advertisement

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort has offered to be interviewed by House Intelligence Committee

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee says former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort has volunteered to speak with the panel as part of its ongoing investigation into Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 election.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) told reporters that Manafort’s counsel contacted the committee Thursday to offer lawmakers the opportunity to interview him.

Nunes said he does not know whether the interview will take place in a public forum or behind closed doors.

The Associated Press reported this week that Manafort, before signing up with the Trump campaign, secretly worked for a Russian billionaire and wrote a proposal aimed at benefiting the government in Moscow.

The House Intelligence Committee is investigating whether any ties exist between Trump associates and Russia.

Share

GOP’s Obamacare repeal bill clears hurdle, heads toward final vote

President Trump is flanked by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), left, and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) at the White House.
President Trump is flanked by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), left, and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) at the White House.
(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

The GOP effort to undo the Affordable Care Act crossed a key hurdle when House Republicans approved a procedural step, setting up a final vote expected later Friday.

UPDATE: At Trump’s request, House again pulls Obamacare vote amid crumbling support >>

But the bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, as the law is called, is still in serious doubt amid deep Republican dissent.

Late Thursday, President Trump issued lawmakers an ultimatum to either pass the bill or he would move on to other issues. The White House said it was done negotiating with the conservative House Freedom Caucus, which wants a tougher bill, and more centrist and moderate Republicans worried about Americans losing coverage under the GOP plan.

Trump’s threat changed the tenor of what had been relatively congenial negotiations. Some lawmakers embraced the moment as their battle cry to act, while others resented the president’s hard-sell language.

On Friday, Trump went a step further, criticizing the caucus publicly for its opposition.

“The irony is that the Freedom Caucus, which is very pro-life and against Planned Parenthood, allows P.P. to continue if they stop this plan!,” the president tweeted.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) has struggled to build majority support for passage and Trump’s message cut both ways.

Approval of the rules package Friday morning by a 230-194 vote does not ensure final passage later in the day. Six Republicans voted against advancing the bill.

Share
Advertisement

Trump attacks House Freedom Caucus for opposing his healthcare bill

Share

Trump administration to give green light to Keystone XL pipeline

Reviving a big oil project which environmentalists had hoped was dead and buried, the Trump administration plans to announce Friday that it has issued a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline.

The project, which would ship 800,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada’s tar sands to Gulf Coast refineries, had been rejected by the Obama administration last year, a move heralded by climate activists. The rejection came just before the former president signed an international agreement on global warming in Paris.

But Trump vowed to undo the previous administration’s work on climate change. He announced soon after taking office that he would seek to restart the pipeline project, a clear signal that he would move aggressively to promote oil development.

The pipeline’s future, though, remains uncertain. Keystone was conceived at a time of significantly higher oil prices. Its developers had not envisioned prices would drop and remain so low, for so long. Extracting oil from the tar sands is costly, and it remains to be seen if the project will ultimately cost out.

Already, the White House has retreated from a demand that the builders of the pipeline use American steel -- a vow that Trump announced with considerable fanfare. That requirement would have raised the cost of the project substantially.

Crews clear a route in preliminary construction work for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline near Winona, Texas.
Crews clear a route in preliminary construction work for the proposed Keystone XL pipeline near Winona, Texas.
((Sarah A. Miller / Tyler (Texas) Morning Telegraph)

About half the steel being used to build the pipeline would be imported, much of it from India and some from a Canadian company owned by a wealthy Russian. White House officials said they exempted the project from Trump’s buy-American order because it was already underway at the time the order was signed.

Trump plans to speak about the project this morning, according to a tweet from White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer.

The State Department earlier announced that the pipeline developer, TransCanada, has been given the required permit to construct a line that crosses the U.S. border. The State Department concluded that building Keystone is in the national interest, reversing the view of the Obama administration.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the former chief executive of ExxonMobil, had recused himself from the decision-making process. The permit was signed by Tom Shannon, a career diplomat serving as undersecretary of state for political affairs.

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s travel ban could remain blocked for weeks

A federal appeals court said Thursday that it would hear arguments in early May over the Trump administration’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling against its travel ban, potentially leaving the ban stalled for several more weeks.

The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals filed notice scheduling oral arguments for May 8 on the Justice Department’s appeal. The federal government is asking the court to reverse a ruling by a federal judge in Maryland that called for a national halt to the 90-day ban in President Trump’s executive order on travel from six majority-Muslim countries.

The Justice Department said it planned to file a motion in the appeals court on Friday asking for the Maryland decision to be reversed more quickly for national security purposes. According to the court’s schedule that was released Thursday, the court would wait until at least April 5 to rule on that request, though the process could take longer.

U.S. District Judge Theodore D. Chuang’s decision in the Maryland case against the travel ban came down on March 16, the day the ban was supposed to go into effect. A day earlier, a federal district court in Honolulu also ruled against Trump. The Hawaii ruling blocked enforcement of the ban affecting the six countries, as well as a 120-day pause on refugee resettlement.

The Trump administration has not appealed the Hawaii decision. If it appeals, the case would go to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

The court is the same one where three judges last month unanimously rejected the Trump administration’s request to reverse a Seattle federal judge’s order halting the first travel ban. A different set of judges would likely hear any new appeal.

Trump has said he wants to take the case over the travel ban -- which was retooled in an attempt to pass court muster -- to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Share

Revised GOP bill to overhaul Obamacare would save less money, still lead to 24 million more uninsured

House Republicans’ revised plan to overhaul the Affordable Care Act would reduce the deficit by half as much as their original plan, according to a new analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

But the legislation, which GOP leaders are scrambling to advance, would still double the number of Americans without coverage over the next decade, increasing the ranks of the uninsured by 24 million.

The new CBO estimate does not take account of current negotiations among GOP lawmakers about rolling back Obamacare further.

Conservative lawmakers are pushing to scrap requirements in the current law that all health plans cover a basic set of benefits.

Eliminating that requirement could have an impact on how many Americans have coverage.

But if House leaders proceed with their plans to vote Friday on a revised bill, it is unlikely the CBO would have enough time to evaluate the impact before lawmakers vote.

Share
Advertisement

President will likely be making calls ‘throughout the night’ on healthcare bill, aides say

(Andrew Harnik / Associated Press)

As Republicans scrambled for votes to overhaul the Affordable Care Act, President Trump will likely be making calls “throughout the night” to shore up support, a White House official said Thursday.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if he is continuing to make the calls throughout the night,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Sarah H. Sanders told reporters.

GOP lawmakers decided to postpone the vote on the bill until at least Friday morning when it became clear that there weren’t enough “yes” votes to pass it. The decision came only about an hour after White House spokesman Sean Spicer said that there would be no delay, and it appeared to catch the White House by surprise.

Even at this late hour, Sanders said that Trump was still open to hearing from lawmakers on “ways to make the bill better.”

Share

Changes to lease mean Trump doesn’t have a conflict at his Washington hotel, agency rules

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

President Trump can continue to lease a downtown Washington hotel from the federal government, a federal agency has decided, determining that the unprecedented arrangement does not present a conflict.

The Trump organization has changed the lease to prevent the president from receiving any of the proceeds from hotel operations, a contracting officer with the General Services Administration, the agency that serves as the government’s landlord, wrote in a letter released Thursday afternoon.

Together with the president’s decision to turn operation of the business over to his sons, that was enough to satisfy GSA that the president’s company, Trump Old Post Office LLC, was not in violation of a provision of its lease that forbids any federal official from benefiting from the deal.

“Accordingly, the lease is valid and in full force and effect,” said the letter signed by the contracting officer, Kevin M. Terry.

The luxury Trump International Hotel a few blocks from the White House is one of the most visible examples of the complications presented by Trump serving as president while continuing to own a worldwide network of hotels, golf courses and other properties.

One recent lawsuit, filed by a Washington restaurant owner, argues that the Trump hotel will unfairly grab business because lobbyists, foreign governments and others will be trying to buy favor from the White House.

According to the GSA, the Trump organization wrote an amendment saying that all revenues from the hotel will stay with the hotel — and not flow to the president’s trust company.

“In other words, during his term in office, the president will not receive any distributions from the trust that would have been generated from the hotel,” Terry wrote.

But the leader of one watchdog group called the GSA’s stand a “very tortured reading” of the contract. Trump will continue to benefit from having money flow to a company that he owns, said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy21, which advocates for transparency and limits on political spending.

“So this doesn’t make any sense to me, and it seems like GSA has leaned over backwards to accommodate the president here,” he said. “This is one more example of why President Trump should have divested his assets into a blind trust,” he added.

1:12 p.m. This post was updated with reaction from Fred Wertheimer.

Share
Advertisement

House GOP scrambles to salvage Obamacare overhaul as conservative Freedom Caucus, moderates revolt

A planned vote Thursday on the GOP’s Obamacare overhaul was postponed after President Trump failed to broker a deal with the conservative House Freedom Caucus and the bill continued losing support from moderate Republicans.

Instead of an expected floor debate, the day became a frenzy of closed-door meetings as different GOP factions huddled in rooms across the Capitol complex.

Early in the morning, it became clear that the caucus — whose strength comes from the estimated 30 votes the group brings to the table — was splintering.

GOP leaders worked late into the night to cut a deal with the group that has been pushing changes — namely repeal of all the mandates of the Affordable Care Act, including 10 essential health benefits, such as maternity coverage, that insurers are required to provide.

While the White House appeared willing to compromise, many headed into a morning meeting with Trump complained that GOP leaders did not go far enough to meet their concerns.

“They haven’t met us at all,” Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) said.

Some caucus members simply wanted to start over. Others bristled at maintaining some of Obamacare’s more popular provisions, such as banning lifetime caps on coverage and allowing young people to remain on their parents’ plans until they are 26.

“There’s a split,” acknowledged Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), who is among the few from the group backing the new bill, the American Health Care Act.

Without a deal at the White House and as moderates resisted the conservatives’ changes, Thursday’s vote appeared increasingly in doubt.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) was struggling to cobble together a majority for passage, but attempts to win conservatives pushed moderate Republicans farther away and doomed the bill’s chances in the Senate.

One lawmaker, Rep. Phil Roe (R-Texas), emerged from a chairman’s meeting with Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield), and said the vote likely would be pushed to Friday.

That would dash the GOP’s plans to pass the bill on the seventh anniversary of Obamacare.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (R-San Francisco) said Trump was making a “rookie’s mistake” as he tried to close the deal.

Meanwhile, moderates were huddling on the first floor of the Capitol, and some left their meeting confident the essential benefits that conservatives wanted to eliminate would survive, at least on health insurance plans purchased on the individual marketplaces.

While that might ease some concerns, an increasing number of Republicans are simply uneasy about the details of the GOP bill.

They are being hammered by ad campaigns and phone calls from outside groups on both sides of the issue, and many complain that the process failed to create a workable product. They worry that it will be abandoned in the Senate, where Republican resistance is strong.

The bill aims to fulfill the GOP’s long promise of repealing the Affordable Care Act, but creating a replacement system has proved more daunting. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said 24 million more Americans would be without insurance after the first decade if the new bill becomes law.

Times staff writer Noam N. Levey contributed to this report.

Share

GOP leaders postpone vote on healthcare overhaul

House GOP leaders postponed a vote Thursday on legislation to overhaul the Affordable Care Act amid a Republican revolt that raised doubts about the fate of the measure.

Leaders hope to reschedule a vote Friday.

Despite personal appeals from the president and a flurry of last-minute negotiations with House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), wary lawmakers remained unconvinced.

Conservatives argued the bill did not go far enough in dismantling the healthcare law known as Obamacare, while moderates feared millions of Americans would be left without health coverage.

Republican leaders hoped to swiftly regroup to amend the bill, the American Health Care Act, but options for generating more support appeared limited because making concessions to one faction risked losing support from another. Efforts were complicated by resistance in the Senate, where Republicans have largely panned the House package as unacceptable.

The decision to cancel the vote leaves in limbo Trump’s bid to quickly scrap his predecessor’s signature healthcare law and deliver on his party’s long-running campaign promise.

Trump, faced with a growing fallout from the FBI investigation into possible collusion between Russia and his presidential campaign, was hoping that a decisive victory in the effort to repeal Obamacare would provide him with much-needed political momentum to propel other ambitious efforts, such as overhauling the nation’s tax code, pursuing new trade deals and dramatically scaling back federal spending.

The president made a hard sell this week, warning Republicans that they risked losing their congressional majority in the next election if they failed to support the bill.

The vote delay also dealt an embarrassing defeat to Ryan. Facing solid opposition from Democrats, the speaker must rely on the GOP majority for passage and can lose no more than about 20 Republicans. Defections at one point this week spilled beyond 30.

The conservative House Freedom Caucus — which had been somewhat overshadowed by Trump’s rise in recent months — led the opposition, reestablishing itself as one of the party’s most formidable power centers. Backed by Senate allies, the caucus at times bypassed Ryan and negotiated directly with the White House.

The arrangement raised familiar questions about who was in control of the GOP. And the failure to reach an agreement tarnished Trump’s image as a dealmaker.

“The president’s doing everything he can to make this happen,” said Rep. James Renacci (R-Ohio).

“Everybody has their own opinion. Everybody has their own thoughts. Everybody wants one little thing in a bill,” he said. “In the end, to get something done, you got to have some compromise.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

White House attacks Democrats’ plan to filibuster Supreme Court pick

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

Responding to Democrats’ threat to filibuster Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer attacked the move as partisan and predicted it would backfire.

“We find [Senate Minority Leader Charles] Schumer’s announcement truly disappointing because it breaks with the tradition of how the Senate has handled Supreme Court confirmation votes in modern times and represents the type of partisanship that Americans have grown tired of,” Spicer said.

Schumer, the New York senator, said Democrats would demand that Gorsuch receive at least 60 votes before his nomination comes to a full floor vote.

Republicans only have 52 seats in the Senate and so far no Democrats have announced they plan to vote for President Trump’s nominee. But Republicans have threatened to use their majority to simply change the rules to lower the minimum threshold to 51 votes should Democrats filibuster.

Spicer noted that Supreme Court nominees have rarely been subjected to filibusters.

“We call on Sen. Schumer and the Democrats to abandon this attempt to block Judge Gorsuch from receiving a fair up-or-down vote that he and the American people have voted for,” Spicer said.

Share

U.S. to recommend approval of Keystone XL pipeline, AP sources say

(Sue Ogrocki / Associated Press)

Senior U.S. officials say the State Department will recommend approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, clearing the way for the White House to formally approve it.

Two officials told the Associated Press that Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Tom Shannon would issue the recommendation Friday. A 60-day deadline to complete a Trump administration review is set to expire next Monday.

The pipeline requires a presidential permit. The officials say the White House would announce the permit’s issuance after the State Department makes its recommendation. The officials weren’t authorized to comment publicly ahead of the announcement and requested anonymity, the AP said.

Shannon is making the recommendation because Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has recused himself from the matter. Tillerson is the former chief executive of Exxon Mobil.

The Obama administration had rejected the pipeline.

Share
Advertisement

White House still lacks the votes to pass healthcare bill, spokesman says

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

Despite intensive lobbying by President Trump and congressional leaders, the Republican healthcare bill still lacks majority support with hours left before the scheduled vote, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Thursday.

Although Spicer insisted that the vote-gathering is continuing to “make progress,” he made clear that the White House does not yet have a majority.

“I anticipate that we will get there,” he said at his daily press briefing.

His remarks came after a meeting between Trump and members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus. White House officials have floated a variety of proposals to try to woo enough votes from conservatives to get to a majority. Many of the conservatives say the bill does not go far enough to repeal President Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

This afternoon, Trump will try to shore up the other end of the GOP caucus, meeting with members of the centrist Tuesday Group. Many of the proposals being made to pick up conservative votes run the risk of alienating more moderate members.

Share

Senate votes to overturn FCC’s tough privacy rules for broadband providers

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.)
(Jim Lo Scalzo / EPA)

The Senate narrowly voted Thursday to overturn tough new privacy rules for Internet service providers, employing a rarely used procedure to invalidate restrictions that cable and wireless companies strongly opposed.

The Republican-backed measure, approved 50 to 48, repeals regulations approved on a 3-2 party line vote in October by the Federal Communications Commission when it was controlled by Democrats.

The bill is expected to pass the House in the coming weeks. President Trump, who campaigned on rolling back federal regulations, is likely to sign the repeal.

“The FCC privacy rules are just another example of burdensome rules that hurt more than they help,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Inadvertent surveillance of Trump transition team raises far-reaching questions

(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

The disclosure by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, that communications by Trump transition members were inadvertently picked up by U.S. surveillance legally collecting foreign intelligence raises questions that are likely to consume Congress and the White House for months.

Among them:

  • Who in the Trump transition team was captured by the surveillance? That’s not clear. Nunes gave no names other than to say it was possible that then-President-elect Trump might have been mentioned in classified intelligence reports written at the time. Numerous transition officials could have communicated with foreign ambassadors or others in the United States who were under court-authorized surveillance for counter-intelligence purposes — and thus inadvertently, but legally, had their communications monitored by U.S. intelligence. White House Chief of Staff Reince Preibus, White House aide Stephen Miller, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and Trump’s adult children all played formal roles in Trump’s transition, along with many other Trump associates and former government officials. Nunes himself was a member of the transition executive committee.
  • Who were Trump transition members talking to? Again, Nunes didn’t say, except to note that the surveillance was not part of an ongoing FBI investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russian authorities who were meddling in the election. In addition to foreign diplomats or other obvious contacts, the U.S. intelligence dragnet could include almost any person in the U.S. under court-approved surveillance who was in contact with transition officials or who claimed to have been in contact with Trump transition members.
  • What were they talking about? Again, Nunes didn’t say. But it’s most likely that the classified intelligence reports that Nunes cited discussed either attempts to influence the incoming Trump administration or policy changes that a foreign government was considering in response to Trump’s election. It’s also possible that the surveillance picked up discussions about business deals, though that is unlikely to generate intelligence reports unless the communications suggested a crime was being committed.
  • Was the surveillance done under a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant? Nunes said it was, which suggests that the communications occurred between Trump transition officials and other people in the U.S, not overseas, since the National Security Agency doesn’t need a warrant to conduct eavesdropping overseas.
  • What are the requirements for obtaining a FISA warrant? The FBI asks a special federal court that conducts its proceedings in secret for such a warrant when it has reason to believe that someone in the U.S. is acting as an agent of a foreign power — in the worst-case scenario, conducting espionage against the U.S. But its also possible to get FISA warrants to intercept routine communications by ambassadors and other foreign officials in the U.S., which seems to be how Trump’s former national security advisor, Mike Flynn, was detected on phone calls with Russia’s ambassador last year.
  • Aren’t the identities of U.S. persons who are picked up inadvertently by surveillance supposed to be protected under the FISA law? Yes. But senior intelligence officials can decide to include their names or other identifying information in classified intelligence reports if they believe that doing so is important for understanding the intelligence, or if it shows clear evidence of a potential crime. This process, known as unmasking, could have happened with the Trump transition team. Nunes said it had, but Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) said that in most cases he had been told the identities were not unmasked but were obvious. So far, Flynn is the only member of Trump’s team who is known to have been picked up by the surveillance.
  • How did Nunes get the information? He said he got it from intelligence sources but did not identify them.
  • Does this mean President Trump was correct to claim on Twitter that he was wiretapped by President Obama? No. There is no evidence of a wiretap at Trump Tower and the intercepts were not aimed at Trump or his aides. They were aimed at foreign intelligence targets with whom they apparently were communicating. A president cannot order an FBI wiretap.
  • What’s the impact of all this? At a minimum it has disrupted the House Intelligence Committee’s efforts to conduct a bipartisan investigation into Russia’s role in the election. Schiff, the ranking Democrat, was furious that Nunes held a news conference and then briefed the president on Wednesday. On Thursday, a committee aide said Nunes had apologized “for not sharing information about the documents he saw with the minority before going public” and that he “pledged to work with them on this issue.”
Share

Senate Democrats plan filibuster to stop Gorsuch confirmation to Supreme Court

Democrats plan a filibuster against Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, setting up a Senate fight that they are almost certain to eventually lose.

The long-expected announcement of the filibuster plan came from Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). In a message on Twitter, Schumer said that Gorsuch would “face a cloture vote,” referring to the Senate process for filibusters.

Democratic vote counters are confident they have more than the 40 votes needed to sustain a filibuster, at least for a time. Currently, 48 senators caucus with the Democrats, including two who were elected as independents.

That leaves Senate Republicans with two paths they could use to confirm Gorsuch.

One option would be to have repeated cloture votes to test whether some Democrats, especially those from states carried by Trump in the presidential election, might break ranks after a symbolic vote or two.

The other option would be to move immediately to change Senate rules to allow a confirmation with only 51 votes.

Democrats already set the precedent for changing the rules in 2013, when they voted to require only a simple majority to confirm all presidential appointments other than Supreme Court justices. At the time, Republicans protested, but Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has strongly hinted he would follow suit if needed to get Gorsuch confirmed.

One issue for McConnell will be whether some veteran Republican senators are reluctant to change the filibuster rule without at least going through the motions of trying to gain 60 votes for cloture. McConnell has said he wants to get Gorsuch confirmed before the Senate takes its Easter recess, scheduled to begin April 6.

The move to a filibuster does not come as a surprise. Democratic senators have been under intense pressure from activist groups in the party to fight the Gorsuch nomination even if, ultimately, they’re doomed to lose.

Share
Advertisement

Russia inquiry threatened by claims that Trump’s team was named in foreign surveillance reports

(Mark Wilson / Getty Images)

U.S. intelligence agencies inadvertently intercepted communications involving the Trump transition team late last year, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Wednesday, a disclosure that President Trump said “somewhat” vindicated his claim that he was wiretapped by President Obama.

But Democrats immediately disputed that claim, asserting that the intercepts appeared to be court-authorized intelligence gathering that did not target Trump or his aides and may not have disclosed their names even in classified intelligence reports.

Rather than confirming Trump’s claims, the disclosures by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), chairman of the House committee, sparked a political uproar that threatened to obliterate attempts to conduct a bipartisan congressional investigation into whether Trump campaign aides coordinated with Russian intelligence agencies during the 2016 presidential race.

Read More

Share

Obama defends Affordable Care Act as Republicans look to take first step in repeal

Former President Obama marked the anniversary of the Affordable Care Act with a robust defense of the law Republicans will seek to begin repealing Thursday.

In a lengthy written statement, Obama made no explicit mention of the action pending in the House. But he clearly contrasted the grueling process that ended with his signing the law seven years ago and the positive impact he said it has had with the aims of congressional Republicans and his successor today.

The health law was passed after a battle “carried out in congressional hearings and in the public square for more than a year,” Obama noted. By contrast, lawmakers still haven’t seen final text of the bill scheduled to be voted on Thursday night in the House. It is still the subject of a furious round of last-minute negotiations between President Trump and House conservatives.

Obama listed key new protections guaranteed in the current law — coverage for those with preexisting conditions, lower costs for prescription drugs for seniors and free preventive care — all of which could be stripped now.

The Democrat also took on common GOP talking points about “Obamacare.”

“Reality continues to discredit the false claim that this law is in a ‘death spiral,’ ” he wrote. And “this law is no ‘job-killer,’ ” he added, pointing to a record streak of job growth.

Obama conceded that improvements could be made to further reduce costs and stabilize markets.

“If Republicans are serious about lowering costs while expanding coverage to those who need it, and if they’re prepared to work with Democrats and objective evaluators in finding solutions that accomplish those goals — that’s something we all should welcome,” Obama said. “But we should start from the baseline that any changes will make our health care system better, not worse, for hardworking Americans.”

Obama’s statement concluded by noting the grassroots efforts that were key in helping build support for his legislation, and noting Americans “who love their country still have the power” to support its goals today.

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s awkward alliance with Ryan faces biggest test: Will healthcare vote bind or push them apart?

Speaker Paul D. Ryan confers with President Trump.
(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

President Trump and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan are staring at a moment that could define or derail their tenures, with the vote on the GOP measure to repeal and replace Obamacare approaching and the tally seemingly moving against them.

The two are not natural allies, something that was clear during the presidential campaign. As any number of Trump controversies swirled, particularly those that raised questions about the nominee’s temperament and judgment, Ryan (R-Wis.) did his best to keep his party’s standard-bearer at arm’s length.

But they began working closely after Trump’s victory in November to set a strategy for their legislative agenda.

Healthcare was the first big item — the bill that would fulfill a central campaign promise for the GOP and open the way to other priorities, including a major tax cut.

Now, however, the outcome of the healthcare vote, scheduled for Thursday evening, appears very much in doubt.

Read More

Share

Federal elections commissioner wants Trump to back up his allegations of voter fraud

(Gerry Broome / Associated Press)

The questions about President Trump’s allegations of widespread voter fraud are not going away.

Ellen Weintraub, a Democratic commissioner at the agency, sent Trump a scathing letter Wednesday, calling on the president to produce evidence that illegal ballots were cast in last year’s election.

“This allegation of a vast conspiracy … has deeply disturbed citizens throughout America,” she wrote. “Our democracy depends on the American people’s faith in our elections. Your voter fraud allegations run the risk of undermining that faith.”

In January, days after he entered the White House, Trump said that between 3 million and 5 million illegal votes were cast in the November presidential election. He told members of Congress that he lost New Hampshire because “thousands” of people came from neighboring Massachusetts and voted illegally. White House officials at the time said the claim was based on studies and evidence presented to the president.

The administration has produced no evidence to back up these claims.

“Facts matter, Mr. President,” Weintraub wrote. “The American people deserve to see your evidence.”

Trump, who lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton, has called for an investigation into voter fraud, but nothing formal has been launched.

In December, researchers at Dartmouth College conducted a study of abnormal voting patterns in the 2016 election. They looked into voting by noncitizens and the dead, among other things, and found no evidence to support Trump’s claims. After his statements about New Hampshire, the researchers homed in on voting there and found no irregularities.

Nationwide, Republican and Democratic elections officials said that voter fraud is rare and that it did not affect their states’ results.

Weintraub has drawn criticism from the nonprofit group Cause of Action Institute, which said that allegations of voter fraud fall outside the campaign finance jurisdiction of the FEC, an independent regulatory agency that focuses on campaign finance rules.

“This is not how the FEC operates,” James Valvo, a senior policy advisor for the group, told the Washington Post. “There are procedures in place for the agency to investigate allegations of violations of federal campaign finance law. Those procedures do not include individual commissioners sending public letters demanding evidence.”

Share
Advertisement

Schiff says Nunes can’t lead Russia inquiry and be a Trump surrogate

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank).
(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) has risked undermining the credibility of the panel’s investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 election by sharing new information with the White House, his Democratic counterpart said Wednesday.

By briefing the public and then President Trump about intercepted communications involving members of the transition team, but not other members of the committee involved in the investigation, Nunes cast “quite a profound cloud over our ability to do our work,” Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank) told reporters.

“The chairman will either need to decide if he’s leading an investigation into conduct which includes allegations of potential coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russians, or he is going to act as a surrogate of the White House. Because he cannot do both,” Schiff said at a Capitol Hill news conference.

The assessment, even if delivered in Schiff’s typically understated fashion, reflected a potential breakdown in what is traditionally a nonpartisan partnership between the top Republican and Democrat on the Intelligence Committee.

It was all the more striking given that both men have served together for more than a decade in the same state congressional delegation.

Schiff said he raised his concerns directly with Nunes after the Republican disclosed new information publicly and then to the White House. He stopped short of saying whether Nunes was improperly making classified information public, saying instead that his actions were “beyond irregular.”

Nunes’ actions further demonstrated the need for an independent inquiry into Russia’s actions during the campaign, Schiff said.

“We’re the only investigation there is. If we don’t do it, no one is going to do it,” Schiff said. “Now, perhaps the White House would like it that way. But the American people, I think, want there to be a credible investigation. And if we’re not going to conduct it, then we need to have an independent commission do it.”

Share

Trump says he feels ‘somewhat’ vindicated by spying revelations from Rep. Devin Nunes

(Erik S. Lesser / EPA)

President Trump said he felt “somewhat” vindicated by revelations from the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee that U.S. intelligence agencies may have picked up communications involving members of his transition team late last year.

While the intelligence reports do not back up Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that former President Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower, they apparently show that Trump and his associates may have been named in classified reports circulated in the weeks before Trump took office, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) told reporters Wednesday.

Nunes visited Trump at the White House on Wednesday afternoon to tell him about dozens of intelligence reports from the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency he had seen. He said he reports included information about communications by Trump and those working for him in the transition.

The surveillance appears to have been conducted with legal authorizations, Nunes said, and the Trump team was not the intelligence target.

But Nunes said he was uncomfortable that intelligence officials were circulating reports that identified people close to Trump, or perhaps the president-elect himself, without having a clear foreign intelligence justification.

“What I’ve read bothers me, and I think it should bother the president himself and his team,” Nunes said outside the West Wing.

When asked by a reporter whether he felt vindicated by what Nunes had said, Trump said: “I somewhat do. I must tell you I somewhat do. I very much appreciated the fact that they found what they found,” Trump said.

Nunes told reporters at the White House that intelligence officials had brought the information to him “through the proper channels,” and he is concerned that some of the information collected may not have been handled properly.

When asked whether what he found meant that Obama ordered phones in Trump Tower to be wiretapped, as Trump had alleged, Nunes said simply: “That never happened.”

Share
Advertisement

Top Democrat on House Intelligence Committee has ‘grave concerns’ about handling of Trump team intercepts

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank).
(Mark Wilson / Getty Images)

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank) said in a statement he had “grave concerns” about revelations made Wednesday by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare).

Nunes told reporters that U.S. intelligence agencies monitoring foreign targets hd incidentally heard communications involving members of the Trump transition team and that reports about those communications were disseminated around the government.

Nunes is chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and Schiff is the panel’s ranking Democrat.

Schiff called Nunes’ decision to talk to the media and the White House -- before speaking to him and the rest of the committee -- a “profound irregularity.”

Here is Schiff’s statement:

“This afternoon, Chairman Devin Nunes announced he had some form of intercepts revealing that lawfully gathered intelligence on foreign officials included information on U.S. persons, potentially including those associated with President Trump or the president himself. If accurate, this information should have been shared with members of the committee, but it has not been. Indeed, it appears that committee members only learned about this when the chairman discussed the matter this afternoon with the press. The chairman also shared this information with the White House before providing it to the committee, another profound irregularity, given that the matter is currently under investigation. I have expressed my grave concerns with the chairman that a credible investigation cannot be conducted this way.

“As to the substance of what the chairman has alleged, if the information was lawfully gathered intelligence on foreign officials, that would mean that U.S. persons would not have been the subject of surveillance. In my conversation late this afternoon, the chairman informed me that most of the names in the intercepted communications were in fact masked, but that he could still figure out the probable identity of the parties. Again, this does not indicate that there was any flaw in the procedures followed by the intelligence agencies. Moreover, the unmasking of a U.S. person’s name is fully appropriate when it is necessary to understand the context of collected foreign intelligence information.

“Because the committee has still not been provided the intercepts in the possession of the chairman, it is impossible to evaluate the chairman’s claims. It certainly does not suggest -- in any way -- that the president was wiretapped by his predecessor.”

Share

GOP healthcare bill in serious jeopardy as dozens of Republican lawmakers withhold support

The Republican bill to repeal and replace Obamacare hit serious trouble Wednesday, with more than 30 GOP House members -- more than enough to sink it -- refusing to back the proposal.

With the vote count looking uncertain at best, Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) now must decide whether to push forward with plans to vote on Thursday or put it off to allow more time for negotiations.

The White House stepped up its efforts to sway resistant lawmakers, including meetings with President Trump and other officials.

So far, however, those appeals appeared unable to sway enough votes for the bill to gain a majority. Assuming that all the chamber’s Democratic members vote against the bill, Republicans can afford to lose 21 from their ranks.

The White House insisted, though, that Thursday’s vote was on, setting up a potential showdown with opponents.

“If you want to see Obamacare repealed and replaced, this is the vote, this is the time to act,” said Trump Press Secretary Sean Spicer. “There is no Plan B,” he said.

Republican hold a majority in the House and Senate but lawmakers have struggled to agree on legislation to replace the Affordable Care Act, also called Obamacare. Many conservatives say the bill doesn’t go far enough to repeal Obamacare, while some centrists fear it goes too far and will deprive too many people of health coverage.

Conservatives claimed they have the votes to defeat the measure.

“We easily have enough votes -- with a buffer -- to kill this legislation unless it’s substantially improved,” Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) said as he emerged from a private meeting of the conservative Freedom Caucus.

Caucus members appeared unmoved after a lengthy meeting at the White House with Vice President Mike Pence and other top administration officials, including White House advisors Stephen Bannon and Kellyanne Conway and Chief of Staff Reince Priebus.

“We still haven’t seen the movement we want,” Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.) said afterward.

Brooks dismissed the session as a “rah-rah” meeting.

“It’s ‘we really need you to help. It’s a part of a team effort. This is part of a sequence of events,’ those kinds of things, when really what we need is a healthcare bill that’s going to lower premiums for the people of America.”

Trump didn’t appear to do much better. The president met with 10 reluctant lawmakers brought in by the GOP whip’s team to win their support, and he met the day before with members of the more centrist Tuesday Group.

“I don’t know that anybody changed their mind,” said Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), a co-chairman of the Tuesday Group.

“I went into the meeting with serious reservations about the bill, and I still have serious reservations about the bill,” Dent said.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) said the president was very engaged and asked a lot of questions.

“There were people with concerns in there, and as they voiced them, he did everything he could to address them,” said Kinzinger, who was also in the Tuesday Group session.

“It’s obviously a huge, deep issue, so I don’t know if anybody was swayed.”

Conservative opponents are demanding, among other things, legislative language that would undo requirements for the level of benefits that insurers have to provide. Such rules are too restrictive, and looser policies would reduce insurance premiums, they argue.

At the same time, more moderate Republicans are worried that too many of their constituents will lose access to care because of the bill’s rollback of coverage under Medicaid, the safety net program for low-income, disabled and older Americans.

Other Republicans are also concerned that they are being asked to vote on changes to the bill without updated analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Earlier this month, the budget office said that the number of Americans without insurance would rise by as much as 24 million over the next 10 years if the bill becomes law.

Meanwhile, protesters trying to save Obamacare rallied both inside and outside the Capitol on Wednesday.

Former Vice President Joe Biden joined Democrats on the East Front of the Capitol to celebrate the seventh anniversary of the law’s passage.

Share
Advertisement

Trump Labor nominee Acosta frustrates Democrats by dodging questions at confirmation hearing

(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

President Donald Trump’s second nominee for Labor secretary, law school dean R. Alexander Acosta, frustrated Democrats at his Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday by dodging questions about how he would handle some key workplace rules enacted by the Obama administration.

But Acosta, a former Justice Department official, had strong support from Republicans during the hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and he appeared on track for confirmation.

That was a sharp contrast to Trump’s first pick for the job, Southern California fast-food executive Andy Puzder, who withdrew last month after some GOP senators balked at voting for him amid a series of controversies. On Tuesday, Puzder said he is stepping down as chief executive of CKE Restaurants.

Acosta is a much more conventional pick than the outspoken and flamboyant Puzder. The dean of the law school at Florida International University in Miami since 2009, Acosta acted like a lawyer in cautiously answering some tough questions.

Read More

Share

Trump transition communications were swept up in U.S. spying on foreign targets, Rep. Nunes says

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare)
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

U.S. intelligence agencies picked up communications involving members of the Trump transition team late last year and reports of the conversations were circulated within the government, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said Wednesday.

“I recently confirmed that on numerous occasions, the intelligence community collected information on U.S. individuals involved in the Trump transition,” Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) told reporters.

The eavesdropping appears to have been legal and inadvertently picked up Trump associates because they were communicating with individuals under government surveillance, Nunes suggested.

The surveillance was apparently unrelated to an ongoing FBI counterintelligence investigation into whether Trump campaign aides coordinated with Russian intelligence agencies that sought to interfere in the 2016 presidential race, Nunes said.

“Details about U.S. persons involved in the incoming administration with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reports,” he said.

Under the law, identities of Americans whose communications are picked up by intelligence eavesdropping of foreign targets are supposed to be kept confidential unless the conversations relate to espionage or some other potential crime that warrants further investigation.

FBI Director James B. Comey and National Security Agency Director Adm. Michael Rogers testified to Nunes’ committee on Monday that they had “no information” to back up President Trump’s claims in several tweets this month that President Obama had ordered wiretaps against him.

Nunes and other Republicans used the five-hour hearing to argue that leaks of classified information, especially those involving U.S. surveillance, were a threat to national security and should be prosecuted.

They repeatedly cited the case of Michael Flynn, who was ousted as Trump’s national security advisor last month after news reports disclosed that he had misled Vice President Mike Pence about phone conversations with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

The calls were picked up by U.S. surveillance targeting the Russian envoy, and a description of the contents were leaked to the Washington Post after the Justice Department warned the White House that Flynn could be subject to blackmail.

Nunes said “sources,” whom he did not identify, provided him the information about communications intercepts involving Trump transition members.

Share
Advertisement

In rebuff to high court nominee Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court rules for children with autism

Supreme Court building in Washington
(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

A unanimous Supreme Court strengthened the rights of nearly 7 million schoolchildren with disabilities Wednesday and did so by rejecting a lower standard set by Judge Neil M. Gorsuch.

The ruling, one of the most important of this term, came as President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee is wrapping up his third day of testimony before a Senate committee.

Justices ruled for the parents of Endrew F., a Colorado boy with autism who pulled their son from the public school after his progress “essentially stalled.”

They enrolled him in a private academy that specialized in autism, where his behavior and learning improved markedly. They then sued the school district for a reimbursement, alleging a violation of the federal law that promises a “free appropriate public education” to children with disabilities.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the school district had not met its duty under the law. Children like Endrew F. have a right to an “educational program that is reasonably calculated to enable [them] to make progress,” he said. And the learning program “must be appropriately ambitious in light of” the child’s capabilities.

This stand “is markedly more demanding than the ‘merely more than de minimus’ test applied by the 10th Circuit,” he said, including a 2008 opinion written by Gorsuch. Under that standard, a school need show only that it was providing a minimal special program with some level of benefit.

The high court did not mention Gorsuch’s opinion in the earlier case, but it reversed a 10th Circuit ruling that had relied on it.

Asked about the issue on Wednesday, Gorsuch said he was a part of a unanimous three-judge panel that had sought to follow a Supreme Court standard set in 1982.

Several liberal groups described the court’s decision as a direct rebuke of Gorsuch.

However, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) noted that Gorsuch was not part of the three-judge panel whose ruling was directly reversed in the court’s decision in Endrew F. vs. Douglas County.

Share

About that stinging WSJ editorial targeting Trump

(Jose Luis Magana / Associated Press)

President Trump claimed that his phones were tapped by President Obama ahead of last year’s election.

False.

It’s an assertion first debunked last week by a bipartisan Senate panel, then this week by FBI Director James B. Comey.

Naturally, one might assume Trump would walk back those comments – someway, somehow. But that’s not Trump. It’s never been his style.

Instead, at least for now, the White House is not offering much else in terms of comment, even as some on Capitol Hill are calling on Trump to apologize to Obama.

And even some conservative media appear fed up with the unfounded claim.

Here are some of today’s headlines:

A president’s credibility (The Wall Street Journal)

Rupert Murdoch, owner of the Wall Street Journal, is friends with Trump.

That did not prevent the editorial board from delivering a powerful blow to Trump, assailing him on Wednesday for holding on to his claims that Obama wiretapped his phones.

“He has offered no evidence for his claim, and a parade of intelligence officials, senior Republicans and Democrats have since said they have seen no such evidence,” wrote the editorial board. “Yet the President clings to his assertion like a drunk to an empty gin bottle, rolling out his press spokesman to make more dubious claims.”

Ouch.

And some Trump allies are feeling the sting.

“It does hurt,” Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas said on CNN when asked about the editorial. “It hurts a lot not only for my party but for people to have a sobering look at what others are saying.”

Democrats always loved the Russians (Rush Limbaugh)

Even as an FBI investigation is well underway into possible collusion between Trump aides and Russians during the campaign, many conservatives have dismissed it as a witch hunt by Democrats.

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh is one of them.

“Given that the Democrat party has no history of disliking the Soviet Union, the Democrat party has no history of opposing the Soviet Union or Russia, we are being asked now to believe that the Russians wished to influence a U.S. presidential election,” Limbaugh argued.

He added, wryly, “This master stroke of statecraft by Putin was designed, however, to bring to power a man, Donald J. Trump, who has pledged to rebuild the United States militarily and economically.”

AHCA earns backing of prominent pro-life groups (TownHall)

The big vote is looming on Thursday, and – as of now – the Republican plan to replace Obamacare doesn’t appear to have enough votes to pass.

Still, some groups, such as the staunchly anti-abortion National Right to Life Committee, are backing it.

This piece notes the group recently penned a letter to members of Congress touting its support.

The group, in its letter, voiced support for the bill because it “contains the following essential provisions: 1) prevents federal tax credits from being used for plans that pay for abortions, 2) preserves non-taxed employer-provided health plans, 3) postpones the ‘Cadillac tax’ until 2025 and 4) eliminates roughly 89% of federal Planned Parenthood funding for the next year.”

We’ll see if it passes on Thursday.

Share
Advertisement

Feinstein says Gorsuch dodges specifics ‘like no one I have seen before’

(Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press)

Conservatives are enamored with Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch because he has declared himself a staunch originalist, much like the man he would replace on the court, the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

But Sen. Dianne Feinstein asked Gorsuch to articulate how far he would go in pursuing a philosophy that rejects the idea that the Constitution is a living, breathing document that evolves with society.

Feinstein demanded to know whether Gorsuch’s view of originalism leaves room for gay rights, women’s rights or the right to abortion. She told of having to sentence women to prison for abortion when she was a member of the California Women’s Parole Board, of suicides of women who could not get abortions when they were illegal and of cases of women passing around a donation plate so friends could travel to Tijuana for the procedure.

“We are still fighting for equal pay, equal work,” Feinstein went on. “And it goes on and on, and as women take their place in the workplace, in society … life changes. And the originalism of the days when the Constitution was written … don’t bring somebody forward, they bring them backward.”

Gorsuch sought to assure Feinstein that “no one is looking to return us to horse-and-buggy days. We’re trying to interpret the law faithfully, taking principles that are enduring and a Constitution that was meant to last ages and apply it and interpret it to today’s problems.”

He pointed to cases like one involving searches of homes with heat-seeking devices, where originalist judges seek to invoke “neutral principles, the law to apply it to current realities, not to drag us back to a past, but to move forward together as judges applying the law neutrally.”

Feinstein was not persuaded. She expressed frustration at how vague Gorsuch has been on every issue that might come before the court, saying, “You have been very much able to avoid any specificity, like no one I have seen before.”

When Gorsuch repeated his assertion that he is loath to overturn precedent — which presumably would include the precedent established in Roe vs. Wade that women have a right to abortion — Feinstein pointed out how she has heard similar remarks from previous GOP nominees who then became antiabortion votes once on the court.

“For the life of me, I really don’t know when you’re there what you’re going to do.… As you say, this isn’t text. This is real life. And young women take everything for granted today. And all of that could be struck out with one decision.”

Share

Tillerson meets with coalition nations to discuss strategy against Islamic State

The Trump administration will publicly assess its strategy against Islamic State for the first time Wednesday in a State Department summit with the 68 nations in the U.S.-led coalition against the militant group.

The meeting, hosted by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, comes days after visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Abadi won assurances from President Trump about more U.S. support in the war against Islamic State that has been raging for nearly three years.

In his opening remarks, Tillerson said the coalition had managed to reclaim large parts of Iraq and Syria from the militants even as intense fighting continues in some areas.

“Our end goal in this phase is the regional elimination of ISIS through military force,” he said, using an acronym for the terror group.

In a speech to Congress last month, Trump said he had asked the Defense Department for a plan to “demolish and defeat” Islamic State, but he has not rolled out a new strategy.

The Pentagon has about 5,200 troops in Iraq and 1,000 in Syria. They rely on Iraqi security forces and Kurdish guerrillas in Iraq, and U.S.-backed rebel militias in Syria, to carry out combat operations, while the U.S. and its allies provide intelligence, launch airstrikes and fire artillery to support the ground attacks.

Over the last year, the combined attacks have pushed out the Sunni militants from most major cities in Iraq. Despite a five-month U.S.-backed assault, heavy fighting is still underway to retake the group’s remaining stronghold in Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city.

The challenge is tougher in Syria, where the Pentagon has backed the Syrian Democratic Forces, a coalition of mostly Kurdish rebel groups that operates chiefly in northern Syria. Preparations are underway for an assault on the Islamic States’ self-declared capital of Raqqah.

Long-term challenges will be to rebuild the cities and towns destroyed by Islamic State during their occupation, or by coalition bombardments that sought to dislodge them.

Tillerson will ask other coalition nations to invest in the recaptured areas and to help provide humanitarian aid and other resources for the millions of people displaced in the fighting.

“We will continue to facilitate the return of people to their homes and work with local political leadership,” he said Wednesday.

“They will provide stable and fair governance, rebuild infrastructure and provide essential services,” he added. “We will use our diplomatic presence on the ground to facilitate channels of dialogue between local leadership and coalition partners.”

Share
Advertisement

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch says defending waterboarding was just part of his job as a lawyer

Sen. Dianne Feinstein on Wednesday returned to aggressively questioning Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch about his apparent defense of waterboarding and other such interrogation tactics while he was working in the administration of George W. Bush.

Her questions focused on a set of talking points the nominee had prepared for former Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales in 2005 that asked whether “aggressive interrogation techniques employed by the administration yielded any valuable information.” In the margin, Gorsuch had written, “Yes.”

Watch live: Confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch

Gorsuch demurred on Tuesday when Feinstein pressed him on what information he had showing that the techniques were effective, a finding that was contradicted by a 7,000-page report congressional investigators published on the issue. He asked for time to review the talking points in question.

When Feinstein brought the issue up again Wednesday, Gorsuch was prepared with an answer. He said he didn’t necessarily have any evidence to back up what was in the document.

“That was the position the clients were telling us,” he said. “I was a lawyer. My job was as an advocate. We were dealing with detainee litigation.”

Feinstein was unimpressed.

“It seems to me that people who advise have an obligation to find the truth in these situations,” said Feinstein, who helped lead an exhaustive bipartisan probe of American use of the torture tactics. “When we looked into it, we really saw the horrendous nature of what went on. … This is America. It is not what we stand for.”

Share

After a day of trying to close the deal, Trump remains short on healthcare votes

Despite President Trump’s personal appeals to lawmakers, the fate of the Republican healthcare bill remained uncertain Tuesday, as the fraught relationship between the president and congressional Republicans faces what could be a defining test.

“Honestly, a loss is not acceptable, folks,” Trump warned lawmakers, bluntly telling fellow Republicans that failure to pass the bill to repeal much of the Affordable Care Act could cost the GOP its majorities in the House and Senate.

The morning strategy session at the Capitol was the first time in his two months as president that Trump met with almost the full House Republican Conference that was elected with him in November. The membership reflects the disparate coalition of Republicans who aligned to make him their standard-bearer last year.

The question for the party now is whether that ideologically diverse group can govern.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Under fire over Russia investigation, White House officials choose to change the subject

After the heads of the FBI and the National Security Agency denied President Trump’s claim that then-President Obama had wiretapped him, Trump’s Twitter account provided the best clue to how the White House would respond: Tuesday morning, it was silent on the subject.

Trump had started the day Monday with a tweet storm defending himself against allegations that his campaign had cooperated with Russian efforts to affect the 2016 election. He’s spent days quadrupling down on his unsubstantiated insistence that Obama had surveilled Trump Tower in New York.

But that sometimes-manic flurry of counterpunches has done little if anything to help the president, who has been frustrated by how controversies get in the way of his agenda, even as his own words often keep those controversies alive.

Some of Trump’s advisors think House Republicans could have done a more forceful job at Monday’s hearing of defending the president. Democrats spent much of the hearing laying out the circumstantial evidence for improper contacts between Trump aides and Russian officials.

Rather than lash out or try to rebut the Democrats’ case, however, White House aides have counseled the president to change the subject and talk about his sales pitch to members of Congress on healthcare and his Supreme Court nominee.

Read More

Share

How the phony conspiracy theory over wiretapping caught fire

When Michael Flynn, President Trump’s short-lived national security advisor, resigned last month, Mark Levin was outraged.

Not because Flynn had falsely denied speaking with the Russian ambassador about U.S. sanctions before Trump took office. Rather, the conservative talk radio host was furious that U.S. surveillance had picked up Flynn’s venture into freelance diplomacy.

“How many phone calls of Donald Trump, if any, have been intercepted by the administration and recorded by the Obama administration?” Levin demanded on his program, which reaches millions nationwide. “This, ladies and gentlemen, is the real scandal.”

With that, what began as rumors and unverified accounts percolating through right-wing media coalesced into a wild conspiracy theory adopted by a president with an itchy Twitter finger, a penchant for intrigue and eagerness to embrace information — however sketchy — that reinforces, rather than tests, his beliefs.

Trump’s unfounded claim that President Obama had wiretapped his telephone ricocheted throughout the country, shook Washington and stunned disbelieving U.S. allies. The fallout continues to rattle the embryonic Trump White House.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

The GOP drive to repeal Obamacare could snuff out a quiet revolution in how U.S. cities care for their poor

Over the last four years, this city at the foot of the Rocky Mountains has quietly transformed how it cares for its poorest residents.

As hundreds of thousands of Coloradans gained health insurance through the Affordable Care Act, known as or Obamacare, Denver built an extensive new system to keep patients healthy, hiring dozens of mental health specialists and nurses, expanding dental clinics and launching efforts to help patients manage debilitating illnesses, such as diabetes and heart disease.

Republican legislation to roll back Obamacare — slated to be voted on Thursday in the House — threatens to not only strip Medicaid coverage from millions of poor Americans, but also to take away the funding that has allowed communities like Denver to build better systems to care for them.

That is fueling rising alarm in cities such as Los Angeles, Cincinnati, Charleston, W.Va., and Boston, where safety net hospitals have also used the ACA’s insurance expansion to take on underlying challenges that make lower-income Americans sick, including unsafe housing, poor diet and untreated mental illness.

In Denver, the loss of coverage would be devastating, said Dr. Bill Burman, who for the past year served as interim chief executive of Denver Health, the city’s public healthcare system. “The insurance expansion has been absolutely critical to strengthening how we treat our patients. … I don’t think we could absorb those kinds of cuts without paring back.”

Particularly frustrating for Burman and other public health leaders around the country is the prospect that coverage may be stripped away amid growing evidence that this new approach is having an impact.

Denver Health, for example, has seen a slowdown in the growth of emergency room use since the coverage expansion began in 2014, with visits up just 4% between 2013 and 2016. By contrast, ER visits rose 15% in the previous three years.

Read More

Share

Some right-wing media sites under investigation for possible Russia ties

The investigation is well underway into any potential collusion between President Trump’s campaign aides and Russian officials during last year’s campaign.

A day after FBI Director James B. Comey confirmed the investigation, Trump and his allies are pushing back – forcefully.

Kellyanne Conway, a senior advisor to Trump, told Fox News on Tuesday that the investigation “has nothing to show for it.”

Conservative media, much like the administration, have down-played the investigation, and now some right-wing outlets are facing scrutiny themselves.

Here are today’s headlines:

FBI’s Russian-influence probe includes a look at Breitbart, InfoWars news sites (McClatchy)

OK, McClatchy is not considered so-called conservative news.

But this report focuses on the FBI looking into right-wing websites like Breitbart and InfoWars to see if they played any role last year in a Russian cyber operation that dramatically widened the reach of news stories that favored Trump’s presidential bid.

In recent months, intelligence officials have confirmed that Russia did seek to influence the 2016 election by, among other things, hacking into emails at the Democratic National Committee.

McClatchy, citing anonymous sources, reports “operatives for Russia appear to have strategically timed the computer commands, known as ‘bots,’ to blitz social media with links to the pro-Trump stories.”

The story generated a response from Alex Jones, who runs InfoWars.

“I don’t personally take this as a threat … I’m threatened for the country,” he said on his radio show. “I mean if the Russians want to secure our borders, cut our taxes, not have us go bankrupt, rebuild our military, block radical Islam — well then, hell, I’m a Russian agent! But I’m not.”

Democrats break out political playbook against Gorsuch in hearing (Weekly Standard)

His Senate confirmation hearings are underway and Democrats are ready.

The piece argues that Neil M. Gorsuch, whom Trump tapped as his Supreme Court nominee, is walking into a “fray of flying elbows,” mostly thrown by Democrats.

“The Senate minority’s number two and committee member Dick Durbin said Gorsuch was part of a Republican strategy to capture our judicial branch,” writes Chris Deaton.

A year ago, former President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to fill the Supreme Court position left vacant following the death of Antonin Scalia. However, Senate Republicans, led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, refused to grant Garland a hearing.

Among Democratic topics of discussion for Trump’s nominee: Gorsuch’s past writings on executive power, Roe vs. Wade, and his lower-court opinion in Hobby Lobby vs. Sebelius for its application to Obamacare’s contraception mandate, to name a few.

Trump counters media narrative with victims of Obamacare (American Spectator)

The consensus is that, well, the House Republican plan to replace Obamacare isn’t perfect.

A report released last week by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that by 2026 nearly 24 million people would be uninsured. Some GOP governors have castigated the plan for its cuts to Medicaid.

But as this piece highlights, Trump has sought to find people who have suffered under Obamacare.

“There also is scant mention of the Americans who stand to lose coverage as healthcare providers drop out of the individual market or who pay their premiums but don’t see doctors because their plans’ high deductibles are prohibitive,” writes Debra J. Saunders. “There is little mention of the 6.5 million Americans who preferred to pay a penalty last year rather than purchase their own policies.”

Share
Advertisement

U.S. skips regional human rights panel examining reports of abuse by U.S. officials

The Trump administration did not attend a regional human rights hearing that examined how U.S. policies are hurting asylum claims or triggering other alleged immigration abuses.

For decades, U.S. administrations have enthusiastically supported the Inter-American Human Rights Commission as it defended rights throughout the hemisphere, especially in repressive countries like Cuba and Venezuela.

But no U.S. official attended Tuesday’s hearing, which examined Trump’s executive actions to restrict the admission of refugees and restrict travel from six mostly-Muslim nations.

The commission also heard cases from the Obama administration involving U.S. Border Patrol agents accused of turning back migrants seeking to cross the border to apply for asylum.

Mark Toner, a State Department spokesman, said State officials decided not to attend on the advice of government lawyers who said any testimony by them could harm pending litigation.

“This was deemed not appropriate by our legal experts,” Toner said.

He said the United States has “tremendous respect” for the commission’s role “in safeguarding human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the hemisphere, including the United States.”

Human rights advocates said only the administration’s proposed travel ban has been blocked in federal court, not the border cases, and a U.S. delegate would not have to give testimony but could simply observe.

Maureen Meyer of the Washington Office on Latin America, which has worked on some of the border cases, said the U.S. absence sent a message that the Trump administration was uninterested in how its policies affected human rights.

“It is alarming because [the commission] is one of the last resorts for many of these people,” she said.

The commission is the autonomous human-rights branch of the 35-nation Organization of American States, the hemisphere’s most important alliance.

It was the second time this week that the U.S. skipped an international human rights forum.

On Monday, the Trump administration announced it was boycotting a meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva because of what it described as an anti-Israel bias in the discussion of Israeli abuse of Palestinians.

Toner said comparing the two events was “apples and oranges.”

Share

Sen. Al Franken brands Gorsuch a partisan and ‘absurd’

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

As Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch asserts that he is beholden to no ideology or partisan agenda, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are working hard to make the case that is not true.

Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota argued it most effectively on Tuesday afternoon.

He relentlessly sparred with Gorsuch about the nominee’s dissent in the case of a trucking company employee who was fired after abandoning his cargo when no one came to help him during a breakdown, and he was stuck for hours in subzero temperatures. Gorsuch came down on the side of the company.

“I had a career in identifying absurdity, and I know it when I see it,” said Franken, a former “Saturday Night Live” performer and writer. “And it makes me question your judgment.”

He grilled Gorsuch on what the nominee would do if stuck in the same predicament as the trucking employee, who Franken said was beginning to experience symptoms of hypothermia.

“I don’t know what I would have done if I were in his shoes,” said Gorsuch, who had earlier told the panel that he felt constrained by the existing law at the time of the case to decide for the company, regardless of whether he empathized for the employee’s predicament. “I don’t blame him at all for doing what he did do. I thought a lot about this case. I totally empathize.”

Franken shot back. “I would have done exactly what he did,” Franken said. “And I think everyone here would have done exactly what he did. And I think it is an easy answer.”

The senator also grew impatient as Gorsuch recycled responses from earlier in the day that he is completely apolitical as a judge and has no place weighing in on political issues. He repeatedly cut the nominee off while building his case that Gorsuch had strong political opinions and ties to partisans, reading from exchanges with high-level Republicans during the administration of George W. Bush that suggested he was a fiercely loyal Republican foot soldier.

Then Franken turned to the Conservative Political Action Conference, the annual gathering of conservatives in Washington, where Franken said White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and senior advisor Stephen K. Bannon pointed to the Gorsuch nomination as a central part of their plan to “deconstruct the administrative state” and roll back 40 years of regulatory law.

“Are you comfortable with your nomination being described in such transactional terms?” Franken asked Gorsuch.

“There is a lot about this process that makes me uncomfortable,” Gorsuch said.

Share
Advertisement

Trump didn’t quite close the deal with House GOP on Obamacare repeal bill

President Trump might not have quite closed the deal Tuesday when he swooped over to Capitol Hill to lobby reluctant Republicans to get behind the GOP plan to replace Obamacare.

The most conservative Republican lawmakers remained deeply skeptical despite the president’s hard sell during a morning meeting in the Capitol basement.

The momentum Speaker Paul D. Ryan hoped to gather ahead of Thursday’s vote left leaders scrambling to shore up support.

“I haven’t heard anyone who changed their mind after this morning,” said Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, who remains opposed.

“The president’s a persuasive guy and he’s well liked,” said Davidson, adding that most of the opponents “worked hard to see our president elected.”

But he added, “I didn’t run on a pretty slogan like ‘repeal and replace.’ I ran on fixing the problem.”

Trump warned House Republicans they would lose their majority in the next election if they failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

The president’s speech was part pep talk, part finger pointing, and he singled out Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), the Freedom Caucus chairman, joking, “Oh, Mark, I’m gonna come after you,” according to a source in the room.

But even amid the nervous laughter, the most conservative lawmakers seemed ready to take that risk.

Rep. Walter B. Jones (R-N.C.), who said the session was his first time meeting with the president, was taken aback by Trump’s behavior. It did not win his vote.

“For me, I’m raised in the South. I’ve learned to say thank you, no thank you,” said Jones, a veteran congressman often at odds with his party. “That’s no way. You shouldn’t single anybody out. They’re not up here to represent a president or an administration. They’re up here to represent the people of their district.”

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) said he would not be moved by such tactics and skipped Trump’s talk for an unrelated meeting on water issues important to his state. He is voting no.

“I don’t care who says it. I’ve lived this,” said Gosar, a dentist, who said he feels the bill is being arbitrarily rushed. “I’m tired of this place: You got to pass something because there’s some little deadline? Do the right thing.”

Republican leaders can afford to lose no more than about 20 votes and still pass the bill with a simple majority.

Outside groups were adding pressure Tuesday, with the conservative Heritage Action opposing the bill but the influential U.S. Chamber of Commerce supporting it — and both promising the vote would be counted in their annual scorecards of lawmakers’ performances.

The right-leaning Club for Growth started running ads in the districts of 10 Republican lawmakers who had expressed reservations about the bill, pushing them to vote against it.

After making late changes to the bill to attract more support, Republican leaders want to build momentum ahead of Thursday’s vote.

They’ve punted many of the toughest issues — including a promise to boost tax credits to help older Americans pay for healthcare — to the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) promised to take up the bill as soon as next week.

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the late changes were no better than “putting a fresh coat of paint on an old jalopy” and suggested Republicans were “walking the plank” by taking votes on a bill that will not pass the Senate.

Share

Gorsuch open to idea of cameras in Supreme Court

On the heels of a C-SPAN poll that found 76% of Americans want to be able to watch Supreme Court arguments on television or over the Internet, Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch said it is something he would be open to considering.

Several other current and former justices have long resisted such efforts. “I can tell you the day you see a camera come into our courtroom, it’s going to roll over my dead body,” former Justice David Souter told a congressional committee in 1996.

But asked about the issue by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Gorsuch said, “I come to it with an open mind. It’s not a question I confess I have given a great deal of thought to.”

Gorsuch joked that he is getting plenty of experience with cameras of late. “The lights in my eyes are a bit blinding sometimes,” he said. “So I have to get used to that.”

Share
Advertisement

‘Nobody speaks for me,’ Gorsuch says of ‘dark money’ group

(Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press)

Democrats questioning Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch took aim at the millions of dollars from unidentified donors that have gone to a political organization advocating for his confirmation.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) sparred with Gorsuch extensively on the issue, ultimately calling on him to publicly urge the donors to the group to reveal themselves.

Gorsuch demurred.

Whitehouse also asked Gorsuch to opine on why the donors are so invested in seeing him on the court.

“You’d have to ask them,” Gorsuch said.

Whitehouse shot back: “I can’t because I don’t know who they are. It is just a front group.”

The exchange seemed to annoy the otherwise unflappable nominee.

When Republicans on the panel came to his defense and gave Gorsuch another opportunity to address the issue of what Whitehouse called “dark money” supporting his nomination, Gorsuch was resolute.

“Nobody speaks for me,” he said of the suggestion the group represented him. “Nobody. I speak for me. I am a judge. I don’t have spokesmen. I speak for myself.”

Share

Democratic National Committee leader faces steep climb to break GOP dominance

Tom Perez
(Branden Camp / Associated Press)

Tom Perez can only hope that the Democratic Party has hit bottom.

He has taken over as chairman of the Democratic National Committee just as the party is struggling to recover from a November rout that left Republicans in charge of the White House, both houses of Congress and most of the nation’s governorships and state legislative chambers. It’s hard to imagine how things could get any worse in 2018 or 2020.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Perez was candid about some of the party’s failures in 2016, most notably its abandonment of vast stretches of rural and small-town America.

But Perez, 55, who was Labor secretary under President Obama, offered little detail on what changes the party would make to win over President Trump’s supporters in those areas.

He also glossed over the internal rancor that lingers from the party’s split between establishment leader Hillary Clinton and insurgent Bernie Sanders in the Democratic presidential race.

What follows are excerpts from Perez’s remarks.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Schiff, a former U.S. prosecutor, relies on old skills to lay out Trump’s links to Russia

Like a prosecutor outlining his case to a jury, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) methodically laid out the many connections between President Trump’s current and former aides and Russian authorities at a nationally televised hearing on Monday.

It wasn’t just coincidence. Schiff was a prosecutor for six years in the Los Angeles branch of the U.S. attorney’s office before he was elected to the California State Senate in 1996. He has served in Congress since 2001.

Schiff is the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and he used that position to deliver an impassioned opening statement that went on for nearly 10 minutes.

In it, Schiff described how former Trump advisor Roger Stone had accurately predicted that hacked emails damaging to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton would be released last summer, shortly before they were posted online.

Schiff recounted how Trump campaign aides had removed proposed wording from the Republican Party platform that called for the U.S. to arm Ukraine against pro-Russian separatists.

He also cited the multiple conversations and meetings between Trump’s aides and Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, before and after last November’s election.

Schiff conceded that he has no proof that these and other ties between Russian officials and Trump, members of his family and a slew of top aides amounted to more than “an entirely unhappy coincidence.”

“But it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not disconnected and not unrelated, and that the Russians used the same techniques to corrupt U.S. persons that they have employed in Europe and elsewhere,” Schiff said. “We simply don’t know, not yet, and we owe it to the country to find out.”

He urged FBI Director James B. Comey to keep investigating, adding that the House Intelligence Committee would do the same.

Share

Welcome to the GOP’s Obamacare war room: Coffee, pastries not included

Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, left, and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) are seen in Washington.
(J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

Each weekday morning, groggy aides pile into House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s conference room and suit up for battle.

No pastries. Bring your own coffee. The niceties are limited.

The sunny space belies the daunting work as the Capitol office is transformed into a Republican war room for the GOP’s Obamacare overhaul.

Passage of the GOP’s American Health Care Act is the first — and perhaps biggest — legislative test for President Trump and the Republican majority in Congress.

The war room’s job is to keep Republicans marching ahead on their campaign promise to repeal and replace Obamacare.

“This is obviously going to be a huge lift for us,” said one Republican leadership aide, granted anonymity to discuss the private meetings. “We all need to be on the same page. Our teams need to be in sync.”

That job got tougher after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected 24 million more Americans will be uninsured if the bill passes — essentially wiping out the gains made by Obamacare.

The GOP’s Obamacare bill already faced stiff resistance, particularly from within the ranks of Republicans, which was partly why McCarthy assembled the top GOP aides for the morning confab.

Such strategy sessions are not unusual for a party trying to push a legislative priority across the finish line. In fact, Senate Democrats have operated a perpetual war room on the other end of the Capitol for the past decade.

But this latest effort from McCarthy, the Bakersfield Republican, could not come quickly enough.

Every morning, aides from the White House and Republican leadership hash out the opportunities — and obstacles — as they try to push the bill through the House.

Trump’s team arrives from one side of Pennsylvania Avenue; Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s staff comes from the other. The GOP whip’s office, which will be in charge of counting votes, joins, as do other GOP leadership offices.

The aides go over talking points, take stock of supporters versus detractors and set the media message for a day of interviews and TV appearances.

“It allows everyone to start the day on the same page,” said another GOP aide involved in the meeting.

McCarthy launched the war room earlier this month to coincide with the rollout of the Republican bill.

On Tuesday, after Republicans made changes to the bill to attract more votes, the war room prepared for battle.

3:55 p.m. - Updated with more information on this week’s vote.

Share
Advertisement

Sen. Feinstein suggests Gorsuch would undermine EPA on fuel mileage standards

(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

The heated dispute between California and the Trump White House over aggressive federal fuel mileage standards emerged as an issue in the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch.

Much to the dismay of California, the Trump administration has put on the shelf fuel rules that would require vehicles to average 54 miles per gallon by 2025. The state, which sees the rules as key to combating climate change and air pollution, is threatening to invoke a federal waiver it argues would allow it to continue enforcing the higher standard. The Trump administration has suggested it could try to block the state from doing that.

At the Gorsuch hearing, the issue arose as California Sen. Dianne Feinstein grilled the nominee on his broader approach to government and the power of the bureaucracy. Gorsuch is among a group of conservative jurists who advocate limiting the authority of federal regulators to draft rules when there is no clear congressional mandate or when there are conflicting laws on the books.

Feinstein said that approach would prevent Environmental Protection Agency scientists from continuing to update the mileage standards as appropriate.

“What we said in the legislation was science would prevail,” Feinstein said. “That is still the law. It is working. What is wrong with that? How else could we have done it?”

Gorsuch suggested that Feinstein misunderstood his view of when the bureaucracy should be reigned in.

“I am not aware of anything wrong with that,” he said. “I never suggested otherwise.” But then he pointed to an immigration case he had presided over in which there were conflicting laws on the books. His court had ruled that immigration authorities should follow the first of the two laws in such cases, but he said immigration authorities ignored the court’s guidance, creating a legal mess for the immigrant seeking entry into the United States. He suggested the case was an example of the problems that can arise when agencies are given too much deference in how to interpret laws.

Share

Gorsuch says he is no bulwark for the travel ban

Allies of President Trump who had been hoping Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch could be a bulwark for his administration’s travel ban applying to residents of six predominantly Muslim nations may have been unsettled by the nominee’s testimony Tuesday.

Gorsuch would not say whether he is for or against the ban, but he spoke forcefully about the importance of preserving freedom of religion and declared “silly” a congressman’s remark, made outside the hearing room in recent weeks, that the best hope for preserving the ban is to install Gorsuch on the high court.

“A lot of people say a lot of silly things,” Gorsuch said when asked about the unnamed congressman’s comment by Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.). “He has no idea how I would rule in that case. And senator, I am not going to say anything here that would gave anybody any idea how I would rule.… It would be grossly improper.”

But Leahy pushed. He pointed out that Trump had vowed repeatedly to stop Muslims from entering the country and asked Gorsuch if it would be appropriate to issue an order blocking Jews from coming to the country, or banning residents of Israel.

“We have a Constitution,” Gorsuch said in response. “And it does guarantee freedom to exercise. It also guarantees equal protection of the laws and a whole lot else besides, and the Supreme Court has held that due process rights extend even to undocumented persons in this country. I will apply the law faithfully and fearlessly and without regard to persons.”

Critics of Trump’s travel ban have been challenging it in court, saying it conflicts with constitutional freedoms of religion and due process.

Share
Advertisement

Trump warns GOP: Vote for Obamacare repeal or lose your seat

President Trump on Tuesday bluntly laid out the political stakes for Republicans if their bid to overhaul the healthcare system falters out of the gate, saying failure would imperil the rest of their agenda and ultimately their congressional majorities.

His remarks to a closed-door meeting of House Republicans at the Capitol came just over 48 hours before leaders hope to have the House vote on their plan to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Speaker Paul D. Ryan and his lieutenants are still working overtime to secure additional commitments from Republicans, particularly among the members of the conservative Freedom Caucus, to get to a majority.

If the bill passes, it would move on to the Senate with a goal of enacting legislation before the Easter recess, although many senators have expressed doubts that the process can move that quickly in their chamber.

Trump told House members that after promising voters for years that they would repeal the Affordable Care Act, they have little choice but to vote for the bill before them. He singled out a leader of the Freedom Caucus and early campaign supporter of his, Rep. Mark Meadows of North Carolina, to encourage him to come on board.

“Because honestly, a loss is not acceptable, folks,” Trump said, according to sources present for the discussion.

“The president was very direct. We get this done, and tax reform, he believes we pick up 10 seats in the Senate, and we add to our majority in the House,” said Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.), another longtime Trump backer. “And if we don’t get it done, we lose the House, and we lose the Senate.”

Republicans largely called the discussion upbeat despite the president’s warnings, but there was no mistaking the uncertainty surrounding the final outcome. Trump wasn’t making political threats, but clearly laying out the consequences, attendees said.

“President Trump was here to do what he does best, and that is to close the deal,” Ryan said afterward. “I think our members are beginning to appreciate just what kind of a rendezvous with destiny we have right here.”

Several leading conservative members, though, remained on the fence, even after the hard sell.

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), a member of the Freedom Caucus, said most lawmakers from the group opposed the bill ahead of the morning meeting, but Trump’s all-in warnings were a “selling point.”

“We’ll see what happens,” said Griffith, who was leaning in favor. “He was very personal, and he said we need to work together as a team ... but that we have to stick together or else this will fall apart and the American people will lose confidence that we can get things done.

“It is a selling point,” he added. “For some of my friends, you have to get a little bit more conservative in the bill in order to get them to feel comfortable with it.”

Share

Sen. Feinstein grills Neil Gorsuch on torture and wiretapping work during Bush presidency

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein aggressively questioned Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch about his involvement in defending the torture policies of the George W. Bush administration while Gorsuch was an official there.

Feinstein produced documents that she said appear to show Gorsuch condoning the use of waterboarding and other torture techniques, and offering ways to defend or explain their use. Such methods have since been abandoned by national security agencies as inhumane and ineffective. She pointed to a set of talking points she said Gorsuch prepared for former Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzalez for a 2005 news conference.

Feinstein said the talking points asked whether “aggressive interrogation techniques employed by the administration yielded any valuable information.”

“And in the margin next to this question, you hand wrote, ‘yes’,” she said. Then she asked Gorsuch what information he had showing that the techniques were effective, a finding that was contradicted by a 7,000-page report congressional investigators published on the issue.

Gorsuch demurred. He said he was unfamiliar with the document that Feinstein was quoting from. They agreed he would review it during a break and offer more fully informed answers during the second round of questioning Tuesday afternoon.

Feinstein then moved onto an anti-torture bill passed by Congress, and quizzed Gorsuch about his advocacy to craft Bush’s signing statement in a way that would enable the administration to continue using techniques like waterboarding and would limit the ability of prisoners subjected to them to sue the government.

Gorsuch said his memory was hazy from the discussions, which took place 12 years ago, but that he recalled there were officials in the White House who were aggressively pushing to preserve some of those techniques in the signing statement, but that he was not among that group. “There was a tug of war among parties in the White House,” he said. Feinstein asked which side Gorsuch was on. He said he was on the side of aggressively preserving the anti-torture provisions in the legislation.

When Feinstein moved to Gorsuch’s apparent advocacy in favor of a White House policy aimed at wiretapping U.S. citizens, he again said the documents she produced did not reflect his point of view.

“I was acting in my capacity as a speech writer,” he said. “I think people liked my writing.”

Share
Advertisement

Tillerson to skip meeting of NATO foreign ministers, but will travel to Russia and Italy

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson plans to skip a semiannual meeting of NATO foreign ministers this spring and will instead travel to a Group of 7 meeting of top diplomats in Italy and then to Russia.

U.S. officials said Monday that Tillerson will meet NATO diplomats this week in Washington for a conference on defeating Islamic State, suggesting there was no need for him to attend the meeting of the alliance in Brussels. The State Department’s third-ranking official, Undersecretary of State Tom Shannon, will represent the U.S. at that meeting, the officials said.

The officials said Tillerson would attend the G7 meeting in Sicily in May and then travel to Moscow.

Share

Gorsuch signals reluctance to overturn long-standing court precedents like Roe vs. Wade

Supreme Court nominee Neil M. Gorsuch told senators at his confirmation hearing that he would be reluctant to overturn any decision a previous court has made, including in the landmark Roe vs. Wade case that affirmed the right to abortion.

How a nominee might rule on the right to abortion has long been a litmus test at such hearings, and nominees have long declined to provide any concrete assurances.

Gorsuch was no different. But faced with Democrats still resentful that former President Obama’s pick for the seat was never granted a hearing, Gorsuch worked hard in day two of questioning Tuesday to present himself as nonpartisan, open-minded and loathe to undo the work of previous courts.

“Part of being a good judge is coming in and taking precedent as it stands, and your personal views about precedent have absolutely nothing to do with the job of a good judge,” Gorsuch said amid questioning from committee chairman Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa.)

Grassley asked if Gorsuch would consider overturning several historic cases covering gun rights, campaign finance and the controversial Bush vs. Gore ruling that determined the outcome of the 2000 presidential election.

“I know some people in this room have some opinions, but as a judge it is a precedent of the Supreme Court and it deserves the same respect as other precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court when coming to it as a judge,” Gorsuch said.

Then Grassley got to Roe vs. Wade. He asked whether it was decided correctly.

Gorsuch pointed out that not only was Roe vs. Wade precedent, but that it had been reaffirmed several times.

“A good judge will consider that precedent worthy as treatment of precedent like any other,” Gorsuch said.

Share
Advertisement

In a bid to get votes, House Republicans propose changes to their bill rolling back Obamacare

Scrambling to round up votes to roll back the Affordable Care Act, House Republican leaders made a series of last-minute changes late Monday to their Obamacare repeal bill ahead of this week’s vote.

The changes, which senior GOP leaders hope will sway wary conservative and moderate lawmakers, are aimed at building momentum for House passage while punting more substantive fixes to the Senate.

President Trump came to Capitol Hill on Tuesday morning to rally House Republicans to close the deal.

It was unclear whether the changes being discussed would be enough to satisfy conservatives still angry that the repeal legislation preserves major parts of Obamacare or the growing number of centrist GOP lawmakers who have voiced concerns about how many people are scheduled to lose coverage.

“While I’ve been in Congress, I can’t recall a more universally detested piece of legislation than this GOP healthcare bill,” tweeted Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.).

To win over conservatives, House GOP leaders are proposing to give states new authority to limit who qualifies for Medicaid, the government health plan for the poor, and impose work requirements for some aid recipients.

And to appeal to moderates, the amended legislation would provide additional assistance for Americans nearing retirement who rely on insurance marketplaces created through Obamacare, as the healthcare law often is called.

Read More

Share

FCC chief says media aren’t the enemy of the people. He dodged the question earlier

(Nicholas Kamm / AFP/Getty Images)

The news media are not the enemy of the American people, the new head of the Federal Communications Commission said after dodging the question at a Senate hearing this month.

“A free media is vital to our democracy,” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai wrote last week to Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who released the letter Monday.

“That is why during my time at the commission I have consistently opposed any effort to infringe upon the freedom of the press and have fought to eliminate regulations that impede the gathering and dissemination of news,” said Pai, a Republican who has served as a commissioner since 2012.

His views are important because the FCC has oversight over many federal regulations covering the media, including access to public airwaves and limits on ownership of broadcast stations and newspapers in the same market. The agency also often must decide whether to approve major media mergers.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Facing pressure to attack, Gov. Jerry Brown explains his measured approach to Trump

(Lenny Ignelzi/AP)

When Gov. Jerry Brown landed in Washington on Monday on his mission to raise awareness about the nuclear threat and secure funding for disaster relief in the state, he didn’t strike the tone of defiance many are looking for from the Democrats’ most influential voice in the West.

Brown is taking a noticeably measured approach to the new White House. Even after President Trump has put himself on a path of confrontation with California on so many issues — threatening the state’s sanctuary cities, its landmark fuel mileage standards and its precarious budget — Brown says he’s not going to be pressured by the left into relentlessly attacking the White House.

“I will pursue my own rhetorical paths,” Brown said to reporters Monday after a meeting at the Federal Emergency Management Agency. “At least in the spirit of advancing the interest of California, recognizing we are a part of the Union and … we are not going a totally separate way. We are distinct. We have a sovereignty. We will pursue that. But we also have a commonality with other states and with the national government. So wherever we are going to find common ground, we are going to do it.”

Brown said “he wouldn’t rule anything out or anything in” when it comes to California’s dealings with Washington.

“Nothing is all that predictable under the current administration,” he said. “That could be a cause for alarm, but also a cause for some optimism and creative possibilities.”

Of course, Brown’s motivation for the trip was to bring attention to the threat of a nuclear apocalypse, which he said is as big a danger now as during the Cold War. But even on that issue he was reluctant to lay blame on Trump, who many disarmament experts say has elevated the potential for doomsday with his loose talk about nuclear weapons and aggressive posture toward other nations that have nuclear capability.

Asked if the nuclear threat has increased under Trump, Brown said: “I would say it hasn’t been diminished. I don’t want to speculate. It’s a little early.”

Share

Iraqi prime minister welcomes ‘new era’ of Trump support in terrorism fight

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Abadi praised what he called a “new era” of cooperation after meeting President Trump at the White House.

“I think this administration wants to be more engaged ... and is prepared to do more to fight terrorism,” Abadi said. “We are happy with the new era.”

Abadi said he had seen no “blueprint” of U.S. plans for Iraq and had received no new concrete commitments of aid, and he warned that Islamic State would take more than battlefield victories.

In addition to his White House meeting, Abadi and other senior Iraqi officials are in Washington for a 68-nation meeting on new ways to combat the terrorist organization.

Islamic State has suffered significant defeats in the last year and appears poised to soon lose control of west Mosul, its last major urban stronghold in Iraq, after a battle that began in October.

U.S. aircraft and other units are deeply involved in supporting Iraqi troops that are carrying out the ground assault.

Abadi spoke at the United States Institute of Peace, a congressionally supported think tank.

Despite recent successes, Abadi cautioned that Iraq faces major challenges in rebuilding the economy, helping displaced families return home and making displaced minorities feel invested in the country.

Some Western experts believe Iraq will remain fractured along ethnic, religious and tribal lines.

“We are proving that Daesh can be killed,” Abadi said, using an Arabic acronym for Islamic State.

“We are showing ... that we can eliminate this terrorist organization.... And we see an administration that sees what we are doing and gives us support.”

The Trump administration initially included Iraq in its travel ban from seven mostly Muslim countries. Officials at the Pentagon and elsewhere argued that Iraq deserved greater U.S. support for its burden in the war against Islamic State.

Iraq was removed from the administration’s revised travel ban, but federal courts have again blocked it.

Share
Advertisement

White House downplays FBI investigation into campaign’s possible links with Moscow

The White House pushed back against the revelation that the FBI is investigating potential coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, downplaying the investigation and the role that certain advisors now under scrutiny had in Trump’s campaign.

“Investigating it and having proof of it are two different things,” White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters Monday when asked about the FBI inquiry.

Spicer noted that top Republicans in Congress who were briefed on the intelligence said they haven’t seen evidence of collusion, and James R. Clapper, former President Obama’s director of national intelligence, recently said he had not either

Spicer referred to some of the people reportedly being investigated for possible links to Russia as “hangers-on around the campaign,” including Carter Page, who served as a foreign policy adviser to the campaign, and Roger Stone, a longtime Trump associate and New York Republican strategist.

But Spicer also described Paul Manafort, who ran Trump’s campaign from April to August in 2016, as having played “a very limited role for a very limited amount of time.” Manafort resigned in August after reports surfaced about his connections to the pro-Moscow former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich.

“I think it’s fine to look into it, but at the end of the day, they’re going to come to the same conclusion that everybody else has had,” Spicer said. “So you can continue to look for something, but continuing to look for something that doesn’t exist doesn’t matter.”

Instead the White House called for a deeper investigation into who gave information to reporters that exposed conversations between Trump’s former national security advisor, Michael Flynn, and the Russian ambassador to the U.S. as well as what surveillance of Trump’s camp may have occurred.

That put White House officials in the awkward position of trying to pour cold water on one investigation and gasoline on another.

During the campaign, Trump hammered Clinton for being under FBI investigation for her handling of classified material on a private email server, encouraging chants of “Lock her up!” at rallies. The bureau concluded that her actions did not warrant prosecution.

Since then, Trump has painted the accusations about his campaign’s potential ties to Russia as a politically motivated smear by Democrats and former Obama administration officials.

‘“The Democrats made up and pushed the Russian story as an excuse for running a terrible campaign,” Trump wrote on Twitter early Monday.

Spicer took aim at former Obama administration officials, hinting that they were responsible for leaks to reporters about Flynn’s conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The two discussed, among other things, sanctions against Russia that the Obama administration had imposed.

Flynn’s conversations were picked up by routine surveillance the U.S. government does of Kislyak. The White House and some Republican members of Congress say that whoever revealed that fact to reporters illegally disclosed classified information.

“Not only was Gen. Flynn’s identity made available. Director Comey refused to answer the question on whether or not he’d actually briefed President Obama on his phone calls and activities,” Spicer said.

FBI Director James B. Comey told the House Intelligence Committee on Monday that agents have been investigating potential links since July.

Share

Judge Gorsuch strikes a note of humility and idealism in a deeply personal opening statement

(Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press)

A smiling and confident Judge Neil Gorsuch talked of his family, his Colorado roots and his love of fly fishing in his opening statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, steering clear of the partisan controversy over President Trump and the Republicans’ snub of Judge Merrick Garland, the nominee of President Obama.

Gorsuch said he had an earnest and idealistic view of judges, saying they had a duty to faithfully follow the law, without regard to politics or ideology. Sometimes, he said, judges are “described as politicians in black robes,” he said, adding he would quit and “ hang up the robe” if he thought that were true.

He said that in his decade as a judge on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver he had participated in deciding 2,700 cases, and 97% of those resulted in unanimous rulings. “I was in the majority in 99% of the cases,” he added.

But of course, the Supreme Court regularly takes up the cases where judges have disagreed on the proper outcome.

The minority Democrats spent most of Monday’s opening day raising doubts over whether Gorsuch could be trusted to fairly decide cases involving corporations or on social controversies such as abortion.

On Tuesday, they will have a full day to question him.

But Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said he expected Gorsuch would be approved by the committee and confirmed by the full Senate in early April.

“We have 52 Republicans, and I haven’t heard of any opposition” among them, Grassley said after the hearing. He predicted that after the four days of hearings, “people will have a difficult time voting against [Gorsuch].”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Comey rejects tweet by President Trump that Russia did not influence outcome of election

(Manuel Balce Ceneta / Associated Press)

President Trump tweeted Monday that FBI Director James B. Comey and National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers had testified to a House Intelligence Committee hearing that “Russia did not influence electoral process.”

Not really.

When asked at the hearing about the tweet, which came from the White House official account, Comey swiftly knocked it down.

“It certainly wasn’t our intention to say that today because we don’t have any information on that subject,” he said.

Comey had testified that the FBI is investigating possible illegal “coordination” between Trump’s campaign and Russian authorities during the 2016 campaign.

He said U.S. officials made no effort to determine if Russian hacking and leaks of Democratic Party emails had affected voters on Election Day, however.

Both Comey and Rogers said they stood by a Jan. 6 report by the U.S. intelligence community that said Russian President Vladimir Putin had approved the meddling in an effort to hurt Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to help Trump.

Share

Five takeaways from a historic hearing into Russian meddling in the U.S. election

(Shawn Thew / EPA)

After more than five hours of testimony by FBI Director James B. Comey and National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers to a House committee investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election, we can point to five key takeaways.

Most of it is bad news for the Trump administration.

1) Comey told the House Intelligence Committee that not only was the FBI investigating Russian interference in the campaign but he also dropped this bombshell: FBI agents are probing potential “coordination” between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. This investigation could lead to criminal charges.

Comey’s exact statement (emphasis added):

“I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts. As with any counterintelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed.”

2) There was no wiretapping of Trump Tower by President Obama or anyone else. On March 4, Trump tweeted explosive accusations that his predecessor had ordered wiretapping of his phones in Trump Tower.

Comey refuted the claims in this way:

“With respect to the president’s tweets about alleged wiretapping directed at him by the prior administration, I have no information that supports those tweets and we have looked carefully inside the FBI,” Comey testified. “The Department of Justice has asked me to share with you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components. The department has no information that supports those tweets.”

He later pointed out that no president has the authority to order a wiretap. It requires a warrant from a special panel of judges.

3) Rogers rejected the possibility that British spies had eavesdropped on Trump Tower at Obama’s request, as the White House suggested last week.

On Thursday, Sean Spicer, the White House spokesman, cited a claim by a Fox News commentator that British intelligence had spied on Trump before his inauguration to keep “American fingerprints” off the surveillance.

The British signals agency, known as GCHQ, issued a rare and angry denial. A spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa May also denied the allegation, and the British Embassy in Washington, D.C., complained to the White House.

Trump last week declined to withdraw the allegation during a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and referred reporters to Fox News for comment. Fox News later said it had no evidence “full stop” to support the commentator’s claim.

Here is the exchange between Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), the ranking member of the committee, and Rogers:

“Director Rogers, in an effort to explain why there was no evidence supporting the president’s claim that Obama had wiretapped him, the president and his spokesman, Sean Spicer, have suggested that British intelligence through its NSA or GCHQ wiretapped Mr. Trump on President Obama’s behalf,” Schiff asked. “Did you ever request that your counterparts in GCHQ should wiretap Mr. Trump on behalf of President Obama?”

“No sir, nor would I,” Rogers said, adding that such a request “would be expressly against the construct” of an agreement between the U.S. and its closest allies “that’s been in place for decades.”

Rogers added that the allegation “frustrates a key ally of ours” and was “not helpful.”

4) Two hearings were occurring at the same time. Democrats pressed for details about ties between Russian officials and Trump’s current and former aides, and sought to lay out an elaborate but circumstantial case of potential nefarious activity by the Trump campaign.

Republicans didn’t rush to defend Trump. They instead sought to redirect the hearing’s focus onto another potential crime: leaking of classified material.

They spent a great deal of time probing Comey and Rogers about disclosures of classified material to news organizations that led, in part, to the ouster of Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn.

News reports last month revealed that Flynn had spoken several times to the Russian ambassador in December, including about U.S. sanctions on Russia, and had misled Vice President Mike Pence about those conversations.

“We aim to determine who has leaked or facilitated leaks of classified information so that these individuals can be brought to justice,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), the committee chairman.

“I thought it was against the law to disseminate classified information,” agreed Rep.Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) during a long stretch of queries about the nature of the leaks and the consequences for the leakers and the nation.

Comey and Rogers both said leaking of classified information was a serious offense but they declined to reveal any details about probes into unauthorized disclosures of classified material.

5) Comey and Rogers stood by a U.S. intelligence community report released in early January that concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin had authorized meddling in the election to undermine U.S. democracy, to harm Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to boost Trump’s chances.

“They wanted to hurt our democracy, hurt her, help him,” Comey said, adding that “Putin hated Secretary Clinton so much that .. he had a clear preference for the person running against the person he hated so much.”

Share
Advertisement

Can Democrats claw their way back to power in the House? They’re counting on Trump to help.

Looking at the numbers, Democrats seem to have a better chance seizing control of the Senate in 2018 than winning a majority and clawing their way back to power in the House.

Republicans hold a mere 52-48 Senate majority while outnumbering Democrats in the House by 44 seats, with five vacancies.

But elections are not about mathematics, or determined by probability.

Read More

Share

The view from Moscow: ‘What goes around, comes around’

( Spencer Platt / Getty Images)

In Moscow, Kremlin loyalists took a dim view of Monday’s House Intelligence Committee hearing into alleged Russian hacking of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Sergei Markov, a Moscow-based political analyst and a former lawmaker with the ruling United Russia party, said that the aim of the hearings “is not to allow [President] Trump to improve ties with Russia.”

“Very serious circles in the U.S. think that they can’t let Russia become a great power, that Russia should be pressed, pressed, pressed,” Markov said in an interview. He said Trump was attempting “to let Russia have its own sphere of interests,” but that effort had prompted accusations “that everything around Trump is related to Russia and betrays the U.S.”

The hearings are also “related to an attempt to impeach Trump,” he claimed. “Many think that Trump is not an acceptable figure for the U.S., that he is a maverick who is an accidental byproduct of American democracy and he should be done with, he must be impeached.”

Alexandra Silantyeva, 64, a retired history teacher in Moscow, offered a slightly different view: Russia did influence the U.S. election, and was justified in doing so. In her view, the congressional inquiry is hypocritical.

“They are unhappy because for the first time, Russia installed its own candidate on the throne in America,” she said. “They forgot about their own attempts to topple governments all over the world, and about their drunken puppet [Russian President Boris] Yeltsin. What goes around, comes around, and this mess serves them right.”

Share
Advertisement

FBI chief seems to have learned a hard lesson from Clinton email investigation

Share

Comey stands by U.S. intelligence assessment that Putin wanted Trump to win election

Two of the nation’s top counter-intelligence officials stood by the U.S. intelligence assessment in January that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s government sought to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election.

Under questioning from Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), FBI Director James Comey and Adm. Mike Rogers, director of the National Security Agency, said nothing has changed since they issued their Jan. 6 report on Russian interference in the election.

The report found that senior Russian officials, including Putin, wanted to undermine the U.S. democratic process, hurt Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and help Trump’s campaign.

Comey and Rogers declined to provide details on how the intelligence community reached that assessment.

“They wanted to hurt our democracy, hurt her and help him,” Comey said, adding that officials had reached that conclusion by December.

In part, the FBI and intelligence agencies came to believe that Putin wanted Trump to win because he very much disliked Clinton, Comey said.

“Putin hated Secretary Clinton so much that the flip side of that coin was that he had a clear preference for the person running against the person he hated so much,” Comey said.

Conaway interjected with an anecdote about his wife cheering for the Texas Tech Red Raiders on the football gridiron and wondering whether such an analysis may be too simplistic.

“That might work on Saturday afternoon when my wife’s Red Raiders are playing the Texas Longhorns,” he said. “She really likes the Red Raiders ... The logic is because he didn’t like candidate Clinton that he automatically liked Trump. That assessment is based on what?”

“Well, it’s based on more than that,” Comey said. “But part of it is the logic. Whoever the Red Raiders are playing you want the Red Raiders to win; by definition you want their opponent to lose.”

“I know, but [Putin] wanted her to lose and him to win?,” Conaway asked.

“They are inseparable,” Comey replied. “It’s a two-person event.”

“When did you decide [Putin] wanted him to win?”

“Logically, when he wanted her to lose,” Comey said to laughter.

Republicans noted there had been no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian authorities.

But otherwise most lawmakers did not attempt to defend Trump directly, though they sought to limit the damages of Coney’s disclosures to Republicans.

“Don’t you think it’s ridiculous to say the Russians prefer Republicans over Democrats?” Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), the committee chairman, asked Comey and Rogers.

Neither replied.

Share
Advertisement

Feinstein sees Judge Gorsuch as a threat to Roe vs. Wade and the right to abortion

(BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / AFP/Getty Images)

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Monday that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, poses a threat to Roe vs. Wade and the right to abortion.

The ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Feinstein noted that Trump had promised to appointed “pro-life” justices who would overturn Roe vs. Wade.

This debate “is not theoretical,” she said, addressing Gorsuch at the start of his confirmation hearing. The abortion right “allows women and their doctors to decide what is best for them and their kids, not politicians.”

Meanwhile, committee chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) praised Gorsuch as a judge who will enforce the Constitution’s separation of powers and protect against “executive overreach.”

He teased some of his Democratic colleagues for expressing a newfound interest in this principle now that a Republican is in the White House rather than President Obama. “Some of us have been alarmed by executive overreach, and the threat it poses to the separation of powers, for quite some time,” he said in his opening statement.

Grassley said the committee will spend most of its first day hearing 10-minute statements from each of its 20 members.

Gorsuch is then expected to deliver his opening statement in late afternoon. Questioning will not begin until Tuesday morning.

But Feinstein set out a lengthy agenda of concerns for the committee’s minority Democrats.

She said she was troubled by Supreme Court rulings that allow “billionaires to spend unlimited sums to buy elections,” and said she feared Gorsuch might support a 2nd Amendment right for gun owners to have “assault weapons” and “extreme military-style weapons.”

She said she would be looking to see whether Gorsuch is a “reasonable mainstream conservative” and not a right-wing activist.

Share

Haley accuses U.N. of ‘anti-Israel bias’ and tensions rise over proposed U.S. budget cuts

Trump administration tensions with the United Nations over Israel won’t help the world body as it tries to maintain some part of its funding from Washington.

Those tensions flared again Monday when both the State Department and the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations sharply attacked an agenda item in a U.N. meeting in Geneva that would have focused on alleged human rights abuse by Israel against Palestinians.

Ambassador Nikki Haley, speaking from the world body’s headquarters in New York, said the decision to focus on Israel at the regular meeting of the U.N. Human Rights Council reflected long-standing “anti-Israel bias” at the United Nations.

“The United States will not participate” in the discussions “other than to vote against the outrageous, one-sided, anti-Israel resolutions that so diminish what the Human Rights Council should be.”

She said the constant focus on Israel allowed other nations to distract from their own, often-egregious human rights records.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said the United States will vote against any and every resolution that emerges from the debate.

“It does not serve the interests of the council to single out one country in an unbalanced matter,” he said in Washington.

Last week, the United States blasted a report from a U.N. body that accused Israel of imposing an “apartheid regime” on Palestinian territories.

The predominantly Arab group — the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia — was forced to withdraw the report amid the controversy, and its leader, Rima Khalaf, resigned.

The United States and Israel had said the report was inflammatory and anti-Semitic, and praised U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ decision to accept Khalaf’s resignation.

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said the problem was not the report’s content but that it had been published without going through proper secretariat channels.

The disputes come at a time when the new Trump administration is proposing a drastic cutback in U.S. aid to U.N. programs and other multilateral international organizations. Instead, the administration wants to boost “hard power” defense spending by $54 billion annually.

The United States pays roughly one-fifth of the United Nations’ regular budget, and cuts of the size President Trump is proposing would dramatically curtail peace-keeping, health and educational projects, advocates say.

Share
Advertisement

Republicans’ concern: Leaks about the FBI investigation and Flynn’s calls to Russian ambassador

Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee pressed two top counterintelligence officials about leaks to the media that led to the ouster of former national security advisor Michael Flynn after less than a month on the job.

Reps. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) and Tom Rooney (R-Fla.) pushed FBI Director James B. Comey and National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers to explain how details from Flynn’s phone calls with Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the United States, were made public.

Flynn was forced to resign last month after media reports said he had discussed Obama administration sanctions on Moscow with the Russian envoy in December, and then had misled Vice President Mike Pence about the discussions.

“I thought it was against the law to disseminate classified information. Is it?” said Gowdy.

He appeared particularly irked that Flynn’s name was made public in news accounts that said U.S. spy agencies had picked up Flynn’s conversations while they targeted the Russian diplomat.

Comey agreed that leaks of classified information are illegal, but he declined to comment further on the investigation, saying such information would be highly classified and sensitive.

The FBI director dodged questioning by Gowdy on whether reporters could face prosecution for publishing classified material.

He said no such prosecution had occurred in his lifetime and said it would be up to the Justice Department to pursue such a case.

Democrats pressed Comey and Rogers to say if they had confirmed links between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Russian government.

In January, the U.S. intelligence community issued a report that said Russian intelligence agencies had hacked and leaked emails from Democratic Party officials and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s senior aides in an attempt to hurt Clinton and help Trump win in November.

Comey confirmed that the FBI was investigating potential links, but he declined to comment further.

Share

Comey says FBI began investigation into Russia meddling in July

FBI Director James B. Comey told Congress that the FBI launched its investigation into Russian meddling in the U.S. elections nearly nine months ago.

He said the FBI started investigating the matter in July and that its work was still in the early stages.

He declined to say when the investigation might concluded.

Comey refused to comment when asked by Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) if the investigation had uncovered evidence of collision between Trump campaign associates and Russia.

Earlier at the hearing, he confirmed publicly for the first time that the FBI is investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

Comey and Rogers said they remained convinced that Russia interfered in the election and sought to help Trump.

“Putin hated Secretary Clinton so much that he had a clear preference for the person running against Secretary Clinton,” Comey said.

Share
Advertisement

NSA director says U.S. government did not ask British intelligence to spy on Trump

The director of the National Security Agency said the Obama administration did not ask British intelligence to spy on Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign, as White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer alleged last week.

Adm. Mike Rogers said such a request to eavesdrop on a U.S. citizen would be “expressly against the construct” of intelligence agreements with the British and other close allies.

“I have seen nothing on the NSA side that we ever engaged in such activity” or was asked to conduct surveillance of Trump by Obama, Rogers said.

Rogers testified during the first congressional hearing into Russia’s role during the 2016 presidential campaign and into President Trump’s claims, first made on Twitter, that Obama had wiretapped him at Trump Tower.

Last Thursday, Spicer repeated a claim by a Fox News commentator that British intelligence had spied on Trump before his inauguration to keep “American fingerprints” off the surveillance.

The British signals agency, known as GCHQ, issued a rare and angry denial. A spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa May also denied the charge, and the British Embassy in Washington complained to the White House.

Trump last week declined to withdraw the allegation during a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and referred reporters to Fox News for comment. Fox News later said it had no evidence “full stop” to support the commentator’s claim.

Rogers declined to discuss press reports that U.S. surveillance picked up several telephone conversations between retired Lt. Gen Mike Flynn, who was ousted as national security adviser last month, and Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the United States, after last year’s election.

Share

Comey says FBI and Justice Department have no information supporting Trump’s wiretapping claims

FBI Director James B. Comey comments on President Trump’s assertions that President Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower.

FBI Director James B. Comey said his agency and the Department of Justice have “no information” to support President Trump’s allegations that his predecessor ordered wiretapping of him and his campaign.

“With respect to the president’s tweets,” Comey testified at the House intelligence committee, “I have no information that supports those tweets. We have looked carefully inside the FBI.”

Responding to a question by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), the ranking Democrat on the committee, Comey added that the Justice Department asked him to convey that it also had not been able to uncover any information related to such wiretaps.

In a series of tweets, Trump has accused former President Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower and his campaign. Lawmakers of both parties have rejected the allegations.

Share
Advertisement

FBI director confirms investigation of possible collusion between Trump campaign and Russia

FBI Director James B. Comey confirms his agency is investigating possible cooperation between Russia and Trump campaign associates.

Director James B. Comey confirmed for the first time Monday that the FBI is investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian authorities during the 2016 election campaign.

Comey said the investigation was examining whether “there was any coordination” between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

Comey suggested that the case was not a criminal investigation but was being conducted as part of FBI’s “counterintelligence mission,” aimed at preventing Russia intelligence operations against the U.S.

“I can promise you we will follow the facts wherever they lead,” he said.

The FBI does not usually publicly confirm its investigations. Comey said he had been authorized by the Justice Department to confirm the investigation in this case.

“I cannot say more about what we are doing,” Comey said.

Although the FBI investigation has been reported for weeks, the FBI has not previously confirmed it. He did so in the first congressional hearing into Russia’s role in the presidential race.

In his opening statement, Comey did not discuss President Trump’s claim that President Obama had ordered wiretapping of Trump Tower.

Trump first accused Obama of wiretapping him on March 4 and has refused to back down even though Obama, the heads of both GOP-led Congressional intelligence committees and the former director of national intelligence said it wasn’t true.

Comey’s testimony came a day after the House intelligence panel’s leaders said that documents provided to Congress by the Justice Department on Friday did not substantiate Trump’s claims of wiretapping or surveillance at Trump Tower.

“Was there a physical wiretap of Trump Tower? No ... there never was,” Rep. Devin Nunes, (R-Tulare), the chairman, said on “Fox News Sunday.”

Nunes said no evidence indicated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a panel of judges that must approve warrants required to conduct wiretaps for intelligence purposes, had ever done so for Trump Tower.

Rep. Adam Schiff, (D-Burbank), the panel’s top Democrat, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that investigators had searched deep to find evidence for Trump’s claims but had come up dry.

“We are at the bottom of this,” he said. “There is nothing at the bottom.”

Trump’s continued insistence that he was wiretapped by Obama, despite the lack of any evidence, led to a diplomatic tiff last week with the British government, one of America’s closest allies.

After White House spokesman Sean Spicer on Thursday cited a Fox News commentator who claimed that Obama had secretly used a British spy agency to eavesdrop on Trump, the British Embassy in Washington complained to the White House, and Prime Minister Theresa May’s spokesman publicly denied any such activity. Fox News also said it had no evidence to support the claim.

Trump did not back down on Friday, however, alluding to it again during a White House news conference with visiting German Chancellor Angela Merkel. She did not appear amused to be pulled into his imbroglio.

Share

House Intelligence Committee chairman: No wiretaps on Trump Tower

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee told a packed hearing room that no evidence of a wiretap was found at Trump Tower, but he didn’t rule out other types of surveillance.

“There was not a physical wiretap of Trump Tower,” Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) said in his opening statement at the first congressional hearing exploring Russian meddling in the U.S. election.

Nunes added that “it’s possible other surveillance activities were used against President Trump and his associates.”

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank), the ranking Democrat on the committee, said in his opening statement that if Trump or his associates colluded with the Russians during the 2016 campaign it would be “one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history.”

FBI Director James B. Comey is slated to testify on the FBI investigation into Russia’s interference and may rebut charges by President Trump that Obama ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower or his campaign.

The FBI is spearheading an investigation into Russia’s meddling in the campaign.

Share
Advertisement

Trump defends himself on Twitter against accusations he colluded with Russia to win the election

As the House Intelligence Committee prepares for its first public hearing on Russian interference in the 2016 election, President Trump took to Twitter to defend himself against suggestions that he or people close to him had colluded with Moscow.

The story line is “fake news” pushed by Democrats, Trump declared.

Two politically fraught, related stories are expected to come together at Monday’s hearing.

FBI Director James B. Comey is set to testify about the conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community that Russian spy agencies used cyberattacks and other tactics to influence the presidential race. He’ll likely get questions about whether the FBI is currently investigating possible contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.

Lawmakers are also expected to ask Comey whether the FBI conducted wiretapping or other secret surveillance of Trump or his associates before or after the 2016 election

Trump has been under fire for tweets that accused President Obama, without evidence, of wiretapping Trump’s phones during the campaign.

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), said on “Fox News Sunday” that “there never was” a wiretap at Trump Tower. Other congressional leaders of both parties have similarly debunked Trump’s accusation.

Nunes also said he has seen “no evidence of collusion” between Russia and Trump or Trump’s associates.

Earlier in this month, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said he could deny that he’d seen any evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

“James Clapper and others stated that there is no evidence Potus colluded with Russia,” Trump wrote Monday, referring himself by an acronym for President of the United States. “This story is FAKE NEWS and everyone knows it!”

A few minutes later, Trump wrote another tweet, saying: “The Democrats made up and pushed the Russian story as an excuse for running a terrible campaign.”

But several of Trump’s campaign staff and close associates had contacts with Russian officials. Trump’s former national security advisor Michael Flynn, for example, had direct contacts with Russia’s ambassador in Washington and was paid tens of thousands of dollars by a state-owned Russian television channel.

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee fired back at Trump Monday morning, taking aim at Trump’s track-record of making unsubstantiated claims.

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank) wrote on Twitter: “Mr. President, the Russians hacked our election and interfered. No one disputes this now, but you. This is what is called ‘fact’.”

Schiff has said the committee should be looking for evidence Moscow worked with Trump’s inner circle to sway the election as well as any effort to cover up Trump’s links to Russia.

“At the outset of the investigation, there was circumstantial evidence of collusion,” Schiff told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. “There was direct evidence, I think, of deception,” Schiff added.

Trump has repeatedly promised to ferret out government officials who are talking to the press about investigations into contacts between his team and Russia.

“The real story that Congress, the FBI and all others should be looking into is the leaking of Classified information. Must find leaker now!” Trump wrote Monday.

Share

Here’s what Trump supporters mean when they talk about the ‘deep state’

(Patrick Semansky / Associated Press)

Leaks to reporters. Supposed wiretaps of Donald Trump during the presidential campaign. Federal court rulings against the ban on travel and refugee resettlement.

For allies of Trump — aides, politicians and right-wing news sites — these are evidence of the existence of a “deep state,” a secretive, coordinated network inside the government dedicated to undermining the administration.

Asked by reporters recently whether the deep state exists, Sean Spicer, the president’s press secretary, offered this observation: “I don’t think it should come as any surprise that there are people burrowed into government during eight years of the last administration and may have believed in that agenda and want to continue to seek it.”

But whether it goes beyond that is a topic of debate. Here’s some background on the deep state:

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Hawaii judge rejects Trump administration request to revise ruling against travel ban

(Andrew Harnik / Associated Press)

The Hawaii judge who brought a national halt to President Trump’s new travel ban last week has rejected the government’s request to limit his ruling.

In a short filing in his Honolulu court on Sunday, U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson told federal lawyers who protested against the broad scope of his ruling that “there is nothing unclear” about his order against the ban.

The Department of Justice had filed a motion late Friday asking Watson to scale back his decision that found the travel ban to discriminate against Muslims to match a narrower ruling against it issued by a federal court in Maryland.

On Wednesday, Watson ordered a stop to Trump’s 90-day ban on travel into the U.S. by citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, and a 120-day pause on refugee resettlement from any country. The judge also stopped the government’s attempt to cap refugee resettlement and the compiling of a series of government studies and reports on how refugees and foreign visitors to the U.S. are vetted.

In their Friday motion, government lawyers had asked Watson to revise his ruling to say it did not apply to the refugee ban or to the government studies and reports. Federal lawyers did not abandon their argument that Trump’s executive order is constitutional but said the judge should limit his ruling to the six-country ban.

“The motion, in other words, asks the court to make a distinction that the federal defendants’ previous briefs and arguments never did. As important, there is nothing unclear about the scope of the court’s order…. The federal defendants’ motion is denied,” Watson wrote on Sunday.

If Watson had granted the request, the Hawaii ruling would have largely matched a Maryland federal court order against the travel ban that was issued on Thursday by U.S. District Judge Theodore D. Chuang. The Maryland judge declined to rule against the pause and cap on refugees.

The Department of Justice has appealed Chuang’s decision to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. It could also appeal last week’s Hawaii ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

The original travel ban, signed Jan. 27, was blocked in federal district courts and the 9th Circuit. The new ban, signed March 6 and scheduled to go into effect March 16, was modified in an attempt to pass court muster.

Changes in the new version included deleting Iraq from the list of countries whose travelers would be blocked and removing preferential treatment of refugees who were religious minorities.

Share

Afghan soldier opens fire on U.S. service members, wounding 3

A member of the U.S. military stands guard in July 2016 during a graduation ceremony for Afghan troops in Lashkar Gah, capital of Afghanistan's Helmand province.
(Abdul Khaliq / Associated Press)

Three American service members were wounded Sunday afternoon when an Afghan soldier opened fire on them at a base in the country’s southern Helmand province, U.S. officials said.

Capt. William Salvin, a U.S. military spokesman in Afghanistan, said security forces on base killed the attacker to end the assault.

“The U.S. soldiers are receiving medical treatment at this time, and we will release more information when available,” he said.

The so-called “insider attack” happened around 1:30 p.m. local time at Camp Antonik in Washer District in Helmand.

It wasn’t immediately clear if the shooting involved a Taliban sympathizer, a personal dispute or a cultural misunderstanding.

Since 2008, there have been 94 insider attacks in Afghanistan, with at least 150 foreign soldiers killed and 187 wounded, according to the Long War Journal blog.

The shooting comes as the Afghan government in Kabul has come under growing pressure from the Taliban and other armed insurgents despite 16 years of war.

The Pentagon has 8,400 troops deployed in Afghanistan to train and advise Afghan forces; most rarely participate in direct combat.

Gen. John W. Nicholson Jr., the top U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in February that a “few thousand” more troops are needed to help train Afghanistan’s military and police forces as they battle Taliban insurgents, Islamic State militants and other militias.

Share
Advertisement

Ryan feels ‘very good’ about chance House will pass GOP healthcare bill this week even as changes are made to lure votes

(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan on Sunday said he felt “very good” about the chances that the House would pass the Republicans’ healthcare bill, even as changes were being made to lure votes, such as providing more assistance for older Americans.

“We’re still having conversations with our members,” Ryan (R-Wis.) said on “Fox News Sunday.” “We’re making fine-tuning improvements to the bill to reflect people’s concerns, to reflect peoples’ improvements.”

He said the House was likely to bring the Republicans’ Obamacare replacement to floor vote on Thursday. Asked about the likelihood of passage, Ryan said, “I feel very good about it, actually.”

Part of the confidence stems from President Trump’s involvement in “helping us close this bill,” Ryan said.

“We have a president who is rolling up his sleeves…. He’s helping us make sure that we bridge differences with members who are bringing constructive ideas and solutions for how to make this bill better,” Ryan said.

Among the changes being considered are allowing states to impose a work requirement for able-bodied Medicaid recipients and increasing tax credits for lower income and older Americans, he said.

The analysis released last week by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said that the House Republican plan would provide less assistance to older, low-income Americans than Obamacare while allowing insurers to charge older customers up to five times more than younger consumers.

Under Obamacare, insurers can charge only three times more.

“We believe we should have even more assistance, and that’s one of the things we’re looking at, for that person in the 50s and 60s because they experience higher healthcare costs,” Ryan said.

He emphasized that until the bill is on the floor for a vote, “we are always making improvements.”

Tom Price, secretary of Health and Human Services, said the Trump administration was open to changes to address the effects on older Americans and other concerns.

“If it needs more beefing up… for folks who are low-income, between 50 and 64 years of age, that’s something we’ve talked about, that’s something we’ve entertained,” Price told ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”

“We’ve talked to so many folks in the House of Representatives to try to see what their discomfort level is, if they have any, with this piece of legislation,” he said.

But Price admitted that changes to the House bill could potentially cost Republican votes in the Senate.

“It’s a fine needle that needs to be threaded,” Price said.

But there’s enough Republican opposition in the Senate to put the House plan in trouble there unless significant changes are made.

“The current House bill, as drafted, I do not believe it would pass the Senate,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

Cruz said he can’t vote for a bill that allows health insurance premiums to continue to rise. And he noted that the CBO projected that the bill would cause premiums to rise as much as 20% during the first two years before they start going down.

“If Republicans hold a big press conference and pat ourselves on the back that we’ve repealed Obamacare and everyone’s premiums keep going up, people will be ready to tar and feather us on the streets and quite rightly,” Cruz said.

7:55 a.m.: This article was updated with comments from Sen. Ted Cruz.

7:10 a.m.: This article was updated with comments from Tom Price.

Share

Kellyanne Conway’s husband reportedly picked for Justice Department post

White House advisor Kellyanne Conway, whose husband, George Conway, has reportedly been chosen to lead the civil division of the Justice Department.
White House advisor Kellyanne Conway, whose husband, George Conway, has reportedly been chosen to lead the civil division of the Justice Department.
(Richard Drew / Associated Press)

President Trump has chosen the husband of White House advisor Kellyanne Conway to head the civil division of the Department of Justice, the Wall Street Journal reported.

George Conway was chosen to head the office that has responsibility for defending the administration’s proposed travel ban and defending lawsuits filed against the administration, the newspaper reported.

He is a partner at the New York law firm of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. The law firm’s website says Conway has extensive experience in litigation involving securities, mergers and acquisitions, contracts and antitrust cases. He graduated from Harvard and Yale Law School. He joined the law firm in 1988, soon after his graduation from law school.

He has been involved in numerous complex, high-profile cases with that firm, where he has been a partner since 1994. In the 1990s, Conway wrote the Supreme Court brief that cleared the way for Paula Jones’ civil suit against President Clinton. Clinton’s denial of an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky during a deposition in the Jones case led to his impeachment.

The White House and the Justice Department would not confirm the pick Saturday. George Conway declined to comment.

Kellyanne Conway is a longtime Republican pollster who helped turn around Trump’s presidential campaign at a critical time last summer. She joined the campaign as a senior advisor and quickly earned the candidate’s trust. She is also close with the president’s daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, another influential voice in Trump’s inner circle.

Kellyanne Conway stepped in to manage Trump’s campaign against Democrat Hillary Clinton when it began foundering in the face of a series of controversies. Many credit her with boosting him toward his election victory after she urged him to more closely follow the teleprompter in his speeches and helped him deliver clearer talking points that minimized controversy in the final days of the campaign.

Share
Advertisement

China pushes back on tougher U.S. approach to North Korea

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, left, and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi arrrive for a joint news conference at Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing.
(Lintao Zhang / Getty Images)

China on Saturday dismissed U.S. efforts to adopt a a stronger stance toward North Korea, testing the progress Secretary of State Rex Tillerson hopes to achieve in Beijing on the final, most precarious leg of his Asia tour.

Tillerson’s visit came a day after he warned of using “all options” against North Korea, reversing the tactics of previous administrations and sending a direct signal to Beijing that the U.S. has not ruled out military strikes on China’s ally.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, standing next to Tillerson after their meeting, urged the U.S. to stay “cool-headed” as it seeks to suppress North Korean nuclear ambitions that have reached “a new crossroads.”

“No matter what happens, we have to stay committed to diplomatic means as a way to seek a peaceful settlement,” Wang said, adding that sanctions are largely an issue between the U.S. and Pyongyang.

Read More

Share

Department of Justice asks Hawaii judge who stopped travel ban to limit his ruling

(Jae C. Hong / Associated Press)

The Trump administration has asked a Hawaii federal court that brought its travel ban to a national halt this week to revise its ruling.

In a motion filed in Honolulu late Friday, the Department of Justice argued that the court’s order finding that the administration’s latest travel ban discriminated against Muslims should be scaled back to match a more limited ruling against the ban issued by a federal court in Maryland.

The ruling in Hawaii by U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson ordered a stop to Trump’s 90-day ban on travel from citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and his 120-day pause on refugee resettlement.

The ruling, issued Wednesday, also stopped the government’s attempt to cap refugee resettlement and the compiling of a series of government studies and reports on how refugees and foreign visitors to the U.S. are vetted.

In the new filing, the Department of Justice argues that the judge’s order should not have applied to refugees or to the government studies and reports.

Federal lawyers are not abandoning their view that Trump’s executive order is constitutional, but said that Watson should limit his ruling to the six-country ban.

If the government’s request is granted, the Hawaii ruling would then largely match a Maryland federal court order against the travel ban that was issued on Thursday by U.S. District Judge Theodore D. Chuang. He declined to rule against the pause and cap on refugees.

On Friday, the Department of Justice filed an appeal of Chuang’s decision to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va.

The Hawaii suit was brought by the state, which argued that its residents, businesses and universities were negatively affected by the travel ban. Lawyers representing Hawaii said Trump’s executive order, signed March 6 and scheduled to go into effect March 16, was an extension of his campaign promise to suspend travel into the country by Muslims. The Maryland case, based on similar arguments, was brought by immigrants and nonprofit organizations that work with refugees.

March’s travel order was a revised version of a Jan. 27 travel ban that also included Iraq and gave preference to refugees who were religious minorities. The original ban was blocked in federal district courts and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

None of the court orders on the travel ban are permanent. Instead, they halt it while more thorough court proceedings determine its constitutionality.

Share
Advertisement

Trump administration reportedly blocks anti-protectionist statement at G-20 meeting

The Trump administration on Saturday reportedly rejected anti-protectionist language in a statement by finance chiefs of the world’s most important economies after a summit meeting in Germany.

A communique from finance ministers and central bankers, including Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, after the Group of 20 meeting failed to include a phrase included after other recent meetings that the nations would reject protectionism.

“We are working to strengthen the contribution of trade to our economies,” said the communique issued Saturday after the two day summit in Baden-Baden.

After the last G20 meeting of finance ministers and central bank governors, in Chengdu, China in July, the communique said, “We will resist all forms of protectionism.”

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble said Saturday the group was unable to agree on trade language this time.

“That’s why at the end we said nothing on [avoiding protectionism], because it meant different things when we said we didn’t want protectionism,” he said, according to the Financial TImes.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet L. Yellen represented the U.S. at the German summit. It was Mnuchin’s fist appearance on the world stage as the Trump administration’s leader on financial issues.

“I understand what the president’s desire is and his policies and I negotiated them from here, and we couldn’t be happier with the outcome,” Mnuchin said at a news conference Saturday after the summit, according to the Washington Post.

Pierre Moscovici, the European Union’s economics commissioner told the Wall Street Journal that “it was not the best communique that was ever produced by the G-20, certainly.”

The move came as President Trump has vowed to pursue an “America first” agenda that includes striking better trade deals. He has pulled out of the Trans Pacific Partnership pact and wants to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada.

“I don’t believe in an isolationist policy. But I also believe a policy of trade should be a fair policy,” Trump said at a news conference Friday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

“And the United States has been treated very, very unfairly by many countries over the years. And that’s going to stop,” he said.

1:00 p.m.: This article was updated with comments from the German Finance Minister.

12:10 p.m.: This article was updated with information from the German summit’s communique.

Share

Spicer: Secret Service stops attempted White House intrusion

A Trump administration spokesman says an individual was apprehended near the White House, a week after an intruder was caught on White House grounds.

Press Secretary Sean Spicer wrote on Twitter on Saturday that the individual “jumped bike rack on Pennsylvania Ave” but did not make it onto White House property.

Spicer added, “Great response by @SecretService.”

President Donald Trump was not at the White House on Saturday. He and his family are spending the weekend at his Palm Beach, Fla., resort.

The Secret Service did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The incident comes about a week after a man breached a 5-foot outer perimeter fence and scaled an 8-foot vehicle gate to gain entry to the White House grounds.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump says Merkel meeting was ‘great,’ then blasts Germany for NATO bills

President Trump on Saturday followed up what he called a “great” meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel by blasting her country for what he said were unpaid bills for NATO defense.

On Twitter, Trump reiterated a point he made at his joint news conference Friday with Merkel that many NATO nations owe money to the alliance and the U.S. because they haven’t paid their fair share.

This time, he chastised Germany for not paying enough “for the powerful, and very expensive, defense” NATO and the U.S. provide.

Trump didn’t single out Germany for NATO bills as he stood next to Merkel and addressed reporters’ questions on Friday at a news conference in which he also doubled down on his unsubstantiated accusations that President Obama had ordered surveillance of him during the 2016 campaign.

“Many nations owe vast sums of money from past years, and it is very unfair to the United States,” Trump said. “These nations must pay what they owe.”

He then thanked Merkel for Germany’s commitment to increase its defense spending.

Merkel said Germany had increased its defense spending by 8% last year and was committed to reaching NATO’s goal for each member nation to spend 2% of total economic output on defense by 2024.

Share

Justice Department tells court that Trump should be able to fire consumer watchdog

The Justice Department told a federal court on Friday that President Trump should be able to fire the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, arguing the structure of the controversial independent watchdog group is unconstitutional.

The brief, filed in a case in which a New Jersey mortgage company is challenging the bureau’s authority, is a reversal of the position taken by the Obama administration. It had strongly backed the agency, which was created by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law and was one of Obama’s signature accomplishments.

Conservatives have argued the bureau gives too much power to its director, who serves a five-year term and could be removed only “for cause,” such as neglect of duty.

Several lawmakers have called for Trump to fire CFPB Director Richard Cordray, a Democrat and former Ohio attorney general who was appointed by Obama.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump administration appeals court decision that halted revised travel ban

The Trump administration on Friday filed a notice in a Maryland federal court that it would appeal the court’s decision halting the president’s revised travel ban.

The case, in which a judge on Thursday ruled against President Trump’s effort to stop immigration for 90 days from six majority-Muslim countries, heads to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. The administration is asking the appeals court to reverse the lower court’s decision.

The Maryland case, which was brought on behalf of immigrants and nonprofit groups that work with refugees, followed a Hawaii federal court’s broader order against the travel ban on Wednesday. That order stopped its pause on immigration from the six nations and its 120-day moratorium on refugee resettlement.

The travel ban was supposed to take effect Thursday.

Read More

Share

Trump and Merkel seek common ground on NATO and trade

In their first face-to-face meeting, President Trump told German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Friday that he fully supports NATO but will insist member states, including Germany, pay their “fair share” to continue the crucial security alliance.

Merkel and Trump met in private, spoke to reporters and then had lunch in a daylong summit that both sides portrayed as an attempt to restore stability in relations between the U.S. and the most populous and richest nation in Europe.

At the news conference, Trump said it was “unfair” for the United States to shoulder the bulk of the NATO budget and he welcomed Merkel’s pledge to increase Germany’s military spending.

The 38 countries in NATO are supposed to allocate 2% of their gross domestic product to defense, but few do.

In a slight dig at Merkel, Trump said immigration was “a privilege not a right.” During the presidential campaign, he had accused her of “ruining” Germany by allowing tens of thousands of refugees, many from Syria and other predominantly Muslim countries, to enter Germany.

But he also aligned himself with Merkel when he was asked whether he stood by his unproven claims that he was wiretapped by the Obama administration.

Although the GOP-led House and Senate intelligence committees have said they’ve seen no evidence to support Trump’s claim, he refused to back down. Instead, he said, he and Merkel “have something in common.”

In 2013, leaks by Edward Snowden revealed that the National Security Agency, which operates overseas, had eavesdropped on Merkel and other foreign leaders. Obama subsequently ended the surveillance on her.

Trump denied a reporter’s suggestion that his America First policy mean he was an isolationist, saying such an assertion was “fake news.”

Merkel repeatedly stressed the importance of trade and the European Union’s role as one of the United States’ leading trade partners.

Asked what she thought of Trump’s often bombastic style, in contrast to her own calm demeanor, Merkel was gracious. She said Trump “has a right to stand up for American interests” and had received her warmly.

She added it was better for leaders to “talk to one another, rather than about one another.”

Earlier, the two sat in the White House Oval Office before news cameras, barely smiling and declining urges to shake hands. They shook hands after the news conference, however.

Germany is worried that the Trump administration has little regard for a united Europe and is overly friendly to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump has voiced support for Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union and urged other countries to follow suit, steps that would undermine longstanding economic and political stability.

In addition to their private meeting, Trump and Merkel spoke together with business leaders from their two countries to discuss trade and vocational training programs. Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner were among the participants.

Share
Advertisement

‘At least we have something in common’: Trump makes a joke out of his unproven wiretap claim

President Trump dismissed questions about his still-unfounded claim that President Obama ordered surveillance of him with a joke Friday and revived one of the most troublesome diplomatic episodes of Obama’s tenure in the process.

Trump was asked twice about his wiretap claim during a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. He ignored the first question and only briefly addressed the issue in answering the second.

“As far as wiretapping, I guess, by this past administration, at least we have something in common, perhaps,” Trump said.

Trump was referring to a disclosure in 2013 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden that the U.S. had conducted spying operations in Germany, including the monitoring of Merkel’s cellphone.

The revelation dealt a major blow to U.S.-German relations and was politically damaging to Merkel at home. But Obama and Merkel ultimately repaired the rift, and their relationship was among the closest and most critical Obama had with any world leader.

Share

Trump tells conservative House Republicans he’s ‘1,000% behind’ Obamacare overhaul, Medicaid changes

President Trump privately told House conservatives he was “1,000%” behind the GOP’s Obamacare repeal as they incorporate new Medicaid changes ahead of next week’s vote.

Republicans trying to amass support before the House vote first will amend the bill to draw in more conservatives who said Friday they would vote yes if the changes are made.

Trump met Friday with members of the conservative Republican Study Committee at the White House and endorsed their ideas to change the Medicaid provision by allowing states to take federal funds as a lump-sum block grant and impose a work requirement for patients receiving care.

“He said he was 1,000% behind us,” said Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), who was among those attending. He noted that in public remarks to the media afterward, Trump said he was 100% behind the bill.

“He really wants to see this pass and wants to see healthcare improved for the country, and he sees this as a big win.”

Rep. Mark Walker (R-S.C.), the group’s chairman, said they worked with the administration all night on the proposal.

Republicans are trying to build momentum for the bill ahead of a scheduled vote next Thursday.

Another conservative group of House Republicans, the smaller Freedom Caucus, also has pressed for changes, but it is unclear whether their requests are being included. They want to reduce the essential benefits that health insurers must provide in their policies.

While adding conservative elements to the bill may help Speaker Paul Ryan amass the votes for passage, the strategy risks losing more moderate lawmakers who are worried their constituents will be left without healthcare coverage.

Ryan also may end up passing a legislative package that is dead on arrival in the Senate, where Republicans have largely panned the House effort.

“I have serious concerns and reservations about the bill in its current form,” said Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Penn.), who does not believe the tax credits, which start at $2,000 for young adults and rise to $4,000 a year for those over 60, are substantial enough to purchase private health insurance.

“We don’t like sending a bill over to the Senate that’s dead on arrival,” he said. “I’d rather have a better sense of where the Senate is before we send it over.”

The Medicaid changes have been a long sought conservative goal and would be a substantial reform of the decades-old healthcare program that serves the poor, disabled and elderly.

By block-granting the funding, the states would have more flexibility to design their programs free from federal interference.

For example, Westerman, the Arkansas congressman, said he would like to see his state require Medicaid recipients to start paying a premium or co-pay for healthcare, so patients “have some skin in the game.”

Healthcare advocates, though, have warned that patients may opt to go without healthcare because they cannot afford the payments or are unable to meet new work requirements.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said that 24 million more Americans would be uninsured if the House bill became law — essentially wiping out the coverage gains made under Obamacare.

Share
Advertisement

Help build Trump’s border wall? Mexico’s Cemex company says no way

Mexico-based Cemex, one of the world’s largest suppliers of building materials, says it will not participate in the construction of President Trump’s border wall.

The company has been viewed as a potential beneficiary as the U.S. presses forward with plans to build a barrier along 1,600 miles of unfenced terrain on the southern border. But Cemex has come under intense pressure at home to boycott the multibillion-dollar project, which Trump says will curb illegal immigration from Mexico.

According to the U.S. General Services Administration’s Federal Business Opportunities website, Cemex has not registered as a potential government contractor for the border barrier. On Thursday, company spokesman Jorge Perez said Cemex also won’t supply third-party contractors working on the wall with cement or other building materials.

“We will not participate,” Perez said in a phone interview.

There has been feverish speculation about the Mexican firm’s possible involvement in the project since Trump ordered construction of the wall to begin as one of his first acts as president.

Although Trump’s ascension to the White House has generally been a bad thing for Mexican companies, with the Mexican peso plummeting amid Trump’s threats to renegotiate trade deals and tax Mexican imports, Cemex’s stock has risen to eight-year highs in recent months.

READ MORE >

Share

Is the Scalia theory that Judge Gorsuch embraces a lofty constitutional doctrine or just an excuse to be conservative?

President Trump with Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch in January.
President Trump with Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch in January.
(Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press)

When Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, goes before the Senate next week, it will be a triumphant moment for “originalism,” the once-obscure theory that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the meaning of words and phrases as they were understood in the times they were written.

The late Justice Antonin Scalia was the foremost champion of this approach. Often frustrated inside the court, he traveled the country, scoffing at liberals who believed in a “living” Constitution that changes with the times.

Not since the failed 1987 nomination of Robert Bork has a prospective high court justice so embraced originalism as has Gorsuch, an appellate judge on the Denver-based 10th Circuit. Last year, he said courts must “apply the law as it is, focusing backward, not forward, and looking to the text, structure and history to decide what a reasonable reader at the time of the events in question would have understood the law to be — not to decide cases based on their own moral convictions or policy consequences they believe might serve society best.”

Gorsuch’s public endorsement of originalism helped him get the coveted nomination to succeed Scalia, and it is likely to play a key role in the debate over his confirmation.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that Obama spied on him has now entangled — and upset — Great Britain

White House officials scrambled to explain themselves Friday after an unusual press briefing a day earlier prompted a diplomatic flap with Britain, one of the United States’ closest allies.

It began Thursday when Press Secretary Sean Spicer read a series of news stories from the White House briefing room in an attempt to defend President Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that President Obama wiretapped him during the campaign. One was an allegation from a Fox News commentator, Andrew Napolitano, that Obama used British spies to snoop on Trump.

The British government was not happy.

The allegations are “nonsense” and “should be ignored,” an official for the Britain’s General Communications Headquarters, said in a statement Friday. The secretive signals intelligence agency is the British equivalent of the National Security Agency.

“Recent allegations made by media commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano about GCHQ being asked to conduct ‘wiretapping’ against the then-president-elect are nonsense. They are utterly ridiculous and should be ignored,” the official said.

British media reported that Spicer and H.R. McMaster, the U.S. national security advisor, issued a formal apology. A White House official who declined to be named gave a slightly different version. The official conceded that British Ambassador to the U.S. Kim Darroch and Mark Lyall, the British national security advisor, “expressed their concerns to Sean Spicer and Gen. McMaster.”

“Mr. Spicer and Gen. McMaster both explained that he was simply pointing to public reports and not endorsing any specific story,” the White House official said.

The official also pointed to a tweet from a reporter from the Guardian newspaper, quoting the British Embassy saying that there was “no formal apology.”

U.S. officials, including Democratic and Republican leaders of the House and Senate Intelligence committees, have said that no evidence has emerged to back Trump’s claim of wiretapping. But Spicer, under pressure from Trump, has not backed down.

One House Republican called on Trump to apologize to Obama, repeating Intelligence Committee leaders’ assertions that no evidence has surfaced to support Trump’s claim.

“Frankly, unless you can produce some pretty compelling proof, then ... President Obama is owed an apology in that regard,” said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.). “Because if he didn’t do it, we shouldn’t be reckless in accusations that he did.”

9:13 a.m.: This story was updated with comment from Britain’s General Communications Headquarters.

Share

Analysis: After all the profits NBC made on ‘The Apprentice,’ he deserves better coverage, Trump says. Really?

In the flurry of news on his tax returns, his troubled healthcare plan and his suspicion that his phones were bugged, it was easy to miss one of President Trump’s most startling comments Wednesday night on Fox News.

Trump was griping about the coverage he gets on every major television network except right-leaning Fox News, and he singled out NBC as a prime offender. After all the money that NBC made on his reality-TV franchise, Trump suggested, it owed him more favorable coverage of his presidency.

“I made a fortune for NBC with ‘The Apprentice,’” he told Fox anchor Tucker Carlson. “I had a top show where they were doing horribly, and I had one of the most successful reality shows of all time. And I was on for 14 seasons. And you see what happened when I’m not on. You saw what happened to the show was a disaster. I was very good to NBC, and they are despicable — they’re despicable in their coverage.”

What do NBC’s profits on “The Apprentice” have to do with the way its journalists cover Trump?

Read More

Share
Advertisement

U.S. military denies airstrike hit mosque in Syria were dozens are reported killed

Syrian civil defense volunteers dig through the rubble of a mosque following a reported airstrike late Thursday.
Syrian civil defense volunteers dig through the rubble of a mosque following a reported airstrike late Thursday.
(Omar Haj Kadour / AFP/Getty Images)

The U.S. military conducted an airstrike on a building in northern Syria targeting Al Qaeda militants and is investigating reports that civilians were killed or injured in a nearby mosque.

U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, said in a statement late Thursday that the bombing raid hit a “meeting location” in Syria’s Idlib province and left “several terrorists” dead.

Col. John Thomas, spokesman for the command, said the airstrike destroyed a building about 50 feet from the mosque while aerial photos showed the mosque was still standing.

The military is investigating whether civilians were killed or injured as a result of the strike.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a British-based monitoring group with a network of activists in Syria, reported earlier that an airstrike hit the mosque in Al Jinah village and at least 42 people were killed. The group did not specify who launched the air attack.

Read More

Share

Paul Ryan’s make-or-break moment on Obamacare will test his power, legacy and relationship with Trump

It’s a make-or-break moment in House Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s crusade to pass the GOP’s Obamacare replacement amid growing opposition from critics in his own party who see a chance to topple not only the bill but perhaps his young speakership as well.

No other Republican has staked his political capital on passage of the House GOP plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act as much as Ryan. He’s hawked the plan almost daily on television and radio, using a wonkish PowerPoint demonstration, and he’s worked furiously to drum up support in Congress and the White House.

“People say it’s like herding cats. It’s not herding cats. It’s herding ravenous tigers,” said Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), a conservative who has yet to give his support to the House bill.

Whether the Wisconsin Republican can pull off the legislative lift as the bill heads to a House vote next week will establish not only Ryan’s power and legacy, but also the tone of his rocky relationship with President Trump.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Why did Fed’s Neel Kashkari oppose a rate hike? The economy’s not ready for it, he says

(Steve Yeater / Associated Press)

Neel Kashkari, the only Federal Reserve policymaker to vote against an interest rate hike this week, said he balked because the economy’s not ready for it.

The president of the Fed’s Minneapolis regional bank, explained in an essay Friday that inflation still hasn’t hit the central bank’s 2% annual target, the job market has room to improve and financial market assumptions about stimulus policies from the Trump administration are premature.

“Financial markets are good at some things, but, in my view, notoriously bad at forecasting political outcomes,” said Kashkari, who knows politics after running unsuccessfully for California governor in 2014 and administering the federal government’s bank bailout fund during the 2008 financial crisis.

“They didn’t forecast ‘Brexit.’ They didn’t forecast the results of the U.S. presidential election,” he said. “I don’t have much confidence in their ability to forecast fiscal policy given how little we know today.”

Read More

Share

Why Trump’s budget proposal may not be a blueprint for economic growth

A researcher works at a lab at the National Cancer Institute, part of the National Institutes of Health.
A researcher works at a lab at the National Cancer Institute, part of the National Institutes of Health.
(Maggie Bartlett / Associated Press)

For all of President Trump’s promises to strengthen America’s economy, his first proposed budget would make significant cuts for research and development that analysts say in the long run most likely would hurt U.S. competitiveness and slow economic growth.

While Trump’s 2018 budget blueprint released Thursday would sharply boost federal defense spending by $54 billion, that would be offset by slashing funding for the National Institutes of Health — a center of world-class medical research — and education and science programs at the Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency and other organizations.

The budget proposes to streamline functions, eliminate ineffective programs and shift the financial burden to states and the private sector. But analysts say that shrinking federal support for things like basic research is unlikely to be made up by others, and could in fact further reduce the nation’s research and development spending because universities and private companies often rely on and build upon the groundwork made by government scientists.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

U.S. warns of military option if North Korea continues push for nuclear weapons

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Friday that “all options” were available to deal with North Korea’s emerging nuclear threat, including a militarily strike if necessary to safeguard the region and American forces stationed here.

“Certainly we do not want for things to get to a military conflict,” Tillerson told reporters here. “We’ve been quite clear on that in our communications. But obviously if North Korea takes actions that threaten the South Korean forces or our own forces, then that will be met with an appropriate response.

“Let me very clear: The policy of strategic patience has ended,” he said, referring to the Obama administration’s policy of trying to wait out the North Korean regime while pressing it with economic sanctions and covert actions.

He repeatedly stressed the need for continued sanctions but also made clear that the Trump administration would not be limited to that approach.

“We’re exploring a new range of diplomatic, security and economic measures. All options are on the table,” he said.

He also appeared to reject the idea of a negotiated freeze in the current North Korean weapons program.

“In terms of talking about any kind of a freeze, I think it’s premature for that,” he said. “At this stage, I’m not sure we would be willing to freeze with the circumstances where they exist today, given that would leave North Korea with significant capabilities that would represent a true threat not just to the region but to American forces as well.

Tillerson’s remarks, standing next to his South Korean counterpart, Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se, were made during a three-country diplomatic swing through Asia. They came a day after he declared, in a news conference in Tokyo, that two decades of American policy on North Korea’s advancing nuclear program had “failed” and that a “different approach” was required.

President Trump later declared that North Korea was “behaving very badly” and dismissed Chinese efforts to engage the U.S. and North Korea in talks.

6:21 a.m.: This story was updated with comment from President Trump.

Share

Trump takes aim at ‘sanctuary cities’ with a proposal to cut more than $200 million in local funds

(Pool / Getty Images)

Buried in President Trump‘s budget proposal released Thursday was an opening salvo against so-called sanctuary cities, local jurisdictions he promised to punish for refusing to cooperate with deportation officers.

Trump wants to slash $210 million in federal reimbursements to state and local jails that hold immigrants convicted of crimes while in the country illegally. The Trump administration called the program “poorly targeted,” adding that two-thirds of the money goes to only a handful of states, including California and Illinois, “for the cost of incarcerating certain illegal criminal aliens.”

The money, awarded by the Department of Justice, can make up a sizable portion of budgets for state and local police and sheriff’s departments.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump faces major hurdles -- and his own words -- in challenging orders against his new travel ban

(Paul Sancya / Associated Press)

When President Trump issued his first travel ban on citizens from several Muslim-majority countries, the stated premise was simple: Give the government 90 days to review its vetting procedures to reduce the chances that a terrorist could get a U.S. visa.

That was 48 days ago.

With the executive order blocked by the courts — and judges now halting a revised order that was supposed to take effect Thursday — the legal battle over the constitutionality of the ban stretches on. Trump has vowed to pursue it all the way to the Supreme Court.

By then his administration will have had several weeks to review screening procedures, which opponents said weakens its original case for why the ban is necessary.

The ticking of time is just one of several problems Trump faces as his administration contemplates what so far has been a major blow to his fledgling presidency.

“He keeps losing,” said Steve Schmidt, a longtime Republican strategist who helped run Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “He keeps facing these setbacks. At what point do they give up?”

Read More

Share

Israel only country to escape proposed cuts to U.S. foreign aid

Israel would be the only country to escape the Trump administration’s proposed deep cuts in foreign aid, the State Department said Thursday.

The budget plan from the White House calls for slashing the State Department’s $50 billion budget by about 28%, cuts that would mostly target climate change, democracy promotion and health programs, and numerous foreign aid projects.

Congress is highly unlikely to approve the White House proposal, however, so the impact is still unknown.

Mark Toner, a State Department spokesman, said U.S. aid to Israel, which totaled about $3.1 billion this year, would not be touched under the Trump plan. Israel gets more U.S. aid than any other nation.

Aid to every other country will come under review, he said.

Egypt gets about $1.5 billion and has been one of the largest recipients of U.S. aid in an arrangement that has helped maintain peace between Egypt and Israel since the Carter presidency.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, speaking Thursday in Tokyo, said he accepted the administration’s budget plan and was confident the State Department could find more efficient ways to work with less money.

Tillerson said he thought overseas conflicts that the U.S. has been involved in would diminish, easing the demands on State.

Toner said Tillerson, the former CEO of the oil giant Exxon Mobil, would use “resources the right way, and personnel the right way, in order to ensure that the mission is being accomplished.”

Numerous members of Congress, along with advocacy organizations, spoke out Thursday against the proposed cuts to State.

“Slashing our international engagement by even a fraction of [the amount proposed], at a time when we’re facing serious challenges around the world, would be an absolute disaster,” said Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s budget tests his political coalition

(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

President Trump’s first draft budget, released Thursday, included the kind of deep cuts in discretionary spending that fiscal conservatives have long sought.

It calls for a ramp-up in defense spending in a way that traditional GOP hawks would cheer, if only they didn’t want even bigger increases.

And it lays the foundation for construction of the border wall and other tougher immigration enforcement measures that are the top priority of his nationalist core of support.

In short, there was something for everyone in the coalition that Trump attracted in his campaign victory. But in combination, the final product could be tough for them to fully embrace.

When staffers at the Office of Management and Budget crafted the budget, they pored over Trump’s campaign speeches and promises in an attempt to translate them into dollars and cents. Many of his pledges are reflected in the budget, but reconciling them with one another was daunting.

So while Trump’s nationalist supporters may cheer tougher border enforcement, those who live in more rural and impoverished communities would have to grapple with cuts to programs like the Appalachian Regional Commission, which provides grants for education, broadband and other programs in rural communities.

The budget would also slash funding for programs to boost manufacturing and for farm subsidies that seek to boost sectors of the American economy threatened in the increasingly global economy.

Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s budget chief, emphasized that the budget is just a first step. The administration is targeting inefficient and duplicative programs, but not necessarily the goals behind those programs.

“We have to do Obamacare repeal and replace first, then tax reform second,” he said Thursday. And doing so will pave the way for further investments, like infrastructure.

Share

Trump’s press secretary says president stands by accusation that Obama wiretapped him, despite bipartisan rebuttals

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer mounted a vigorous, albeit unwieldy, defense of President Trump’s accusation that he was wiretapped by President Obama during the presidential campaign, despite agreement from the Republican and Democratic leaders of both the House and Senate Intelligence committees that no evidence backs Trump’s claim.

“He stands by it,” Spicer told reporters during his daily press briefing Thursday.

But that was hardly the beginning or the end of the conversation, which made for an unusual press briefing full of filibustering and confrontation.

Republican leaders seem eager to move on from the issue in the face of growing skepticism from all corners of the intelligence community and a lack of evidence presented by Trump to back up his extraordinary claim.

But Spicer is under intense pressure to hold the line: His boss is known to hate retreating and love watching the televised press briefings. In recent days, Spicer has alternated between blaming the media for ignoring statements or taking intelligence officials out of context and broadening the definition of wiretapping.

Thursday’s briefing was scheduled to begin at 2 p.m. but was delayed by more than an hour after the leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee issued a joint statement saying that “based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016.”

When reporters asked Spicer to respond, he spent several minutes reading from a long list of media accounts on the broad subject of government surveillance and the election, none of which lent credence to the specific claim that Trump had been the target of a wiretap.

The articles he read from included several that cited anonymous sources -- even as Trump has condemned reporters for using them -- and the New York Times, which Trump has called failing and accused of making up stories.

But when a New York Times reporter tried to ask a question about the subject, Spicer balked at calling on him.

Spicer also pointed to single quotes around the term “wiretapping” in some of Trump’s tweets on the subject to suggest that he was referring to other forms of surveillance.

And Spicer shifted the burden to present evidence away fom the president, who made the accusation, and toward those who would disprove it.

“You seem to know all the answers,” Spicer said at one point, when CNN reporter Jim Acosta quoted Senate intelligence leaders and pressed Spicer to show evidence contradicting them.

When asked to defend the list of news articles he was reading against official intelligence statements, Spicer seemed to move the goalposts yet again.

“All we’re doing is literally reading off what other stations and other people have reported,” Spicer said. “We’re not casting judgment on that.”

Shortly after the briefing ended, House Speaker Paul Ryan appeared on MSNBC and was shown several clips. He said he was “having earpiece problems” as he tried to avoid getting enmeshed in the discussion.

“We have not seen any evidence,” Ryan said. “That’s all I really have to add to it.”

Share
Advertisement

White House asks Congress for $33 billion more this year for military and border security

President Trump speaks to governors Feb. 27 at the White House.
President Trump speaks to governors Feb. 27 at the White House.
(Pool / Getty Images)

The White House is seeking $33 billion in extra funding over the next six months for the Pentagon, for the military prison at Guantanamo Bay and to construct a barrier along parts of the border with Mexico.

In a supplemental budget request, the Trump administration asked Congress on Thursday to boost spending for the Pentagon and to cut nondefense-related domestic programs for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30.

The supplemental request was issued the same day the White House rolled out its fiscal 2018 budget proposal, a blueprint that already is under sharp attack in Congress.

The proposed budget would expand military spending by $52 billion and commit more than $4 billion for construction of a border wall with Mexico. It would sharply cut the State Department, health, environment and education budgets.

The supplemental request for this fiscal year asks Congress to also cut $18 billion from the nondefense discretionary budget to partially offset the proposed increases in defense and homeland security funding.

The largest element of the supplemental request would add $24.9 billion to the Pentagon’s base budget. That would require Congress to lift spending caps established in 2011 as part of a budget deal.

“The appropriations request seeks to address critical budget shortfalls in personnel, training, maintenance, equipment, munitions, modernization, and infrastructure investment,” Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote in a letter to Congress. “The request is a first step in investing in a larger, more ready, and more capable force.”

The White House also asked for $5.1 billion for an overseas contingency fund that pays for U.S. combat operations overseas.

It includes more than $4 billion for the war against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, and for a Pentagon fund to “maximize the impact of U.S. counterterrorism activities and operations.”

The remaining $1.1 billion would fund the war in Afghanistan and other “counterterrorism activities.”

Among the activities listed is “planning and design of construction projects” at the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where 41 detainees are held.

The White House request also seeks $3 billion “to address urgent border protection activities,” including the first phase of the wall President Trump has vowed to build along the Mexican border.

It’s not clear how the administration will offset the increased spending.

Trump promised during his campaign to protect Social Security and Medicare, and aides said the current spending proposal would not affect those programs.

Share

Analysis: President Trump embraces the blame game, while brushing aside some inconvenient realities

(Mark Humphrey/AP)

President Trump’s frustration has repeatedly been visible as his successful campaign has given way to a troubled presidency, driven by the distance between his promises and the bracing difficulty of governing.

At a campaign rally Wednesday in Nashville and in a separate Fox News interview, Trump had two opportunities to encourage Americans to move toward his plans on issues like healthcare. Instead, he continued to lean on campaign bravado and deflect responsibility.

He blamed his lawyers’ advice for the repeatedly stalled effort to enact a travel ban that most dramatically affects Muslims. He blamed Democrats for the difficulties facing healthcare legislation, even though his most urgent current problems lie among his fellow Republicans. He complained that he’d been forced to take on healthcare when he really wanted to focus on tax reform — as if he hadn’t included, in every campaign speech, his vow to repeal President Obama’s healthcare plan on day one.

Trump’s credibility has long rested on the notion of winning — over and over. He told his campaign audiences that when he was president, they would win so much they’d be sick and tired of winning. So far, polls continue to show that he gets strong marks for keeping his promises. But he’s not winning some big battles now, and the tension shows.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Here’s why the dramatic budget cuts that Trump proposed are unlikely to survive intact

The Trump administration proposes dramatic cuts to the State, health and education departments while ramping up defense spending and $4 billion for construction of a border wall.

Congress takes its power-of-the-purse role seriously, which is why a president’s budget almost always lands on the other side of Pennsylvania Avenue with a bit of a thud.

President Trump’s blueprint for the next fiscal year, released Thursday, was no different.

The reaction illustrated why, despite the significant attention they are drawing, Trump’s proposed dramatic cuts will likely be scaled back, changed or eliminated altogether.

The president’s spending plan was only the first step in months of negotiations between the White House and Capitol Hill over how to allocate funding. Trump will put forward a more detailed spending proposal in May, and various legislative committees will scrutinize his requests, calling on Cabinet secretaries, agency heads and others in the administration to explain their wish lists.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) effectively took a deep breath Thursday, a reminder that the plan was merely the start of a long, legislative grind that will play out for months, until funding for the new fiscal year is needed when it begins Oct. 1.

“When the president submits a budget, that is a beginning of the budget process,” said Ryan, a former House Budget Committee chairman whose own past proposals, particularly his steep cuts to revamp Medicare, were nowhere to be found in Trump’s initial plan.

“Do I think we can cut spending and get waste out of government? Absolutely,” Ryan said. “Where and how, and what numbers, that’s something we’ll be figuring out as time goes on.”

The Oct. 1 deadline is particularly important this year because spending levels from a past budget accord are set to expire. Without a new deal, automatic cuts would take effect that many in Congress want to avoid.

Trump’s budget lays down a marker in that fight, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) had a blunt response:

“As we have said over and over again in this room, the budget — the federal budget — should be a statement of our national values.... This budget is not a statement of values of anyone.”

More immediately, though, Congress will need to pass a measure to keep the government running past April 28, a self-imposed deadline when funding for the current fiscal year runs out.

That is shaping up to be a more imminent showdown because Trump has requested $3 billion in supplemental funds for his promised border wall with Mexico and other immigration actions.

Democrats are refusing to fund the border wall. Even Republicans want Trump to keep his promise to have Mexico pay for it. And that could lead to a spring funding stalemate that risks a government shutdown.

Even though there might be line items to like — for example, many in Congress would like to beef up military spending — not as many want to make Trump’s proposed cuts pay for it.

11:58 a.m.: This story was updated with details on the appropriations process.

Share

Senate intelligence committee sees no evidence for Trump’s surveillance claim

The Senate Intelligence Committee has seen no evidence to support President Trump’s claim that his Manhattan office building was wiretapped by the Obama administration, the panel’s leaders said Thursday.

“Based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016,” Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the committee chairman, and Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), the ranking member, said in a joint statement.

In tweets on March 4, Trump accused Obama of wiretapping him and his office building before his inauguration and urged Congress to investigate the claim. A spokesman for Obama described the claim as false, and no evidence has emerged to substantiate it.

The statement by Burr and Warner, who are conducting an investigation into whether Trump or his associates had improper contact with Russian authorities during the campaign, came a day after the two leaders on the House Intelligence Committee also said they had seen no evidence to support Trump’s claims.

FBI Director James Comey will testify before the House panel at a public hearing Monday and will be questioned about Trump’s claim, the lawmakers said.

Share
Advertisement

The U.S. hit its debt limit again. Now Treasury is maneuvering to avoid a default until Congress acts

(Paul J. Richards / AFP/Getty Images)

The U.S. hit its debt limit again on Thursday — a whopping $19.9 trillion this time — and the Treasury Department started using accounting maneuvers to buy Congress several months to raise it to avoid a potential federal government default.

The statutory limit on borrowing has become a partisan flash point in recent years. During the Obama administration, conservatives in Congress tried unsuccessfully to include spending cuts with any debt increases.

Although analysts believe the limit will be raised this time, Republicans might not be able to count on as much Democratic support with President Trump in the White House.

And with narrow House and Senate majorities, Republicans might need that support if hard-line GOP members balk again.

Read More

Share

Trump budget revives nuke waste dump at Yucca Mountain that Obama had shelved

In his first budget, then-President Obama, with a serious nudge by then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, zeroed out funds for the nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

Now President Trump wants to revive it.

Trump has requested $120 million to kick-start the abandoned waste dump on federal land in the desert about 90 miles north of Las Vegas.

Restarting plans for Yucca Mountain has been on a wish list for years among those advocating for a more permanent repository for the nation’s spent nuclear fuel -- much of it sitting in storage at abandoned power plants around the country.

But much has changed in the 30-plus years since Nevada was first selected by Congress as the site for the nation’s nuclear waste. The site that at the time was a distant spot in the desert is now not far from the increasing sprawl of Vegas.

Reid may be retired now, but key Nevadans in Congress are fighting Trump’s plan.

“Yucca is dead,” said Republican Sen. Dean Heller, “and this reckless proposal will not revive it.”

Share
Advertisement

Pentagon would see 10% spending boost under Trump’s ‘hard-power budget’

President Donald Trump after speaking on Mar. 2 to Navy and shipyard personnel aboard the nuclear aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford at Newport News Shipbuilding in Newport News, Va.
President Donald Trump after speaking on Mar. 2 to Navy and shipyard personnel aboard the nuclear aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford at Newport News Shipbuilding in Newport News, Va.
(Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP Photo)

President Trump’s first budget proposal calls for the largest increase in Pentagon spending since President Reagan’s defense buildup in the 1980s, proposing more money to fight Islamic State and to buy stealth fighter jets, warships and new weapons.

The president’s plan asks Congress to allocate $639 billion for the military in the next fiscal year, a boost of $52 billion over current spending.

“This is a hard-power budget,” Mick Mulvaney, director of the Office of Management and Budget, told reporters Wednesday. “And that was done intentionally. The president very clearly wants to send a message to our allies and our potential adversaries that this is a strong-power administration.”

The White House also sent a letter to Congress on Thursday seeking additional money for the final five months of the current fiscal year, which includes a $25-billion increase in base defense spending.

The call for a 10% boost in military spending is unsurprising for Trump, who as a candidate vowed to increase the Pentagon budget.

The budget blueprint says the additional money is needed to strengthen the Army, rebuild the Navy, ensure a fully equipped Marine Corps and accelerate Air Force efforts to “improve tactical air fleet readiness, ensure technical superiority, and repair aging infrastructure.”

Defense hawks in the GOP, led by Sen. John McCain of Arizona, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Rep. Mac Thornberry of Texas, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, have advocated for a $640-billion base defense budget.

When combined with the special $65-billion fund that Congress gives the Pentagon to fight overseas wars, that would produce a total defense budget of $705 billion, more than Trump has proposed.

“It is clear to virtually everyone that we have cut our military too much and that it has suffered enormous damage,” Thornberry said in a statement Thursday. “Unfortunately, the administration’s budget request is not enough to repair that damage and to rebuild the military as the president has discussed.”

McCain said in a separate statement that the Trump budget proposal cannot pass the Senate.

“Moving forward, it is imperative that we work together to reach a bipartisan agreement that provides sufficient funds to rebuild the military,” he said.

The Pentagon long has complained about the effects of the so-called sequestration across-the-board spending cuts that were part of a 2011 budget deal with Congress that were intended to be so unpalatable they would never be enacted.

But they took effect in 2013 after lawmakers failed to reach a compromise to avert them. The pleas to lift the spending restraints have produced only temporary, and partial, changes.

The Pentagon’s budget fell by more than $100 billion between 2011 and 2014 as the Obama administration withdrew troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Although the U.S. military budget is the world’s largest by far, top U.S. military leaders have griped about fighting Islamic State and other terrorist groups while preparing to confront threats from Russia and China.

Share

How Trump’s budget proposal would reshape the government

The White House released its “skinny budget,” a simplified version of the administration’s federal budget proposal for the 2018 fiscal year. It differs radically from that of President Trump’s predecessor and includes large cuts in discretionary spending and additional money for defense.

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s budget cuts would free billions to build a border wall and ramp up deportations

(Guillermo Arias / AFP/Getty Images)

President Trump’s sweeping budget cuts would free billions of dollars that he proposes to spend on building a border wall and increasing deportations, two of his signature campaign pledges.

He wants to increase funding by $1.5 billion for detaining and quickly deporting immigrants found in the country illegally, according to the White House budget plan released Thursday.

On top of that, he’s requested $2.6 billion for building the “big, beautiful wall” he promised rowdy crowds during the election, making it one of the single largest projects proposed in his budget for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.

That also accounts for 90% of the total increase in funding Trump is seeking for the Department of Homeland Security. Trump wants to increase the agency’s budget by $2.8 billion, or 6.8%, over the current year.

To ramp up the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration, Trump requested $314 million to hire and train 1,000 new deportation officers and 500 Border Patrol agents next year. Those hires would be a first step toward bringing on board 15,000 more officers and agents Trump demanded in his immigration orders in January.

The cash for the wall would be on top of an additional $1.5 billion the White House wants from Congress this year, bringing Trump’s total funding request to $4.1 billion for the wall so far, a fraction of the estimated $12 billion-$38 billion cost for the project.

The budget request did not include a way for Mexico to pay for constructing the barrier, as Trump pledged during the campaign.

The boost in border spending would be paid for in part by cuts to some transportation security programs and disaster preparedness grants.

Government spending on the Transportation Security Administration would be cut by $80 million, including reductions in funding for teams that use bomb-sniffing dogs, bag searches, and other techniques to conduct spot checks at train and bus stations, ports and other transportation hubs.

The cuts to TSA would be offset in part by raising airline passenger fees.

Trump’s budget also cuts $667 million state and local grants managed by the Federal Emergency Management Administration and requires state and local authorities to match 25% of funding for all grants geared toward preparing for emergencies and disasters.

The budget would add $1.5 billion in cybersecurity funding to help defend federal computers from hackers and protect the networks that run important parts of U.S. infrastructure such as the electrical grid and water supply.

Trump also asked for $15 million to jump-start a program to require all U.S. employers to check every new hire against a federal work authorization database called E-Verify.

Share

The Environmental Protection Agency is targeted for some of Trump’s most brutal cuts

(Charlie Riedel / Associated Press)

President Trump’s budget envisions a rapid retreat from the aggressive federal environmental protection policies developed over the last four decades, to be replaced with hollowed-out enforcement and wholesale elimination of some signature federal conservation efforts.

The Environmental Protection Agency, which accounts for just a small percentage of federal spending, is targeted for some of Trump’s most brutal cuts. Its budget would be shrunk by nearly a third, and its workforce would drop from 15,000 to 12,000.

Communities looking for help cleaning up the national backlog of contaminated properties would find it considerably more difficult as the Hazardous Substance Superfund Account would be slashed by $330 million, a cut of roughly 30%.

Spending on enforcement efforts aimed largely at finding and stopping polluters would also be cut by nearly a third.

The agency’s research arm, which develops the science that underpins environmental health and safety efforts on the federal level, would be shrunk by nearly half.

The federal money Washington has been providing states and Native American tribes to assist with their efforts to clean their water and air, limit exposure to pesticides and toxic substances, and cleanup waste would drop more than 40%.

Large scale cleanup and restoration efforts on iconic waterways such as San Francisco Bay, the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay would be scrapped entirely.

“The budget returns the responsibility for funding local environmental efforts and programs to state and local entities, allowing EPA to focus on its highest national priorities,” the budget blueprint says.

In most cases, state and local governments don’t have the funds to pay for those efforts, which cost a total of $427 million annually.

Another 50 smaller environmental programs are also targeted for outright elimination, including infrastructure assistance on the Mexican border, which has been crucial in keeping sewage from flowing into San Diego’s waters and has provided 569,800 homes with access to wastewater treatment.

The 25-year-old Energy Star efficiency program, through which the federal government has partnered with consumers and private firms to save more than $230 billion on utility bills, would also be among the programs eliminated outright.

The budget would also make good on Trump’s promise to retreat from climate action. It discontinues all funding for the landmark Clean Power Plan, which aimed to cut power plant emissions, as well as the international climate change programs and climate research.

No president in recent decades has proposed cuts to environmental protection this deep, and even the Republicans who control Congress are chafing at the prospect of so severely gutting the EPA.

Advocacy groups have put them on notice that embracing the plan is a path to political peril.

“Trump’s budget proposal would effectively cripple the EPA’s ability to do anything on behalf of public health and environmental protection, and leave local and state governments on their own in fighting climate change, water contamination, air pollution from toxic industries,” said Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group.

“This is not a philosophical debate about regulations or “deconstructing government,” but about our health, our safety and the world we’re going to leave to our children,” he said.

Share
Advertisement

House panel approves troubled GOP healthcare bill

The House Budget Committee on Thursday voted to advance the troubled Republican healthcare bill.

Three conservative GOP lawmakers joined the panel’s Democrats in voting against the measure. That was one vote shy of what would have been needed to deal a damaging and embarrassing — but not fatal — setback to the party’s showpiece legislation.

Even so, the tally underscored the challenge Republican leaders face in trying to round up votes for the measure. They hope to bring it to the full House next week.

The committee is planning to debate a slew of nonbinding proposals suggesting changes in the measure. They may provide clues about the types of changes the legislation will need for it to win House approval.

Share

Here are the agencies Trump’s budget would stop funding

  • African Development Foundation
  • Appalachian Regional Commission
  • Chemical Safety Board
  • Corporation for National and Community Service
  • Corporation for Public Broadcasting
  • Delta Regional Authority
  • Denali Commission
  • Institute of Museum and Library Services
  • Inter-American Foundation
  • U.S. Trade and Development Agency
  • Legal Services Corporation
  • National Endowment for the Arts
  • National Endowment for the Humanities
  • Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
  • Northern Border Regional Commission
  • Overseas Private Investment Corporation
  • United States Institute of Peace
  • United States Interagency Council on Homelessness
  • Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Share
Advertisement

Trump budget slashes State Department, but top U.S. diplomat doesn’t object

In President Trump’s new proposed budget, the State Department and its foreign-aid programs take a huge cut, one that several experts have said will be devastating for global American diplomacy.

But the head of the department, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, seemed unconcerned Thursday.

“The level of spending that the State Department has been undertaking in the past — and particularly in this past year — is simply not sustainable,” Tillerson said at a brief news conference in Tokyo, the first stop on a six-day, three-nation tour of Asia.

He said the department’s budget last year was “historically high,” in part because of conflicts around the globe where U.S. spending, in addition to military money, includes humanitarian aid and so-called “nation-building” assistance, as well as disaster relief in other parts of the world.

Tillerson, for most of his career a top executive at Exxon Mobil, said he expected more aid from other countries would help to cover the shortfall as the U.S. recedes, and he said he was “confident” the State Department would continue to fulfill its mission.

“We are going to be undertaking a very comprehensive examination of how programs are executed, a very comprehensive examination of how we are structured, and I’m confident that with the input of the men and women of the State Department, we are going to construct a way forward that allows us to be much more effective, much more efficient and be able to do a lot with fewer dollars,” Tillerson said.

“We understand the challenge,” the former corporate CEO with no experience in diplomacy said. “I take the challenge that the president has given us on willingly and with great expectation that with everyone in the State Department’s assistance, we’re going to deliver a much better result for the American people in the future.”

It was the first time Tillerson had answered questions publicly from reporters since assuming office more than six weeks ago.

Under the Trump proposal, the budget for the State Department and the Agency for International Development would be cut by 28%, percentage-wise a reduction second only to the Environmental Protection Agency. The Pentagon and other “hard power” agencies receive large increases in funding.

Advocacy groups immediately expressed outrage.

Michael J. Abramowitz, president of Freedom House, which advocates for press freedom and democracy around the globe, said the slashing “would make the world a more dangerous place.”

“Foreign assistance and diplomacy are critical to defend democratic values and U.S. interests at a time when both are increasingly under threat,” he said. “When the United States pulls back, authoritarian powers that oppose our values, and interests will step in.”

Share

Trump budget could hit California especially hard

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

President Trump’s budget would deliver a painful financial blow to California, with the potential to push a state that has struggled for years to keep its books balanced back into the kind of red ink that consumed it after the housing market collapse a decade ago.

The only solace state and local officials are taking in a White House budget plan that would cut most federal departments by about 10% to 12% is that even Republicans in Congress probably will find all the cuts on the table too hard to stomach.

The president’s blueprint would disrupt almost everything California does, in some cases quite brutally.

Millions would lose health insurance, police forces would be cut back, schools would face layoffs and cleanup of contaminated lands would be put off. Some of the state’s signature initiatives for the poor — such as the massive In-Home Supportive Services program, which provides care for the elderly and disabled, and the CalFresh food stamp program, which serves hundreds of thousands of needy residents — probably would have to be scaled back dramatically.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump budget cuts IRS funding despite Mnuchin’s staffing concerns

(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

President Trump’s initial spending plan calls for a $239-million cut to the Internal Revenue Service despite Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s public support for boosting the staff of the beleaguered tax-collection agency.

The administration’s budget blueprint released Wednesday said the 2018 funding “preserves key operations” of the IRS. But the plan calls for “diverting resources from antiquated operations that are still reliant on paper-based review in the era of electronic tax filing” to produce “significant savings.”

The proposed 2018 spending would be about 2% less than this year’s $11.2 billion, a modest reduction given earlier reports of a possible 14% cut.

The IRS, never popular among Republicans, has been in the party’s cross-hairs after the 2015 controversy over the agency’s handling of applications for tax-exempt status by conservative tea party groups.

Trump’s proposed 2018 cut is similar to a $236-million spending reduction approved by the House last summer.

During his Senate confirmation hearing, Mnuchin said he was concerned about low staffing levels at the IRS and wanted to increase hiring.

“I was particularly surprised ... that the IRS headcount has gone down quite dramatically, almost 30% over the last number of years,” he said at the Jan. 19 hearing. “I don’t think there’s any other government agency that has gone down 30%, and especially for an agency that collects revenues, this is something that I’m concerned about.”

Some lawmakers have complained that low staffing levels have made it difficult for the IRS to enforce tax laws and make sure all Americans are paying what they owe.

Despite a federal hiring freeze, Mnuchin said he thought he could make the case to Trump that adding more IRS workers would pay for itself.

“I can assure you that the president-elect understands the concept of when we add people, we make money,” Mnuchin said at the hearing the day before Trump’s inauguration. “He’ll get that completely. That’s a very quick conversation with Donald Trump.”

Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) called Trump’s budget “a step backward for the Internal Revenue Service and the American people it serves.”

“Congressional Republicans have been saying they want the IRS to be more focused on customer service, but slashing funding for the agency by hundreds of millions of dollars would result in the exact opposite outcome,” said Neal, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee.

Overall, Treasury’s budget would be reduced by 4.4% in 2018, one of the smallest cuts among Cabinet departments.

11:25 a.m.: This article has been updated with comments from Rep. Richard Neal.

Share

Trump’s first budget offers a glimpse of the administration’s ultimate vision

President Trump’s chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, asserted a bold goal recently, sounding as if he were pitching a plot of an action thriller: “deconstruction of the administrative state.”

Thursday, as Trump released his first budget, Americans got a wider glimpse of what exactly that means.

This earliest version of Trump’s spending plan is far from final and will be short of many specifics, but it promises to lay out a vision for a stripped-down federal government that is heavy on defense and far lighter on employees assigned to protect the environment, regulate business, work with foreign governments and provide assistance on things such as housing and heating oil that many at the state and local level have long taken for granted.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Education: Trump wants more money for vouchers, cuts elsewhere

The Trump administration wants to spend $1.4 billion to expand vouchers, including for private schools, and would pay for it with deep cuts to federal aid to public schools, according to budget documents released Thursday.

Voucher programs, a favorite cause of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, provide tax funds to families that they can use to pay for tuition at private or religious schools.

The $1.4 billion in the budget for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 would be the down payment on a program that would be “ramping up to an annual total of $20 billion,” the budget says.

Opponents of voucher programs say they would drain funds from public schools. The administration’s budget provides some support for that fear -- it would cut existing education programs by about 16% to reduce the department’s overall budget while absorbing the new program.

The full $20-billion annual program would be roughly a third of existing federal aid to education if it were enacted.

Of the proposed new $1.4 billion, about $250 million would go to private schools, $168 million would go to new charter schools, which are independent schools within the public system, and the rest to expand programs that allow parents to send their children to public schools outside their local attendance areas.

The budget’s cuts would hit a wide variety of federal school-aid programs, including before- and after-school programs and an Obama administration program that provides grants to school districts for improvements in teaching.

Share

Trump budget envisions big cuts for health and human services

President Trump’s first budget blueprint envisions a major retrenchment for the Department of Health and Human Services, calling for a nearly 18% cut next year, or $15.1 billion, for programs that are subject to annual spending bills.

Among the biggest targets are the National Institutes of Health, which would see their budgets cut by $5.8 billion to $25.9 billion. The budget plan says this would “help focus resources on the highest priority research.”

Trump would also cut $4.2 billion in grants the federal government provides to communities to assist poor people, including the decades-old Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps low-income Americans with their heating bills.

And the budget would slash more than $400 million in training programs for nurses and other health professionals, which the Trump administration said are ineffective.

The president’s budget is only an outline, as Congress has the authority to set government spending levels and appropriate money. And this budget is less detailed than most, including only highlights selected by the administration

But Trump’s first spending blueprint is an early road map of the new president’s plans to scale back government.

The mammoth health agency – the largest in government – includes the huge Medicare and Medicaid programs as well as National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The current budget does not deal with Medicare, Medicaid and other major entitlement programs, which the administration has said will be covered by separate proposals. The two healthcare entitlement programs consume the majority of the heath agency’s budget.

Trump has in the past said he would protect these programs, along with Social Security, but he and his administration are heavily supporting the current House plan to roll back the Affordable Care Act, which envisions nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts over the next decade.

Share
Advertisement

Trump vows to appeal ruling against his revised travel ban -- or perhaps resurrect the first ban

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

President Trump said Wednesday that he would fight “to the Supreme Court” a new judicial ruling blocking his revised immigration and travel ban — and then, adding confusion, suggested he might proceed in the courts with the more stringent ban he first signed.

Trump’s remarks before a raucous crowd of supporters in Nashville came little more than an hour after a federal judge in Hawaii put on hold the second ban, which was scheduled to take effect just after midnight.

Judges in several states had been asked to block Trump’s executive order, which was aimed at people from six countries that are predominantly Muslim.

Officials in Hawaii had argued that residents there would be harmed by separation from their families and the effect of the ban on recruitment of workers and the important tourism industry.

The first order, which went into effect one week into Trump’s presidency, caused international confusion and prompted protests at airports across the United States.

“A judge has just blocked our executive order on travel and refugees coming into our country from certain countries,” Trump told the crowd in Nashville, which reacted with boos. “The order he blocked was a watered-down version of the first order that was also blocked by another judge and should have never been blocked to start with.”

Trump said both actions represented “an unprecedented judicial overreach” that threatened “the safety of our nation.” He read his audience the legal statute giving a president the power to curb the detrimental “entry of any aliens or any class of aliens.”

“You don’t think this was done by a judge for political reasons do you, no?” he asked his supporters, a wry look on his face. “This ruling makes us look weak, which by the way we no longer are, believe me.... We’re going to fight this terrible ruling. We’re going to take our case as far as it needs to go, including all the way up to the Supreme Court.”

As Trump noted, the second ban was tailored to get around the judicial criticisms of the first measure, which was to be rescinded when the second one went into effect.

More openly than he has before, the president indicated his displeasure at having to concoct the new version at all.

“I wasn’t thrilled, but the lawyers all said, ‘Let’s tailor it,’” Trump said, adding, “I think we ought to go back to the first one and go all the way, which is what I wanted to do in the first place.”

Share

Federal judge in Hawaii puts revised Trump travel ban on hold

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

A federal judge in Hawaii has blocked the major provisions of President Trump’s revised ban on refugee resettlement and travel from six predominantly Muslim countries, hours before the executive order was to take effect.

The decision has at least temporarily struck down the Trump administration’s attempt to pause all refugee resettlement for 120 days and block citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the U.S.

U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson said his ruling applies nationwide. It appears to set the stage for a battle in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which last month upheld a ruling blocking Trump’s original travel ban.

The case, brought by Hawaii Atty. Gen. Douglas Chin, argued that the latest travel ban would have “profound” and “detrimental” effects on residents, businesses and universities. In its complaint, the state of Hawaii also said the executive order discriminates against Muslims and violates the equal protection and due process guarantees of the U.S. Constitution.

Lawyers for the state also argued that the order illegally discriminates based upon nationality.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Our readers are split on GOP healthcare plan

For the past several weeks, we’ve been asking people to grade President Trump on his performance and share their stories of how his presidency has affected them personally. The answers have varied greatly.

Then last week, House Republicans released their plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, and we received an overwhelming number of responses on the issue. Here’s what some of you had to say:

The healthcare system in the United States has many negatives that derive from it. It needs reform and President Trump has held to his promise and done so. Like it or not, Trump has followed through on almost everything on his platform in only 50 days!

— Jack Gangbar, an independent from Washington

The ‘new, better’ healthcare plan. Ha. I’m 58, I make $800 a month, my insurance through the ACA is a little over $400 a month. Under your plan, I fall into that age category where ‘good luck’ is the GOP plan. How about the same insurance we pay for Congress is offered to us??’

— Jill Phelps DeCarolis, an independent from Florida

The healthcare replacement is terrifying for people like me — self-employed with a pre-existing condition. I’m honestly thinking of closing my business I love to find a ‘real job’ just to make sure I’m OK in the future.

— PJ Bonnet, an independent from Colorado

Read More

Share

Senate confirms Trump’s pick for national intelligence chief

Former Sen. Dan Coats walks through the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington on March 10.
(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

The Senate on Wednesday confirmed President Trump’s choice for national intelligence director.

Senators voted 85-12 to approve the nomination of former Indiana Sen. Dan Coats, making him the fifth person to hold the post created after the 9/11 attacks.

Coats replaces James R. Clapper, who retired at the end of the Obama administration.

As the Trump administration’s top intelligence official, Coats will oversee 16 other intelligence agencies that have been harshly criticized at times by Trump for past failures and their assessment that Russia interfered in the election to help him win.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Coats will be an effective director and also would restore credibility to the U.S. intelligence community.

Share
Advertisement

Sexual assaults increase at U.S. military academies, Pentagon reports

(Kathleen Lange / Associated Press)

Sexual assaults increased at two of the three U.S. military academies last year, and surveys show sexual misconduct reports increased at all three, the Pentagon said Wednesday.

The new data represent the latest setback for the military in its efforts to reduce sexual misconduct. The services have struggled to explain a series of recent problems, including disclosure of Marines and other military members sharing nude photos of servicewomen on websites and social media.

Misconduct reports increased at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., and the U.S. Air Force Academy near Colorado Springs, Co., according to data from anonymous surveys the Pentagon conducts.

The study showed that assaults declined at the Air Force Academy, but increased at the two other schools.

The Pentagon has been under intense pressure for years to show progress in preventing and prosecuting sex crimes. While there have been a series of programs designed to halt the behavior, scandals continue to plague the military.

Lawmakers from both parties have rebuked the Pentagon, and some have argued that military commanders should be stripped of the power to decide whether or not to prosecute and punish offenders.

Pentagon officials have pushed back and established measures that they said were intended to ensure victims could lodge complaints without fear they would be ostracized in their units, their careers would suffer or their attackers would be protected by the chain of command.

Share

Key House members say they’ve seen no evidence to back Trump’s claim that Obama wiretapped him

The leaders of the House Intelligence Committee said Wednesday that they had seen no evidence to support President Trump’s claim that he was wiretapped by President Obama before he took office.

“We don’t have any evidence that that took place,” Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said at a press conference with Rep. Adam Schiff, (D-Burbank) , the top Democrat on the panel.

“I have seen no evidence that supports the claim that President Trump made,” Schiff said.

In a series of tweets on March 4, President Trump accused President Obama of wiretapping him and he urged Congress to investigate the claim.

FBI Director James Comey will testify before the committee at a public hearing Monday and will be questioned about Trump’s claim, the lawmakers said.

The Intelligence panel is conducting an investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential campaign, including whether the FBI and intelligence agencies collected information into contacts between Trump associates and Russian government officials.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, (R-S.C.) on Wednesday threatened to subpoena Comey for information about whether the agency received a federal warrant to conduct surveillance on Trump, his campaign or his Manhattan headquarters.

If the FBI does not provide an answer, Graham said, Congress would need to establish a special House-Senate committee to examine Russia’s influence on the 2016 election.

Share
Advertisement

Maryland federal judge says he could rule Wednesday on challenge to stop Trump’s revised travel ban

(Jae C. Hong / AP)

A federal judge in Maryland said Wednesday he would “hopefully today, but not necessarily” rule on a legal bid to temporarily block President Trump’s retooled travel ban.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs, a group of refugee and immigrant organizations and their clients, argued that the order, scheduled to take effect just after midnight Eastern time Thursday, was an attempt to ban Muslims from the United States.

Government lawyers insisted that Trump was acting within the scope of his executive powers in matters of national security.

Judge Theodore D. Chuang closely questioned both sides during nearly two hours of arguments. He pushed the government to explain how the reworked measure would address previous legal challenges. A federal judge in Seattle last month brought a national halt to implementation of the first travel order, and his decision was upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Chuang also questioned the plaintiffs: “The government says the executive order is to protect the public. On what basis can I overrule that?”

The case was filed by the International Refugee Assistance Project on behalf of immigrants, including those from Syria, Somalia and Iran whose spouses and families are in the middle of the visa approval process to come to the U.S. The suit argues that the new executive order, which pauses refugee resettlement and travel from nationals of six Muslim-majority countries, will prevent family reunification and discriminates on the basis of religion.

The intent of both executive orders, Trump administration officials say, is to screen out visitors from countries affected by terrorism until more stringent vetting measures can be put in place.

The new order has been stripped of many provisions that federal judges across the country found troublesome in the first one. The order applies to citizens of Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Syria and Yemen (it does not include Iraq, as the previous order did). It no longer gives preference to religious minorities in refugee admissions. And it exempts several categories of people from its restrictions, including dual nationals who have U.S. citizenship, green card holders and people who already hold valid visas.

Two additional federal cases challenging the revised travel ban also will be heard Wednesday in federal courts in Hawaii and Washington state.

Share

Another piece of Trump’s taxes revealed: 2005 documents show he made $150 million

President Trump paid about $36.5 million in federal income taxes in 2005 on $150 million in income, an effective rate of 24%, according to a leaked portion of a return given to Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter David Cay Johnston.

The revelation Tuesday amounted to a rare glimpse of Trump’s tax filings. It provided a spectacle, heavily promoted on MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” which used the release of the new information to create maximum suspense and promote speculation about the reasons behind Trump’s unwillingness to release his returns.

The New York Times previously reported on portions of Trump’s 1995 returns, which showed that he took a write-down of nearly $1 billion.

Trump defied modern presidential expectations in denying to release his returns, blaming the failure to disclose on an audit. He had said he would furnish the returns when the audit was complete, but presidents are automatically audited, suggesting he will never release them.

Trump’s tax bill would have been much smaller — $5.3 million, or less than 4% — if he were not forced under tax law to pay the so-called alternative minimum tax.

Johnston, an expert on the tax code, pointed out on Maddow’s show that Trump supports eliminating the alternative minimum tax and noted that his tax rate would have been equal to someone earning less than $33,000 a year without it.

Trump’s effective rate of about 24% still fell short of the top bracket of 35% paid on regular income that year and 28% on the alternative minimum. Trump took a write-down of $103 million.

A White House official confirmed the authenticity of Johnston’s document in a statement, though that statement included Trump’s payroll taxes to bring the total paid to $38 million.

The White House statement called Maddow “desperate for ratings” and accused her of violating a law by publishing the documents.

“Before being elected president, Mr. Trump was one of the most successful businessmen in the world with a responsibility to his company, his family and his employees to pay no more tax than legally required,” the statement read in part.

“That being said, Mr. Trump paid $38 million even after taking into account large scale depreciation for construction, on an income of more than $150 million, as well as paying tens of millions of dollars in other taxes such as sales and excise taxes and employment taxes and this illegally published return proves just that....

“The dishonest media can continue to make this part of their agenda, while the president will focus on his, which includes tax reform that will benefit all Americans.”

Share
Advertisement

White House says Trump paid $38 million in taxes on $150 million in income in 2005, calls tax form disclosure ‘illegal’

As MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow prepared to air President Trump’s tax returns from 2005, the White House pushed back in advance, saying that publishing the returns was illegal and a stunt to get ratings.

“You know you are desperate for ratings when you are willing to violate the law to push a story about two pages of tax returns from over a decade ago,” a White House official said in a statement.

Trump paid $38 million in tax on an income of more than $150 million in 2005, the White House official acknowledged, “even after taking into account large scale depreciation for construction.”

“Before being elected president, Mr. Trump was one of the most successful businessmen in the world with a responsibility to his company, his family and his employees to pay no more tax than legally required,” the White House official said.

Maddow tweeted earlier Tuesday that her show would air Trump’s 2005 1040 tax form. Trump biographer David Cay Johnston said that he would be appearing on Maddow’s show to break the news.

Trump is the first president in decades not to release his tax returns. He has previously said he would not release the documents while he is being audited by the Internal Revenue Service, but being under audit does not preclude someone from releasing the forms.

Share

Rachel Maddow says she’s revealing Trump’s tax returns on TV tonight

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow announced on Twitter that she has President Trump’s tax returns.

Then she followed up with what, specifically, she has: his IRS Form 1040 from 2005.

Trump has been under pressure to provide his tax returns since early in his candidacy. Though candidates aren’t obligated by law to make their tax returns public, it has been a tradition to do so since the 1970s.

On the campaign trail, Trump said he could not release his returns because he was being audited. (The IRS said that an audit does not preclude someone from releasing their tax returns.) Once he was elected, he said he would not be releasing them, as all recent presidents have done.

Journalist and author David Cay Johnston tweeted to say he’d be joining Maddow to break the story.

UPDATE, 7:12 p.m.: Maddow’s report confirmed the numbers the White House preemptively released shortly before her segment. Donald Trump paid $38 million in taxes on $150 million in income in 2005. The White House statement called Maddow’s disclosure illegal, a claim she pushed back against on air: “The 1st Amendment gives us the right to publish this return.”

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s nominee for top trade post defends president, sees ‘new paradigm’ in dealing with China

Stacks of containers are unloaded at the Port of Los Angeles last year.
Stacks of containers are unloaded at the Port of Los Angeles last year.
(Christina House / For The Times)

President Trump’s nominee to be the top U.S. trade negotiator, getting a hearing before the Senate after a long delay, passionately defended Trump against concerns that his business interests abroad could compromise America’s trade objectives.

Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s choice to be the U.S. trade representative, is well regarded by many on both sides of the aisle as a knowledgeable, aggressive and seasoned trade negotiator with deep experience in the private sector and government.

He was introduced at the hearing Tuesday as a “bulldog” by Bob Dole, the respected Republican former senator for whom Lighthizer once worked, and there was every indication that he will eventually win full Senate confirmation.

Yet the hearing made clear the tough job Lighthizer would inherit. It exposed differences within the Republican Party on the Trump administration’s trade approach as well as lingering concerns about Trump’s refusal to liquidate his private businesses around the world and the potential conflict of interest that his holdings might present.

Read More

Share

Trump spurs sharp jump in optimism of top U.S. CEOs, survey finds

Jamie Dimon, left, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase & Co., and President Trump appear before a White House forum on Feb. 3.
(Michael Reynolds / EPA)

The nation’s top chief executives like what they’re seeing and hearing from President Trump and his fellow Republicans, according to survey results released Tuesday by the Business Roundtable.

The economic expectations of the heads of the nation’s largest companies jumped in the first quarter by the most in more than seven years amid optimism about corporate tax cuts, reduced regulations and a boost in infrastructure spending promised by Trump and congressional leaders, the trade group found.

“I am enthusiastic about the opportunity to enact a meaningful pro-growth agenda that will benefit all Americans,” said Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and this year’s chairman of the Business Roundtable.

“As these results confirm, business confidence and optimism have increased dramatically,” he said.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump administration shifts away from ‘insurance for everybody’

The White House shifted away from President Trump’s stated goal of providing “insurance for everybody” on Tuesday, instead promising that the House GOP plan to repeal and replace Obamacare offers “more people the option to get healthcare.”

The altered tone from Press Secretary Sean Spicer comes as the bill faces new scrutiny, including a report Monday from the independent Congressional Budget Office concluding that 24 million fewer people will have insurance by 2026 under the GOP plan.

Spicer took issue with that analysis, in part by insisting that it failed to take into account separate actions Republicans say they plan to take after their initial bill.

Spicer called the bill to repeal and replace Obamacare the first of three prongs in the administration’s strategy, but he declined to specify what actions will take place in the next two prongs, referring questions to House Speaker Paul Ryan.

Democrats and some Republicans have cast doubt on whether Congress can pass a second bill (the proposed third prong, after the first bill would become law and the regulations to enforce it would be enacted), given that doing so would require support from Democrats.

Even as the administration has often deferred to Ryan and has declined to label the proposed bill as “Trumpcare,” Spicer said Trump is proud of the bill.

Share

Though a target of potshots, the CBO is widely seen as impartial and credible

Congressional Budget Office Director Keith Hall.
(Michael Reynolds / EPA)

Even before the Congressional Budget Office released its cost estimates Monday on the House proposal to overhaul Obamacare, the Trump administration and GOP lawmakers were trying to discredit the much-anticipated report, or CBO score, as it’s familiarly called.

“Really been meaningless,” said Gary Cohn, Trump’s top economic advisor. “Consistently inconsistent,” added Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.). “A red herring,” chimed Rep. Larry Buschon (R-Ind.).

Never mind that the CBO works for Congress and that its director, Keith Hall, was appointed by their own party leaders in the House and Senate in 2015.

Here’s a closer look at the CBO:

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Justice Department asks for more time to provide evidence of Trump’s wiretapping claim

(Mark Lennihan / Associated Press)

Facing a Monday deadline, the Justice Department asked lawmakers for more time to provide evidence backing up President Trump’s unproven assertion that his predecessor wiretapped his New York skyscraper during the election. The request came as the White House appeared to soften Trump’s explosive allegation.

The House Intelligence Committee said it would give the Justice Department until March 20 to comply with the evidence request. That’s the date of the committee’s first open hearing on the investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and possible contacts between Trump associates and Russia.

A spokesman for the committee’s Republican chairman said that if the Justice Department didn’t meet the new deadline, the panel might use its subpoena power to gather information.

Trump’s assertions have put his administration in a bind. Current and former administration officials have been unable to provide any evidence of the Obama administration wiretapping Trump Tower, yet the president’s aides have been reluctant to publicly contradict their boss.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer tried to clarify Trump’s comments Monday, saying the president wasn’t using the word “wiretapping” literally, noting that Trump had put the term in quotation marks.

“The president used the word ‘wiretap’ in quotes to mean broadly surveillance and other activities,” Spicer said. He also suggested Trump wasn’t accusing former President Obama specifically, but instead referring to the actions of his administration.

Trump himself has not commented on the matter since his March 4 tweets.

Share

White House ‘strenuously’ disagrees with report showing millions would lose coverage under GOP health plan

The White House said it “strenuously” disagreed with a nonpartisan government analysis showing 14 million people would lose healthcare coverage by 2018 under a GOP health plan, striking a different tone from House Speaker Paul D. Ryan’s response to the report.

“It’s just not believable,” Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price said Monday outside the White House, standing by Mick Mulvaney, the White House budget director.

“We believe our plan will cover more individuals at a lower cost,” Price added.

The Congressional Budget Office released the report Monday afternoon showing the numbers of Americans without health insurance under the plan would rise by 14 million next year and increase by 24 million by 2026. The plan would reduce the deficit by $337 billion over the next decade, according to the analysis.

The report is expected to have a major effect on the debate over the bill on Capitol Hill.

The Trump administration has been laying the groundwork for disputing the CBO report for days, pointing to past predictions for coverage under Obamacare that turned out wrong to make the case that the office, which Trump has cited in the past, is unreliable.

But Ryan sounded a different message after Monday’s report was released, pointing to aspects that he liked.

The report “confirms that the American Health Care Act will lower premiums and improve access to quality, affordable care,” he said in a statement. “CBO also finds that this legislation will provide massive tax relief, dramatically reduce the deficit and make the most fundamental entitlement reform in more than a generation.”

Price said the report’s conclusions that millions of Americans would lose healthcare ignore other aspects of the GOP plan that would depend on administrative actions and measures they are planning to introduce in Congress.

Share
Advertisement

USC professor named first African American president of a Fed regional bank

USC professor Raphael Bostic on Monday was named president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, becoming the first African American to lead one of the Fed’s 12 regional banks.

The choice of Bostic, director of the Bedrosian Center on Governance at USC’s Sol Price School of Public Policy, comes after members of Congress and advocacy groups have sharply criticized the central bank for a lack of diversity.

They had pushed for a diverse choice to head the Atlanta region, in part because it has a large African American population.

Read More

Share

Kellyanne Conway on surveillance: We have ‘microwaves that turn into cameras’

Last week, the White House tried to avoid giving further life to President Trump’s stunning and unsupported allegation that President Obama ordered surveillance of him last year.

And when Wikileaks posted new documents claiming to expose surveillance tactics available to the intelligence community, the White House steadfastly refused to confirm their validity, in keeping with longstanding U.S. policy about keeping spying operations secret.

In the space of a few seconds, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway appeared to undo both administration objectives.

In an interview in her New Jersey home with the local newspaper, the Bergen Record, Conway was asked about whether Trump’s wiretap claim distracted from White House efforts to sell his agenda.

“There are many ways to surveil each other now, unfortunately,” she said. “There was an article this week that talked about how you can surveil someone through their phones, certainly through their television sets, any number of different ways. And microwaves that turn into cameras, et cetera. So we know that that is just a fact of modern life.”

Put another way, Conway gave credence to the documents published by Wikileaks in an attempt to back up the president’s claim.

Conway attempted to defend herself, saying her comments were being misconstrued.

On CNN, she said she had been asked about “surveillance generally.” But the Bergen Record columnist’s question was more specific: “Do you know whether Trump Tower was wiretapped?”

So Conway went another direction on CNN.

“I’m not in the job of having evidence,” she said. “That’s what investigations are for.”

As the comments made the rounds on morning television, Trump appeared to back up Conway, his top aide and former campaign manager, in a tweet.

Share
Advertisement

Businesses say they need the Export-Import Bank to sell goods abroad. Will Trump fix it?

Steve Wilburn, chairman and CEO of FirmGreen Inc., a renewable energy company in Newport Beach.
(Rick Loomis / Los Angeles Times)

FirmGreen Inc., a Newport Beach renewable energy company, is preparing to start construction on a solar project in the Philippines. The job could have yielded about $180 million in contracts to U.S. manufacturers to supply most of the equipment — but the work most likely will be done in China instead.

When FirmGreen was unable to get the necessary loan guarantees from the U.S. Export-Import Bank, it had to seek them from China’s version of the federal export-credit agency, Chief Executive Steve Wilburn said. And that financial assistance is available only if FirmGreen promises to manufacture the project’s equipment in China.

“I’m a patriot. I’m a former Marine, a 100% disabled Vietnam vet, and for me to have to go to China and other overseas sources for manufacturing goes against my grain,” Wilburn said. “But I have to survive as a businessman.”

Now exporters such as Wilburn, along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, are urging President Trump to help fix the Ex-Im Bank — a move they said would boost the White House’s efforts to increase U.S. manufacturing jobs and reduce the nation’s trade deficit.

Two administration Cabinet secretaries have indicated that they support the bank. But it’s unclear whether Trump will take action, adding to the uncertainty that has plagued the controversial agency in recent years.

Read More

Share

Woman confronts Spicer at Washington, D.C., Apple store, tweets video

A woman has posted video of herself pointedly questioning White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer while he was out shopping at a local Apple store.

Shree Chauhan has identified herself as the video’s poster to Britain’s Daily Mail. She’s an Indian American who was born in New York. She put up video of the encounter on Twitter on Saturday.

In it, Chauhan asks Spicer how it feels to work for “a fascist” and “what can you tell me about Russia.” Spicer smiles through the encounter and repeatedly says “thank you” to Chauhan. At one point, he tells her, “such a great country that allows you to be here.”

Chauhan says in a blog post that Spicer’s comment was racially motivated.

The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Share
Advertisement

Health secretary promises ‘nobody will be worse off financially’ under Obamacare replacement

Americans will not suffer economic harm as a result of the Republican-backed plan to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system, President Trump’s secretary of Health and Human Services said.

“I firmly believe that nobody will be worse off financially” under the measure being weighed by the House of Representatives, Secretary Tom Price said in an interview that aired Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Yet a Times analysis showed that the proposal would most hurt Trump’s own backers — lower-income, older voters in conservative, rural parts of the country.

Heading into a week in which the Congressional Budget Office is expected to unveil its assessment of the GOP plan’s impact, the administration again portrayed the Affordable Care Act, colloquially known as Obamacare, as a failure.

“That was a broken system,” said Trump’s budget director, Mick Mulvaney. Speaking on ABC’s “This Week,” he predicted the Republican replacement would be “wildly successful.”

Critics sharply disagreed.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), interviewed on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” called the GOP plan “an absolute disaster” intended to create “a massive shift of wealth from working people and middle-income people to the very richest people in this country.”

The Republican leadership sought to dilute the impact of the coming budget office forecast, saying it had been off base in the past in predicting the numbers of people who would be able to obtain insurance.

“The one thing I’m certain will happen is the CBO will say, ‘Well, gosh. Not as many people will get coverage,’” said House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), also interviewed on CBS. “You know why? Because this isn’t a government mandate. This is not the government making you buy what we say you should buy.”

But even some Trump supporters reiterated doubts about the House version of the healthcare bill. Chief among them was Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who urged House colleagues not to “walk the plank” for a bill that would not pass muster in the Senate.

“The bill can probably be fixed, but it’s going to take a lot of carpentry on that framework,” he said on ABC.

Moreover, conservatives in the Senate believe the Republican plan as it stands does not go far enough to distinguish itself from the Affordable Care Act, said one vocal critic, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

On CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Paul repeated his forceful earlier criticism, calling the GOP measure “Obamacare lite” and adding, “We are not going to vote for it.”

10:34 a.m.: This story was updated with comment from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

Share

Congressional calls mount for Trump to back up unsubstantiated wiretap claim

Congressional pressure – some from the Republican side of the aisle – is mounting over President Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that he was wiretapped on President Obama’s orders during last year’s presidential campaign.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said it was incumbent on Trump to “clear this up.”

“The president has one of two choices: Either retract, or provide the information that the American people deserve,” McCain said in an interview that aired Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“All he has to do is pick up the phone, call the director of the CIA, director of national intelligence, and say, ‘OK, what happened?’” McCain said. “Because they certainly should know whether the former president of the United States was wiretapping Trump Tower.”

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank) said the veracity of Trump’s tweet eight days ago accusing Obama needed to be aired in an open hearing. Obama, through a spokesman, denied ordering Trump’s phones wiretapped, which would have been illegal.

Schiff said such a serious charge, made amid ongoing investigations over ties between Trump aides and Russia, should be either publicly supported with evidence or withdrawn.

“Either the president quite deliberately, for some reason, made up the charge, or perhaps more disturbing, the president really believes this,” Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), interviewed on the same program, said an “air of distrust” had grown around Trump and some of those around him.

“I just think that the president has to be — I’ve told him this, by the way — that he needs to be careful with what he tweets and what he says,” he said.

Some Republicans, however, put the emphasis on an assertion made a week ago by former Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper that under his watch, no evidence had been found of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign in Moscow’s interference in the U.S. election.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), interviewed on ABC’s “This Week,” said Trump’s opponents needed to avoid being drawn into “wild-eyed, hair-on-fire” theories about Russian entanglements on the part of the president’s campaign aides.

“I hope that we get to the bottom of all these matters and that we make all those conclusions public to the American people,” said Cotton, who serves on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Other senior Republicans were saying as little as possible about the matter.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, appearing on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” was reminded by interviewer John Dickerson that he was one of the “Gang of Eight” with access to high-level intelligence briefings.

“Have you seen anything to suggest there are wiretaps?” Dickerson asked.

Ryan replied: “No.”

------------

FOR THE RECORD

June 14, 3 p.m.: An earlier version of this post incorrectly referred to House Speaker Paul D. Ryan as House majority leader.

Share
Advertisement

California man arrested at White House after jumping fence

President Trump said Saturday that the Secret Service did a “fantastic job” apprehending a “troubled person” who got onto the White House grounds after climbing a fence on the east side of the property while Trump was inside the executive mansion.

It was the first known security breach at the White House since Trump took office nearly two months ago.

Washington police identified the intruder as 26-year-old Jonathan Tran of Milpitas, Calif. When approached by a Secret Service officer on the south grounds about 11:38 p.m. Friday and asked whether he had a pass authorizing him to be in the restricted area, Tran replied, “No, I am a friend of the president. I have an appointment,” the police report said.

Asked how he got there, he said he “jumped the fence.”

The Secret Service said in a statement that the intruder, whom it did not identify, had climbed an outer perimeter fence near the Treasury Department and East Executive Avenue. He was arrested without further incident and no hazardous materials were found in his backpack, the agency said.

“Secret Service did a fantastic job last night,” Trump said Saturday from his golf club in northern Virginia. He described the intruder as a “troubled person” and “very sad.” He was briefed on the matter Friday night.

Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly also was briefed on the incident, the Secret Service said. Kelly was among several Cabinet secretaries and senior White House staff members who attended a working lunch with the president at the Trump National Golf Club.

The Secret Service said a search of the north and south White House grounds found “nothing of concern to security operations.” Standard practice is to turn intruders over to the local police department.

A series of security lapses took place during the eight years that Barack Obama was president. An especially embarrassing breach came in September 2014 when an Army veteran with mental health issues scaled a fence on the Pennsylvania Avenue side of the White House and made it into the East Room before the Secret Service could apprehend him.The Obamas were not at home at the time.

The incident was one of several breakdowns by the Secret Service that ultimately led to the resignation of the agency’s director, Julia Pierson, the following month.

Share

U.S. Atty. Preet Bharara of New York refuses to resign and says he was fired

An outspoken Manhattan federal prosecutor said he was fired Saturday after refusing Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions’ request to resign along with other U.S. attorneys appointed by President Obama.

U.S. Atty. Preet Bharara said he had received assurances last year from President Trump and Sessions that they wanted him to stay on, according to a person with knowledge of Bharara’s actions. The person wasn’t authorized to comment publicly on the matter and spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

Sessions asked Friday for the resignations of dozens of politically appointed U.S. attorneys. He wanted “to ensure a uniform transition” to the Trump administration, spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement.

Bharara, known for crusading against public corruption, tweeted Saturday that he was fired.

Representatives for Bharara’s office declined to comment after word that Bharara’s name was included on Sessions’ list.

The Justice Department declined to comment Saturday.

11:43 a.m.: This story was updated with Bharara saying he was fired.

Share
Advertisement

Flynn’s lobbying relationship poses a new headache for the White House

Former national security advisor Michael Flynn.
(Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press)

President Trump was not aware that former national security advisor Michael Flynn previously acted as an agent of the Turkish government, the White House said Friday while sidestepping questions about whether Flynn’s lobbying work conflicted with his sensitive position.

Flynn, who resigned last month, filed paperwork with the Justice Department this week that retroactively disclosed work that his personal company did last year on behalf of a firm with connections to the Turkish government.

The disclosure was being made “to eliminate any potential doubt” about the nature of Flynn’s lobbying for the firm, Inovo, Flynn’s attorney wrote in an accompanying letter. He acknowledged that the arrangement “could be construed to have principally benefited the republic of Turkey.”

The relationship between the Flynn Intel Group and Inovo began in September -- during the presidential campaign -- and was terminated after Trump’s election in November.

Flynn, who was a top advisor to Trump’s campaign, was named as his national security advisor on Nov. 18 during the presidential transition. He left the White House after about three weeks on the job for misrepresenting contacts he had with the Russian ambassador to the U.S.

Flynn’s lawyer had told attorneys for the transition of his deal with Inovo, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said, and was told “to work with the appropriate authorities or subject matter experts to determine what was appropriate.”

Transition lawyers gave similar advice about other potential conflicts of interest, Spicer said in explaining why Trump was not informed about the matter.

“We trust people to fill out the forms that they are required to do so in an honest and legal manner,” Spicer said.

Flynn’s attorney said his work for Inovo targeted Fethullah Gulen, a cleric residing in the U.S. whose extradition to Turkey has long been sought by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Flynn wrote an op-ed for The Hill newspaper on Nov. 8 calling for closer ties with Turkey and accusing then-President Obama of keeping Erdogan’s government at “arm’s length,” while referring to Gulen as a “shady Islamic mullah” and “radical Islamist.”

“From Turkey’s point of view, Washington is harboring Turkey’s Osama bin Laden,” Flynn wrote.

Ekim Alptekin, the Turkish businessman whose firm contracted Flynn’s, tweeted this week that Flynn’s new disclosure was “flawed.” He said Flynn’s op-ed was written without input from him or anyone “remotely linked” to the Turkish government.

“Gen. Flynn never engaged in lobbying work for me or my firm. And I never lobbied or contracted lobbyist on behalf of the Turkish Government,” he wrote.

A supplemental filing to Flynn’s federal disclosure said that his Hill op-ed was “related to the same subject matters” as his lobbying work but was written “on his own initiative.”

Share

Jeff Sessions asks 46 Obama-appointed U.S. attorneys to resign

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions.
(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions asked Friday for the resignations of dozens of politically appointed U.S. attorneys held over from the Obama administration, the Justice Department said.

Sessions wanted “to ensure a uniform transition” to the Trump administration, spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement.

“Until the new U.S. attorneys are confirmed, the dedicated career prosecutors in our U.S. attorney’s offices will continue the great work of the department in investigating, prosecuting and deterring the most violent offenders,” she said.

The order affects 46 U.S. attorneys; 47 others have already stepped aside. Ninety-three U.S. attorneys are the top federal prosecutors in 94 districts. (Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands share a federal prosecutor.)

It is not unusual for a new administration to seek the dismissal of political appointees, particularly those of a different party. In March 1993, then-Atty. Gen. Janet Reno sought the resignations of U.S. attorneys appointed by President George H.W. Bush, a move that sparked intense criticism from conservative commentators.

Attorneys general under Presidents Obama and George W. Bush generally tried to stagger departures over a few months.

When Obama was weighing how to handle the situation, former top prosecutors and the leader of an association that represents front-line federal prosecutors urged the administration to take a different approach than Reno. Firing U.S. attorneys en masse could harm continuity, they told the Washington Post in March 2009, and throw “law enforcement efforts into disarray.”

Sessions’ action comes the same day that White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer addressed the specter of a “deep state” of bureaucrats trying to harm President Trump’s agenda. Spicer told reporters that it should come as no surprise that “there are people that burrowed into government during eight years of the last administration and may have believed in that agenda and may continue to seek it.”

In California’s Central District, which includes Los Angeles and several surrounding counties, the move by Sessions meant Eileen Decker was out of a job.

Decker was appointed U.S. attorney for the district in 2015. Before taking over the office, she served for several years as the deputy mayor for homeland security in Los Angeles, overseeing issues related to law enforcement and the city’s emergency response capabilities. Earlier in her career, she worked in the U.S. attorney’s office as a prosecutor.

During her short tenure as the region’s top federal law enforcement official, Decker gave the go-ahead to her public corruption unit to prosecute former Los Angeles Sheriff Lee Baca on charges he obstructed an FBI investigation into county jails. She also oversaw cases stemming from the San Bernardino terror attack.

A spokesman for Decker declined to comment.

2:28 p.m.: This story was updated with details on U.S. Atty. Eileen Decker.

Share
Advertisement

How does Trump feel about official statistics? ‘They may have been phony in the past, but it’s very real now’

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer rightly suspected that reporters might ask him Friday about President Trump’s past comments questioning the accuracy of government data on employment.

So when a reporter asked whether Trump stood by his remarks that the data were “phony,” Spicer had a ready answer — and used words that he said were the president’s.

“They may have been phony in the past, but it’s very real now,” Spicer said. He also said Trump’s instructions were to quote him “very clearly” on that point.

Spicer laughed as he shared the sentiments and elicited laughter from some reporters as well. But what Spicer, and Trump, were admitting to was a stark reality: that Trump appears content to undermine facts that don’t serve his interests, but will not hesitate to embrace them when they do.

Spicer’s comment came just days after he preemptively cast doubt on the validity of a cost estimate of the new Republican healthcare bill, expected soon from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

That so-called CBO score is tabulated for any legislation that would affect the federal budget — either adding to deficits or reducing them. The office also addresses other policy ramifications for legislation.

Republicans this week moved quickly to begin consideration of the health bill in key committees even without that figure available, drawing criticism from Democrats who say the estimate is likely to show the plan would significantly add to the national debt.

“If you’re looking to the CBO for accuracy, you’re looking in the wrong place,” Spicer said Wednesday. “They were way, way off last time in every aspect of how they scored and projected Obamacare.”

Share

Spicer broke a federal rule when he hailed jobs report too soon after its release

The White House was excited Friday when the first jobs report of the Trump administration came in stronger than expected.

But one official got carried away and broke an obscure federal rule by publicly touting the data too soon.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer took to Twitter 22 minutes after the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the February jobs report.

He tweeted that the 235,000 net new jobs and the slight decline in the unemployment rate was “great news for American workers.”

But the timing of the tweet was not great news for Spicer.

It didn’t take long for some experienced jobs-report watchers to note that he had jumped the gun and violated a longstanding prohibition against executive branch officials publicly commenting on the report within an hour of its release.

Specifically, Spicer broke the Office of Management and Budget’s Statistical Policy Directive No. 3, adopted in 1985.

“Except for members of the staff of the agency issuing the principal economic indicator who have been designated by the agency head to provide technical explanations of the data, employees of the Executive Branch shall not comment publicly on the data until at least one hour after the official release time.”

Among those pointing out the violation was Jason Furman.

As chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Obama from 2013 until this past January, Furman emailed a lengthy analysis of the monthly jobs report and often went on TV to discuss the data.

Furman tweeted that the rule has been in place for decades and “everyone has followed it. Until now.”

Spicer made light of the situation when asked about it at his daily briefing, saying he was only tweeting out the headline numbers that news organizations around the world already had reported.

“Don’t make me make the podium move on you,” he joked, a reference to Melissa McCarthy’s portrayal of him on “Saturday Night Live” plowing over reporters with a moving White House lectern.

Spicer said Trump and his staff were thrilled about the strong jobs report.

“I apologize if we’re a little excited and we’re so glad to see so many fellow Americans back at work,” he said.

Spicer said his understanding of the rule was that it was designed to avoid affecting the stock market.

But that’s not the reason.

The rule dates back to the Nixon administration.

Concerned about the credibility of government statistics, federal officials in 1969 called for a one-hour delay in comments on economic data.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics website, the rule was designed to “preserve the neutrality and objectivity of the statistics.”

Officials at the bureau and the White House were concerned that news briefings about economic data “invited questions on economic policy and outlook matters beyond the responsibility of career service statistical offices.”

Under new procedures, the data “would be issued in written releases.” Then reporters would be allowed to call bureaucrats to ask questions and the Labor secretary “would wait at least 1 hour to make his statement,” the bureau said.

11:53 a.m.:This article was updated with comments from Spicer’s briefing.

Share
Advertisement

Pelosi says the FBI director should publicly contradict Trump’s wiretapping claim

(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said Friday that FBI Director James Comey should refute President Trump’s claim over the weekend that President Obama had wiretapped his campaign.

“Theoretically, do I think that a director of the FBI who knows for a fact that something is mythology, but misleading to the American people, then he should set the record straight?” Pelosi said to reporters at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. “Yes, I do think he should say that publicly.”

Shortly after Trump made the claim on Twitter and provided no evidence to substantiate it, Comey privately asked the Justice Department to push back on the accusation. It has not.

Obama and his staff have flatly denied that any such surveillance took place.

House Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Tulare) has said Trump’s allegations will be rolled into the committee’s ongoing investigation into Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 campaign, but Pelosi called it a distraction to do so.

“They should be investigating the Russian connection to undermine our democracy,” she said.

Pelosi (D-San Francisco) is among the Democrats calling for an independent, nonpartisan investigation. She said she couldn’t answer whether she herself has seen evidence of improper interactions between the Russians and the Trump campaign.

“I really don’t think I can answer that question because I have to filter out what I know from a classified standpoint,” she said. “This is a really sensitive issue at this time, and maybe in a short period of time, much more will be in the public domain.”

Share

White House celebrates the new jobs report, even though Trump was skeptical of the data before

The White House quickly seized on new employment data Friday as evidence of renewed confidence in the nation’s economy under President Trump.

Trump’s account retweeted the Drudge Report’s assessment: “GREAT AGAIN.”

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer called the 235,000 jobs added in February “great news for American workers,” a sentiment seconded by Chief of Staff Reince Priebus.

The jobs report covered the first full month of the Trump administration, and the upward trend line is consistent with gains that occurred during the Obama administration.

But it was the first hard data to back up the anecdotal evidence or opinions that Trump and his top aides have cited to back up their contention that employers are expressing confidence that the new administration’s policies will help sustain and perhaps accelerate long-term positive trends.

The White House’s eagerness to seize on the Bureau of Labor Statistics data was notable given how the president has long expressed skepticism that it reflects the true health of the economy and accurately presents the jobs picture.

“So many people can’t get jobs. The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction,” Trump said at a post-election rally in Iowa in December.

The president’s critics, expecting Trump to take credit for the new numbers, launched a preemptive strike earlier Friday.

American Bridge, an opposition outfit led by Clinton loyalist David Brock, launched trumpeconomy.com as a repository for announcements of job cuts and plant closures across the country.

“Trump’s economy is making outsourcing great again, and we’re going to hold him accountable for his lies, distractions, and economic failures in the White House,” Brock said in a statement.

Share
Advertisement

California GOP leader under consideration for key Department of Justice post

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Harmeet Dhillon, a California GOP leader, is under consideration to run the civil rights branch of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The post will be heavily scrutinized given the Trump administration’s positions on issues such as voting rights, and because of past controversial statements about race made by the department’s leader, Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions. A series of hate crimes have also taken place in the weeks since Trump’s election.

Dhillon declined to comment, but a source said she was interviewed for the job last week in Washington, D.C.

Read More

Share

Mexican foreign secretary goes straight to the White House, skips usual channels

(AFP / Getty Images)

Mexico’s top diplomat came to Washington Thursday for meetings with the U.S. government, sidestepping the normal channels and heading straight for the White House.

Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Videgaray met at the White House with President Trump’s son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner, along with National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and Gary Cohn, a top financial aide, the Mexican government announced.

Striking in its absence from that announcement was any mention of a meeting with officials from the State Department.

It is customary for foreign secretaries from all nations to be received by their U.S. counterpart when in Washington, currently Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

But when asked whether any sessions were scheduled at the State Department, the spokesman, Mark Toner, said he didn’t know Videgaray was in town. That disconnect suggested the State Department, under Trump, was being marginalized.

Later, however, Videgaray himself explained that he had spoken by telephone to Tillerson the night before to let him know he was arriving in Washington.

But Videgaray said the thrust of his mission meant he needed to speak directly to the White House. He and Tillerson agreed to meet in person in a couple of weeks, Videgaray said, part of an ongoing “dialogue” the two governments are holding to attempt to repair relations damaged by Trump’s bombastic campaign rhetoric against Mexico.

For Thursday’s meetings, however, Videgaray said he had to raise Mexican complaints about U.S. suggestions it would separate migrant children from their parents at the border as a way to discourage illegal crossings.

“Family integrity,” Videgaray said during a briefing at the Mexican Embassy in Washington, “is a basic human right.”

He said his U.S. interlocutors said the separation plan was only “under consideration.”

Tillerson and Videgaray met two weeks ago in Mexico City, along with Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and his Mexican counterpart, Interior Minister Miguel Angel Osorio Chong.

Mexico has also objected to U.S. suggestions it would dump non-Mexican migrants over the border inside Mexico.

The Trump administration has had little success in soothing Mexican anger after the new president unleashed a string of insults against Mexicans and insisted they would pay for a multi-billion-dollar wall along the U.S.-Mexican border. Trump says it would stop illegal immigration and the flow of illicit drugs, something most experts dispute.

New U.S. statistics show detentions of people crossing the border illegally are declining, part of an overall immigration slowdown that has been taking place for the last decade.

Share
Advertisement

U.S. to host 68-nation anti-Islamic State conference

The United States will host the first major meeting since 2014 of a 68-nation coalition formed to fight Islamic State, administration officials announced Thursday.

The conference is set for March 22-23, and the U.S. contingent will be led by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, in a rare high-profile role.

The meeting will underscore that the U.S. considers “the complete defeat” of Islamic State its “top priority in the Middle East,” State Department spokesman Mark Toner said in making the announcement.

Most nations will be represented by their foreign ministers, as well as some military commanders, Toner said.

“It’s an opportunity for Secretary Tillerson to lay out the challenges that are facing the coalition moving forward,” he said.

Toner said there has been progress in beating back Islamic State on the ground by recapturing most of Mosul in Iraq and reducing the group’s territory in Syria. But there are new “battlefields,” he said, such as the Internet, where Islamic State frequently recruits, indoctrinates and strategizes.

“How do we leverage that success? How do we build on that success?” Toner said.

Russia will not participate in the conference, Toner said, even though it is a leading fighting force in Syria, where it backs the regime of President Bashar Assad in that country’s civil war, the region’s other major conflict.

Toner denied that the U.S. was losing its focus on the Syrian conflict in the pursuit of Islamic State, but he characterized the latter fight as the prelude to stability in the region.

The State Department said this will be the first meeting of the full coalition since December 2014, shortly after it was formed.

Share

Andy Puzder blames Democrats for collapse of his Labor secretary nomination

(Jack Plunkett / Associated Press)

Southern California fast-food executive Andy Puzder on Thursday blamed Democrats for the collapse of his nomination to be Labor secretary, even though he admitted he withdrew after being informed there was not enough support among Senate Republicans to confirm him.

“I think the big problem here was the left and the Democrats really didn’t want a successful businessman who started out as a working-class kid. … That really was their worst nightmare for the Department of Labor,” Puzder told Fox Business Network in his first public comments since withdrawing on Feb. 15.

“So they were going to do anything they possibly could to try and keep me out of that office,” he said.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Six states are challenging Trump’s travel ban in court

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

Washington state Atty. Gen. Bob Ferguson said Thursday that the state would take President Trump to court to block enforcement of of his new, revamped travel order pausing refugee resettlement and travel from six majority-Muslim countries.

Washington state’s lawsuit against the first travel ban led a Seattle federal court judge to order a national halt to the executive order, which had caused chaos at airports around the country and led to the cancelation of 60,000 travel visas.

At a news conference Thursday, Ferguson said he would file a motion asking the judge in the case, James Robart, to apply the restraining order against the old travel ban to the new one.

Ferguson said the state’s challenges to the new travel ban remain largely the same as the first one, which it said was discriminatory against Muslims and caused unnecessary harm to the state’s residents, universities and businesses.

Washington is joined by Minnesota in its lawsuit. The attorneys general of New York, Oregon and Massachusetts also said they would join the suit.

The states follow Hawaii, which filed a complaint in a Honolulu federal court against the revised travel ban on Wednesday.

Hawaii’s complaint says it objects to the new travel order because it has “profound” and “detrimental” effects on the state’s economy and people. The state also argues that the executive order discriminates against Muslims and violates the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Constitution.

“[W]hile the President signed a revised version on March 6... we still know exactly what it means. It is another attempt by the administration to enact a discriminatory ban that goes against the fundamental teachings of our Constitution and our immigration laws, even if it is cloaked in ostensibly neutral terms,” the state says in its filing.

The state’s new complaint amends its initial challenge to an earlier, more comprehensive travel ban issued by the Trump administration in January.

A hearing is set for 9:30 a.m. March 15 in Honolulu on Hawaii’s request for a national temporary restraining order on the new travel order, which is scheduled to take effect March 16.

The intent of both travel orders, Trump administration officials say, is to screen out visitors from countries affected by terrorism until more stringent vetting measures can be put into place.

The new order has been stripped of many provisions that federal judges across the country found troublesome in the first one.

Trump’s new order does not give preference to religious minorities in refugee admissions. It exempts several categories of people from its restrictions, including dual nationals who have U.S. citizenship, green card holders and people who already hold valid visas.

Legal experts have said the new travel ban, which applies to citizens of Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Syria and Yemen (it does not include Iraq as the previous order did), will be tougher to fight in court because of the president’s broad authority over immigration enforcement and national security when it comes to noncitizens and those without visas.

The Department of Justice has argued in federal court filings this week that several court orders calling for a halt to the first ban do not apply to the new one. In Washington state, government lawyers have filed papers saying that the new order “falls out of the scope” of Robart’s earlier injunction.

This post has been updated with the addition of Oregon and Massachusetts.

Share

GOP’s health overhaul clears second key House committee

Republicans have scored an early triumph as a second key House panel approved a bill to end the Affordable Care Act and fundamentally restructure Medicaid for low-income people.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee cleared the GOP bill on a party-line vote of 31-23 Thursday — after more than 27 hours of debate. The Ways and Means Committee approved the legislation earlier in the day.

With backing from President Trump, Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) wants to push the bill through the House in weeks. Ryan appears to be off to a good start, though opposition to dismantling the program known as Obamacare is building.

Hospitals, doctors, and consumer groups are warning of large coverage losses and cost shifts if the bill is signed into law as written.

Share
Advertisement

Senate panel approves David Friedman for ambassador to Israel

(AFP/Getty Images)

Over considerable opposition, a Republican-controlled Senate panel Thursday approved President Trump’s nominee for ambassador to Israel.

The nomination of David Friedman, Trump’s long-time bankruptcy lawyer, now faces a final vote in the full Senate.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 12-9 to advance Friedman, despite statements he has made attacking liberal American Jews and his financial ties to the Israeli settler movement.

One Democrat, Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, sided with the panel’s 11 Republicans to approve Friedman.

In his hearing Feb. 16, which was frequently interrupted by hecklers, Friedman apologized for his comments and vowed to obey U.S. law and policy.

He had said in the past he would work out of Jerusalem, although the U.S. Embassy is in Tel Aviv, and he has contributed money to Jewish settlements in West Bank lands claimed by the Palestinians. Most of the world considers the settlements to be illegal, and the U.S. in the past has labeled them an obstacle to peace.

Several Republicans said they accepted Friedman’s apologies and believed he could rein in personal feelings to fulfill his diplomatic duties.

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, however, disagreed.

“While it is clear that David Friedman is committed to the U.S.-Israel relationship, his history of inflammatory rhetoric is poorly matched for this role,” Kaine said.

J Street, a liberal, pro-Israel lobbying organization -- whose members Friedman had likened to “kapos,” Jews who collaborated with the Nazis during the Holocaust -- also protested the nomination.

Share

Washington restaurant: Competing with the president’s own hotel is tough

Diane Gross and Khalid Pitts own Cork Restaurant in Washington.
(Mark Wilson / Getty Images)

The owners of a Washington wine bar have sued President Trump for unfair competition, saying he is using the power of the presidency to steal business for his luxury hotel near the White House.

The action, filed in District of Columbia Superior Court late Wednesday, is the latest legal attempt to pressure Trump over the unprecedented potential conflicts presented by his worldwide business holdings – including the Trump International Hotel, in a former Post Office building still owned by the federal government.

The General Services Administration, which manages the property, has not yet said whether it considers Trump in breach of a clause in the lease that prohibits federal officials from benefiting from the deal. Trump, since the election, has become his own landlord for the lease.

The owners of the Cork Restaurant and their lawyers, speaking to reporters Thursday, said Trump’s hotel and its restaurants are now a hot spot for anyone looking to buy favor with the Trump administration.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

EPA chief: Carbon dioxide not primary cause of warming

The new chief of the Environmental Protection Agency said Thursday he does not believe that carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming, a statement at odds with mainstream scientific consensus.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said that measuring the effect of human activity on the climate is “very challenging” and that “there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact” of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

“So, no, I would not agree that [carbon dioxide] is a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” Pruitt told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”

Pruitt’s view is at odds with mainstream climate science, including NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The two agencies reported in January that Earth’s 2016 temperatures were the warmest ever. The planet’s average surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the late 19th century, “a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere,” the agencies said in a joint statement.

Environmental groups seized on Pruitt’s comments as evidence he is unfit for the office he holds.

“The arsonist is now in charge of the fire department, and he seems happy to let the climate crisis burn out of control,” said Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune.

Pruitt “is spewing corporate polluter talking points rather than fulfilling the EPA’s mission of protecting our air, our water and our communities,” Brune said, noting that the EPA has a legal responsibility to address carbon pollution.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said the comments underscore that Pruitt is a “climate denier” and insisted lawmakers will stand up to him.

“Anyone who denies over a century’s worth of established science and basic facts is unqualified to be the administrator of the EPA,” Schatz said in a statement.

Pruitt previously served as Oklahoma attorney general, where he rose to prominence as a leader in coordinated efforts by Republican attorneys general to challenge former President Obama’s regulatory agenda. He sued or took part in legal actions against the EPA 14 times.

Share

Sessions says he is open to naming ‘special counsel’ to investigate decisions by Obama-era Justice Department

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions told a conservative radio host Thursday morning that he was open to naming a “special counsel” to review actions of the Justice Department under the Obama administration.

Sessions was a vocal critic of his predecessors, Eric H. Holder Jr. and Loretta Lynch, and their decisions in various investigations. Among those that irked him most were the probes into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of State and into the IRS’ mishandling of tax exemption applications by conservative groups.

The Justice Department declined to bring charges in either investigation. In 2015, Justice Department officials sent a letter to Congress, saying it had closed its IRS investigation without charges after finding no evidence of criminal activity or politically motivated bias. But it added that it had found “substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia” at the agency.

Sessions told radio host Hugh Hewitt that he was “going to do everything I possibly can to restore the independence and professionalism of the Department of Justice.”

“So we would have to consider whether or not some outside special counsel is needed,” he said. “Generally, a good review of that internally is the first step before any such decision is made”

When asked specifically about the IRS investigation, Sessions said “that circumstance raised a lot of questions in my mind, and when I was in the Senate. So it is a matter of real concern to me.”

Sessions also said he favored keeping open the controversial prison at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and would support sending terror suspects there. “It’s just a very fine place for holding these kinds of dangerous criminals,” Sessions said.

When asked if he would recommend to President Trump sending a newly captured enemy combatant to the prison, Sessions said “there’s plenty of space.”

“It’s the perfect place for it,” he said. “Eventually this will be decided by the military rather than the Justice Department. But I see no legal problem whatsoever with doing it.”

Sessions was not asked whether he supported sending terror suspects captured in the United States to the prison; such an action would likely spark a major legal battle.

Share
Advertisement

Healthcare overhaul scores early triumph despite opposition

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), left, listens to the committee's ranking member, Rep. Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.) in Washington on Wednesday.
(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

House Republicans scored a pre-dawn triumph Thursday in their effort to scuttle former President Obama’s healthcare overhaul, but it masked deeper problems as hospitals, doctors and consumer groups mounted intensifying opposition to the GOP healthcare drive.

After nearly 18 hours of debate and over two dozen party-line votes, Republicans pushed legislation through the Ways and Means Committee abolishing the tax penalty Obama’s statute imposes on people who don’t purchase insurance and reshaping how millions of Americans buy medical care.

It was a victory of high symbolism because Obama’s so-called individual mandate is perhaps the part of the statute that Republicans most detest.

Even so, the White House and Republican leaders confront a GOP and outside groups badly divided over the party’s high-stakes overhaul crusade.

Ways and Means members worked till nearly 4:30 a.m. EST before approving the final batch of tax provisions in a party-line 23-16 vote. The Energy and Commerce Committee panel continued working Thursday morning, tackling a reshaping of Medicaid.

Share

San Francisco asks federal judge to block Trump’s ‘sanctuary’ city order

(Jeff Chiu / Associated Press)

San Francisco asked a federal judge Wednesday to block President Trump’s order threatening to strip federal funds from so-called sanctuary cities that bar police from enforcing immigration laws.

The city followed Santa Clara County in asking U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick for a nationwide preliminary injunction against Trump’s executive order until a lawsuit against the order is heard. A hearing on the injunction request has been tentatively scheduled in Orrick’s San Francisco courtroom for April 5.

San Francisco is one of several local governments nationwide that have sued to block the Jan. 25 order, aimed at about 400 cities and counties that refuse to comply with federal agencies’ requests to hold residents who crossed the border illegally or to participate in immigration raids.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

FBI joins CIA in hunt for leaker of sensitive data to WikiLeaks

The FBI has launched a criminal investigation into the security breach that resulted in the publication of detailed records concerning the CIA’s super-secretive computer hacking operations, according to a U.S. official familiar with the matter.

Nearly 9,000 of those documents were posted Tuesday by WikiLeaks, providing a detailed look at the Central Intelligence Agency’s efforts to capture conversations, encrypted communications and online browsing data by hacking into smartphones, computers and even televisions.

The U.S. official who confirmed the existence of the federal probe requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive investigation. CNN reported that the FBI and CIA “are coordinating reviews of the matter.”

Reuters reported Wednesday that the intelligence community has been aware since last year of a security breach that led to the publication of the records.

Current and former U.S. officials have said the publication of the tools could harm the ability of the United States to gather intelligence on other countries and terrorists.

Carol Cratty, an FBI spokeswoman, referred calls on the matter to the CIA. Heather Horniak, a CIA spokeswoman, in a statement declined to comment “on the status of any investigation into the source of the documents.” She also declined to say whether the records were authentic.

“The American public should be deeply troubled by any Wikileaks disclosure designed to damage the intelligence community’s ability to protect America against terrorists and other adversaries,” Horniak added. “Such disclosures not only jeopardize U.S. personnel and operations, but also equip our adversaries with tools and information to do us harm.”

It is no surprise that the CIA uses malicious software to gather information about specific individuals. Even so, the leaked documents are a stunning look at the agency’s hacking capabilities.

1:26 p.m.: This story was updated with additional comments from the CIA.

Share

Donald Trump expresses support for women -- some show it back

(Timothy A. Clary / AFP/Getty Images)

It’s International Women’s Day, and here in the United States it’s also “A Day Without a Woman.”

The latter is a follow-up to the Jan. 21 Women’s March that drew millions of people across the country into the streets to protest President Trump a day after his inauguration.

But Trump, despite his past harsh rhetoric about women -- he’s called women “slobs” and “pigs” -- applauded them on Wednesday.

“I have tremendous respect for women and the many roles they serve that are vital to the fabric of our society and our economy,” he tweeted.

Conservative media sought to highlight the politics behind the day.

Here are some of today’s headlines:

A day without women who claim to speak for women (Daily Caller)

Last fall, Trump lost women voters overall to Hillary Clinton by about 54% to 42%, based on exit polls. Still, about 53% of all white female voters backed Trump over Clinton.

Among them was Lauren Appell, who penned this opinion piece for the Caller, and who is not supporting “A Day Without a Woman.”

“For most women like myself, a day without women who claim to speak for other women would be a peaceful reprieve. These women have declared themselves the self-appointed spokespeople for all things female,” she writes about leaders of Women’s March, an advocacy group that organized today’s protest. “The problem is they don’t represent all females, particularly females who voted in the last election.”

Tim Kaine’s son arrested at Trump rally protest (Breitbart)

This was splashed all over conservative media on Wednesday.

Linwood Kaine, the youngest son of Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who was Clinton’s No. 2 on the Democratic ticket last year, was arrested at the Minnesota state Capitol after disrupting a pro-Trump rally.

Kaine, 24, was held over the weekend on suspension of second degree rioting.

“The rally in Minnesota was one of many pro-Trump rallies to take place nationwide, as people expressed their support for Trump and his administration’s fast-moving agenda,” notes this piece about the event that was disrupted.

The Trump Recovery -- The biggest news in Washington, D.C.: Deregulation (American Spectator)

In the weeks since Trump entered the White House, his team has methodically scaled back some regulations on, among other things, fracking and Wall Street banks.

“While the media obsess about Russian conspirators, people who make things for a living — whether burgers, bridges, or buildings — see that the real story unfolding in Washington, D.C., is the unprecedented pace of deregulation,” writes the author, Betsy McCaughey. “It’s helping to fuel the stock market’s record-shattering optimism. And in the nick of time.”

She argues, “The United States has been sinking into economic mediocrity over the last decade, because of excessive regulation.”

Share
Advertisement

Hawaii says it will sue over Trump’s new travel ban

The state of Hawaii said in a court filing Tuesday that it intended to file a legal challenge to President’s Trump’s revamped executive order pausing refugee resettlement and immigration from six majority-Muslim countries.

In a court filing in the state, Hawaii Atty. Gen. Douglas Chin asks the court to approve a swift briefing schedule on the state’s intended request for a temporary restraining order blocking the new travel ban before it takes effect on March 16.

The state said it would file a new complaint to supplement its initial challenge to an earlier, more comprehensive travel ban issued by the Trump administration in January.

The intent of both travel orders, Trump administration officials say, is to screen out visitors from countries affected by terrorism until more stringent vetting measures can be put into place.

In a second filing late Tuesday, Hawaii listed its reasons for challenging the new travel order. Hawaii says the new order has “profound” and “detrimental” effects on residents, businesses and universities. The state also argues that the executive order discriminates against Muslims and violates the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Constitution.

The state’s filing lists Ismail Elshikh, the imam of the Muslim Assn. of Hawaii, as an example of a Hawaii resident affected by the travel order. Elshikh’s mother-in-law is a national of Syria, a country listed in the new travel ban. The state also says his mosque members’ relatives live in countries under the new ban and would not be able to visit family in Hawaii.

The state’s initial legal challenge to the president’s first order on travel was filed Feb. 3 and was paused after a federal judge in Seattle blocked implementation of that order nationwide.

Lawyers from Washington state who brought the Seattle case said Monday that they had not decided if they would sue over the new travel rules.

In a separate filing Tuesday with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the Department of Justice moved to dismiss its appeal of the Seattle court’s ruling on the first executive order.

The new order has been stripped of many provisions which federal judges across the country found troublesome in the first one.

Trump’s new order does not give preference to religious minorities in refugee admissions. It exempts several categories of people from its restrictions, including dual nationals who have U.S. citizenship, green card holders and people who already hold valid visas.

Legal experts have said the new travel ban, which applies to citizens of Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Syria and Yemen -- it does not include Iraq as the previous order did -- will be tougher to battle in court because of the president’s broad authority over immigration enforcement and national security when it comes to non-citizens and those without visas.

Update: This article was updated with details on Hawaii’s challenge of President Trump’s executive order.

Share

What is the future of recreational marijuana in Trump’s America?

It’s a movement charging ahead — for now.

Legalizing recreational marijuana is currently a priority in more than a dozen states as polls show overwhelming support and lawmakers see a way to bring in hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue. So far, eight states have legalized recreational cannabis.

But in recent weeks, the Trump administration has alarmed some pot supporters by warning states that have legalized recreational marijuana — California, Colorado and Oregon, among them — that federal law enforcement agents could soon come after them.

“I am definitely not a fan of expanded use of marijuana,” U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions told reporters recently. (Last year, Sessions characterized marijuana as a “very real danger.”)

Here’s a look at the current state of marijuana in America:

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s wiretapping suspicions find credence in conservative media

He’s at odds with the intelligence community, but that’s nothing new.

President Trump, as we know, called for an investigation into allegations his Trump Tower phones were wiretapped with authorization from former President Obama. FBI Director James B. Comey pressed the Justice Department to publicly repudiate the charge, even as Obama administration officials, including former National Intelligence Director James Clapper, flat-out denied the claims.

In Tuesday’s conservative media, there are plenty who are ready to give credence to the wiretapping claims.

Here are some of today’s headlines:

Five reasons why Trump’s wiretapping claims aren’t crazy (Washington Times)

So did wiretapping really occur?

This piece lays out five things the Washington Times asserts may bolster the president’s claim, which has been widely denied.

Among them: A report that wiretapping may have been used to obtain details of a phone call between Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who briefly served later as Trump’s national security advisor, and the Russian ambassador.

This post cites a New York Times story, which reports that investigators had the transcript of a phone call — whose phones were tapped is not clear — between Flynn and the ambassador. Flynn resigned last month after it was revealed that he had misled Vice President Mike Pence and other top White House officials about his conversations with the Russian ambassador.

This piece also questions the credibility of Clapper, who, when asked by Congress in 2013, said the National Security Agency does not “wittingly” collect random data on ordinary Americans. Later that year, the piece notes, NSA leaker Edward Snowden revealed the government was indeed engaging in mass data collection of Americans.

“The media, conveniently picking and choosing what they want to report or what leads they want to follow, reeks of media confirmation bias,” the Times piece concludes.

Clinton campaign staffers now driving anti-Trump ‘Women’s March’ organization (Daily Caller)

Remember last fall when audio from 2005 leaked of Trump talking about grabbing women by their private parts?

Not surprisingly, that upset a lot of women — including many who worked for Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Now, some are working for Women’s March, an advocacy group that supports the rights of, among others, women and immigrants.

“Six former Hillary Clinton campaign operatives are playing key roles for one the nation’s most prominent anti-Trump organizations,” notes the opening of this Daily Caller piece.

Millions of women nationwide marched in protest of Trump a day after his inauguration.

Research by the Caller reveals a half-dozen former Clinton campaign operatives are “helping guide Women’s March in its anti-Trump agenda.”

“Three of the five ‘strategic advisors’ listed on the organization’s website are former Clinton campaign operatives,” notes the piece.

The group is also helping to organize Wednesday’s “Day Without a Woman.”

Another temper tantrum in college (Townhall)

A college campus is usually a place where free speech is cherished.

Last week, however, students at Middlebury College in Vermont launched protests — which at times turned violent — against Charles Murray, the controversial conservative writer whom many accuse of espousing racist ideas. Similar protests have taken place on campuses across the country in recent weeks as students protest conservatives thinkers.

This Townhall piece assails students for pitching so-called temper tantrums.

“If they didn’t scream and yell and chant and set off fire alarms they may have had to listen to something they didn’t want to hear. Oh, the horror,” Bernard Goldberg writes. “They might have actually learned something. And if something that horrible happened, they might have needed therapeutic puppies to calm them down.”

He adds, “Liberal students who demand ‘safe spaces’ for themselves wouldn’t provide a safe space at Middlebury for Charles Murray.”

Share

Amid deportation fears, requests for legal advice at Mexican consulates in U.S. are up 400%

Mexico Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray says his country is prepared to retaliate against actions by the Trump administration if necessary.
Mexico Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray says his country is prepared to retaliate against actions by the Trump administration if necessary.
(Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)

Requests for legal advice at Mexico’s consulates in the United States have increased 400% amid fears of mass deportations, Mexican officials said Tuesday.

“There is a huge concern on the part of the Mexican community abroad,” Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray said at a news conference in Mexico City. Requests for legal services, he said, have risen fourfold since the inauguration of President Trump on Jan. 20.

The Mexican government is expanding access to lawyers and legal consultants at its 50 consulates across the United States, Videgaray said, and consular officials are helping those in deportation proceedings to protect vehicles, real estate and other property they may own in the United States.

Videgaray said government lawyers in Mexico City are paying particular attention to cases that may have “strategic value,” some of which could become the subject of official complaints with the United Nations or the Organization of American States.

Videgaray, who met earlier this month with Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly, also said the Mexican government is worried about a U.S. plan to possibly separate children from parents at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Kelly said this week that he is considering family separation as a part of a broader effort to discourage immigrants from making the dangerous trek to the U.S. border.

Videgaray said the Mexican government reached out to the U.S. government to express its concerns about the plan, which he said could inflict “irreversible damage” on Mexican families.

Share
Advertisement

White House corrects Trump’s tweet about Guantanamo detainees, sort of

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer did something Tuesday he doesn’t often do from the briefing room podium: correct the president.

The subject was President Trump’s tweets about terrorism suspects released from the military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Trump attacked over the number of detainees that he said were released during the Obama administration and again took up militancy.

But the figure was inaccurate. Of 182 detainees transferred during the Obama administration, just eight were confirmed to have reengaged — or just over 4%, according to data updated Tuesday from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Under former President George W. Bush, 113 of the 532 detainees transferred out of Guantanamo, or more than 21%, returned to fighting.

“Obviously the president meant in totality the number that had been released,” Spicer said when asked if the White House would correct the president’s comments. “That is correct.”

Longstanding White House policy, carried over from the transition period and the campaign before it, was to respond to questions about the president’s social media postings by saying only some variation of, “The tweet speaks for itself.”

>> ‘The tweet speaks for itself’ could become a Trump administration motto

And while Spicer somewhat timidly acknowledged a misstep, the original tweet posted to Trump’s personal account and a second version posted an hour later to his official White House account remained online and had been retweeted at both accounts more than 22,000 times.

The origin of Trump’s tweet appeared to be a segment on “Fox & Friends,” the Fox News morning show that has long been a favorite of the Republican. The segment made no distinction between the number of detainees who had reengaged under the Bush and Obama administrations.

Share

Nominee to be No. 2 at Justice Department says he sees no reason to recuse himself from Russia investigation

Rod Rosenstein, the nominee to be the second-in-command at the Justice Department, testified Tuesday that he was “not aware” of any reason he would be prohibited from overseeing investigations into Russia’s meddling in the U.S. presidential campaign.

The 52-year-old federal prosecutor told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he may have met with Russian lawyers and judges over the course of his career but did not recall any contacts or meetings with Russian officials.

If confirmed to be deputy attorney general, Rosenstein would oversee any investigations into Russia’s efforts to influence the fall elections after the recusal last week of Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions.

The attorney general stepped aside from the investigation after it was reported that he had met twice with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. during the presidential campaign but had told the Judiciary Committee he had no such contacts.

The FBI is investigating Russia’s efforts to influence the election and potential ties between President Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin.

Democrats have called for a special prosecutor to handle the Russia investigation. Pressed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) if he thought such a special prosecutor might be required, Rosenstein said he had not yet been briefed on the investigations.

He noted that former Atty. Gen. Loretta Lynch and acting Deputy Atty. Gen. Dana Boente had declined to name a special prosecutor.

“I am not in a position to answer the question because I don’t know the information they know,” Rosenstein said, adding that he would consult with career lawyers and rules and regulations governing such appointments to determine if one is necessary.

He said he was confident he could ensure that all investigations at the Justice Department would be free of political influence.”My job would be to make sure all investigations are conducted independently,” he said.

Rosenstein has strong support from both Democrats and Republicans, and served as the top federal prosecutor in Maryland under Presidents Bush and Obama.

Share
Advertisement

Mexican presidential candidate attacks Trump as the ‘bad hombre’

Mexican presidential candidate Margarita Zavala issued a warning to the United States in an op-ed published in the Washington Post on Tuesday.

“It is up to the United States to decide whether it wants to continue a strong partnership, or whether it will let one bad hombre destroy it,” Zavala said.

The “bad hombre” she was referring to? That was President Trump, who has famously used the same phrase to describe members of Mexican drug cartels and some of the immigrants living in the U.S. illegally.

Zavala, a former congresswoman for the right-leaning National Action Party and the wife of former Mexican President Felipe Calderon, attacked Trump’s “ignorance” of the strong ties between the U.S. and Mexico, and called him dangerously impulsive.

“When the American president can undo with a tweet what has taken us decades to build, Mexicans have to wonder whether the United States is a reliable partner and what the future of our relationship will look like,” she said.

Zavala, who recently met with U.S. leaders, including Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, during a trip to Washington, isn’t the only candidate in Mexico’s 2018 presidential elections who has seized on Trump to generate support at home.

Andrés Manuel López Obrador, a leftist candidate who narrowly lost in the last two presidential elections, has highlighted Trump’s vows to tax imports from Mexico and other attacks as a way to generate nationalistic fervor. López Obrador is also in the U.S. this week, holding rallies in border cities including El Paso.

The leading candidates to replace President Enrique Peña Nieto have both attacked Peña Nieto for capitulating to Trump. The president invited then-candidate Trump to meet with him in Mexico City last fall, provoking outcry from Mexicans who feel insulted by Trump’s attacks on their country, starting with his criticisms of Mexican immigrants as rapists and drug dealers on the day he launched his campaign in 2015.

Still, Zavala said her countrymen can make a distinction between Americans and their elected leader.

“Mexicans know that our differences are not with the American people, but with an American president who began his campaign with racist attacks against Mexican immigrants, whose cruel policies have entire communities living in fear and who seems intent on making an enemy out of a friend,” she said.

“Frankly,” Zavala continued, “the United States is fortunate to have Mexico as a neighbor and partner.”

Share

WikiLeaks publishes trove of what it says are CIA cyberspying documents

(Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press)

WikiLeaks on Tuesday published thousands of documents purportedly taken from the Central Intelligence Agency‘s Center for Cyber Intelligence, a dramatic release that appears to provide an eye-opening look at the intimate details of America’s cyberespionage toolkit.

The dump could not immediately be authenticated by the Associated Press, but WikiLeaks has a long track record of releasing top-secret government documents.

Jonathan Liu, a spokesman for the CIA, said: “We do not comment on the authenticity or content of purported intelligence documents.”

Experts who have started to sift through the material said it appeared to be authentic — and that the release was almost certain to shake the CIA.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Possible No. 2 at Justice Department expected to be grilled over Russia investigation

Rod Rosenstein, the top federal prosecutor in Maryland, is expected to be grilled Tuesday morning by members of a Senate committee wondering how he will oversee the controversial investigation into Russia’s meddling in the U.S. presidential campaign.

Rosenstein will testify at his confirmation hearing to be the deputy attorney general. The 52-year-old Harvard Law School graduate served as U.S. attorney in Maryland under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and is well regarded by lawyers and politicians on both sides of the aisle.

His confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee was expected to have been a pro-forma affair -- until Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions last week recused himself from any aspect of investigations into last year’s presidential race.

That means Rosenstein will be in charge of overseeing the federal investigation into Russia’s hacking of Democratic Party computers and other efforts to influence the campaign.

Part of that investigation focuses on whether there are any links between Trump surrogates, associates and campaign workers and Russian officials.

READ MORE

Share

House Republicans unveil Obamacare replacement plan that would sharply reduce coverage and cut federal role

(Jim Lo Scalzo / AFP/Getty Images)

House Republicans released a long-awaited Obamacare replacement Monday that would dismantle the healthcare law’s extensive system for expanding health insurance coverage to millions of Americans.

The legislation, the first such bill that House Republican leaders have produced, would eliminate hundreds of billions of dollars of federal aid that has allowed states to expand their Medicaid programs to millions of previously uninsured poor people.

And the bill — titled the American Health Care Act — would restructure a system of tax subsidies that have helped millions of working Americans who don’t get coverage through an employer to buy health plans.

In all, the plan would probably take away health coverage from several million Americans and raise costs for many more, especially low-income people and the middle-aged. But it would immediately end the requirement that all Americans have insurance, which has been highly unpopular, especially with Republicans, reduce federal authority over the healthcare system and provide a huge tax cut to upper-income families.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Civil rights leaders to meet Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions on Tuesday

(Jacquelyn Martin / Associated Press)

Leaders from some of the country’s most prominent civil rights organizations, many of which have been critical of the Trump administration’s record on civil rights, plan to meet Tuesday with Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions.

The group includes the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights President Wade Henderson, National Urban League President Marc Morial, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law President Kristen Clarke, National Action Network President Rev. Al Sharpton, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund President Sherrilyn Ifill, and National Coalition on Black Civic Participation President Melanie L. Campbell.

According to a news release from the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, an umbrella group, the civil rights leaders plan to “express grave concern for several troubling actions by the Department of Justice and the Trump administration.”

The civil rights leaders’ agenda will include addressing Trump’s newly revamped executive order on refugees and travel from six majority-Muslim countries, voting rights, police reform, the Violence Against Women Act, LGBTQ rights, sentencing reform and hate crimes.

The meeting is scheduled for 2:30 p.m. Eastern time at the Department of Justice.

Share

Ben Carson refers to slaves as immigrants on his first day as Housing secretary

Ben Carson opened his tenure as secretary of Housing and Urban Development with remarks to agency staff about American idealism that drew unwanted attention when Carson equated slaves to immigrants.

“There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

It’s not the first time that Carson, who was confirmed last week, has discussed slavery in the political sphere. In 2013, he called Obamacare “the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery.”

In 2015, President Barack Obama made similar comments at a naturalization ceremony.

“Life in America was not always easy. It wasn’t always easy for new immigrants. Certainly it wasn’t easy for those of African heritage who had not come here voluntarily, and yet in their own way were immigrants themselves,” he said.

Obama’s remarks gained renewed attention Tuesday night when “The Daily Show” host Trevor Noah discussed them after conservative news outlets had reported earlier in the day.

Updated on March 8 at 11:20 a.m.: This post has been updated with information about Obama’s remarks.

Share
Advertisement

House Republicans release Obamacare replacement plan -- and back away from several controversial ideas

(Jim Lo Scalzo / AFP-Getty Images)

House Republicans released a long-awaited Obamacare replacement plan Monday that would roll back the healthcare law’s extensive system for providing health insurance to millions of Americans.

The legislation, the first such bill that House Republican leaders have produced, would in 2020 eliminate federal aid that has allowed 31 states to expand their Medicaid programs to millions of previously uninsured poor people.

And the bill would restructure the tax subsidies that help Americans who don’t get coverage through an employer to buy health plans.

The House GOP plan, which has gone through a series of major changes in closed-door negotiations over the last several days, stepped back from several of the more controversial ideas that had been on the table.

For example, the legislation no longer proposes to tax health benefits that Americans get through an employer.

Share

New poll shows Americans want to fix Obamacare, not end it, while Koch groups push for full repeal

"We know the task before us is daunting," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Monday.
(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

As Republicans worked overtime Monday to craft their Obamacare replacement plan, political pressure mounted from almost all sides with conflicting messages over what to do with the healthcare law.

New polling Monday showed that most Americans want to fix the the Affordable Care Act, rather than gut it, as Republicans have long promised.

Fully 68% of Americans want to keep what works and fix the rest, while just 32% prefer the GOP’s repeal and replace approach, according to polling from Hart Research. Moreover, the polling showed most Americans — including 54% of President Trump’s voters — have a favorable view of the Medicaid system, which would face steep cuts under the Republican plan.

At the same time, the powerful Koch conservative network has launched a massive advertising push to encourage Republicans to keep their promise of full repeal of the healthcare law.

“You promised” is the slogan for the effort by Americans for Prosperity, which is hosting a rally Tuesday outside the Capitol to pressure GOP lawmakers.

The mixed political messages complicate the already difficult legislative task for Republicans.

Republicans in Congress want to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a new healthcare system that costs less but provides just as much coverage.

Analysts, though, find that goal difficult and expect millions of Americans to lose insurance under the GOP plan. It call for slashing access to Medicaid and capping the tax benefits of employer-sponsored healthcare plans.

“We know the task before us is daunting,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Monday.

“Let’s keep working this week so that we can bring Americans much-needed relief from Obamacare as soon as possible.”

As Republicans struggled to meet a self-imposed deadline Monday to unveil their bill, their traditional allies in the Koch network of conservative groups hardened against them.

Americans for Prosperity launched a six-figure ad buy against any GOP effort that falls short of full repeal.

The Koch groups are siding with a growing number of congressional conservatives who oppose the proposal, which he derided as “Obamacare lite” or “Obamacare 2.0.”

Conservatives, including President Trump’s rivals Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), worry the GOP alternative will simply replace the healthcare law with new mandates for coverage and create new federal costs.

They particularly take aim at the GOP plan to replace the subsidies offered through Obamacare that help some Americans buy private insurance with new tax credits. They see that as a new federal entitlement program.

The Koch group’s campaign is expected to expand soon to television ads with stories of Americans who want Republicans to end the healthcare law.

Share
Advertisement

Trump orders new, narrower travel ban

President Trump today signed an executive order ordering new travel restrictions for residents of six Muslim-majority countries as well as a temporary ban on refugees from around the world, retooling a directive issued five weeks ago that stoked chaos at the airports and drew international condemnation and a rebuke in the federal courts.

The new ban, which is set to take effect March 16, halts travel for 90 days for residents of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. The refugee suspension will last 120 days.

Read More

Share

House GOP readies ambitious push to repeal Obamacare, but many hurdles remain

House Republicans, despite stiff political headwinds, are readying an ambitious push this week to begin moving legislation to replace major parts of the Affordable Care Act, a crucial test of their ability to fulfill one of their party’s main campaign promises.

The plan marks the first time GOP lawmakers will do this since Obamacare was enacted seven years ago and will provide an early indication of whether President Trump can rally his party’s members of Congress, many of whom are anxious about how to repeal and replace the healthcare law.

The legislation could affect health insurance for tens of millions of Americans — not only those with Obamacare coverage, but also people with employer-provided insurance and Medicaid.

The House legislation — which was being finalized over the weekend, according to GOP officials — aims to fundamentally restructure the system that Obamacare created, which has extended health coverage to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Supreme Court puts off ruling on rights of transgender students

The Supreme Court announced Monday that it will put off a ruling on the rights of transgender students.

Instead, the justices asked an appeals court in Virginia to reconsider the case of Gavin Grimm, a transgender boy who was denied the right to use the boys’ restroom in his high school.

Lawyers for the Obama administration had weighed in on his behalf and said transgender students had a right to be treated based on their “gender identity,” not their gender at birth.

Based on that guidance, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled in favor of the student.

But last month, the Trump administration said it had withdrawn that guidance, leaving the law in doubt.

In a brief order issued Monday in the case of Gloucester County v. G.G., the court said the lower court’s decision is “vacated and the case is remanded to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit for further consideration in light of the guidance document” issued by the new administration.

The action will put off indefinitely a final ruling from the high court on the rights of transgender students.

Share

Revised travel ban is likely to come today, White House official says

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

The new version of President Trump’s controversial limits on entry for travelers from some predominantly Muslim countries will strike Iraq from the list and clarify that legal permanent residents are still allowed in the U.S., senior White House counselor Kellyanne Conway said Monday.

White House officials have indicated for days that a new iteration of the January order — now stuck in legal limbo — was imminent, though plans for when to release it have changed. Conway and White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said it would come Monday.

“This is a very important week in this White House, where the president is going to continue to act on, along with the Congress, major pieces of his legislative and executive agenda,” Conway said on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” citing the travel ban order as one piece of Trump’s plan.

Conway said the order contained “six or seven major points” that clarify who would be covered. In addition to removing Iraq from the list of seven Muslim-majority nations covered in the initial order, Syrian refugees would be subject to the same 120-day admission ban that refugees from other nations were; initially, Syrian refugees were to be barred indefinitely.

The new order is to take effect March 16, Conway said.

In defending the hasty rollout of the initial Jan. 26 directive, White House officials said they were acting with urgency to address an ongoing security threat. But after a Washington state federal judge issued a blanket restraining order to halt its implementation, which was sustained by a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the White House said it would focus on drafting a new order.

During a weekend escape to his Mar-a-Lago retreat, Trump dined Saturday with Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions and Secretary of Homeland Security John F. Kelly, as well as top White House officials involved in the order, including counsel Don McGahn, chief strategist Stephen Bannon and senior policy advisor Stephen Miller.

Share
Advertisement

Nunes, acceding to White House, says Trump’s wiretap claim will be investigated

(Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

Although many Republicans were caught unawares by President Trump’s unproven claim that the Obama White House ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower, Rep. Devin Nunes has promised to look into it.

Nunes (R-Tulare), who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, said the probe of the president’s allegation would be wrapped into an existing investigation of Russia’s role in the 2016 presidential campaign.

Obama, through a spokesman, denied Trump’s wiretap claim, which was made Saturday on Twitter. And James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that no such surveillance had been carried out during the campaign against Trump or his aides.

Nunes, who has been publicly skeptical as to whether there was any collusion with Russia by Trump or his camp, said the intelligence committee would “make inquiries into whether the government was conducting surveillance activities on any political party’s campaign officials or surrogates.”

The White House on Sunday demanded that Congress investigate whether Obama abused his executive powers, without providing any evidence the former president had done so.

Share

Atty. Gen. Sessions should ‘explain himself’ to Senate Judiciary Committee, Franken says

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions should reappear before the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain his contacts with Russia’s ambassador to Washington, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) said Sunday.

It was a question by Franken during Sessions’ confirmation hearing that elicited the then-nominee’s assertion that he had not met with any Russians during the presidential campaign, to which Sessions served as an advisor.

Franken, appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” said he wanted to give Sessions “the benefit of the doubt,” but that Sessions needed to clear up why he had not acknowledged two meetings with the Russian envoy, Sergey Kislyak, during the 2016 campaign.

Following the Washington Post’s disclosure of the meetings, Sessions recused himself from investigations surrounding Russian involvement in the campaign, but Franken said that did not end the matter.

“The attorney general owes it to the Judiciary Committee to come back and explain himself,” he said. “If he lied knowingly, he committed perjury.”

Share
Advertisement

Administration refuses to offer evidence for Trump accusation that Obama tapped his phones during the election

(Luis M. Alvarez / Associated Press)

President Trump, confronted by mounting pressure for an independent investigation into his associates’ ties to Russia, unleashed a startling and unsupported attack on his predecessor Saturday, accusing former President Obama of wiretapping his phones during the 2016 election.

Trump’s flurry of Twitter messages, which was supported by no evidence, was bizarre even for a White House with a history of broadsides against political opponents. Throughout the day, administration officials refused to offer any explanation for the president’s missive or any evidence to back it up.

Read More

Share

White House, still offering no evidence, demands investigation of whether Obama abused executive power

(Luis M. Alvarez / Associated Press))

The White House on Sunday called on Congress to investigate whether former President Obama abused his executive powers in connection with the 2016 campaign, but continued to offer no evidence to back up the claim.

The demand came amid a swirl of claims and counter-claims about Russian meddling in the presidential election. U.S. intelligence agencies have said such interference took place, and connections between the Trump camp and Russia are under investigation by the FBI.

Saturday on Twitter, President Trump accused Obama of “wire tapping” his New York headquarters, Trump Tower. He offered no evidence to substantiate the claim, which an Obama spokesman labeled false.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer followed up Sunday with a statement citing “very troubling” reports of “politically motivated” investigations during the 2016 election campaign. He did not cite the source of the reports.

“President Donald J. Trump is requesting that as part of their investigation into Russian activity, the congressional intelligence committees exercise their oversight authority to determine whether executive branch investigative powers were abused” in advance of the presidential election, Spicer said in the statement.

The former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, interviewed Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said he had no knowledge of any electronic surveillance having taken place at Trump Tower, which served as Trump’s headquarters during the 2016 campaign and transition to power after his election.

If a warrant for such surveillance had been obtained by the FBI under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, “I would know that,” Clapper said.

Clapper also said a report by the overall U.S. intelligence community did not contain any proof that the Trump camp had worked in concert with the Russians in order to tip the election to him.

Share
Advertisement

Violence erupts at a pro-Trump rally in Berkeley

Violence broke out Saturday at a rally in Berkeley aimed at expressing support for President Trump.

The rally and march, one of several held across the country, were slated to begin at Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park. But the pro-Trump contingent was met by Trump critics. Some shoving and punching occurred, and police were trying to maintain order.

The pro-Trump crowd marched several blocks but faced resistance from counter-protesters.

The East Bay Times reported there were several incidents in which protesters were punched, and at least one case where someone was pepper sprayed. Reporters at the scene said some of those involved had bloodied faces.

Videos and photos on Twitter show two people punching each other and pulling each other’s hair. Several people in the crowd were pepper-sprayed, among them an elderly man.

Read More

Share

Supporters gather for ‘March 4 Trump’ rallies around U.S.

Supporters of President Trump are convening at Trump Tower, the Washington Monument and other spots around the country to show their pride in his presidency.

Groups of hundreds of people turned out in places from Colorado’s state Capitol to near Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida for Saturday’s “March 4 Trump” rallies. At some gatherings, they clashed verbally with generally smaller groups of counterprotesters.

At Trump Tower in Manhattan, a couple of hundred supporters chanted “U-S-A” and held signs with messages such as “Yes he is our president.”

Some minor scuffles between dueling demonstrators at the Minnesota state Capitol were quickly defused by other protesters and police. Near Mar-a-Lago, where Trump is spending the weekend, the Palm Beach Post reported that people on both sides exchanged profanity.

Trump’s motorcade briefly stopped so he could wave to supporters.

Share
Advertisement

Obama’s spokesman responds to Trump’s wiretap allegations: ‘Simply false’

A spokesman for President Obama has issued a statement responding to Trump’s allegations that he was wiretapped by his predecessor during last year’s election.

“A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice,” Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for the former president, said in a statement.

“As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen,” Lewis said. “Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”

Early Saturday morning, Trump tweeted a series of accusations that the Obama administration had wiretapped the phones in Trump Tower. He compared it to “Nixon/Watergate” and McCarthyism and called Obama a “bad (or sick) guy.” Trump offered no evidence to back up his allegations.

Share

Citing no evidence, Trump accuses Obama of tapping his phones during the election

(Luis M. Alvarez / Associated Press)

President Trump accused the Obama administration of wiretapping his phones during the 2016 election, an escalation of tit-for-tat allegations between Trump and Democrats as pressure mounts for an independent investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia.

Trump cited no evidence that former President Obama deployed what Trump described as a “Nixon/Watergate” effort to monitor his campaign.

“Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found,” Trump wrote on Twitter Saturday, adding: “This is McCarthyism!”

It would be highly unusual for a sitting president to be aware of such requests. By blaming Obama directly, Trump accused the former president of reaching into a federal investigation and signing off on an illegal wiretap, which is a felony.

“How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!” Trump wrote in a series of four tweets.

If federal investigators did monitor Trump’s phones or computers lawfully, a court would have demanded information about potential criminal misconduct or unlawful foreign contacts. Such investigations are closely held and rarely, if ever, shared with the White House.

It is also possible Trump has no evidence his phones were tapped and is repeating unfounded reports circulating in conservative media circles.

The suggestion that Obama ordered surveillance on Trump is “false,” said a spokesman for Obama in response to Trump’s tweets.

“A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice,” Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for the former president said in a statement.

“As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen,” Lewis said. “Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”

Trump has pushed back hard against accusations his campaign had improper contacts with Russian officials during the 2016 campaign.

U.S. intelligence officials concluded in January that Russia had launched covert actions and cyberhacking to damage Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and help Donald Trump win. But it is unclear if those actions were coordinated with people in Trump’s inner circle.

In the meantime, a pattern of Trump officials downplaying their contact with Russia has stirred calls for further investigation.

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions did not disclose meeting Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak when asked about contacts with Russians during his Senate confirmation hearing. On Thursday, Sessions recused himself from any potential investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Trump’s former national security advisor, Michael Flynn, resigned last month when it was disclosed that he had misled Trump administration officials about conversations with Kislyak about U.S. sanctions against Russia.

Share
Advertisement

Trump won’t require Keystone XL pipeline to use American steel after all

A few weeks ago, when President Trump signed a directive clearing several hurdles out of the way of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, the White House touted a new requirement -- that the pipeline be made with American-produced steel.

Never mind.

The requirement to use domestic steel posed a potential conflict between the administration’s populist agenda and it’s pro-business stance. Apparently, business won.

Friday, a White House spokeswoman said Keystone would be exempt from the buy-America requirement because the pipeline was already partially underway.

“The way that executive order is written,” said White House Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, “it’s specific to new pipelines or those that are being repaired.

“Since this one is already currently under construction, the steel is already literally sitting there; it would be hard to go back,” Sanders told reporters traveling with Trump on Air Force One en route to Florida.

That’s not the way Trump described the requirement in his public statements. In a speech a week ago at the CPAC conference of conservative activists, the president said he had personally come up with the buy-America idea while signing off on the Keystone project.

“We have authorized the construction ... of the Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines,” he said.

“This took place while I was getting ready to sign,” he continued. “I said, ‘who makes the pipes for the pipeline?’

“‘Well, sir, it comes from all over the world, isn’t that wonderful?’

“I said, ‘Nope, it comes from the United States, or we’re not building one.’ American steel. If they want a pipeline in the United States, they’re going to use pipe that’s made in the United States.”

About half the steel used to build the pipeline is to come from a plant in Arkansas, according to the pipeline builder, TransCanada. The rest will be imported.

Share

Launch of major State Department human rights report is low-key

Peace advocates protest extrajudicial killings in the Philippines that were cited in the State Department's human rights report.
(Rolex Dela Pena / EPA)

In a possible sign of things to come, the State Department gave a decidedly low-key launch Friday to its annual report on human rights worldwide.

Normally the comprehensive report that looks at the human rights situation in nearly 200 countries and territories is released with a bit of fanfare.

Some years, the secretary of State has personally announced it to reporters, or, at the least, the official in charge of the agency’s democracy and rights department does so.

This year, new Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was not on hand. And only a State Department official who declined to be identified announced the release of the study and agreed to answer reporters’ questions by telephone conference call.

President Trump has indicated that promoting democracy and human rights will not be his administration’s top foreign policy priorities.

Tillerson, in his Senate confirmation hearing, alarmed some activists when he declined to label some countries with notorious human rights records as abusers.

The State Department official who spoke took issue with reporters who suggested Tillerson was less interested in human rights. The official cited a preface that Tillerson wrote for the report, which he noted showed the United States’ “unwavering commitment to advancing liberty, human dignity and global prosperity.”

Tom Malinowski, who headed the democracy and rights office as an assistant secretary of State until Trump was inaugurated, was present at last year’s launch.

“Every SecState since at least Warren Christopher [1993-97] personally released the human rights reports,” he tweeted Friday. “MIA Tillerson - bad for him and the country.”

The Human Rights First advocacy organization said in a statement that the failure to put a public face on the report’s release was “another troubling indication that the Trump administration intends to abandon U.S. leadership on human rights and universal values.”

Asked why neither Tillerson nor any other official was publicly attending the rollout, the State Department official referred back to Tillerson’s Senate testimony.

The report itself said that, despite consolidation of democracy in some parts of the world, there was also a great deal of backsliding.

Extrajudicial killings, torture and abuse of minorities, migrants, women and gays and lesbians is on the rise in many countries. Among those cited is the Philippines, where the government and vigilantes have been accused of killing thousands of people in a so-called drug war.

This is the 41st year that the report, compiled through the work of hundreds of U.S. diplomats the world over, has been released. It is often used as guidance for congressional decisions on the distribution of foreign aid — something else the Trump administration is considering cutting back.

Share
Advertisement

As governor, Mike Pence used a personal email to conduct public business -- and got hacked

(Michael Conroy / Associated Press)

He was a chief critic of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. Now it appears Vice President Mike Pence did the same.

While serving as governor of Indiana, Pence used a private email account to conduct public business, according to a report from the Indianapolis Star.

Based on emails obtained by the newspaper, Pence, who served as governor from 2013 until January, communicated via his personal AOL account with top advisors concerning, among other things, security gates at the governor’s residence and his state’s response to terror attacks around the globe. Moreover, Pence’s email was hacked last summer, the newspaper reported.

A governor’s use of a private email account is not new.

In 2008, it was revealed that Sarah Palin, while serving as Alaska’s governor, maintained a private email account in addition to her official government account.

Unlike Clinton, who used a private email server while secretary of State, Pence and governors do not deal with federally classified information.

Marc Lotter, a spokesman for Pence, told the Star that any comparisons between Pence and Clinton were “absurd.”

Throughout the campaign, Pence, along with then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, assailed Clinton relentlessly for her use of the private server.

Both called on then-Atty. Gen. Loretta Lynch to file charges against Clinton, but after an investigation the FBI recommended that no charges be filed.

Share

Conservatives ponder if Sessions should have recused himself

( (John Bazemore / Associated Press))

U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions has recused himself from any probe into the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russians during last year’s election. Now what?

President Trump still voices confidence in him.

“Jeff Sessions is an honest man. He did not say anything wrong,” Trump tweeted Thursday following developments that Sessions met with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the U.S., on a handful of occasions in 2016. (In January, during his confirmation hearing, Sessions had denied any contacts with Russians last year.)

Here are some of today’s headlines on Sessions and other matters:

Sessions recusal is an unfortunate surrender (TownHall)

While Democrats and Republicans alike on Capitol Hill called for Sessions to recuse himself, some conservatives have asked: If Sessions didn’t do anything wrong, why bother to recuse himself?

“Liberals were joined by pandering Republicans seeking to curry favor by staking out the seemingly reasonable middle ground of a mere harangue that Sessions recuse himself from further investigations into the matter,” writes the conservative columnist Mark Davis.

As intelligence officials have made clear that Russians interfered in the 2016 election, Congressional Democrats have vowed to press ahead with investigations.

Even so, writes Davis, for now “there is no evidence that Sessions or anyone with the Trump campaign engaged in any sinister collusion to facilitate Russian mischief toward our election.”

Two Republicans break ranks, call for Trump’s taxes (Washington Examiner)

It used to be an issue only Hillary Clinton and her allies focused on. Now, it seems even Republicans are interested in seeing Trump’s taxes.

Reps. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) and Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) joined nearly 160 Democrats on Friday in signing a letter calling on Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to compel Trump to release his taxes from the past decade, notes this Examiner piece.

During the campaign Trump said he would not release any of his recent returns until the Internal Revenue Service completes an audit. But the IRS says all taxpayers are free to make their own tax returns public, regardless of any audit.

Trump became the first presidential candidate in modern political history to refuse to release his tax returns. Since he entered the White House Trump has said it’s a non-issue and that the American people do not care about his taxes.

Jewish bomb threat arrest shows Trump was right not to jump to conclusions (Daily Caller)

In recent weeks, Trump was assailed by critics – mostly on the left – for not offering a forceful rebuke of recent threats against Jewish centers nationwide.

Last week, Jewish leaders castigated Trump after he reportedly said that recent bomb threats against Jewish centers could have been done in “the reverse” to “make others look bad.”

On Friday, authorities arrested a 31-year-old man on suspicion of making bomb threats to seven Jewish community centers around the country. The man, Juan Thompson, was a writer for the Intercept, and was fired last year for fabricating quotes.

This piece notes that Trump was “blasted for saying that it was too early to conclude who was making the phone calls.”

The Caller highlights some of Thompson’s public support for Bernie Sanders, adding “at the very least, Thompson’s involvement shows at least some of the threats came from people opposed to Trump. And Thompson was certainly no fan of the Republican.”

Share
Advertisement

Trump fires back at Democrat over Russia ties, calls Schumer a ‘total hypocrite’

His administration under fire over Russian contacts, President Trump shot back at Democrats on Friday by posting an old photo of Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) having a doughnut and coffee with Russian President Vladimir Putin, labeling the senator a “total hypocrite” and somewhat jokingly calling for an investigation.

Above the smiling photo-op, Trump wrote: “We should start an immediate investigation into @SenSchumer and his ties to Russia and Putin. A total hypocrite!”

Trump, who rarely passes up an opportunity to punch back when under attack, was responding to Democrats’ calls for an investigation into Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions’ failure to tell Congress under oath about two meetings with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Sessions agreed to recuse himself Thursday from any investigation related to Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign.

The president had “zero” interaction with Russian officials about his campaign and his presidency, a White House spokeswoman told reporters aboard Air Force One.

“The president himself knows what his involvement was, and that’s zero, and I think he is the you know primary person that he’s be held responsible and he had no interaction,” Deputy White House Press Secretary Sarah H. Sanders said.

When asked whether the president is concerned that there are more contacts between his circle and Russian officials that he doesn’t know about, Sanders said, “I don’t think so.”

Trump’s taunting tweet was part of a running tit-for-tat exchange between the White House and the Senate minority leader on social media.

Schumer had written on Twitter on Thursday that Congress should expand its investigation into Russia’s intelligence effort to tip the 2016 election in Trump’s favor.

“The bottom line is we have an obligation to get to the truth. We must evaluate the scope of Russia’s interference in our election,” Schumer tweeted.

In response, White House communications official Dan Scavino posting the photograph of Schumer and Putin smiling together, writing: “Do it over a donut and coffee.”

Schumer, however, had a quick comeback for Trump’s latest missive.

Share

How Jeff Sessions’ influence flows through the Trump administration

(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions has significant influence on President Trump’s administration, having placed former staffers and associates in key positions. Sessions, who shares Trump’s hard-line view on immigration enforcement, was the first senator to endorse Trump’s candidacy.

Here’s where Sessions’ former staffers and close associates have landed, including at some of the most senior levels of the White House.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s fast-track deportations face legal hurdle

The Trump administration’s plan for putting hundreds of thousands of recent migrants in the country illegally onto a fast track for deportation is likely to trigger the next major legal battle over immigration enforcement.

Judges have put on hold the president’s temporary ban on travel to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries. That executive order, as originally proposed, could have affected tens of thousands of travelers and U.S. visa holders.

But the administration’s efforts to step up immigration enforcement and streamline deportation — outlined in memos from Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly — could affect far more people, including potentially most of the estimated 11 million immigrants living illegally in the United States.

One part of that effort — the expanded use of what the law refers to as expedited removal — is almost certain to face a constitutional challenge in the courts.

Read More

Share

How Jeff Sessions came to be an integral part of Trump’s administration

(John Bazemore / Associated Press)

Shortly after Jeff Sessions swore his oath as attorney general, former staffers gathered in the Oval Office alongside him and President Trump for a photo. Missing, one noticed, was Stephen Miller, who’d left Sessions’ Senate office to join Trump’s campaign and is now the president’s chief policy advisor.

Trump enthusiastically summoned Miller to join them, saying that without this aide who’d worked at Sessions’ side for years, he wouldn’t have been elected president.

That a former aide is now in a powerful West Wing position demonstrates how Sessions has so stocked Trump’s administration with allies and loyalists that his influence is unlikely to be diminished, even as he finds himself under fire for failing to disclose meetings last year with a Russian official. Sessions said Thursday that he would recuse himself from the investigation of Russian interference in the presidential election.

Sessions’ swearing-in marked the culmination of an unlikely partnership between Trump, the brash and burly New York businessman, and Sessions, an elfin Southerner, that brought each from the fringes of the Republican Party to the center of national power.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Jared Kushner met with Russian ambassador during transition, White House official says

Jared Kushner at Trump Tower in November.
(Spencer Platt / Getty Images)

A White House official said President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and the man who would become national security advisor, Michael Flynn, met with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. in December.

The official called the sit-down at Trump Tower in New York a “brief courtesy meeting.” The official wasn’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly and insisted on anonymity.

Flynn resigned last month after admitting that he misled Vice President Mike Pence and other White House officials about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

The Trump team’s public accounting of Flynn’s conversations with the ambassador have changed multiple times. The White House did not confirm the in-person meeting — or Kushner’s contact with the ambassador — until Thursday.

The New York Times cited White House spokeswoman Hope Hicks in confirming that Kushner and Flynn met with Kislyak.

Share

Read Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions’ prepared remarks

(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions’ prepared statement:

“During the course of the confirmation proceedings on my nomination to be Attorney General, I advised the Senate Judiciary Committee that ‘[i]f a specific matter arose where I believed my impartiality might reasonably be questioned, I would consult with Department ethics officials regarding the most appropriate way to proceed.’

“During the course of the last several weeks, I have met with the relevant senior career Department officials to discuss whether I should recuse myself from any matters arising from the campaigns for President of the United States.

“Having concluded those meetings today, I have decided to recuse myself from any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for President of the United States.

“I have taken no actions regarding any such matters, to the extent they exist.

“This announcement should not be interpreted as confirmation of the existence of any investigation or suggestive of the scope of any such investigation.

“Consistent with the succession order for the Department of Justice, Acting Deputy Attorney General and U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Dane Boente shall act as and perform the functions of the Attorney General with respect to any matters from which I have recused myself to the extent they exist.”

Share
Advertisement

Atty. Gen. Sessions says he will step aside from Russia investigation

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions will step aside from any further involvement in the investigation of Russian interference in the presidential election, he announced at a news conference Thursday.

The announcement came after a day of mounting calls from fellow Republicans for Sessions to recuse himself from any role in the investigation. Those calls began when news broke that Sessions had failed to disclose contacts during the campaign year with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

During his confirmation hearing earlier this year, Sessions said he had not had meetings with Russian officials. In fact, he had at least two conversations with the ambassador.

Sessions defended his meeting with Kislyak, saying the two had not discussed campaign-related issues.

“I don’t recall any specific political discussions,” he told reporters, describing his conversations with Kislyak.

In the news conference, Sessions said that even before the news of his meetings with Kislyak became public, he had consulted with career Justice Department officials and had planned to make a decision today on whether to recuse himself.

“I asked for their candid and honest opinion about what I should do,” he said. “My staff recommended recusal.”

The officials he consulted “said that since I had involvement in the campaign, I should not have any involvement” in any investigation of campaign-related matters.

“I believe those recommendations are right and just ... therefore I have recused myself,” he said.

Future decisions related to the investigation will be in the hands of the department’s acting deputy Attorney general Dana J. Boente, a career prosecutor who was appointed to that job a few days after President Trump’s inauguration.

Earlier in the day, Trump said he did not think Sessions should recuse himself, but Sessions said that a close examination of the Justice department’s rules showed he had little choice.

“When you evaluate the rules,” he said, it’s clear that “I should not be involved in investigating a campaign I had a role in.”

Sessions noted that his statement should not be taken as confirming the existence of any specific investigation.

Other officials have confirmed that the FBI and other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been examining Russia’s role in the 2016 campaign and have also been looking at possible contacts between people close to Trump and Russian officials.

Share

Jeff Sessions to address Russia questions this afternoon

(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions is set to hold a news conference at 4 p.m. EST in response to the firestorm over his meetings with a Russian ambassador last year and whether he should recuse himself from a federal investigation into the Kremlin’s efforts to influence U.S. elections.

Sessions, under rapidly mounting pressure from Republican members of Congress, indicated Thursday that he would be open to stepping aside from any role in the investigation of Russian involvement in the presidential election.

Sessions quickly came under fire after reports late Wednesday that he had met with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. last year, which appeared to contradict a statement Sessions made in his confirmation hearing to be attorney general.

Share
Advertisement

Rep. Adam Schiff blasts FBI director, demands more information about Russia investigation

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee criticized the FBI on Thursday, complaining that it failed to share enough information about its investigation into alleged Russian interference in the presidential election.

“We cannot represent to the American people that we’re doing a thorough job if the Department of Justice or the FBI is unwilling to tell us what indeed they’ve looked at, what leads they have followed, where they have found substance and where they have not,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) told reporters shortly after his committee was briefed by FBI Director James Comey.

In a separate interview, Schiff said Comey declined to answer many of the lawmakers’ questions and that such reticence “can’t persist.”

“If we’re going to do our job, the FBI is going to have to fully cooperate with us, and that means they can’t say, ‘We’ll tell you about this but we won’t tell you about that,’” Schiff told the Los Angeles TImes.

Schiff has also called for Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions to recuse himself from oversight of the federal investigation into the Kremlin’s meddling in November’s elections.

Many other Democrats and even some Republicans were also urging Sessions to recuse himself in the wake of disclosures Wednesday night that Sessions had failed to tell senators at his confirmation hearing that he had met with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. on at least two occasions.

Sessions’ spokeswoman said the then-senator met with the Russian ambassador in September in his capacity as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, not as a surrogate for the Trump campaign.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), the Intelligence Committee’s chairman, said he had “no idea” whether Sessions should recuse himself or not. “We have no idea what — what he did or didn’t do,” Nunes said.

“We’ve got to be very careful here,” Nunes said. “It’s a slippery slope. All the countries in the world basically have embassies here. A lot of those countries are adversaries. But we all meet with those — many senators and congressmen meet with those ambassadors on a regular basis.”

Share

Fallout from Sessions’ meetings with Russian ambassador has conservatives on edge

After a widely lauded speech before Congress this week, President Trump is now faced with mounting concerns over Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions’ meetings with the Russian ambassador last year.

In January, during his confirmation hearings, Sessions denied any contacts with Russians during the campaign, but now it’s been revealed he actually met with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, on a handful of occasions. Many Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill have called on Sessions to recuse himself from overseeing any investigation into potential ties between Trump’ s campaign and Russian officials.

Trump said Thursday he has “total” confidence in Sessions and was not aware of the conversations Sessions had with Kislyak.

Here are some of today’s headlines:

Claire McCaskill says she never met with the Russian ambassador, but she did (TownHall)

Sessions says his meetings with Kislyak took place because he was a member of the Senate Armed Services committee, but now a top Democrat is under scrutiny.

U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who has served on the committee for more than a decade, said she has never visited with the Russian ambassador. Indeed, she’s been a vocal critic, calling for Sessions to recuse himself from an investigation into ties between Trump’s campaign and the Russians.

But wait, notes this piece — did McCaskill really never meet with the Russian ambassador?

It cites a January 2013 tweet from McCaskill’s official Twitter account, in which she says, “Off to a meeting w/ Russian ambassador.”

And in August 2015, this piece notes, she tweeted: “Today calls with British, Russian and German ambassadors re: Iran deal. #Doingmyhomework”

In a follow-up tweet, McCaskill said that four years ago she did go to a meeting with “many Senators about international adoptions. Russian Amb also attended.”

Pelosi: Sessions’ Russia contacts ‘completely different’ from Loretta Lynch’s secret meetings with Bill Clinton (Daily Caller)

This piece, interestingly, allows a top Democrat to offer analysis.

Last year, as Republicans focused on Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, former President Bill Clinton visited privately with then-U.S. Atty. Gen. Loretta Lynch. It was around the time that her office was weighing whether to file charges against Hillary Clinton. (Ultimately, no charges were filed.)

So is this similar to Sessions’ meeting with Kislyak?

No, says House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has called on Sessions to resign.

“There couldn’t be a starker difference,” Pelosi told reporters Thursday. “Atty. Gen. Lynch had a social encounter, serendipitous, some might say, that the former president of the United States came by to say hello and they discussed their grandchildren.

“He [Sessions] was a very important part, one of the first people in the Congress to endorse President Trump, and now we see that he — although he has not told the truth about it — had conversations with Russian officials.”

The military build up we need (Weekly Standard)

On the heels of Trump’s announcement that he’s seeking a $54-billion increase in military spending, Republicans, for the most part, have rejoiced. In polls, Republicans normally favor more military spending.

In this article, the authors argue in support of the budget hike.

“Today … the strategic landscape is darkening and U.S. primacy is eroding,” write the authors. “Great-power military competition is back. China and Russia are seeking regional hegemony and contesting global norms such as nonaggression and freedom of navigation. They are also developing the military punch to underwrite these ambitions.”

Updated - 12:11 p.m. This post was updated with recent comments from Trump and an additional tweet from Sen. McCaskill.

Share
Advertisement

Find the bill? Sen. Rand Paul, House Democrats scour the Capitol for GOP’s secret Obamacare replacement

One of the most closely guarded secrets on Capitol Hill has been the House GOP’s proposed legislation to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

On Thursday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) wanted to have a look.

Paul, a critic of the House efforts, got word that draft legislation was available for viewing by House Republicans in a secure, undisclosed location in the Capitol.

So he headed over Thursday, copy machine in tow, for a look-see. He was denied entry.

“We don’t know if it’s 1,000 pages, 1,500 pages, but we know we’re not given access to read it, and I think that’s a problem,” Paul told reporters, standing outside a closed door on the first floor of the Capitol.

“I’m not waiting until after it passes to find out what’s in Obamacare — the new replacement bill.”

Paul, the brash libertarian-leaning Republican who first swept into Congress on the 2010 anti-Obamacare wave, reminded reporters that one of his own early bills was the “Read the Bill Act.”

At the time, Republicans had scolded Democrats for suggesting that once Congress passed the Affordable Care Act, Americans would come to understand its benefits.

Now, it’s GOP leaders who have tried to avoid public exposure for their proposal, even though various committees could begin debating the legislation as early as next week.

Rather than allow public access, the House Energy & Commerce Committee took the unusual step of allowing its GOP members to view the bill Thursday in a secure room, leaving their smartphones outside, aides said.

House Speaker Paul Ryan gave assurances Thursday that leaders would reveal the bill publicly “soon.”

Predictably, the effort to keep the text a secret backfired. Once Paul got shut out, others leaped into the hunt for the bill.

Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the top Democrat on the Energy & Commerce panel, led a “goose chase” around the Capitol complex Thursday afternoon in search of the bill, a spokesman said.

Pallone and Rep. Jan Schakowski (D-Ill.) tried their luck at the secure location where they believed the bill to be to no avail.

Then they ventured a few doors down to Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s office, only to be turned away.

From there, they snooped around the office of Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), the chairman of the Energy & Commerce Committee. Next, they went to the committee itself.

Nothing.

After about 45 minutes, they called it quits, for now.

“He’s never encountered a bill in a secure room that only one side of the aisle could see,” a Pallone spokesman said.

The theatrics have a serious side: Congress is deeply split over replacing the Affordable Care Act.

House Republicans face deep resistance from within their ranks, mostly from conservatives who, like Paul, say that the proposed bill is just “Obamacare lite.”

At the same time, some Senate Republicans say the proposal goes too far.

Democrats, almost unanimously, oppose the GOP plans.

One key part of the House proposal, to replace the current subsidies that help people buy insurance with a new refundable tax credit, has drawn special fire from conservatives. They see it as another federal entitlement program.

“That sounds like Obamacare under another name. It’s Democrat ideas in Republican clothing,” Paul said.

Other Republicans worry that residents in their states will lose healthcare coverage because the GOP plan would make steep cuts to Medicaid.

“Everybody’s saying the train’s left the station and it’s coming,” Paul said. “Well, why don’t we get to read it then?”

Share

Donald Trump has ‘total’ confidence in Jeff Sessions but ‘wasn’t aware’ of Russia conversations

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions.
(Jim Lo Scalzo / EPA)

President Trump said he has “total” confidence in Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions in his first public comments since reports emerged that Sessions failed to disclose meetings with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak last year.

But that confidence could be undermined given that Trump also indicated he did not know about the meetings before they were reported by the Washington Post on Wednesday night.

“I wasn’t aware,” Trump said in response to shouted questions from reporters as he toured the aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford, stationed in Newport News, Va.

As to whether Sessions spoke truthfully in his Senate confirmation hearing, when he denied under oath having meetings with Russians, Trump said, “I think he probably did.”

Trump also said, “I don’t think so,” when asked whether Sessions should recuse himself from an FBI investigation of Russian meddling in the election.

Share
Advertisement

Senior U.S. drug official praises cooperation with Mexico, a ‘law enforcement wall’

A top U.S. drug official made a strong case Thursday for continued cooperation with Mexico on fighting drug-trafficking, saying successful law enforcement already has created a virtual wall.

In a subtle dig at the Trump administration, William Brownfield, the State department’s senior diplomat involved in drug policy, said that despite a crisis drug epidemic, the United States and Mexico were in a better position than ever to combat it.

“In a sense, we have developed a law enforcement cooperative wall at this point without actually having the physical construction of a wall,” Brownfield said.

Brownfield, assistant secretary of State for international narcotics and law enforcement, spoke to reporters as his agency released the 32nd annual narcotics-control strategy report.

Brownfield said the U.S. and Mexico had developed an extended system of intelligence-sharing and joint operations to counter illegal drug trafficking in the last decade since the beginning of the Merida Initiative, an aid program dedicated to law enforcement and the so-called war on drugs.

Any future efforts, he said, should be coordinated with Mexican authorities. That contrasts with what President Trump often describes as a unilateral approach to stopping drugs from flowing into the country.

Still, Brownfield acknowledged that the U.S.is suffering its worst heroin and opioid crisis in 60 years. Almost all the heroin consumed in the United States — 90% to 94% — comes from Mexico, he said.

Brownfield dodged questions about how possible budget cuts at the State Department would hurt his agency’s work. He also had praise for the anti-narcotics trafficking efforts of the United Nations — another potential target of the administration’s budget cutting.

Share

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry confirmed by Senate as new Energy secretary

(Kathy Willens / Associated Press)

The Senate confirmed former Texas Gov. Rick Perry to serve as Energy secretary Thursday.

At his confirmation hearing, Perry vowed to be an advocate for an agency he once pledged to eliminate and promised to rely on federal scientists, including those who work on climate change.

Perry served 14 years at Texas governor. He said he was for “all of the above” on energy production, from oil and gas to renewable sources like wind and solar power, before former President Obama embraced the strategy.

Share
Advertisement

Kremlin spokesman says any contacts between Sessions and Russian envoy are ‘not our headache’

Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov
(Alexander Zemlianichenko / Associated Press)

A Kremlin spokesman said Thursday that any past meetings between Russia’s envoy to Washington, Sergey Kislyak, and U.S. Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions were “not our headache.”

The spokesman, Dmitri Peskov, told reporters in a conference call that he did not know if the two had been in contact during the U.S. presidential campaign, and that if contacts did occur, he did not know “what was their content.”

Sessions, then a U.S. senator, served as a foreign advisor to President Trump during the campaign. He is now at the center of an uproar over reports that he met twice with the Russian envoy and then lied under oath to congressional colleagues when he said he had not had contacts with any Russian official.

Russia has vehemently denied U.S. intelligence conclusions that Moscow meddled in the election campaign. The FBI is looking into whether Trump’s camp was in contact with Russian officials at the time.

Peskov said “unfounded” speculation about Kislyak’s role should be ignored, and urged reporters to be “guided only by official statements.”

American news reports about Russian interference in the U.S. presidential campaign are based on “heated passions … a very emotional background,” he added.

“We can repeat yet again that Russia has not, is not going to and will not meddle in domestic affairs, let alone election campaigns, of other nations,” he said.

Share

U.S. conducts airstrikes against Al Qaeda in Yemen, the first since ill-fated SEAL raid

The U.S. military conducted airstrikes in the predawn hours against suspected Al Qaeda positions Thursday across three provinces in Yemen, marking the first American attacks since an ill-fated Navy SEAL raid in January.

Officials said the bombing runs against alleged Al Qaeda targets in Abyan, Bayda and Shabwa provinces were planned months before the rare on-the-ground Jan. 29 raid, in which Chief Petty Officer William “Ryan” Owens and two dozen civilians were killed.

More than 20 airstrikes took place over several hours beginning at 3 a.m. local time and were coordinated with President Abdu Rabu Mansour Hadi’s fragile government, the Pentagon said.

Yemen has been locked in a civil war since 2014. The resulting chaos has allowed the militant group, known as Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, to flourish and amass power in the country.

“The strikes will degrade the AQAP’s ability to coordinate external terror attacks and limit their ability to use territory seized from the legitimate government of Yemen as a safe space for terror plotting,” Capt. Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement. “Targets of the strikes included militants, equipment, infrastructure, heavy weapons systems and fighting positions.”

It’s not clear whether intelligence gleaned from the special operations raid played any role in the airstrikes because the targets were identified ahead of time.

However, top U.S. officials, including Defense Secretary James N. Mattis, have said that cellphones, laptops and other equipment collected from the raid have resulted in vital intelligence on the group.

The mission comes at a time when the Pentagon is looking to increase its operations against the group.

AQAP has seized cities and towns, looted banks and raised millions of dollars by extorting companies, imposing taxes and export duties, and smuggling amid Yemen’s multi-sided civil war.

U.S. intelligence agencies consider AQAP one of Al Qaeda’s most dangerous offshoots because of its repeated attempts to attack Western targets.

The group attempted to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner over Detroit in 2009, tried to take down two cargo planes headed to Chicago in 2010, and claimed responsibility for the shooting that killed 12 people at the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris in 2015.

Share
Advertisement

Trump sees himself as a dealmaker and immigration reform as the ultimate deal to deliver. But not anytime soon

President Trump sees himself as a masterful dealmaker, and he has begun signaling that he believes he can land perhaps the thorniest of transactions in Washington: immigration reform.

Trump sparked a flurry of speculation when he privately told television anchors over lunch this week that he could support a compromise that allowed people with no criminal record to stay in the country and work and pay taxes.

But immigration experts are skeptical Trump has the attention span or the desire to pass a sweeping immigration overhaul, a deeply complicated undertaking that has failed twice in Washington in the last decade and would represent an about-face from Trump’s hard-line campaign stance against illegal immigration and crackdown on migrants since he took office.

Read More

Share

Senate confirms Ben Carson as Housing secretary

The Senate has confirmed retired neurosurgeon and former Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson as secretary of Housing and Urban Development. The vote was 58-41.

Carson will lead an agency with about 8,300 employees and a budget of about $47 billion.

Carson has no government or housing policy experience. Despite that, his nomination cleared a Senate committee in January on a unanimous vote. Republicans praised his life story as inspiring. Carson grew up in inner-city Detroit with a single mother who had a third-grade education. Democrats welcomed Carson’s promises to address homelessness, lead hazards in housing, and other issues.

HUD oversees billions of dollars in housing assistance to low-income people. It also enforces fair housing laws and offers mortgage insurance to poorer Americans.

Share
Advertisement

Trump trade policy report suggests he might resist WTO system

President Trump in a meeting with manufacturing CEOs at the White House.
President Trump in a meeting with manufacturing CEOs at the White House.
(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

The Trump administration Wednesday sent its strongest signal yet that it was prepared to buck the international trade order, including confronting the World Trade Organization, to assertively defend the economic interests and sovereignty of the United States.

In a mandated annual report to Congress outlining the president’s trade agenda, the administration repeated Trump’s warnings that the U.S. would take tough measures to combat dumping and other unfair practices by trading partners and ensure a level playing field.

The document, like Trump’s speech to Congress on Tuesday, was striking in its lack of specifics on what actions the president intended to take.

At the same time, the administration gave notice to the rest of the world that the U.S. would no longer tolerate distortions in global markets and that it stood ready to make a radical break from the past by emphasizing U.S. laws instead of deferring to global trading rules set by the WTO. The organization regulates trade and settles disputes among the more than 150 member nations, including the U.S.

Read More

Share

Congressional leaders call for Atty. Gen. Sessions to step aside from Russia investigation

Growing numbers of lawmakers from both parties have called on Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions to step aside from the probe of Russian interference in the election after disclosures that, contrary to his sworn testimony, he met with the Russian ambassador twice during the campaign.

Top Democrats, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, said Sessions has perjured himself and must resign.

Republicans did not go that far, but several influential members of the party said Sessions should play no role in the investigation that is being conducted by the FBI and other law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

The unease in Congress underscored the mounting concerns over the Trump administration’s ties to Russia.

Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, tweeted Thursday that Sessions “should clarify his testimony and recuse himself” -- the legal term for an official stepping aside from having a role in an issue.

Many lawmakers want an independent commission or special prosecutor to investigate Russian involvement in the campaign and the question of whether anyone close to Trump was involved.

Currently, the House and Senate Intelligence Committees are conducting separate investigations. Republican leaders in Congress have resisted efforts to broaden the investigation or create a special panel, preferring to keep the investigations more closely held in the intelligence committees.

Late Wednesday, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal both reported that Sessions had met with the Russian ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kisylak, in July and September.

The disclosure appeared to contradict Sessions’ sworn testimony during his Senate confirmation hearing to be Trump’s attorney general, the nation’s top law enforcement officer.

“I did not have communications with the Russians,” Sessions said during the hearing. He was confirmed as attorney general in February.

A spokeswoman for Sessions downplayed the meetings as routine business that he had conducted in his capacity as a senator and a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, not related to his role as the main senator backing Trump’s bid for president.

In a statement issued late Wednesday, Sessions said that he “never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign.”

Pelosi accused Sessions of having lied under oath.

“Atty. Gen. Sessions has never had the credibility to oversee the FBI investigation of senior Trump officials’ ties to the Russians. That is why Democrats have consistently called for Sessions to recuse himself from any oversight of the investigation,” Pelosi said.

“Now, after lying under oath to Congress about his own communications with the Russians, the attorney general must resign,” she said.

Share
Advertisement

California’s Kevin McCarthy, a top House Republican, says Sessions should step aside from Russia investigation

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions should step aside from any role in the investigation of potential contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) said Thursday.

McCarthy’s remarks made him the highest-ranking member of his party to say that Sessions should step aside from the investigation.

The FBI and other U.S. law enforcement agencies have been looking into whether people associated with the Trump campaign may have had contacts with Russian officials during the election year. Sessions, as attorney general, oversees the FBI.

The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday evening that Sessions had at least two meetings during the summer and fall with the Russian ambassador. That appeared to contradict a statement Sessions made in his confirmation hearing to be attorney general.

In the hearing, Sessions had said he had not had any meetings with Russians. Sessions said in a statement late Wednesday that he “never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign.”

McCarthy, in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” said that “I think [for] the trust of the American people you recuse yourself in these situations.”

After adding that he did not want to “prejudge” the situation, McCarthy said that “for any investigation going forward, you want to make sure everybody trusts the investigation.”

Obtaining that trust “would be easier” if Sessions recused himself, McCarthy added. Recusal is the legal term for an official stepping aside from any role in a specific matter.

Share

Pelosi on Sessions: ‘The attorney general must resign’

(Michael Owen Baker / For The Times)

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement Wednesday night:

“Jeff Sessions lied under oath during his confirmation hearing before the Senate. Under penalty of perjury, he told the Senate Judiciary Committee, ‘I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.’ We now know that statement is false.

“Attorney General Sessions has never had the credibility to oversee the FBI investigation of senior Trump officials’ ties to the Russians. That is why Democrats have consistently called for Sessions to recuse himself from any oversight of the investigation.

“Now, after lying under oath to Congress about his own communications with the Russians, the Attorney General must resign. Sessions is not fit to serve as the top law enforcement officer of our country and must resign. There must be an independent, bipartisan, outside commission to investigate the Trump political, personal and financial connections to the Russians.”

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Read More

Share
Advertisement

FCC halts Internet privacy rule that imposes data security requirements on broadband providers

The Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday voted to halt an Internet privacy rule that would have imposed data security requirements on broadband providers.

The move, by a 2-1 vote, came after the agency’s new Republican chairman, Ajit Pai, indicated last week that he opposed the provision and broader privacy rules because they imposed tougher restrictions on high-speed Internet providers than on websites and social networks.

With the backing of the FCC’s other Republican, Michael O’Rielly, the FCC issued a stay of the data security requirements before they were set to go into effect Thursday. Democrat Mignon Clyburn voted against halting the rules.

The stay will allow the FCC to consider formal requests from trade groups representing Internet service providers to reconsider the privacy rules, the agency said.

Read More

Share

No penalties for Kellyanne Conway for plugging Ivanka Trump’s line from the White House

(Mark Wilson / Getty Images)

Kellyanne Conway, the advisor to President Trump who made a commercial pitch for Ivanka Trump’s fashion line from the White House, won’t face punishment for the ethics breach.

In a letter to the Office of Government Ethics, deputy White House counsel Stefan Passantino said that Conway “acted inadvertently and is highly unlikely to do so again.

“Ms. Conway made the statement in question in a light, offhand manner while attempting to stand up for a person she believed had been unfairly treated,” Passantino wrote.

During an interview on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” last month from the White House briefing room, Conway was asked about the controversy over Nordstrom’s decision to drop Ivanka Trump’s clothing and accessories line. The department store cited slumping sales.

Conway suggested that viewers should “go buy Ivanka’s stuff.”

“I’m going to give a free commercial here,” Conway said. “Go buy it today, everybody.”

Democrats and ethics watchdogs immediately criticized her for using the platform to hawk a commercial product.

In the letter, Passantino said he met with Conway and let her know about the prohibition on federal employees using their official position for commercial endorsement.

Although the ethics office serves as a watchdog, the administration is responsible for disciplining its employees.

The decision to not discipline Conway is a “very bad sign,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee. Cummings and other congressional Democrats have been pressing for more investigations and disclosure of possible ethics conflicts presented by Trump’s business holdings.

“Other federal employees would likely be suspended for engaging in this conduct, and White House officials should not be held to a different standard,” he said in a statement.

Share
Advertisement

Was Trump’s speech a success? Mostly yes, conservatives say

(Andrew Caballero-Reynolds / AFP/Getty Images)

President Trump seemed to offer a reset of sorts.

On Tuesday in this space, we wondered whether Trump’s address before Congress would be a dreary outlook for America or perhaps one peppered in partisan politics.

It was neither.

For the most part, Trump talked compromise. On issues from healthcare to immigration to tax code reform, his pitch was largely bipartisan. Also, prominently missing from his speech: bashing the press.

Conservatives, like everyone else, are doing some Monday morning quarterbacking.

Here are some of the headlines:

Trump delivers a Republican case for big government (Weekly Standard)

Normally Republicans eschew more government. Indeed, a Gallup poll from last fall found that 82% of Republicans hate big government.

This piece, however, argues that Trump supports big government.

“His speech, as light on specifics as the White House promised, was nonetheless a call for a muscular response from government to the nation’s problems,” notes the author, Michael Warren. “Trump also made a pitch for more infrastructure spending, paid family leave, and ‘accessible and affordable’ childcare. And there was no talk of reforming Medicare or Social Security, nor of reducing the size and scope of government.”

Trump’s best day as president (Washington Examiner)

For the most part, Democrats and Republicans alike agree Trump’s speech was in large part positive.

This editorial, played prominently on the Examiner’s website, argues that Tuesday was by far Trump’s best day as president.

“There were moments of genuinely fine oratory in his address to a joint session of Congress, and none of the meandering diversions with which he has ruined speeches before (notably his convention acceptance speech),” notes the editorial. “He was, perhaps for the first time, truly and impressively presidential.”

The revolution moves to the bathroom (American Spectator)

Transgender bathroom access is a battle conservatives seem to enjoy.

Last week, the Trump administration announced it had ceased a federal mandate, implemented by President Obama, directing schools to allow transgender students to use restrooms and other facilities that match their gender identities. Republicans rejoiced, while Democrats said it would lead to discrimination.

In this piece, conservative author R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. reflects on a recent encounter inside a gym locker room in which “a large, not to say fat, woman” entered as he was changing.

“Now I concluded she was confused. I told her she had entered the men’s room. By the way, there was no other man in the locker room. She was, shall we say, blase,” he writes.

Tyrrell concludes the woman was perhaps lost, but the incident pointed out, he said, the potential discomfort created when traditional gender lines are crossed in the washroom and the locker room.

“Could there not be a more sensible, less disruptive reform for this tiny minority of human beings?” he writes, referring to transgender men and women. “Set aside a toilet and a locker or two for them at any institution where they exist. The majority has rights, too. Why should a whole locker room be discomfited to appease … well, in my case, a big fat woman who seemed to be lost?”

Share

In red and blue America, they watched the same Trump speech but heard completely different things

(Mark Z. Barabak/Los Angeles Times)

Early in his speech to Congress, when President Trump likened his election to a political earthquake, it practically lifted Kristen Rossow off her couch.

Sitting in the family room of her split-level home in this tidy Boise, Idaho, suburb, watching with her husband and daughter — all Trump fans — she sprang up and raised two fists to the ceiling.

In Las Vegas, Jose Venturi watched with arms crossed, sunk into his orange sofa, as if shielding himself from the words coming from his television set.

Trump spoke to the country for 60 minutes Tuesday night, a delivery of roughly 5,000 words and offering a vision that seemed starkly different — inspiring to some, frightful to others — depending on what they heard.

No speech could bridge the chasm in a nation so deeply split, or bind the wounds after an election so highly contentious, or come even close to satisfying its entire audience.

But seen with opposing partisans, heard through their ears and filtered through their perspectives, the shared moment only underscored the country’s yawning political gap and lack of commonality.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Supreme Court balks at reining in ‘racial gerrymandering’ that protects black lawmakers

(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

The Supreme Court has refused a plea from Democratic Party lawyers, at least for now, to rein in alleged “racial gerrymandering” by Republican-led states in the South that protects black lawmakers at the expense of other Democrats.

Instead, the justices decided Wednesday against ruling on a Virginia case over racial gerrymandering and sent it back for further hearings before a district judge.

The case of Bethune-Hill vs. Virginia highlighted the dilemma faced by Democrats who complain they wield little power in many states because of gerrymandering by Republicans. In response, however, Republicans sometimes point to the Voting Rights Act and argue they must concentrate black voters into a small number of black-majority districts. The law has been interpreted to mean states may not backtrack or retreat in the number of elected black or Latino lawmakers.

While these black-majority districts reliably elect black Democrats, they also may help Republicans win more seats in the adjoining areas.

Last year, Democratic lawyers appealed to the high court, arguing Virginia’s Republican leaders had engaged in unconstitutional racial gerrymandering in 2011 when they drew 12 state house districts with a 55% black majority. They urged the court to rule that the use of such racial targets in drawing districts violated the Constitution

In Wednesday’s opinion, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the court was uncomfortable with such racial line-drawing, but it nonetheless may be needed to protect the seats of black legislators.

“The state did have good reasons under these circumstances” to set a racial threshold for some districts, he said.

“Holding otherwise would afford state legislatures too little breathing room, leaving them trapped between the competing hazards of liability under the Voting Rights Act and the equal protection clause” of the Constitution.

Kennedy described how a Republican leader and a black lawmaker worked together in drawing the districts. The “55% criterion emerged from certain members of the House Black Caucus and the leader of the redistricting effort in the House,” he wrote. The final redistricting plan had “broad support from both parties,” he added.

The court’s opinion said the district judge should take another look at 11 of the districts to see whether the use of the 55% was needed. The court affirmed the upholding of the 12th district because the judge already said the 55% target was justified.

The outcome leaves undecided many of the key issues for the next round of state redistricting, which will begin after the 2020 census.

Kennedy’s opinion spoke for six justices. Writing separately, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito questioned whether the Voting Rights Act should be interpreted to require race-based districts in some circumstances.

Share

Labor Department proposes delay of retirement advisor rule until June to conduct Trump-ordered review

President Trump after signing a memo ordering a review of the Labor Department's retirement advisor rule.
(Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)

The Labor Department on Wednesday proposed a 60-day delay in implementing a new rule for retirement advisors, set to take effect next month, to complete a review ordered by President Trump that will probably kill the controversial Obama-era measure.

Extra time is needed to collect and analyze data about the effects of the so-called fiduciary rule, which requires investment brokers who handle retirement funds to put their clients’ interests ahead of other factors, such as their own compensation or company profits, the Labor Department said.

The rule was scheduled to take effect April 10 but now would not be implemented until June 9 at the earliest. The delay is expected to be approved after a short public-comment period.

On Feb. 3, Trump ordered officials “to examine the fiduciary rule to determine whether it may adversely affect the ability of Americans to gain access to retirement information and financial advice,” the Labor Department said.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump debuted a new tone Tuesday night, but Mexicans aren’t buying it

President Trump dumped the gloomy message of his inauguration speech in favor of a more optimistic tone in his address to Congress on Tuesday night.

South of the border, many were watching closely.

Mexico, after all, has much at stake as Trump considers major policy changes on trade and immigration. Just look at the Mexican peso, which has been fluctuating daily depending on what the U.S. president says.

Mexican political analysts took note of Trump’s more hopeful tone Tuesday. Gone was his pugnacious vow to put “America first.” And while Trump spoke of creating a “merit-based” immigration system, he did not threaten mass deportations.

But some warned Mexicans not to be fooled by Trump’s more “presidential” presentation.

“The ideas of Trump’s speech are the same, but the tone is different, it is presidential,” said Mexican political analyst Javier Tello in a television interview Wednesday. He cautioned Mexicans not to trust Trump.

“Trump’s ideology remains nationalistic, both economically and culturally,” Tello said. “It is still closed, it is still nativist.”

Many took note of Trump’s emphasis on victims of crimes committed by immigrants in the country illegally. In his speech, Trump highlighted several such crimes, and he encouraged members of Congress to stand and clap for several family members of the victims who were seated alongside Trump’s family.

“Trump’s vision is simple: to be an immigrant is to be criminal, period,” tweeted Carlos Bravo Regidor, a professor at Mexico’s Center for Research and Teaching Economics.

Trump’s strategy, Bravo said, is “to criminalize foreigners, and to to assume the position as a victim in front of the rest of the world.”

Trump’s announcement that he was creating a “victims of immigration crime engagement office,” or VOICE, also drew criticism in Mexico.

“Remember this,” said political analyst Alberto Serdán. “It will be the vehicle of racism, particularly against Mexicans and Muslims in the United States.”

Share

Senate confirms Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke as Interior secretary

Rep. Ryan Zinke testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington in January.
(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

The Senate has confirmed Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke as Interior secretary, responsible for more than 400 million acres of public land, mostly in the West.

The Republican-controlled Senate approved Zinke’s nomination on Wednesday, 68-31.

Zinke, a Republican in his second term as Montana’s sole House member, advocates a multiple-use model for federal land management that allows hiking, hunting, fishing and camping along with harvesting timber, mining for coal and drilling for oil and natural gas.

Zinke also pledges to tackle an estimated $12-billion backlog in maintenance and repair at national parks and stand firm against attempts to sell, give away or transfer federal lands.

Zinke, 55, is a former Navy SEAL and Montana state senator. He is expected to be sworn in later Wednesday

Share
Advertisement

Analysis: Trump shifts from doom and gloom to a more optimistic vision. But he offers no clarity on how he’ll get there

President Trump’s well-delivered speech to Congress on Tuesday night answered one major question — whether he could offer the country a less divisive tone — but provided almost no clarity about how he hopes to fulfill the promises that he made in his campaign.

In addition to “massive” tax cuts and additional write-offs, Trump talked of spending tens of billions more on the military and $1 trillion on infrastructure projects, with no explanation of how to achieve that without expanding the debt, which he criticized his predecessor, President Obama, for having increased.

Similarly, he made promises to come up with a health plan that would simultaneously expand choice, lower costs and improve access. But he said nothing about how that would happen.

Trump appeared to leave the tough decisions in the lap of Republican leaders on Capitol Hill, a task made more difficult because the voters who now make up the GOP represent different camps with divergent goals.

Read More

Share

Trump’s most specific new immigration proposal in his speech was on the legal migration system

Although President Trump has railed against illegal immigration since he began campaigning 20 months ago, his biggest new proposal in his high-profile address to lawmakers Tuesday night was about revamping legal immigration.

Trump proposed tilting admissions into the U.S. toward skilled workers to allow in people who are less likely to use federal assistance or compete with low-wage workers. The current U.S. system favors family unification and allowing those from around the globe striving to take advantage of American opportunity.

Such an overhaul would require action by Congress, and Trump told lawmakers that “real and positive immigration reform is possible” as long as the changes improve wages for Americans and increase security.

“If we are guided by the well-being of American citizens, then I believe Republicans and Democrats can work together to achieve an outcome that has eluded our country for decades,” Trump said.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Obamas sign rumored $60-million book deal

(Steve Helber / Associated Press)

Don’t say the Obamas haven’t been busy since they left the White House.

Bidding for the publishing rights to books from former President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama has hit the $60-million mark, according to a report in the Financial Times.

On Tuesday evening, Penguin Random House announced it had landed the deal. The world’s largest publisher did not note which of its imprints would release the books and didn’t disclose the amount of the deal.

Read More

Share

‘I’m excited to see what more he’s going to do’

Kristen Rossow offered a single exuberant word summing up President Trump’s speech to a joint session of Congress: “Inspiring.”

The small-business owner and mother of five had backed Trump from the moment he entered the presidential race in June 2015 as a decided longshot. For her, watching him Tuesday night was one of those pinch-me moments.

“I’m excited to see what more he’s going to do,” Rossow said, hailing his first month in office as a triumph of Trump’s can-do spirit.

More on Rossow, Trump and the view from red-state Idaho tomorrow at www.latimes.com.

Share
Advertisement

San Bernardino-area representatives say it was ‘disgusting’ for Trump to cite attack in his speech

Rep. Pete Aguilar has previously asked President Trump not to refer to the 2015 attack in San Bernardino to justify his plans to limit immigration as a way to prevent terrorism.

When the name of the city he’s mourned with again slipped from the president’s lips Tuesday night, the Redlands Democrat was offended.

“It’s just inaccurate and wrong to use San Bernardino as justification for any of the policies that he’s rolled out,” Aguilar told The Times after the speech. “There are things that we can work on when it comes to self-radicalization and the use of social media platforms, but none of what the president has proposed would have changed the outcome of San Bernardino and that’s frankly quite offensive.”

Aguilar said the White House hasn’t responded to his requests to stop referring to the attack, in which 14 people died at the Inland Regional Center.

“People are tired of San Bernardino being used for political purposes and when he does this it sends a tough message to our community, which is still trying to recover and still trying to move beyond this,” Aguilar said.

Rep. Norma Torres (D-Pomona), who represented San Bernardino in the state Senate, said “it’s disgusting” that Trump can’t seem to remember that one of the perpetrators, Syed Rizwan Farook, was born in the United States. His wife and fellow attacker, Tashfeen Malik, was a legal permanent resident.

Share

‘I really do hope he does help people out’

As Jose Venturi watched President Trump’s speech before a joint session of Congress, he offered little reaction -- until Trump pointed to a college sophomore in the balcony who had been cured of a rare disease thanks to innovations by a drug company.

It made Venturi, a 26-year-old kitchen worker, think about his sister, who died of a rare brain disease three years ago, when she was 16.

“I wish they’d paid that much attention to my sister,” he said quietly. “She was younger and back then my mom and dad weren’t making very much and had to take her to a regular clinic. She was having so many seizures by then. If going to the doctor were more affordable, she might not have died.”

When Trump started talking about dismantling Obamacare and replacing it with something else, Venturi wondered what that might be.

“I really do hope he does help people out,” he said.

More on Venturi, Trump and the view from blue-state Nevada tomorrow at www.latimes.com.

Share
Advertisement

Trump acknowledges Navy SEAL widow, but criticism on botched Yemen operation mounts

Carryn Owens, second from left, the widow of Navy SEAL William "Ryan" Owens.
(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

The widow of a Navy SEAL killed in a problem-plagued raid in Yemen last month attended President Trump’s address to Congress days after the commando’s father publicly criticized the raid.

“We are blessed to be joined tonight by Carryn Owens, the widow of a U.S. Navy Special Operator Senior Chief William ‘Ryan’ Owens,” Trump said, while she fought back tears. “Ryan died as he lived: a warrior and a hero – battling against terrorism and securing our nation.”

Owens, 36, became the first American to die in combat under the Trump administration when he was shot and killed on Jan. 29 during a raid against a compound used by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in a village in Yemen.

Trump said Defense Secretary James N. Mattis had deemed the operation “highly successful” and that it “generated large amounts of vital intelligence that will lead to many more victories in the future against our enemies.”

Congress gave a standing ovation as Owens’ widow looked up, tears in her eyes, her hands folded in prayer. The rousing applause lasted for more than a minute – the longest of the night – which Trump later acknowledged, saying the recognition “probably broke a record.”

“Ryan laid down his life for his friends, for his country and for our freedom. We will never forget him,” Trump said.

Trump authorized the raid less than a week he took office, and the administration has repeatedly said it was a success because the U.S. recovered valuable intelligence about terrorist operations.

In an attempt to bolster that claim, the Pentagon released a video that it said was sensitive intelligence seized during the raid. Officials were embarrassed when the video instead turned out to be a jihadist video posted online since 2007.

William Owens, the SEAL’s father, told the Miami Herald in an interview published Sunday that he refused a chance to meet Trump when he found that the president would attend the transfer of his son’s remains at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.

“I told them I didn’t want to make a scene about it, but my conscience wouldn’t let me talk to him,” Owens told the Herald, saying he wanted an investigation.

“Why at this time did there have to be this stupid mission when it wasn’t even barely a week into his administration? Why?” Owens asked.

“For two years prior, there were no boots on the ground in Yemen — everything was missiles and drones — because there was not a target worth one American life. Now all of a sudden we had to make this grand display?”

The U.S. military has acknowledged that Yemeni civilians – possibly more than two dozen, including women and children – were also killed in the attack, along with 14 Al Qaeda militants.

Three U.S. commandos were wounded in the firefight, and three others were injured when their MV-22 Osprey aircraft made a crash-landing. To prevent it from falling into enemy hands, the $70-million aircraft was destroyed by an airstrike.

The White House said three U.S. military investigations were looking into what happened during the mission, how many civilians died, and why the aircraft crashed.

The investigations will not look into what Owens’ father wants, which is why the president signed off on the operation.

Share

Anne Frank center criticizes Trump’s remarks on Jewish attacks

President Trump condemned attacks against Jews in his speech Tuesday to a joint session of Congress and called threats against Jewish community centers examples of “hate and evil.”

At the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect, that wasn’t enough.

“After weeks of our organization’s having to plead, cajole and criticize this president to speak out against anti-Semitism, we give him credit for doing the right thing tonight by beginning his speech to address anti-Semitism and other hate. But his suddenly dulcet tones weren’t matched by substantive kindness,” executive director Steven Goldstein said in a statement.

“The president didn’t say exactly what he would do to fight anti-Semitism – how he could have stayed so vague? We’ve endured weeks of anti-Semitic attacks across America and we didn’t hear a single proposal from the president tonight to stop them,” Goldstein said.

The Anti-Defamation League, which has also criticized Trump’s response to the nearly 100 bomb threats against Jewish institutions since Jan. 4, was more subdued in its response.

“Thanks @POTUS for condemning #hate ag Jews & immigrants. Now let’s fight it. See our plan. Let’s do it together,” tweeted ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt.

Share
Advertisement

Is the coal industry really roaring back to life under Trump?

The Navajo Generating Station.
(Ross D. Franklin / Associated Press)

In his speech, President Trump said he had promised that “dying industries will come roaring back to life” – and then highlighted the boost he gave one such industry by blocking an environmental regulation “that threatens the future and livelihoods of our great coal miners.”

The move Trump referred to stopped an environmental rule meant to protect streams from pollution stemming from mining.

But while coal companies cheered Trump’s decision, it underscored how little power he has to bring back the bulk of the coal jobs he promised in his campaign.

Environmental regulations are not the main problem killing the coal industry – the realities of the energy market and cheap natural gas are. And Trump can do little to change that.

That much was clear this month when operators of the biggest coal plant in the West, the Navajo Generating Station, announced they can no longer afford to keep it going. The planned closure by 2019 of the plant near Page, Ariz., will likely mean the loss of hundreds of coal-related jobs in a region that badly needs work.

Community leaders demanded that the Trump administration step in with a plan to save them. But the owners of the plant say relief from environmental regulations is not what they need.

A bailout plan would require heavy federal subsidies, which doesn’t square with Trump’s calls to get government out of the business of propping up troubled energy companies – like the failed Solyndra solar plant the Obama administration backed – that can’t stand on their own.

Share

Trump speaks out against attacks on Jews and shooting of Indian immigrants

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

President Trump condemned attacks against Jews and Indian immigrants during the opening of his speech Tuesday to a joint session of Congress, calling them examples of “hate and evil.”

Trump also spoke out against recent vandalism that damaged hundreds of headstones at Jewish cemeteries in Philadelphia and outside St. Louis.

“Recent threats targeting Jewish Community Centers and vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, as well as last week’s shooting in Kansas City, remind us that while we may be a nation divided on policies, we are a country that stands united in condemning hate and evil in all its forms,” Trump said.

The president has been under mounting pressure to address the nearly 100 bomb threats against Jewish community centers, schools, Anti-Defamation League offices and other Jewish institutions since Jan. 4.

All of the threats have been hoaxes.

He’s also been criticized for not forcefully condemning a racially motivated attack against two Indian immigrants last week in Olathe, Kan., that left one dead.

Srinivas Kuchibhotla and Alok Madasani were shot Feb. 21 at a restaurant. The suspect, 51-year-old Adam Purinton, allegedly yelled, “Get out of my country!” before the shooting in at Austin’s Bar and Grill in the Kansas City suburb on Feb. 21.

A man who tried to come to the victims’ aid, 24-year-old Ian Grillot, 24, was also wounded.

In a 911 recording, authorities said, Purinton told an Applebees bartender who called police about the incident that he thought he was shooting at Iranians.

The remarks on anti-Jewish violence were not Trump’s first. He addressed the issue on Feb. 21 at the National Museum of African American History and Culture, where he called anti-Semitism “horrible” and “painful.”

But Jewish groups have called on the president to go further by announcing a federal plan to combat anti-Semitism.

Trump has had a tense relationship to American Jews and minority groups.

During the campaign, he retweeted posts from white nationalists and was accused of using anti-Semitic language and imagery.

Jewish groups criticized the White House when administration officials said the president intentionally did not mention Jews in a statement commemorating Holocaust Remembrance Day last month.

Criticism increased after weeks passed without him addressing bomb threats at Jewish centers before his remarks at the Washington museum.

Share
Advertisement

Was Trump right that 94 million Americans are out of the labor force?

“We must honestly acknowledge the circumstances we inherited,” President Trump declared, as he listed a series of problems the country faces.

First on the list: “94 million Americans are out of the labor force.”

Sounds like an ominously large number. Is it accurate?

Well, if you include roughly 41 million who are retired, yes. You also have to include about 15 million students who are not looking for work. Homemakers make up another big chunk.

In short, while a large number of Americans don’t work, most of those who aren’t working have good, traditional reasons for not doing so.

Hiding behind Trump’s misleading statistic is a real issue: The share of Americans who are in the labor force has gone down in recent years.

Some of the decline comes from the aging of the huge baby boom generation, now moving into retirement. But part of the decline also represents people who have dropped out because they can’t find jobs that pay enough.

Economists differ about how many of those discouraged workers exist and whether that number is still on the rise.

Share

Deep cuts in State Department budget would meet with resistance

Drastic cuts to the U.S. foreign aid budget proposed by the Trump administration is likely to produce strong resistance in Congress and in the foreign policy community.

Several key Republicans, as well as a large contingent of retired military officers, already have spoken out against curtailing the budgets of the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, saying the loss of so-called soft power would hurt U.S. security.

In his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Trump did not specify how much he wants to cut the budget for diplomacy and foreign aid.

But aides have said he hopes to vastly expand military spending and pay for it by cutting budgets for other federal departments and programs.

“To those allies who wonder what kind of friend America will be, look no further than the heroes who wear our uniform,” Trump said Tuesday night.

“Our foreign policy calls for a direct, robust and meaningful engagement with the world. It is American leadership based on vital security interests that we share with our allies across the globe.”

Foreign aid only makes up about 1% of the overall budget, so eliminating it would not account for much money.

“Foreign Aid is not charity,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said in a tweet. “We must make sure it is well spent, but it is less than 1% of budget & critical to our national security.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters before Trump’s address that deep slashes to spending for diplomacy and foreign aid would not win congressional approval.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said such deep cuts would be “dead on arrival.”

A group of 121 retired army generals and naval admirals on Monday released a letter protesting reports of targeted cuts.

They cited Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis, who as commander of the U.S. Central Command, said, “If you don’t fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition.”

The State Department budget -- including foreign aid programs, embassies, USAID and other development programs - comes to about $50 billion a year. That compares with more than $600 billion a year for the Pentagon.

It pays for efforts including the State Department’s role in counter-terrorism, the fight against pandemics like Ebola, and stopping human trafficking.

“It’s a very small budget,” said Daniel Runde, a Republican expert on development who heads the Project on Prosperity and Development at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“There is an opportunity for a top-to-bottom review of how this money is spent,” Runde said, “But soft power is part of our national power. These are the condo fees that you have to pay to be a global superpower.”

Another tricky issue is that the top recipient of U.S. foreign aid is Israel. Reducing support would hurt a key ally with whom Trump has vowed to forge even stronger ties.

Trump reiterated Tuesday night that his government would maintain an unbreakable bond with Israel.

State Department programs that may be vulnerable include those promoting equality for women, gays and lesbians overseas, and United Nations peacekeeping operations.

Share
Advertisement

Trump talks about violence in Chicago -- but doesn’t repeat promise to ‘send in the feds’

A few days after he entered the White House, President Trump threatened to “send in the feds” to Chicago to quell rising violence there.

The city came up again Tuesday in his speech before both houses of Congress.

“In Chicago, more than 4,000 people were shot last year alone –- and the murder rate so far this year has been even higher,” he said. “This is not acceptable in our society. Every American child should be able to grow up in a safe community, to attend a great school, and to have access to a high-paying job.”

He didn’t mention sending in the feds. But can a president even do that?

Read More

Share

Don’t blame NAFTA for all the U.S. factory job losses

President Trump is correct in saying that U.S. manufacturing employment has fallen by one-fourth since the North American Free Trade Agreement took effect in 1994.

But American factory payrolls were declining well before NAFTA -- since the late 1970s, in fact. And as every social scientist knows, correlation is not causation.

While moving work to Mexico and especially to China has cost American manufacturing plants and jobs, most economists believe the bigger culprit was automation and new and faster ways of producing goods: robots and the Internet, for example.

The result is that U.S. manufacturing output today is at a record high. More goods are being produced than ever before, but with far fewer workers -- 12.3 million as of January, compared to 19.3 million in the same month in 1980.

Share
Advertisement

Trump repeats his push for school voucher program in joint address to Congress. But how would it be accomplished?

President Trump announced steps toward creating a national school voucher program during his speech to Congress on Tuesday night.

“I am calling upon members of both parties to pass an education bill that funds school choice for disadvantaged youth, including millions of African American and Latino children,” Trump said. “These families should be free to choose the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school that is right for them.”

Trump didn’t provide details, but experts have said that the most likely way to do this at a national level would be through a tax credit program.

Read More

Share

Here are the stories of Trump’s speech guests whose relatives were killed by people in the U.S. illegally

(Barbara Davidson / Los Angeles Times)

During his first address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Donald Trump highlighted Californians whose loved ones were gunned down by people in the U.S. illegally as he announced the creation of an office to help American victims of such crimes.

“We are providing a voice to those who have been ignored by our media, and silenced by special interests. Joining us in the audience tonight are four very brave Americans whose government failed them,” Trump said. “... I want you to know that we will never stop fighting for justice. Your loved ones will never ever be forgotten; we will always honor their memory.”

He did not offer details on what this new office, to be called Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement and housed in the Department of Homeland Security, would do.

But Trump’s focus on the family members and their murdered relatives was a continuation of a tactic he frequently employed on the campaign trail as he vowed to crack down on illegal immigration. The four relatives were among several guests who sat with First Lady Melania Trump during the speech.

Here are their stories:

Jamiel Shaw’s 17-year-old son was walking to his Los Angeles home in 2008 when two men, both Latino, asked what gang he belonged to. When he failed to respond, he was shot twice by Pedro Espinoza, a gang member who had recently been released from jail. His father heard the shots and raced outside to find his son bleeding on the sidewalk.

The teen, who shared his father’s name, was a high school student and standout football player who was being looked at by NCAA Division I colleges. He reportedly had no gang affiliations and was a serious student and regular churchgoer. His mother, an Army sergeant, flew back from her second tour of duty in Iraq for his funeral.

Jamiel Shaw Jr.’s murder sparked an outcry over local government policies for dealing with those in the country illegally.

Shaw Sr. strongly supported Trump during the election, speaking during the Republican National Convention and appearing with Trump at multiple rallies, including one in Costa Mesa.

Espinoza was sentenced to the death penalty in 2012.

The other Californians in the audience Tuesday were Jessica Davis and Susan Oliver, the widows of two Northern California sheriff’s deputies who were shot in 2014 by a convicted felon who had twice been deported to Mexico; and Jenna Oliver, the daughter of one of the slain deputies.

Trump singled out the daughter to offer solace.

“I want you to know that your father was a hero, and that tonight you have the love of an entire country supporting you and praying for you,” he said.

Her father, Sacramento County Sheriff’s Deputy Danny Oliver, had approached a couple in a vehicle in a strip mall parking lot when a man suspected to be Luis Enrique Monroy Bracamontes shot him in the forehead.

The couple in the car fled, and 30 miles away, the man shot Placer County Sheriff’s Deputy Michael Davis Jr. when he approached the couple in an allegedly car-jacked vehicle.

Davis died 26 years to the day after his father died in the line of duty as a Riverside County sheriff’s deputy.

Bracamontes was also accused of injuring another officer and a civilian. The suspect was apprehended after a six-hour chase.

In the following days, investigators learned that Bracamontes had been deported to Mexico in 1997 after his arrest and conviction in Arizona for possession of narcotics for sale, and that he was arrested and sent back to Mexico a second time in 2001.

Bracamontes, who is scheduled to go to trial in October, has tried to plead guilty to the murders.

Share
Advertisement

Trump gets ahead of himself with boast of creating tens of thousands of pipeline jobs

(Nati Harnik/AP)

President Trump boasted Tuesday night that he has created “tens of thousands of jobs” by clearing the way for construction of two major oil pipelines.

That’s not necessarily true.

The bulk of those temporary, two-year jobs – 42,000 of them -- would come from a project that may never get built, the Keystone XL pipeline. Despite Trump’s best efforts to move the project forward, there are serious questions about whether the economics pencil out for the plan to ship oil from the tar sands of Canada to Gulf Coast refineries. The project was conceived at a time analysts predicted that oil prices would be considerably higher than they are now. Amid the cheap barrels of crude flooding the market, investors are rethinking whether it is worth the expense of extracting and shipping the oil from the Alberta tar sands, a very costly endeavor.

And Trump’s own demand that the pipeline be built with American steel drives the cost up substantially.

That leaves the Dakota Access Pipeline project, which Trump has also moved to revive. Its prospects for completion are brighter. But it won’t create tens of thousands of jobs. It would create 3,900 short-term construction jobs and, according to the developer, roughly 12,000 indirect jobs for businesses in the region that will see a temporary boost in income while the project is in process.

Trump’s critics also point out that his analysis fails to account for the clean-energy jobs that don’t get created when more oil flows into the market.

“He repeated the same tired lies about creating jobs with Keystone XL and Dakota Access, but said nothing about the millions of jobs that could be created by a transition to 100% renewable energy,” said a statement from May Boeve, executive director of 350.org.

Share

Trump lays out five principles for replacing Obamacare in his first speech to Congress

President Trump didn’t repeat his promise to deliver a “terrific” replacement for Obamacare within days Tuesday evening.

But the president did outline a series of “principles” that he said Congress should follow as it repeals the Affordable Care Act and develops an alternative.

Several are staples of conservative thinking on healthcare: restricting medical malpractice suits and allowing more sale of health insurance across state lines.

Neither idea has impressed many healthcare experts, most of whom say the proposals would have relatively little impact on reducing healthcare costs.

But Trump also appears to be staking out positions that may be more consequential.

He said healthcare legislation “should ensure that Americans with preexisting conditions have access to coverage,” a phrase that Republicans have often used to step back from the current law’s guarantee of coverage.

Many conservatives say that the federal government only must guarantee “access,” a distinction that critics note would justify an Obamacare replacement that does not cover as many people as the current law.

The Affordable Care Act has extended coverage to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.

Trump also called for tax credits to help Americans buy health coverage. That could put him at odds with conservative Republicans in Congress, who object to the current law’s system of subsidizing millions of Americans’ health insurance.

And the president said the federal government should give states “the resources and flexibility they need with Medicaid to make sure no one is left out.”

With that phrasing, Trump appears to be supporting longtime calls from Republicans for more flexibility to reshape Medicaid, including imposing work requirements and requiring Medicaid patients to pay more for their medical care.

But his reference to “resources” is less clear. Many Republican Medicaid proposals, including ones by House Speaker Paul D. Ryan and Trump’s health secretary, Tom Price, would slash federal support for the program.

Finally, Trump reiterated calls to make prescription drugs more affordable.

But he seemed to suggest the problem could be best addressed by speeding federal regulatory review of new drugs, not negotiating lower prices for seniors on Medicare, as he has proposed in the past.

Share
Advertisement

Trump calls for fundamental change in legal immigration

(Jim Lo Scalzo/AFP/Getty Images)

One of the most specific pledges in President Trump’s speech is his call for changing America’s system for legal immigration.

The current U.S. system heavily emphasizes family unification and is aimed at allowing strivers from around the world to take advantage of American opportunity. By contrast, Trump advocated a system that would emphasize immigrants who already have skills the economy needs.

“Nations around the world, like Canada, Australia and many others -- have a merit-based immigration system,” Trump said.

“It is a basic principle that those seeking to enter a country ought to be able to support themselves financially. Yet, in America, we do not enforce this rule, straining the very public resources that our poorest citizens rely upon.”

“Switching away from this current system of lower-skilled immigration, and instead adopting a merit-based system, will have many benefits: It will save countless dollars, raise workers’ wages, and help struggling families –- including immigrant families –- enter the middle class,” he said.

Trump’s plan, which he first described during a major speech on immigration during his campaign, would represent a fundamental shift in the philosophy of the U.S. immigration system.

Supporters of merit-based immigration argue that the current system pushes down the wages of those at the bottom of the income ladder by increasing the supply of low-skilled workers.

On the other side, supporters of the current system point to the success that immigrants have had in taking advantage of U.S. opportunities.

Share

Trump says Obamacare ‘is collapsing.’ Here’s what he’s getting wrong

President Trump, as he has repeatedly in the past, said Tuesday that the Affordable Care Act is a disaster.

“Obamacare is collapsing, and we must act decisively to protect all Americans,” he said during his address to a joint session of Congress.

This is a major exaggeration.

Health insurance premiums on marketplaces created by the law did increase markedly this year in many parts of the country as insurers dealt with higher-than-expected medical claims from patients.

But most consumers are still able to get health plans for less than $100 a month on the marketplaces, thanks to insurance subsidies made available by Obamacare.

More broadly, Trump’s attacks miss a much larger part of the Obamacare story.

Marketplaces represent a fraction of the overall system, providing coverage to only about 11 million people, most of whom cannot get coverage through an employer or other government program.

By comparison, more than 150 million Americans get health coverage through an employer. An additional 55 million elderly and disabled Americans get coverage through the federal Medicare program.

Healthcare costs in the employer market and in Medicare have been rising at historically low levels since the enactment of the 2010 health law.

In 2016, for example, annual family premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance rose an average of just 3%, according to an annual survey by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust.

And since 2011, premiums have risen 20%, far lower than in the previous five years, when premiums jumped 31%, and even lower than in the five years between 2001 and 2006, when they shot up 63%.

Medicare has seen a similar slowdown, as the cost per enrollee has grown by an average of just 1.4% annually since 2011, according to the last report by the program’s trustees.

That was the lowest growth rate in Medicare’s history, dating to 1965.

Meanwhile, the law’s coverage expansion has helped more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans get health coverage.

And new research shows the law is dramatically improving poor patients’ access to medical care, particularly in states that have used the law to expand their Medicaid safety nets.

At the same time, contrary to charges from Trump and other Republicans, there is little evidence that Obamacare is destroying jobs.

In fact, the private sector has added jobs every month since President Obama signed the law in March 2010, a stark reversal from the months before the law was enacted when the economy was hemorrhaging jobs amid the recession.

Share
Advertisement

Trump alludes to ‘new friends,’ ‘new partnerships’ in foreign relations

President Trump on Tuesday plans to reiterate a new approach to foreign policy that he has hinted at since before his election.

In his first address to a joint session of Congress, Trump will speak of military might and “American footprints” on distant lands, according to excerpts released by the White House.

But he also will say that new and untraditional alliances are possible, based not on values but on interests.

“America is willing to find new friends and to forge new partnerships where shared interests align,” Trump will say.

Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in forming a closer relationship with Russia even as the FBI investigates whether his campaign aides had improper contacts with Moscow during or after last fall’s election.

Trump also has questioned the international institutions and alliances that have formed the basis of U.S. foreign policy and Western world order for decades, including the European Union and the NATO military alliance.

“We’ve spent trillions of dollars overseas, while our infrastructure at home has so badly crumbled,” Trump will say.

“We must learn from the mistakes of the past – we have seen the war and destruction that have raged across our world.”

Share

Obama holdover and Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin is the designated survivor during Trump’s speech

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

If the Capitol were to go up in flames during Donald Trump’s first address to Congress, and all accountable members of the legislative, judicial and executive branches with it, Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin would become president.

Shulkin, the only holdover from the Obama administration on Trump’s Cabinet, is the designated survivor for such an extremely unlikely scenario.

The White House keeps the identity of the chosen Cabinet member a secret until the day of the event and the person’s location remains a mystery until the all-clear.

The 45-pound briefcase, known as the “football,” that carries the nation’s nuclear launch codes stays with the designated survivor. Whoever is given the title has undergone training to step into the president’s shoes in what would be an unprecedented crisis.

Share
Advertisement

California members of Congress use guests to highlight Trump policies they oppose

California Democrats chose their guests for President Trump’s speech to make pointed criticisms of the new administration’s policies. Among those sitting in the House gallery as the speech began were immigrants in the country without authorization, people who benefited from President Obama’s healthcare overhaul and refugees affected by Trump’s travel ban.

Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) said before the speech that she planned to bring Sara Yarjani, a 35-year-old Iranian graduate student studying at the California Institute for Human Science in Encinitas. Yarjani was returning from visiting family in Austria when she was detained and held for 23 hours at Los Angeles International Airport the day Trump’s ban took effect.

“Sara is an example of the human cost that there is to Donald Trump’s Muslim ban,” Chu said. “Why would she have to be deported out of all people? She had a legal reason to be here, she is a productive student.”

The temporary ban, which sought to block travel from seven majority-Muslim nations, has been halted by the courts. Trump’s administration is crafting a new order which could be issued as early as Wednesday.

Hoping to draw attention to the Syrian refugees affected by the order, Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank) brought Karnig Kalijian, a Syrian Armenian displaced by the conflict in Aleppo, Syria, who along with his wife and two children became U.S. citizens and live in Southern California.

Others focused on “Dreamers,” immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children. Trump, who campaigned on cracking down on illegal immigration, has expressed some flexibility regarding the status of people who were brought here as children.

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-San Bernardino) blasted Trump’s rhetoric about immigrants as he announced that he had selected Maria Barragan-Arreguin, who was brought to the country illegally as a child and now serves as the coordinator at the Cal State San Bernardino Dreamers Resource and Success Center, as his guest to the speech.

“Maria, and the Dreamers like her in our community, are a shining light for our region and nation,” he said. “… President Trump has spent nearly two years villainizing the immigrant community and stomping on the values that established this country. This evening, together, we will remind him that immigrants are what ‘make America great,’ not his flawed policies rooted in hatred.”

Sen. Kamala Harris brought Yuriana Aguilar, a Fresno native who is a biomedical researcher. Such research received additional money under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

“Researchers like Yuriana are on the cutting edge of advancements that will make our nation healthier,” Harris said. “America is the world leader in biomedical research. We must protect that status by continuing to invest in biomedical research through laws, like the Affordable Care Act, and by fostering Dreamers like Yuriana.”

Rep. Anna Eshoo also focused on the Affordable Care Act, which Trump and congressional leaders have promised to repeal and replace. Her guest was Kathy Forte of Saratoga, whose son Tom suffered three strokes as a 24-year-old. He was covered by his mother’s health insurance because of a provision in the Affordable Care Act that allowed young adults to remain on their parents’ insurance until they are 26.

“Kathy’s employer-sponsored insurance covered Tom and provided the necessary treatment for him to survive and the necessary treatment to prevent another stroke from happening again,” she said.

Others focused on gun violence.

Members of the House Democratic Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, led by Rep. Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena), brought law enforcement officers to draw attention to gun laws.

Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-Norwalk) brought Los Angeles County Fire Capt. Andy Doyle.

“Besides the police, firefighters and other first responders are directly affected by loose gun laws. They treat gun victims and become targeted themselves,” Napolitano said in a statement.

Share

In speech, Trump will promise improvements on healthcare, taxes and other big-ticket issues

(Gerald Herbert / Associated Press)

President Trump will ask Congress to replace Obamacare with a proposal that will “expand choice, increase access, lower costs and at the same time provide better healthcare,” according to excerpts released by the White House ahead of Tuesday’s address to a joint session of Congress.

Such a plan has proved elusive to lawmakers in both parties because costs tend to rise as options increase. It’s one reason Republicans have had trouble coalescing around a plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, even though the law is loathed by the party’s base.

“Mandating every American to buy government-approved health insurance was never the right solution for America,” Trump planned to say. “The way to make health insurance available to everyone is to lower the costs of health insurance and that is what we will do.”

The excerpts suggested Trump will make a number of major promises that could be hard to accomplish without increasing the size of the federal deficit, something the president has promised to avoid.

Trump will also promise that his immigration crackdown will “raise wages, help the unemployed, save billions of dollars and make our communities safer for everyone” and that his administration will devise a “historic tax reform that will reduce the tax rate on our companies so they can compete and thrive anywhere.”

“At the same time, we will provide massive tax relief for the middle class.”

The promises span a variety of issues: “My administration wants to work with members in both parties to make childcare accessible and affordable to help ensure new parents have paid family leave to invest in women’s health, and to promote clean air and clean water and rebuild our military infrastructure,” Trump planned to say.

Trump’s aides have promised an uplifting and uniting speech, in contrast to some of the darker addresses Trump gave at his inauguration, the Republican National Convention and other milestone events.

“The time for small thinking is over,” Trump was to say. “The time for trivial fights is behind us.

“We just need the courage to share the dreams that fill our hearts, the bravery to express the hopes that stir our souls and the confidence to turn those hopes and dreams to action. From now on, America will be empowered by our aspirations, not burdened by our fears.”

Share
Advertisement

Jewish groups criticize Trump after he reportedly says bomb threats were made to ‘make others look bad’

(Thomas Lauder / Los Angeles Times)

American Jewish leaders are pushing President Trump to clarify his views after he reportedly said that recent bomb threats against Jewish centers could have been done in “the reverse” to “make others look bad.”

Some in the Jewish community have interpreted the remarks, which Pennsylvania Atty. Gen. Josh Shapiro said came during Trump’s meeting Tuesday with attorneys general from around the country, as suggesting that bomb threats leveled at more more than 60 Jewish institutions since last month were made to harm Trump’s image or that of his supporters.

“Early today, I asked the president about the recent threats against minority communities, specifically the threats against Jewish institutions in Pennsylvania. The president first condemned the threats and intimidation then also suggested the ‘reverse’ may be true and that he planned to address the matter in his remarks tonight,” Shapiro said in a statement.

Shapiro added that he wasn’t sure what the president meant. By “remarks” he was referring to Trump’s speech before Congress on Tuesday night.

White House Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said she was not at the meeting and could not confirm the quotes from Shapiro.

The remarks added to an already tense relationship between Trump and American Jews, which has been rocky since his campaign, in which he re-tweeted white nationalists and was accused of using anti-Semitic imagery.

Jewish groups criticized the White House when administration officials said the president intentionally did not mention Jews in a statement on the Holocaust last month. Criticism increased after weeks passed without him addressing bomb threats at Jewish centers that have been called in since Jan. 9.

Trump addressed them on Feb. 21 at the National Museum of African American History and Culture, where he called anti-Semitism “horrible” and “painful.” In addition to the bomb threats, at least two Jewish cemeteries, one in the St. Louis area and another in Philadelphia, have been vandalized this month.

“We are astonished.... It is incumbent upon the White House to immediately clarify these remarks,” Anti-Defamation League Chief Executive Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement.

Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect, said in a statement that if the reports were true, Trump owed the American Jewish community an apology.

“To cast doubt on the authenticity of anti-Semitic hate crimes in America constitutes anti-Semitism in itself, and that’s something none of us ever dreamed would disgrace our nation from the White House,” he said.

Share

Why are Democratic women wearing white tonight?

As President Trump looks out from the rostrum when he gives his speech to Congress tonight, the rows of members of Congress looking back at him will be dotted with women in white.

Many of the female Democrats, including the majority of the women in California’s delegation, are wearing white to the speech, the color the suffragettes wore as they fought for the right to vote. It was also the color that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton wore at major campaign events, and at Trump’s inauguration.

“It’s really important to show that what candidate Trump said about women and the way that he has behaved toward women in the past is not an acceptable standard for a president,” House Democratic Caucus Vice Chairwoman Linda Sanchez (D-Whittier) said. “We want a visual reminder to him that suffragettes wore white and we are not going to let him take us backward. We are not going to let men dictate the choices that we have in our lives. We are not going to stand for a president that doesn’t respect us and take our perspective into account.”

Rep. Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) said Democrats wanted to show unity with women who have recently protested against Trump “and just women in solidarity with each other against a president who ran a campaign that was rooted in misogyny.”

Share
Advertisement

Former L.A. Times interpreter in Iraq is Sen. Cory Booker’s guest for Trump’s speech

Saif Alnasseri, in glasses, a former translator for The Times' Baghdad bureau, with his family at Disneyland in 2012.
(Kimi Yoshino / Los Angeles Times)

Among the Democratic guests for President Trump’s speech Tuesday: a former Los Angeles Times interpreter from Iraq who came to the United States as a refugee.

Saif Alnasseri, who is now a pharmacy manager at a Walgreens and lives with his wife and two children in New Jersey, was invited by Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

“Saif is a courageous, hardworking and proud American who has risked his life for this nation, who loves it dearly, and who makes our state and our country a better place,” Booker said.

The Democratic guest list has become a protest of Trump’s policies as lawmakers invite Muslims, immigrant “Dreamers” who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children, LGBT activists and others.

Booker’s invitation was seen as a direct response to Trump’s executive order temporarily banning travel to the U.S. for those from seven predominantly Muslim countries. The ban was halted by an appellate court, but the Trump administration is expected to issue a new order this week.

Saif, who worked in Baghdad for The Times, had received death threats for his association with the Americans, the senator’s office said. He and his wife came to the U.S. as refugees in 2008.

The senator called Saif “a man who reflects our nation at its very best.”

The Times wrote about Alnasseri in 2012 — a few years after he arrived in the United States, and his family first visited Disneyland.

Share

Trump says again that he’s open to an immigration reform bill and may mention it in his speech to Congress

President Trump indicated again Tuesday that he is open to overhauling the country’s immigration laws, including a path to legal status for nonviolent offenders, a departure from the harsh crackdown on illegal immigration that he has instituted since taking office.

Trump was considering calling for an immigration reform bill in his high-profile speech to Congress on Tuesday night, he told a group of television anchors earlier in the day.

Trump has expressed a willingness to soften his stance before. He told senators as recently as two weeks ago that they should revive the 2013 proposal that died in the House.

Such a move would be a dramatic about-face from the actions he has taken so far, chiefly signing orders last month that subject to deportation virtually all of the 11 million people in the U.S.

Nonetheless, Trump said Tuesday during a lunch with television anchors that the time may be right for immigration reform if both sides compromise, according to PBS NewsHour correspondent John Yang and others present.

Trump believes Congress may be in a position to navigate one of the thorniest policy thickets after two failures to pass a bill in the last decade, including the 2013 effort.

“The president has been very clear in his process that the immigration system is broken and needs massive reform, and he’s made clear that he’s open to having conversations about that moving forward,” Sarah H. Sanders, White House deputy press secretary, told reporters Tuesday.

She wouldn’t say whether Trump will include a call for immigration reform in his address to lawmakers.

“Right now, his primary focus, as he has made clear over and over again, is border control and security at the border and deporting criminals from our country, and keeping our country safe, and those priorities have not changed,” Sanders said.

During his first week in office, Trump wiped away restrictions on immigration officers, opening the door to deportations for millions of immigrants in the country illegally.

Share
Advertisement

California Rep. Maxine Waters is skipping Trump’s speech: ‘I don’t respect this president’

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) is skipping President Trump’s speech Tuesday night.

“These are ceremonial exercises. These are exercises where we honor the president, and people are shaking hands, smiling. It is an occasion where people are basically sending the message that everybody’s working together, everything is going well. I don’t quite see it that way,” Waters said between House votes. “I don’t honor this president. I don’t respect this president. And I’m not joyful in the presence of this president, and so I will not be attending tonight.”

Waters did not attend Trump’s inauguration, and said no one who knew her should be surprised that she wasn’t going to attend his speech before Congress.

“I’ve thought about it an awful lot, and I’ve thought about if there are any circumstance under which you would engage in this kind of ceremony. The only thing I could think of was this: If he would apologize to the disabled for mimicking and mocking the disabled journalist, if he would apologize to women for talking about grabbing them in their private parts, if he would apologize for some of the other outrageous actions that he has been involved in, maybe I would,” she said.

Waters said she wasn’t encouraging other members to follow her lead and didn’t know of other members skipping the speech.

Several media outlets, citing unnamed sources, reported that Waters had told Democrats she was skipping because she “couldn’t control her enthusiasm” in her opposition to Trump.

Waters said that didn’t mean she thought she would yell out in the chamber as Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) did when he screamed “You lie!” at President Obama during his first speech to Congress in 2009.

“I would never speak out in the chamber. That’s what Republicans do, not what Democrats do,” she said.

3:02 p.m.: The post was updated to correct the name of the House member who yelled at President Obama in 2009. It was originally posted at 2:39 p.m.

Share

Trump to call for return of human space exploration, report says

President Trump will call for a return to manned space exploration in his speech to Congress on Tuesday night, according to a report citing an unnamed senior administration official.

The declaration, reported by PBS NewsHour, comes a day after SpaceX Chief Executive Elon Musk said his space company will send two private individuals on a flyby of the moon next year.

Musk said SpaceX was approached by the two individuals, who have already put down a “significant deposit,” and will be paying their own way for the mission.

Earlier this month, NASA said it would look into the possibility of putting a crew on the first flight of its massive Space Launch System rocket and Orion spacecraft next year. That flight was intended to go around the moon.

Share
Advertisement

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions promises aggressive push to tackle violent crime

In his first major speech as the nation’s top law enforcement official, Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions promised Tuesday to launch an aggressive crackdown on a jump in homicides and violent crime that he warned could portend a long-term rise in street violence.

“I sense that we could be at a pivotal time,” Sessions told a gathering of state attorneys general in Washington.

Although the nation’s murder and violent crime rates have plummeted in recent decades and are near historic lows, Sessions cited statistics indicating that violent crime rose by 3% and murders by nearly 11% in 2015, compared with the previous year.

Sessions acknowledged that crime has dropped substantially since the late 1980s and early 1990s, when he served as a federal prosecutor in Alabama. But he said he worries that the recent rise in reported violence in major cities is not “a blip.”

“I’m afraid it represents the beginning of a trend,” he said.

Read More

Share

Trump calls Obama’s clean water rule ‘horrible, horrible’

President Trump stepped up his attack on federal environmental protections Tuesday, issuing an order directing his administration to begin the long process of rolling back sweeping clean water rules that were enacted by his predecessor.

The order directing the Environmental Protection Agency to set about dismantling the Waters of the United States rule takes aim at one of President Obama’s signature environmental legacies, a far-reaching anti-pollution effort that expanded the authority of regulators over the nation’s waterways.

The contentious rule had been fought for years by farmers, ranchers, real estate developers and other industries, which complained it invited heavy-handed bureaucrats to burden their businesses with onerous restrictions and fines for minor violations.

Obama’s EPA argued that such claims were exaggerated and misrepresented the realities of the enforcement process of a rule that promised to create substantially cleaner waterways and with them, healthier habitats for threatened species of wildlife.

The directive to undo the clean water initiative is expected to be closely followed by another aimed at unraveling the Obama administration’s ambitious plan to fight climate change by curbing power plant emissions.

“It is such a horrible, horrible rule,” Trump said as he signed the directive Tuesday aimed at the water rules. “It has such a nice name, but everything about it is bad.” He declared the rule, championed by environmental groups to give the EPA broad authority over nearly two-thirds of the water bodies in the nation, “one of the worst examples of federal regulation” and “a massive power grab.”

While the executive orders are a clear sign of the new administration’s distaste for some of the highest profile federal environmental rules, they also reflect the challenge it faces in erasing them. Both the climate and the clean water rules were enacted only after a long and tedious process of public hearings, scientific analysis and bureaucratic review. That entire process must be revisited before they can be weakened. It could take years.

And environmental groups will be mobilized to fight every step of the way. “These wetland protections help ensure that over 100 million Americans have access to clean and safe drinking water,” California billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer said in a statement. “Access to safe drinking water is a human right, and Trump’s order is a direct violation of this right.”

The executive orders are compounded by the administration’s release of a budget blueprint that includes deep cuts at the EPA. Even if the process of changing the environmental rules is slow, the Trump administration will aim to hasten their demise by hollowing out the agencies charged with enforcing them.

At the same time, it is working with Congress to immediately kill some environmental protections under an obscure authority that applies to regulations enacted within the final months of the previous administration. A rule intended to limit water pollution from coal mining has already been killed by Congress, which is now weighing whether to jettison rules that force gas drilling operations on federal land to capture more of the toxic methane they emit.

Trump vowed Tuesday that he would continue to undermine the Obama-era environmental protections wherever he sees the opportunity, arguing they have cost jobs. “So many jobs we have delayed for so many years,” Trump said. “It is unfair to everybody.”

Many industries take issue with that interpretation. Tuesday’s order, for example, was met with a swift rebuke from sport fishing and hunting groups. They said the clean water rule has been a boon to the economy, sustaining hundreds of thousands of jobs in their industry.

“Sportsmen and women will do everything within their power to compel the administration to change course and to use the Clean Water Act to improve, not worsen, the nation’s waterways,” a statement from a half-dozen of the organizations said.

Share
Advertisement

Three Californians whose relatives were killed by immigrants in the U.S. illegally will be Trump’s speech guests

Jamiel Shaw Sr.
(Barbara Davidson / Los Angeles Times)

Three Californians whose relatives were killed by people in the U.S. illegally will be among President Trump’s guests as he addresses a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night.

Their presence indicates that illegal immigration – on which Trump staked his campaign – will likely be a major part of his speech to the Senate and House.

Jessica Davis and Susan Oliver are the widows of two Northern California sheriff’s deputies who were shot to death in 2014 by a convicted felon who had twice been deported to Mexico. Luis Enrique Monroy Bracamontes tried to plead guilty to the murders of Sacramento County Sheriff’s Deputy Danny Oliver and Placer County Sheriff’s Deputy Michael Davis Jr. but was ordered to stand trial in October.

Jamiel Shaw Sr., the father of a Los Angeles teen who was killed by a gang member who was in the country illegally, will also attend and sit with First Lady Melania Trump. Shaw’s son, a standout football player, was shot by Pedro Espinoza as he walked home. Espinoza was sentenced to death in 2012.

Shaw strongly supported Trump during the election, speaking during the Republican National Convention and appearing with Trump at a rally in Costa Mesa.

The other guests invited by the president to the speech are Maureen McCarthy Scalia, the widow of the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia; Megan Crowley, a young woman who was expected to die within a few years of being born; and Denisha Merriweather, a low-income African-American woman who struggled in school before attending private school on scholarship and becoming the first person in her family to graduate high school and college.

Share

Trump graded his leadership. Here’s how thousands of Americans are judging his performance

(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

President Trump was asked to grade his presidential performance so far during a Tuesday interview with “Fox and Friends.”

He gave himself a “C or a C+” on messaging, an A for achievement and an A+ for effort.

How does Trump’s self-evaluation stack up against the public’s view?

For the last six weeks, The Times has been collecting grades from readers on Trump’s leadership. We’ve heard from people on both sides of the aisle who have judged his leadership on a scale of A through F.

On one side is a reader like Matthew Belan. He’s a millennial who grew up in California, raised by a mother who holds an immigration green card, and voted for Barack Obama twice.

He believes he’s the polar opposite of what people expect since he gave Trump an A+.

“It’s just nice to hear somebody say the right thing toward us for the first time in a long time,” Belan said.

By “us,” he means police officers. Belan has worked in law enforcement about nine years. He submitted his answer soon after a Whittier police officer he knew personally was killed in the line of duty.

On the other side is a reader like Candace Hamann, a Democrat from Arizona whose dream was to work for the Environmental Protection Agency or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

That all changed when Trump took office.

“This administration has abandoned science and everything it says about climate change, but I have not,” she said.

Hamann, gave Trump an F.

See what others, including The Times’ Doyle McManus, have said.

Share
Advertisement

Kellyanne Conway’s feet on the couch -- does it really matter?

It’s a debate over etiquette.

A photo released on Monday shows Kellyanne Conway, a senior advisor to President Trump, with her feet on a couch in the Oval Office.

Proper? It depends.

Some on Twitter castigated Conway for disrespecting the Oval Office and the guests, which consisted of several presidents from historically black colleges and universities.

A photograph taken from a different angle shows Conway was kneeling on the couch so she could photograph the group with Trump. Here’s that shot, along with tweets from people saying everyone needs to chill out.

Share

Dark and dim or punchy and political? What kind of address will Trump deliver?

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

It’s speech day.

When President Trump addresses a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night, will he deliver a dark, dim view of the nation – similar to his inaugural address – or a punchy, polemical condemnation of the press and Washington establishment, much like he did last week at the Conservative Political Action Conference?

One thing is certain: Trump loves to give a speech.

And conservative media – much like the press as a whole – can’t wait for his speech

Here are some of today’s headlines:

Trump invites victims of illegal immigrant crime as guests for speech to Congress (Washington Times)

If we’re just looking at Trump’s guest list, then it appears his speech could be grim.

Several of the guests Trump and First Lady Melania Trump invited to his address are the victims of violent crimes committed by individuals in the country illegally.

“The dichotomy between valedictorians and felons in the illegal immigrant community has been on display over the last two years as Mr. Trump has tried to give the victims of illegal immigrant crime the same profile as the illegal immigrants themselves,” notes this piece.

Indeed, throughout the campaign Trump told the stories of people killed by immigrants who crossed the border illegally. Some of those people, such as teenager Jamiel Shaw Jr., were from California.

Jamiel, a high school football standout, was fatally shot in 2008 in Los Angeles by an immigrant who was in the country illegally. His father, Jamiel Shaw Sr., was often seen on the campaign trail alongside Trump telling his story.

Trump has signed executive orders in recent weeks to speed up deportations of violent criminals without documentation.

Hundreds of noncitizens registered to vote in Ohio, investigation finds (Daily Caller)

Trump’s claim last month that nearly 5 million people voted illegally in November was, um, false. (The nonpartisan PoltiFact gave his statements on the issue a rating of “Pants on Fire,” which basically means it’s completely untrue.)

But this report, highlighted prominently on the Caller’s website, cites a recent investigation in Ohio that found hundreds of noncitizens are registered to vote in the state.

“According to Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted, his office has identified a total of 821 noncitizens registered to vote in the Buckeye State since 2011 — 126 of whom voted in at least one election,” notes the piece.

Husted was a vocal critic of Trump’s voter fraud claims

Still, in a statement released this week, Husted, a Republican, said “in light of the national discussion about illegal voting it is important to inform our discussions with facts. The fact is voter fraud happens, it is rare and when it happens, we hold people accountable.”

Husted said that this year his office discovered 385 noncitizens registered to vote in Ohio, 82 of whom have cast at least one ballot, notes the Caller report.

Women with guns: The next threat to the Democratic Party (Washington Examiner)

It’s among the most polarizing topics in the country: gun laws.

The issue comes to the forefront with every mass shooting and Democrats often call for stricter gun laws, while Republicans say that would infringe on Americans’ 2nd Amendment rights.

This feature piece notes an uptick in gun ownership among women in recent years and suggests it could hurt Democrats, who often press for more – not less – gun control.

“There is a lesson within a lesson here. As Democrats continue to make gun control a wedge issue in elections, they underestimate the damage they are doing to their own chances among women, who have been flocking to buy guns in the past few years,” writes Salena Zito in this dispatch from Harrisburg, Pa.

“These same voters, whom the NRA calls the ‘shy voters,’ also flocked to Donald Trump, and they are unlikely to reverse course before next year’s midterm elections. So as wedge issues go, this one is becoming more of a loser for the left,” she writes.

Share
Advertisement

Democrats inviting Muslims, LGBT leaders, immigrant Dreamers as guests to Trump’s speech in display of resistance

Presidential visits to Congress almost always include a robust display of partisanship.

Lawmakers on one side of the aisle tend to jump to applaud their party’s leader while those on the other often stew in their seats.

And few will forget the time a Republican lawmaker shouted “You lie!” during President Obama’s speech to Congress.

But President Trump’s first joint address Tuesday is taking on new levels of partisan resistance.

Many Democratic female lawmakers are planning to wear white, to honor the legacy of the suffragette movement and stand up for women’s rights.

Guests on the Democratic side will include those whose livelihoods are being upended by Trump’s policies -- Muslims, immigrant Dreamers brought to the country illegally as children, LGBT leaders and Americans benefiting from Obamacare.

In a sign of party unity, Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota will taking his former rival in the race for party chairman, Tom Perez, as his guest.

“It is time for President Trump to come face to face with the realities of his anti-immigrant and anti-American policies, and understand that his rhetoric has a real impact on communities across the country,” said Rep. Ruben Kihuen (D-Nev.), whose guest will be Dr. Zia Khan, a Muslim-American cardiologist in Las Vegas, who came to the United States to study medicine 25 years ago.

“Our country is unique because it makes it possible for all immigrants to pursue their dreams,” Kihuen said.

Republicans, too, are not shy about making a statement.

Republican Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, who handily won reelection last fall in the swing state, is bringing Nicky “Sonny” Nardi, president of Teamsters Local 416.

And some Democrats plan to protest by staying home.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) told reporters Tuesday she was skipping the speech because she didn’t think she would be able to contain her opposition to Trump.

Share

U.S. diplomats backing Balkan republics against suspected Russia meddling

Even as President Trump seeks to improve relations with Russia, the State Department is countering overtures by Moscow in one of its former satellite regions, the Balkans.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner on Tuesday called for Macedonia, one of the former republics of the now-defunct Yugoslavia, to urgently put together a government.

This comes after the former prime minister of neighboring Montenegro, Milo Djukanovic, accused Russia of meddling in the region and attempting to provoke a coup against Montenegro’s pro-Western government last fall.

Macedonia, Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina have expressed strong interest in joining the European Union and possibly the NATO military alliance, but Russia has opposed those moves.

“The United States calls on Macedonia’s leaders to form a new government without further delay, in a manner consistent with the constitution and Macedonia’s aspirations to join the European Union and NATO,” Toner said. He did not mention Russia.

Macedonia held parliamentary elections in December, but lawmakers continue to squabble over how to form the government. Russia backed fringe parties in the EU-organized vote.

“The formation of a new government committed to rule of law and implementing needed reforms will help end a political crisis that has severely hindered the country’s democratic and economic development and Euro-Atlantic integration,” Toner said.

Moscow’s designs on the Balkans, which were once mostly part of the Soviet bloc, have been decried by much of Western Europe as a resurgent Russia seeks to expand its geopolitical influence and the European Union braces for the withdrawal of Britain.

In addition to its armed intervention in Ukraine and Georgia, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s government is reportedly interfering in elections in France and Germany in support of nationalist, anti-immigrant parties.

U.S. intelligence agencies say Putin’s government sought to interfere in the U.S. election last year by hacking and leaking emails from Democratic Party leaders and sponsoring fake news.

President Trump has repeatedly expressed admiration for Putin and called for improving relations with Moscow. The FBI is investigating whether the Trump team had inappropriate contacts with Russian authorities before and after the election.

Tensions in the Balkans also involve Serbia and the breakaway republic of Kosovo. Nearly two decades ago, the U.S. took part in wars in Bosnia and in Kosovo, both against Serbia. Russia backed Serbia, with which it has religious and cultural ties.

Speaking last week in Kosovo, Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti, NATO’s supreme allied commander for Europe, said Russia was not being “helpful,” especially in media disinformation and efforts at political influence.

“The stability of the western Balkans is of critical importance for NATO because security and stability in this region is important to the security and stability of Europe, a Europe that’s whole, free and at peace,” he said.

Share
Advertisement

Why the GOP’s alternatives to Obamacare are political time bombs

Protesters gather recently outside Raritan Valley Community College in New Jersey before a town hall meeting on healthcare with Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.)
(AFP/Getty Images)

Republicans came into office this year promising to rescue Americans from rising healthcare bills by repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act.

But the party’s emerging healthcare proposals would shift even more costs to patients, feeding the very problem GOP politicians complained about under Obamacare.

And their solutions could hit not only Americans who have Obamacare health plans, but also tens of millions more who rely on employer coverage or on government health plans such as Medicaid and Medicare.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and other congressional leaders, as well as new Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, favor bringing back slimmed-down health plans that were phased out under Obamacare. Such “catastrophic” plans typically offer fewer benefits and often require patients to pay much larger deductibles.

Many in the GOP also want poor people who rely on Medicaid to face more co-payments and higher premiums, citing the need for patients to have “skin in the game.”

Developing House Republican plans to replace Obamacare would scale back government insurance subsidies for millions of low- and moderate-income Americans who rely on the aid to buy coverage.

To fund a healthcare overhaul, Republicans are exploring ways to scale back tax breaks on health insurance, a move that could mean a tax hike for people who get coverage through an employer.

Meanwhile, other GOP plans to overhaul Medicare — which Ryan and Price have championed — would provide seniors with vouchers to shop for commercial health plans, an approach that independent analyses suggest could leave many patients paying more.

Read More

Share

Trump is betting the economy ‘sails’ and will pay for Social Security and Medicaid shortfalls

(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

President Trump plans to leave hundreds of government jobs unfilled and is betting on a boost to the nation’s economy to save Social Security and other entitlement programs, he said Tuesday.

In a preview of his first major address to Congress on Tuesday night, Trump described his plans to slash regulations and government positions and his hope that business-friendly policies will eventually help provide billions of dollars in new tax revenue to cover expected shortfalls in Medicaid and Social Security.

Trump repeatedly promised during his campaign that he wouldn’t touch those programs, which help the poor and the elderly.

“If the economy sails, then I’m right, because I said I’m not touching Social Security,” Trump said on “Fox and Friends.”

Republican lawmakers have long said that major entitlement programs, a huge part of the government budget, need to be revamped to head off massive deficits in the future.

Trump’s view contradicts his director of the Office of Management and Budget, Mick Mulvaney, who said during his confirmation hearing that entitlement programs need to be slashed if they are going to survive.

In addition to preserving benefits, Trump has promised to increase defense spending by 10% and to finance improving roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects around the country.

Budget experts say those hugely expensive initiatives will be difficult to offset with savings elsewhere in the federal budget.

On Monday, White House officials said Trump would pay for a proposed $54-billion boost in military and security spending by cutting domestic programs not related to securing the country, including environment programs.

The budgets of domestic agencies are a fraction of the size of the Pentagon and entitlement budgets.

Trump said Tuesday he would start by leaving most of the 600 mid-level vacancies in his government unfilled.

“In many cases, we don’t want to fill those jobs,” Trump said on Fox.

He sees leaving those positions open as a way to both cut costs and thin out the bureaucracy.

“There are hundreds and hundreds of jobs that are totally unnecessary jobs,” Trump said. “That’s not a bad thing. That’s a good thing. We’re running a very good, efficient government.”

In some cases, government vacancies can lead to slow response times from federal agencies and long waits for citizens requesting services or redress.

Share
Advertisement

Trump’s push for American-made could disrupt NAFTA supply chains and raise consumer prices

Production workers assemble a 2017 Ford F-Series truck at a plant in Louisville, Ky.
(Sam VarnHagen / Associated Press)

Shopping for a new set of wheels at a Chevy dealership recently, Patrick Spradlin had a few priorities: a good commuter car, room for his family of five, low maintenance costs and no more than $20,000.

About the last thing on his mind was where such a vehicle and each of its components — whether engine, car seats or spark plugs — were made. “That’s not a make-or-break issue,” said the 38-year-old systems engineer from Whaleyville, Md.

But such details about the origin of car parts and hundreds of other products soon may take on greater importance under the Trump administration, potentially translating into significant costs for consumers like Spradlin.

The issue, known in trade jargon as rules of origin, figures to be a major bone of contention as President Trump undertakes his promise to radically overhaul the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Read More

Share

Wilbur Ross, to be key player in NAFTA negotiations, confirmed as Commerce secretary

Wilbur Ross, the billionaire investor who will play a leading role in President Trump’s proposed revamping of the North American Free Trade Agreement, easily won Senate confirmation Monday night to be the administration’s Commerce secretary.

Unlike some other Trump nominees who faced intense opposition from Senate Democrats, Ross had a relatively smooth confirmation hearing and cleared the full Senate on a vote of 72 to 27.

Just before the vote, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), the ranking minority member of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, urged fellow lawmakers to vote for Ross, despite what he said was the Trump administration’s refusal to release written answers to questions from Senate Democrats about Ross’ investments in a Cyprus bank with reported financial ties to wealthy Russians.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump blames Obama for protests and gives himself a ‘C or a C-plus’ on getting his message out

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

President Trump said Tuesday morning he believes former President Obama “is behind” nationwide protests against the new administration’s policies, taking an unusual swipe at his predecessor.

He leveled the charge on Fox News a day after former President George W. Bush appeared to criticize Trump for disparaging the media, and said any ties between Trump’s team and Russia should be investigated.

Such sniping is highly unusual. Trump previously has praised Obama for helping ease his transition to the White House, and Bush rarely spoke in public after Obama took office in 2009.

Asked to grade his performance by the hosts of Fox and Friends, Trump gave himself a “C or a C-plus” on messaging, but an A for achievement and an A-plus for effort.

Trump said he believes Obama orchestrated the backlash to new immigration and healthcare plans at angry town hall meetings in recent weeks.

“I think that President Obama is behind it because his people are certainly behind it,” Trump said. “It’s politics. I mean I’m changing things that he’s wanted to do.”

Trump said he believes that some of the “very serious leaks” out of his administration probably come from former Obama staffers.

Trump’s aides have scrambled in recent weeks to tamp down leaks to reporters about the FBI’s investigation of connections between Trump’s former campaign staff and Russian authorities during last year’s presidential race and the transition period.

Trump will give his first major address on Tuesday night to a joint session of Congress. He plans to lay out his plans to fulfill campaign pledges on healthcare and immigration and rolling back environmental regulations.

For the past six weeks, The Times has been collecting grades from readers. Tell us what you think of Trump’s leadership, and see how others have judged his performance here.

Share

The real goal of Trump’s executive orders: reduce the number of immigrants in the U.S.

(Nicholas Kamm / AFP/Getty Images)

Behind President Trump’s efforts to step up deportations and block travel from seven mostly Muslim countries lies a goal that reaches far beyond any immediate terrorism threat: a desire to reshape American demographics for the long term and keep out people who Trump and senior aides believe will not assimilate.

In pursuit of that goal, Trump in his first weeks in office has launched the most dramatic effort in decades to reduce the country’s foreign-born population and set in motion what could become a generational shift in the ethnic makeup of the U.S.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Trump says he’ll keep his promises. Here are some of his biggest from the campaign

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

President Trump will deliver on Tuesday his biggest speech since inauguration, an address to a joint session of Congress. The West Wing is keen to demonstrate that Trump is keeping his promises and will explain how.

With that in mind, it’s worth revisiting some of his signature campaign lines; check back tonight to see which ones we heard again from him in the House chamber.

Read More

Share

The political time bomb at the heart of Republican Obamacare alternatives: higher costs for more Americans

(AFP/Getty Images)

Republicans came into office this year promising to rescue Americans from rising healthcare bills by repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act.

But the party’s emerging healthcare proposals would shift even more costs to patients, feeding the very problem GOP politicians complained about under Obamacare.

And their solutions could hit not only Americans who have Obamacare health plans, but also tens of millions more who rely on employer coverage or on government health plans such as Medicaid and Medicare.

Read More

Share
Advertisement

Dan Coats faces Senate confirmation hearing to be top U.S. intelligence official

Dan Coats will be at the epicenter Tuesday of the bitter squabble between President Trump and the U.S. intelligence community, which the former senator from Indiana will lead if he is confirmed as director of national intelligence.

Coats is certain to be asked at his Senate confirmation hearing about Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential race, alleged contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russian authorities, and the president’s harsh criticism of U.S. intelligence agencies.

Read More

Share

What happens when presidents give their first big speech to Congress

(Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

President Trump on Tuesday plans to make his debut address to a joint session of Congress in a nationally televised speech expected to cover such topics as immigration, healthcare and the military.

The prime-time address comes as Trump looks to reframe his presidency after what many observers described as a chaotic first month in office that included a rocky rollout of a temporary travel ban focused on seven Muslim-majority countries, tension with allies including Mexico, and ongoing hostility toward the media.

Historically, presidents have used the opportunity to inspire optimism and hope about the future, even in dire circumstances. Here’s a look at how some presidents described the challenges facing the nation in their first speeches to Congress.

Read More

Share
Advertisement