Presidential candidate Andrew Yang said Monday he believes Donald Trump has not tweeted much about him because the president knows that Yang is "better at the internet."

Yang made the remarks in a Monday morning interview on MSNBC's Morning Joe. One of the show's hosts, Willie Geist, asked Yang to explain why he decided to ask attendees of an Iowa campaign event on Saturday to "give a round to applause" for those in the audience who voted for Trump in 2016.

The Democratic candidate replied that Iowa, as a "purple swing state" that Trump won in 2016, was bound to be full of people who had voted for Trump or had friends and neighbors who did. He stressed that is important to win the support of some of those voters in 2020.

"So the folks that voted for Trump and come to my events [who] are now excited about my campaign, that's how we're going to win," Yang said. "And head-to-head matchups between me and Trump show that I'm the heaviest favorite to beat him one-on-one, in large part because 18 percent of College Republicans say they'd support me over the president. Ten percent of Trump voters in New Hampshire, in one poll, said they'd support me over the president.

"You know who's figured this out?" Yang asked rhetorically. "President Trump. Because I'm the only candidate he has not tweeted a word about. He knows I'm better at the internet than he is."

Yang, an Ivy Leagueeducated entrepreneur and lawyer, launched his presidential campaign in November 2017. Yang has stayed in the race even as Democratic candidates with experience in government, like Senator Kamala Harris and Julin Castro, a former housing secretary, suspended their campaigns.

A Twitter search appeared to confirm Yang's claim that the presidentknown for his tweeting about, among other things, his political rivalshas not mentioned him on the platform. Trump has never used the term "Andrew Yang" in any of his tweets from his account, @realDonaldTrump. The only time Trump has used the word Yang in a tweet was in 2015and that was to quote an account named @yang_karl, which has since been suspended.

Trump has responded to a tweet that mentioned Yang. In September 2019, Kassy Dillon wrote on Twitter, "Here's the thing: I'm voting for Trump but I wouldn't be friends with Trump. I'm not voting for Yang but I'd definitely be his friend."

The next day, the president retweeted Dillon's remark with a response: "I'm OK with that!"

Continue reading here:

Andrew Yang Explains Why He's The Only Democratic Candidate Donald Trump Hasn't 'Tweeted a Word About' - Newsweek

From the black rural South we get this nugget of wisdom, most often expressed in song: Dont let the devil ride. Dont let the devil ride. If you let him ride, he gon wanna drive; dont let him ride. Subsequent verses provide additional warnings. If you let him flag you down, hell turn you around. If you let him be your boss, hell make your soul be lost. But they all make the same point: Theres no power-sharing agreement with the dark side. Once you welcome it, you become its subject, and it becomes your ruler.

When Donald Trump was running for president, there were quite a number of Republicans who correctly called out his unfitness for the office. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina called the candidate a loser, a nut job and a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot who doesnt represent my party. When Trump, who was being sued for fraud, claimed that he couldnt possibly get a fair hearing from federal judge of Mexican descent, Paul Ryan, then speaker of the House, called the comment a textbook case of a racist comment. These are the words and phrases Sen. Ted Cruz used to describe Trump: pathological liar, utterly amoral, a narcissist at a level I dont think this countrys ever seen and a serial philanderer. Cruz also called Trump a bully.

All those Republican critics of Trump were spot-on. He is what they said he is. But all of those critics gave him their political support and cover. They all seemed to believe that if he were elected then they would be able to effectively restrain him and rein him in when necessary.

There were right-leaning pundits and columnist making similar arguments. Dont worry, they said to those of us horrified at the 2016 election results, the Republican establishment is merely tolerating this guy; theyll keep him in check.

But all weve seen are Republicans falling down before him like supplicants around a throne. All the senators present answered affirmatively when Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts asked them, Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of Donald John Trump, president of the United States, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws, so help you god?" But most of them were lying. There was never any plan for the Republican members of the Senate to do anything other than acquit the president.

If you argue that it was always the plan for most Democrats to convict Trump, then youre right. The difference, though, is that an honest evaluation of the evidence supports Trumps conviction and removal from office. Entering the impeachment proceedings with a mind fixed on acquittal means deciding in advance that no evidence would matter.

Republican senators seem to be most concerned about what might happen to them at the polls if they were to oppose the president. But they ought to be most concerned about what will happen to this country if the person some of them have previously described as an amoral, lying, narcissistic nut job is rewarded and not punished for the lying, amorality and narcissism that led to his impeachment. Obviously, hes already emboldened, but the Senate endorsing his view that he did nothing wrong will only embolden him more.

On July 4, 2017, the first year of Trumps term, NPR published the Declaration of Independence line-by-line on Twitter. Theyd been broadcasting a reading of the document on air every year for 29 years, but when they also turned to social media to promote Americas founding document, Trump supporters accused the news outlet of Trump-bashing. Because who else could NPR have been referring to when it tweeted, A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people?

How does this country go from rejecting the monarchy and establishing a system to keep its chief executive in check to essentially establishing a monarchy by signaling a willingness to deny, look the other way or brazenly lie about the available evidence?

When we look back at it, well see that the first fatal step was believing that Trumps awfulness could co-exist with and be made subservient to the greater needs of the country. In short, that he would just climb aboard and be content to let other, less obnoxious leaders do the driving.

Instead, hes taken over everything. All the people in the White House who were supposed to be his minders are gone, and the two other branches that are supposed to check and balance his powers have all but waved the white flag of surrender.

The Trump-wont-be-that-bad crowd is awfully silent right now. One senses that they are shocked and disappointed at Republicans they believed would provide resistance.

But some of us arent shocked at all. We took the old folks warning to heart.

Jarvis DeBerry is a columnist at Cleveland.com and a member of the editorial board. Reach him at jdeberry@cleveland.com or on Twitter at @jarvisdeberry.

See the article here:

Accommodating Donald Trump cost the GOP its soul - cleveland.com

A week-long dream hunt with the US presidents son Donald Trump Jr is being auctioned at an annual trophy hunting convention in Reno, Nevada alongside expeditions to shoot elephants, bears and giraffes.

The four-day event organized by Safari Club International (SCI) and advertised as a hunters heaven, will culminate on Saturday with an auction for a week-long Sitka black-tailed deer hunt in Alaska with Trump Jr, his son and a guide. At the time of writing, bidding for the yacht-based expedition stands at $10,000 (7,685).

Other prizes include the chance to shoot an elephant on a 14-day trip in Namibia, an all-inclusive hunt package to Zimbabwe to kill buffalo, giraffe and wildebeest, and a 10-day crocodile hunting expedition in South Africa. The proceeds from the auction, which campaigners say could exceed $5m, will fund SCIs hunter advocacy and wildlife conservation efforts, according to the organization.

Thousands of hunters from around the world are expected to attend the convention which begins on Wednesday, where Trump Jr, an avid trophy hunter, is set to give a keynote address.

The description of the auction prize states: This year we will be featuring Donald Trump Jr, a man who needs no introduction, and whose passion for the outdoors makes him the number one ambassador for our way of life.

Don Jr shares this heritage with his son and believes in handing down these lessons to young hunters. Don Jr and his son will be hosting this years hunt along with Keegan [the guide] in Alaska.

It comes just weeks after ProPublica revealed Trump Jr killed a rare species of endangered sheep during a hunting trip to Mongolia last summer.

Last week, anti-hunting campaigners condemned the annual SCI convention, and Brian Wilson and Al Jardine backed a boycott of their former band the Beach Boys, who are scheduled to appear at the event.

Kitty Block, president and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States, said: This annual event is the largest meeting in the world of people who celebrate the senseless killing, buying and selling of dead animals for bragging rights.

As our planet suffers an extinction crisis, it is business as usual for the trophy hunting industry and SCI, who continue to revel in spending millions of dollars every year to destroy imperiled wildlife.

SCI hit back at the criticisms and called them the height of hypocrisy, arguing that hunting makes enormous contributions to conservation and described Trump Jr as an accomplished conservationist.

The regulations around importing hunting trophies has been loosened under Donald Trump, though he has previously described the practice as a horror show despite his sons affection for big-game hunting. In 2018 the administration moved to make it easier to import trophies from exotic big-game animals such as elephants and lions.

Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on Twitter for all the latest news and features

Read more:

Trophy hunting event to auction 'dream hunt' with Donald Trump Jr - The Guardian

In January 2018, Michael Wolffs Fire and Fury made headlines as it depicted a president out of control and a White House that careened from crisis to crisis. Donald Trump threatened legal action against author and publisher. He also lauded himself and his electoral college victory: I think that would qualify as not smart, but genius and a very stable genius at that!

Trumps outburst confirmed what many already feared. In the aftermath of the firing of FBI director James Comey in May 2017, Rod Rosenstein, then deputy attorney general, reportedly weighed secretly recording the president with an eye to removing him from office under the 25th amendment.

Now Philip Rucker and Carol Leonnig of the Washington Post offer A Very Stable Genius. As befitting Pulitzer winners for investigative reporting, their book is richly sourced and highly readable.

It sheds new light on how the 45th president tests the boundaries of the office while trying the patience and dignity of those who work for or with him. It is not just another Trump tell-all or third-party confessional. It is unsettling, not salacious.

Trump himself was quick to criticize the book, calling its authors two third rate Washington Post reporters. In a tweet on Saturday night, the president said the book was all for the purpose of demeaning and belittling a President who is getting great things done for our Country, at a record clip.

Rucker and Leonnig lift the curtain on internal battles over immigration and the attempt to replace John Kelly with Chris Christie as White House chief of staff. It also closely examines the scrum between Bill Barr, the attorney general, and Bob Mueller over Barrs handling of the special counsels report on Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow.

Trumps West Wing is tantamount to a family business and everything is personal

Trumps West Wing is tantamount to a family business and everything is personal. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump obtain security clearances because they are kin.

After publicly punting the issue to Kelly, Trump is described as applying pressure privately. I wish we could make this go away, he reportedly told Kelly. This is a problem. Said differently, protocols and national security were treated as impediments, not safeguards, when Javanka got involved.

When Trump cuts Kelly loose, Kushner and Ivanka are depicted as coveting the job. Their ambitions go unfulfilled but they continue to lurk in the background.

Told by Rudy Giuliani that Trump wants him as his chief of staff, Christie asks why he would want the job if Kushner isnt leaving. For record, as a federal prosecutor Christie sent Charlie Kushner, Jareds father, to prison for one of the most loathsome, disgusting crimes on Christies watch.

Why the fuck am I going to take this job? the former New Jersey governor exclaims. You guys are nuts. Im not going in there.

Still, Ivanka purportedly telephoned Christies wife, Pat, to assure her bygones would be bygones. It didnt work.

A Very Stable Genius also chronicles the back and forth between Trumps lawyers and the special counsels office and the interplay between Barr and Mueller. Under George HW Bush, Barr was attorney general and Mueller headed the criminal division at the justice department. The two men were friends.

Yet when Barr rolled out his summary of Muellers report, Leonnig and Rucker write, the special counsel looked as if hed been slapped. When Mueller sent a rebuttal letter, objecting to Barrs summary, Barr was pissed, thought the letter nasty and felt personally betrayed. Barr and Mueller spoke by phone, a tense conversation that ended on an uplifting note.

As for Trump and name-calling, nothing has changed. As a candidate, he mocked John McCain, a gold star family, a Latino judge and a disabled reporter. Life at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has not alloyed that spirit.

At a meeting in the Pentagons inner sanctum, the Tank, the draft-dodging Trump derided Americas generals as dopes and babies. He added: I wouldnt go to war with you people. Debasement was a coin of the realm.

When Kirstjen Nielsen, secretary of homeland security and a Kelly deputy, balked at Trumps demands on immigration, he berated her looks and height. For good measure, according to the authors, Trump would call her at 5am, just for the sake of harassment.

After James Mattis advised Trump of his intent to resign as defense secretary, Trump moved his departure up two months. At a cabinet meeting, the president bragged that he had essentially fired the four-star general. For the president, policy differences invariably exploded into a matter of honor.

Mattiss resignation letter omitted any praise for the commander-in-chief. Because you have the right to have a secretary of defense whose views are better aligned with yours, he wrote, I believe it is right for me to step down.

Likewise, Trump mocked HR McMaster, Michael Flynns replacement as national security adviser, for his mien and wardrobe. The scholarly McMaster was always on borrowed time.

Says one of McMasters aides, Trump doesnt fire people he tortures them until theyre willing to quit.

Clearly, Trumpworld has its share of casualties. Paul Manafort, a campaign manager, and Michael Cohen, a lawyer, sit imprisoned. Flynn and Roger Stone, a longtime political confidante, await sentencing.

Trumps allergy to reality remains on display. His contention he doesnt know Lev Parnas is belied by video and email. The US now admits 11 troops attacked by Irans missiles were treated for concussions.

Leonnig and Rucker quote Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution, who says Trump appears to be daring the rest of the political system to stop him and if it doesnt hell go further. The law has no force without people who are willing to enforce it.

As the Senate marches toward an impeachment trial and the countdown to the election ticks on, truer words have seldom been spoken.

Continue reading here:

A Very Stable Genius review: dysfunction and disaster at the court of King Donald - The Guardian

As the Senate debates Donald Trumps future, chief executives, financiers and politicians will descend on Davos in the Swiss Alps for their annual self-congratulatory defense of global capitalism.

The events are not unrelated. Trump is charged with abusing his power. Capitalisms global elite is under assault for abusing its power as well: fueling inequality, fostering corruption and doing squat about climate change.

Chief executives of the largest global corporations are raking in more money and at a larger multiple of their workers pay than at any time in history. The worlds leading financiers are pocketing even more. The 26 richest people on Earth now own as much as the 3.8 billion who form the poorer half of the planets population.

Concentrated wealth on this scale invites corruption. Across the world, big money is buying off politicians to procure favors that further enlarge the wealth of those at the top, while siphoning off resources from everyone else.

Corruption makes it impossible to fight stagnant wages, climate change or any other problem facing the vast majority of the worlds population that would require some sacrifice by the rich.

Popular anger is boiling over against elites seen as irredeemably greedy, corrupt and indifferent

Popular anger is boiling over against elites seen as irredeemably greedy, corrupt and indifferent to the plight of most people struggling to get by. The anger has fueled uprisings in Chile, Spain, Ecuador, Lebanon, Egypt and Bolivia; environmental protests in the UK, Germany, Austria, France and New Zealand; and xenophobic politics in the US, the UK, Brazil and Hungary.

Trumps support comes largely from Americas working class whose wages havent risen in decades, whose jobs are less secure than ever and whose political voice has been drowned out by big money.

Although Trump has given corporations and Wall Street everything theyve wanted and nothing has trickled down to his supporters, he has convinced those supporters hes on their side by channeling their rage on to foreigners, immigrants, minorities and deep state bureaucrats.

It seems strangely appropriate, therefore, that the theme of this years Davos conclave is stakeholder capitalism the idea that corporations have a responsibility to their workers, communities and the environment as well as to their shareholders.

Expect endless speeches touting the long-term benefits of stakeholder capitalism to corporate bottom lines: happy workers are more productive. A growing middle class can buy more goods and services. Climate change is beginning to cost a bundle in terms of environmental calamities and insurance, so it must be stopped.

All true, but the assembled CEOs know theyll get richer far quicker if they boost equity values in the short term by buying back their shares of stock, suppressing wages, fighting unions, resisting environmental regulations and buying off politicians for tax cuts and subsidies.

This has been their strategy for three decades, and its about to get worse. Three researchers Daniel Greenwald at MITs Sloan School, Martin Lettau at Berkeley and Sydney Ludvigson at NYU found that between 1952 and 1988, economic growth accounted for 92% of the rise in equity values. But since 1989 most of the increase has come from reallocated rents to shareholders and away from labor compensation. In other words, from workers.

What this means is that in order for the stock market to do as well in coming years, either economic growth has to accelerate markedly (highly unlikely), or chief executives will have to siphon off even more of the gains from growth from workers and other stakeholders to their shareholders.

This is likely to require even more downward pressure on wages, more payoffs to politicians for tax cuts and subsidies and further rollbacks of environmental regulations. All of which will worsen the prevailing discontent.

There will be no mention at Davos of any of this, nor of the increasing political and economic power of these elites and the diminishing power of average workers and citizens around the world.

Nothing will be achieved in the Swiss Alps because the growing global discontent has yet to affect the bottom lines of the corporations and financial institutions whose leaders are assembling to congratulate themselves on their wealth, influence and benevolence.

Trump, meanwhile, is likely to be acquitted by Senate Republicans who are so cowardly and unprincipled that they will ignore his flagrantly unconstitutional acts.

Trump plans to speak at Davos, by the way: an impeached president addressing world economic leaders while being tried in the Senate. Hell probably boast about the stock market, bully and lie, as usual.

One thing he wont say is that the whatever-it-takes abuses of economic and political power such as he and much of his audience are engaged in threaten to destroy capitalism, democracy and the planet.

The rest is here:

Trump is on trial for abuse of power the Davos elites should be in the dock too - The Guardian

Less than 12 hours after the White House announced President Donald Trumps impeachment trial defense team, new questions have emerged about connections between some of his lawyers and figures at the center of the Ukraine investigation.

A document dump from the House Judiciary Committee overnight Friday included more information about Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, who is currently under federal indictment for his alleged role in the political pressure campaign in Ukraine.

The released documents included photos of Parnas with President Trump as well as shots of him with Ivanka Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Pam Bondi, a former Florida attorney general who is among the lawyers on the president's impeachment team.

Trump has repeatedly said he does not know Parnas.

Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.

Bondi, in an interview on NBC's "TODAY" on Saturday morning, dismissed the photos.

Clearly, Lev Parnas liked to take pictures with a lot of people, she said. "He showed up at events pretty much everywhere where Republicans were.

The Judiciary Committee's release also included information obtained by the FBI when they searched Parnas electronic devices. According to his electronic calendar, Parnas had a breakfast meeting scheduled with Trump in September, just days before Parnas was arrested.

I dont know what that matters, what theyre planning on doing with it, Bondi said when asked about how apparent evidence of the presidents relationship with Parnas might figure into Democrats' strategy at the trial. Were going to stick to the facts and stick to the law in this case.

Besides questions about possible connections of Parnas to the president and Bondi, another person on Trump's defense team drawing attention is Kenneth Starr, who in the 1990s oversaw investigations into President Bill Clinton that led to his impeachment. At that time, Trump called Starr a lunatic and a disaster.

Asked about Trump's prior comments on Starr, Bondi said, Clearly he does not think this now.

Ken Starr knows what hes doing," she said. "He has experience in this field.

Bondi also addressed the question of whether new witnesses might be called at the Senate trial, which is set to begin on Tuesday.

If they want to force a witness to be called, thats going to be discussed, Bondi said.

Katie Primm is a news producer at NBC News in New York for Today and News Specials.

View original post here:

Trump lawyer dismisses new evidence, including photos of the president with Lev Parnas - NBCNews.com

Trumps allegations are not new he has sporadically claimed for years that the Democratic establishment sought to undermine Sanders in 2016, as have Sanders own supporters but they come as Trump has accelerated his offensive against the Vermont senator, who continues to show strength in early polling.

Earlier this week, Trump sought to play up a feud between Sanders and Warren, who are battling for progressive voters, and his campaign has begun to single Sanders out in press releases and on social media more often rather than focusing more exclusively on Biden.

Trump has also recently stepped up his attacks on former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is pouring money into TV ads attacking Trump to boost his late-start bid.

But Sanders rejected Trump's "attempts to divide Democrats" in a statement Friday evening.

Lets be clear about who is rigging what: it is Donald Trumps action to use the power of the federal government for his own political benefit that is the cause of the impeachment trial," he said. "His transparent attempts to divide Democrats will not work, and we are going to unite to sweep him out of the White House in November.

When the trial begins in earnest on Tuesday, all senators will be required to attend each day of the proceedings for as long as they last.

But Sanders isnt the only 2020 candidate who will be kept off the campaign trail as the impeachment trial drags on.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), whom polls have shown is within striking distance in Iowa; Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who is hoping for a come-from-behind victory in the Hawkeye State, and Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), a longshot who has placed more stock in the New Hampshire primaries in less than a month, will all be sidelined by the proceedings.

The trial could be a huge boon to White House hopefuls like Biden and former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who are clustered with Sanders and Warren at the top of the field. The senators currently running for president have all expressed disappointment at being kept off the campaign trail while pledging to fulfill their constitutional obligations and sending surrogates to campaign on their behalf.

Continued here:

Trump accuses Dems of using impeachment trial to hurt Sanders campaign - POLITICO

By almost any standard, President Donald Trumps rally on Tuesday evening in Milwaukee was a bizarre affair. The president went on a lengthy tirade about lightbulbs, toilets, and showers; touted war crimes; joked about a former president being in hell; and said hed like to see one of his domestic political foes locked up.

I tried to capture some of the speechs disconcerting oddness in my write-up of the event. In many ways, the remarks the president made were typical of him. And that provides the media with a challenge: Describing Trump as he really is can make it seem as if a report is anti-Trump and that the reporter is trying to make the president look foolish.

But for media outlets that view themselves as above taking sides, attempts to provide a sober, balanced look at presidential speeches often end up normalizing things that are decidedly not normal.

A brief report about Trumps Milwaukee speech that aired Wednesday morning on NPR illustrates this phenomenon. The anchors intro framed Trumps at times disjointed ramblings as a normal political speech that ranged widely, and the ensuing report (which originated from member station WUWM Milwaukee Public Radio) characterized his delivery as one in which he snapped back at Democrats for bringing impeachment proceedings.

Trump was taking on Democrats on their own territory, the reporter said, when in reality Trump heaped abuse on them, for instance, suggesting former Vice President Joe Biden is experiencing memory loss.

Listen for yourself:

On Twitter, Georgetown University public affairs professor Don Moynihan noted that NPRs report about the rally mentioned specific topics like Iran and impeachment but carefully omit the insane stuff. This is one way the media strives to present Trump as a normal president.

NPR is far from alone in struggling to cover Trump.

As I wrote following a previous Trump rally in Wisconsin last April, outlets including CBS, USA Today, the Associated Press, and the Hill failed to so much as mention in their reporting that Trump pushed dozens of lies and incendiary smears during his speech.

The irony is that the media is one of Trumps foremost targets of abuse. He calls the press the enemy of the people, yet the very outlets he demeans regularly bend over backward to cover him in the most favorable possible light.

The disconnect between the real Trump and the whitewashed version that emerges from mainstream reporting was captured nicely by Guardian Australia editor Lenore Taylor in a piece she wrote last September headlined, As a foreign reporter visiting the US I was stunned by Trumps press conference:

Ive read so many stories about his bluster and boasting and ill-founded attacks, Ive listened to speeches and hours of analysis, and yet I was still taken back by just how disjointed and meandering the unedited president could sound.

...

Id understood the dilemma of normalizing Trumps ideas and policies the racism, misogyny and demonization of the free press. But watching just one press conference [in real time] helped me understand how the process of reporting about this president can mask and normalize his full and alarming incoherence.

It is difficult to cover Trump, and it is important to honor the publics trust in the press by providing fair and balanced coverage. But we also have to pay attention to how much more alarming the unfiltered Trump is when compared to the sanitized version that often emerges in mainstream media reporting.

The news moves fast. To stay updated, follow Aaron Rupar on Twitter, and read more of Voxs policy and politics coverage.

Read the original here:

NPR coverage of Trumps Milwaukee rally shows how hes broken the media - Vox.com

Winston Churchill supposedly said: Americans will always do the right thing, only after they have tried everything else. In his new book, Andrew Bacevich goes far towards proving the second half of that sentence and casts doubt on the first, without offering much in the way of alternatives.

In what is mostly a social history of the post-cold war era dont expect to find an analysis of the Balkan wars Bacevich seeks to chronicle how the US wasted little time in squandering the advantage it had gained. Few would disagree.

Yet he defines Americas supposed post-cold war consensus as globalized neoliberalism, global leadership, freedom (as the expansion of personal autonomy, with traditional moral prohibitions declared obsolete and the removal of constraints maximizing choice), and presidential supremacy. The 2016 election, he writes, presented the repudiation of that very consensus.

The villains in this telling are the elites who pushed the consensus heedless of other views or interests expectations raised, but unfulfilled; outraged citizens left with no place to stand to the point where Donald Trump was elected and no one could understand why.

In 2016, he writes, financial impotence was to turn into political outrage, bringing the post-cold war era to an abrupt end. As for the people who shop for produce at Whole Foods, wear vintage jeans and ski in Aspen, they never saw it coming and couldnt believe it when it occurred.

Bacevich argues that the seeds of this failure were present throughout the cold war, notably in Vietnam and Ross Perots insurgent White House run in 1992. But how could there ever have been a consensus if the country were so divided?

We have been here before, both in the history of the US and of ideology. Post-1989 featured the same universal self-congratulation and flinging up of caps that Thomas Carlyle critiqued in The French Revolution. Bacevich is right to criticize it again. But it is surely wrong to claim, for instance, that Reagans entire presidency was a pseudo-event, its achievements based on the masterful creation and manipulation of images. Mikhail Gorbachev, for one, doesnt think so.

Acerbic, even curmudgeonly his catalogue of Americas social ills is harsh but fair Bacevich veers between the commonplace and the sarcastic. The promotion of globalization included a generous element of hucksterism, he writes, the equivalent of labeling a large cup of strong coffee a grande dark roast while referring to the server handing it to you as a barista.

Clearly, for those who favor an expansive role for America and the west, and operating according to the principles of grand statecraft, the post-cold war years were the years the locust has eaten. Social mobility declined. The plight of the poor worsened. But JD Vance wrote more sensitively about this in Hillbilly Elegy and Bacevich adds little on either the wars or the peace.

Even if the Donald Rumsfeld-endorsed, technology-friendly Revolution in Military Affairs only purported to describe the culmination of a long evolutionary march toward perfection, which great power today does not rely on technology for military might? And what, other than isolationism, would preclude the possibility of another Vietnam?

Similarly, even as he chronicles their failures Bacevich is harshly critical of the view that presidents direct history. Abraham Lincoln, call your office. FDR too.

The elites Bacevich chides had many faults, and no president of the period left office fully content. But sometimes the authors strategy, as well as his history, is simply wrong.

The horrors of 9/11 notwithstanding, he writes, terrorism does not pose an existential threat to the United States and never has. As innumerable commentators have noted, terrorism is merely a tactic, and an ancient one at that.

Yet one nuclear bomb can ruin your whole day, as the bumper sticker read, and any leader is responsible for maintaining vigilance. Which threats can be ignored? Air piracy? Chemical weapons? Nuclear smuggling? Bacevich never offers what he would do to states harboring terrorists, even while noting failures in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The book starts out critical of Trump but then takes a more nuanced position. Chiding Barack Obama as the one who saved globalized neoliberalism and inadvertently laid the way for a powerful backlash, he says Trumps detractors commit this categorial error. They confuse cause and effect. They charge him with dividing America. Yet which other recent president attacked fellow citizens so harshly and took delight in smashing the norms of political debate?

Bacevich focuses on the neoconservative project in terms of wars but ignores its Burkean focus on domestic policy, not least David Brooks idea of national greatness conservatism, a very different thing than Maga. John McCain, who articulated a similar vision of national purpose, and whose policies were designed to help Joe the Plumber far more than Trump has, gets one brief mention.

Some people saw what was happening and sought to answer the question Rabbit Angstrom asked and Bacevich cites: Without the cold war, whats the point of being an American? They were ignored.

Bacevich now urges Americans to ignore the tweets and focus on events. But the tweets are events, the way in which the old guardrails are broken down and the boundaries of legitimate discourse weakened, which has let loose some very dangerous ideas, not least on race and republican norms. A tweet is not a notification to Congress under the War Powers Act.

Despite Bacevichs call for conversation on issues formerly beyond the pale such as abandoning globalism and militarism, his book has a fatal weakness: he never quite says what or who he is for. He is too good a historian not to know there was a tendency of anti-anti-communism during the cold war. Perhaps his book is about anti-anti-Trumpism. But the pale is there for a reason

One hopes some future historian will find the seeds of success in our present troubles. Meanwhile, Americans must pick up the pieces as best they can.

See the original post:

The Age of Illusions review: anti-anti-Trump but for what, exactly? - The Guardian

The UK government is preparing to defy Donald Trump and strike a deal with Chinese telecoms company Huawei, despite the president's repeated threats to cut off security ties with the country.

Trump has warned the UK that the intelligence-sharing arrangement between the two allies will be at risk if the deal for a role in Britain's 5G network goes ahead, with US officials warningthat "Donald Trump is watching closely."

However, Johnson is preparing to allow the Huawei deal to go ahead despite the threats, amid a widespread belief in Europe that Trump's warnings are a "bluff".

EU trade commissioner Phil Hogan on Thursday told an event in London that the President's threat was simply not credible.

"I don't think that will happen at the end of the day," he said.

"You can call their bluff on that one."

Johnson is now preparing to agree to allow Huawei a "limited" role in the UK's 5G network, with one UK official telling the Daily Mail that the UK security services simply do not believe Trump's blanket ban on Huawei is justified.

"The security world does not endorse the need for a blanket ban on Huawei. They are not naive they are well aware of the risks but they believe they can be contained," the official said.

Another source told the paper: "From a security point of view the risk is manageable."

Johnson repeatedly promised to upgrade Britain's sluggish communications network during his recent victorious election campaign and has publicly backed the possibility of a role for Huawei.

Asked on Tuesday whether he would allow the Huawei deal to go ahead, Johnson told the BBC that "the British public deserves access to the best possible technology."

He added: "If people oppose one brand or another they have to tell us what's the alternative?"

Donald Trump and Boris Johnson Getty

The development came as Johnson's administration responded to Trump's threats by threatening that the UK would cut UK support for future US-led wars.

The UK Defence Secretary told the Sunday Times that Trump's isolationist foreign policy stance meant that the UK would increasingly look to other international allies instead.

"Over the last year we've had the US pullout from Syria, the statement by Donald Trump on Iraq where he said NATO should take over and do more in the Middle East," Wallace said.

"The assumptions of 2010 that we were always going to be part of a US coalition is really just not where we are going to be."

Johnson's administration has repeatedly criticised Trump's aggressive stance towards Iran, with Johnson warning last week that the president's threats to target Iranian cultural sites could be a war crime.

Read more:

UK prepares to ignore Trump's threats and call his 'bluff' on Huawei - Business Insider

Indeed, there's something uniquely heavy, and even cruel, about the persistent theme of loss -- about having to reckon with its inevitability -- in today's political climate of at times presidentially abetted bigotry.

That's partly because of the sheer scale of our civil rights forebears' work.

Lewis' civil rights background is epochal: one of the few remaining members of King's inner circle, the chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee in the 1960s, a key organizer of the 1965 Selma to Montgomery marches (during one such march, across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, a state trooper beat Lewis and fractured his skull).

The Lewis diagnosis followed the death of Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, who passed in October of last year at the age of 68.

The son of sharecroppers, Cummings was first elected to political office in 1983, as a member of the Maryland House of Delegates. He then won a congressional seat in a 1996 special election; he served in that role until his death.

In other words, the twin stings of Lewis' grim cancer diagnosis and Cummings' death feel in direct proportion to the figures' remarkable histories of confronting the world and its many betrayals, of defining the political fights of their eras. We're losing legends -- rapidly so.

But the context of loss matters, too.

The country is considering the possibility of four more years of Donald Trump: a President who broadly contorts and distorts black experiences, who has specifically taken aim at the reputations of civil rights giants.

If only the President's racist invective were the end of it. But his rhetoric has been reflected in his administration's policies.

Losing civil rights icons in the Trump era, then, can be thought of as a matter of physics: action and reaction, equal and opposite. One minute they're here -- defying a world that'd prefer that black Americans simply move on, not forward -- and the next they're gone. Meanwhile, Trump remains, seemingly looking to cancel out their work.

Go here to read the rest:

The pain of losing civil rights icons in the Trump era - CNN

Corey Lewandowski, President Donald Trump's belligerent former campaign manager, recently decided against a US Senate run. That's good news for the civil-minded among us who respect a free press.

Lewandowski was famous for his rhetorical and sometimes literal pugilism, if you watched his chaotic congressional testimony or saw his altercations with a reporter and protesters. His campaign would've been Trump 2.0 but on a smaller scale.

Beyond Lewandowski, there are others in Trump's orbit contemplating higher office, including the president's son Donald Trump Jr., Trump loyalist and cable-TV staple Rep. Matt Gaetz, and even George Papadopoulos the Trump campaign aide who, as part of the Mueller investigation, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

As these Trump-adjacent figures start running, it'll be a test for the future of Republican politics and our country.

Trump rose to power with an unconventional, in-your-face style that works for him but not the country. For most of the 2016 primary campaign, he was ignored, considered a crude celebrity but not a president. As he started to gain traction, Republicans like Mitt Romney, an array of national-security officials, and retired military brass began to challenge his qualifications for office.

But they were too late. Trump had the momentum, and the Republicans ushered in the era of divide at will, lie with abandon, and point the finger at people who don't look like you.

And as the Trump presidency has progressed, the GOP has increasingly taken on the image of the president. Republican voters have stayed fiercely loyal to Trump, leading politicians in the party to mirror his style. Fueled by this positive reinforcement, the most Trump-like figures are now looking to work their way up the ranks of the party.

The resemblance between the man in the Oval and his disciples is striking. Don Jr. has been a true a chip off the old block with his Twitter fights, questionable testimony, and clashes with media. And "attack dog" Matt Gaetz's bullying,hypocrisy, and "alternative facts" often land him in hot water. Sound familiar?

So for everyone saying that a Democratic president will bring us a return to normality, the alternative narrative is this: The current game is just the first inning of increasingly incendiary leadership in America. We're already beginning to see evidence of this. Despite the turmoil engulfing his administration, Trump faces no credible primary challengers. As state GOP parties scrap their primaries and caucuses, Trump's takeover of the party has never been more apparent.

Twenty years from now, Trump will seem run of the mill, as the divide that began during the Clinton years seems now.

The vocal GOP opposition candidate Trump faced has long subsided in the era of President Trump. While Republicans continue to grumble about Trump in private, they're afraid to stand up to him publicly, even on the smallest matters. If Republicans can stop Trump's disciples from winning office, they'll have a chance to rediscover and recommit to their principles.

For the non-Trumpist Republicans, there's still room to survive and thrive. But their opportunity and maneuverability are limited with Trump at the helm. Their best bet will be when they drop Trump and his minions and rally around a normal standard bearer.

Republicans will need to make a choice about whether to stick with the Trump brand or reject it. Just as with impeachment, they'll have an opportunity to put country first. If they don't, eventually it will catch up to them. But the damage to the country will be beyond repair.

See original here:

The final test of Trump's domination of the GOP will have nothing to do with his reelection - Business Insider

One of Pete Byrons first jobs as mayor of Wildwood? Making sure everyone keeps tabs on how much President Donald Trumps upcoming rally will cost the city.

The mayor who was sworn in just days before hearing Trump would hold a rally in the Jersey Shore resort town said the city does not have a budget for the event but has asked their first responder departments, along with the public works department to keep detailed accounts for the costs incurred.

Byron said he does not see the costs being as high as some of the rallies held in bigger cities because of the limited access into Wildwood by way of the three roads in, along with the beach and ocean acting as a natural barrier behind the convention center, where the rally will be held on Jan. 28 at 7 p.m.

Do I think that our taxpayers should foot the bill for this? Absolutely not," he said. "I will do my best to get a final tally, and I will certainly pass that on to the local Republican organization, and I hope that we get some sort of reimbursement for the event.

Cape May County Republican party chairman Marcus Karavan said there should be a focus on the economic impact of the Presidents visit.

The eyes of the entire country are on Cape May County and the City of Wildwood right now," Karavan said. "Rather than being short sighted and playing partisan politics, Mayor Byron should be thanking President Trump for bringing tens of thousands of visitors to the Wildwoods who will be spending money in local hotels, bars, and restaurants, including the one run by the county Democrat chairman, on a Tuesday in January when they would otherwise be shuttered.

Byron, who is succeeding longtime former Wildwood mayor Ernie Troiano Jr. on the three-person non-partisan commission, began the year focusing on placing new professionals into the city to help with tackling objectives such as boardwalk repairs, and revitalizing the citys downtown area.

Ive always said that when Wildwood was at its best, which was, in my opinion, the 70s and the 80s. You had the balance of the downtown and the boardwalk, Byron said. Now we have very little downtown and many of visitors at our boardwalk. People need other options other than the boardwalk. We are going to make a conscientious effort to do what we have to do to bring Pacific Avenue, which is the center of our downtown back.

Now the newly-minted Wildwood mayor of the town of 5,000 is focusing on preparations for the presidents visit to support Congressman Jeff Van Drew, a longtime Democrat who abruptly switched to the Republican party and pledged his own support to Trump.

The Wildwood mayor said he had heard estimates that 40,000 tickets had been issued for an event being held in a venue that can hold up to 7,400 people. There is also the possibility another 10,000 may show up to the city.

The President brings out the people who support him, as well as who oppose them or both," Byron said. "There is no in-between, and they are all very passionate. You are going to have protesters as well. You have to factor all of that into the equation, but theres going to be a lot of people out on the street.

Byron said that although the presidents visit is a political event, he is taking the personal perspective that party affiliations should be thrown out the door, and people should come to Wildwood and enjoy the historic moment.

It is no disrespect to the president, but I look at this more about the position versus the individual, and I think that we should bask in this opportunity, the mayor said. This is going to give Wildwood national exposure. The cost relative to the exposure, we would never be able to pay the advertising cost to get the type of exposure were going to get nationally, and then youre the middle of January when it is typically a ghost town down here.

Cape May County Administrator Elizabeth Bozzelli confirmed the countys Prosecutors Office, Sheriffs Office, and Office of Emergency Management would be involved in the event. The county would only be paying overtime costs associated with the people working the event, a procedure the county follows when other significant events and busier weekends occur during the year.

In the summer, Wildwood has about 150,000 people on any given day in July and August, Cape May County spokeswoman Diane Wieland told NJ Advance Media earlier this week. With fewer businesses open, it makes that more challenging, but it is Wildwood, and I have no doubt they can do this.

Wieland said that while plans have still not been finalized, there could be the possibility that the overflow crowds may be able to watch the speech outside at either nearby Fox Park or the boardwalk itself.

Chris Franklin can be reached at cfranklin@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @cfranklinnews or on Facebook. Have a tip? Tell us. nj.com/tips.

Get the latest updates right in your inbox. Subscribe to NJ.coms newsletters.

See the rest here:

We shouldnt have to pay for Trumps Wildwood visit so were keeping tabs, mayor says - NJ.com

David Wurmser was a longtime advocate of war with Iraq in the Bush administration. Eventually, he got what he wanted, and it was a total disaster. Now, Wurmser again has the ear of a president this time, Donald Trump and his sights are set firmly on Iran.

An influential neoconservative in President George W. Bushs White House who became a significant force behind the push for war with Iraq in 2003, Wurmser has recently been serving as an informal adviser to the Trump administration, according to new reporting from Bloomberg News. In that capacity, Wurmser helped make the case for the recent drone strike that assassinated Iranian Gen. Qassim Suleimani.

David Wurmser again has the ear of a president this time, Donald Trump and his sights are set firmly on Iran.

Wurmser wrote several memos to then-national security adviser John Bolton in May and June of 2019. In the documents, according to Bloomberg, Wurmser argued that aggressive action by the U.S. such as the killing of Suleimani would, in Wurmsers words, rattle the delicate internal balance offorces and the control over them upon which the [Iranian] regime depends for stability and survival.

The significance of this is two-fold. First, while it was already clear that the neoconservative movement has powerfully influenced the Trump administration, Wurmsers role on Iran is further evidence of the sway that neoconservatism still holds on the U.S. right despite the catastrophic invasion of Iraq and Trumps disavowal of the war. Second, it demonstrates that neoconservatives such as Wurmser still cherish a peculiar theory about Iranian society.

After Bushs reelection in 2005, the hard-right faction of his administration turned its attention to Iran. These officials had always wanted regime change in the Islamic Republic, but now some of them believed that a full-scale invasion would not be necessary to bring this about. A 2005 article in the New Yorker by Seymour Hersh quoted a government consultant who described the perspective of these officials as being that a bombing campaign against Irans nuclear facilities would spur a revolution led by secular nationalists and reformers. The consultant summarized their view: The minute the aura of invincibility which the mullahs enjoy is shattered, and with it the ability to hoodwink the West, the Iranian regime will collapse.

Wurmsers outlook seems not to have changed one bit. In his memos to Bolton, he wrote that the U.S. will not need boots on the ground because Iranians would both beimpressed andpotentially encouraged by a targeted attack on symbols of repression.

This theory, so popular among neoconservatives, has always been bizarre: Nations generally become more right-wing when under attack. For instance, after the destruction of the World Trade Center in 2001, Americans did not demand that Bush be impeached and Dennis Kucinich move into the Oval Office.

We should definitely consider the possibility that the neocons dont know what theyre talking about. And yet, here we are, with those self-same neocons again helping shape our foreign policy in delusional and dangerous ways.

The continued self-confidence of neoconservatives like Wurmser is particularly odd given how all their beliefs were proven disastrously wrong in Iraq.

Wurmser holds a Ph.D. in international affairs and worked for the AIPAC-spinoff Washington Institute for Near East Policy in the mid-1990s. In 1996, he was one of the main thinkers behind a policy document titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm that was prepared by an Israeli think tank for then-incoming Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahus government in 1996. The paper called for Israel to engage in preemptive attacks on its perceived foes and a focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.

In 1999, Wurmser wrote a book titled Tyrannys Ally: Americas Failure to Defeat Saddam Hussein, which was pretty much what it sounds like. Chemical, biological, and even nuclear weapons are the pillars of Saddams regime, Wurmser said, adding that the menace from Saddams Iraq will continue to grow if the U.S. did not remove him from power.

After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the purported wishes of the neoconservatives collided with reality, and reality won.

After the September 11 attacks, Wurmser was appointed to a two-man intelligence unit by then-Defense Undersecretary Douglas Feith. (Feith is perhaps best known for being referred to as the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth by Gen. Tommy Franks, who led the invasion of Iraq.) Among Wurmsers ideas was for the U.S. to respond to Al Qaeda by, as the 9/11 Commission later put it, hitting a non-Al Qaeda target like Iraq.

Wurmser then became a senior adviser to Bolton, who at that point was an undersecretary at the State Department and one of the most vociferous champions of a regime change war with Iraq.

Eventually, Wurmser and company got what they wanted, and the U.S. led an invasion of Iraq in March 2003. At that point, the purported wishes of the neoconservatives collided with reality, and reality won. Hundreds of thousands of people died, the lives of millions have been blighted, and the entire region will be in flames for the indefinite future.

In a 2007 interview, however, Wurmser continued to defend the decision to go to war, though he did question the Bush administrations rhetorical emphasis on democracy in Iraq. Im not a big fan of democracy per se, he said, Im a fan of freedom and one has to remember the difference. Freedom must precede democracy by a long, long time. In the same interview, he stated that if the U.S. failed to trigger a fundamental change in behavior by Irans leaders that America might have to think seriously about going directly into Iran.

In any case, nothing in the past 17 years seems to have made much of an impression on Wurmser; he still maintains a belief in his own skill at precisely calibrated global strategy. Nor has this past calamitous decade and a half prevented him from having the ear of the people who operate Americas killer drones. Notably, the article about Wurmsers current accomplishments, by neoconservative Bloomberg journalist Eli Lake, does not mention any of Wurmsers unfortunate history.

Wurmser did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Follow this link:

David Wurmser, Key Iraq War Architect, Advising Trump on Iran - The Intercept

Was it a birth certificate? You tell me, he told ABC News in 2013. Some people say that was not his birth certificate.

That same year, Nunberg arranged for Trump to make his Levin show debut, preparing a memo to familiarize Mr. Trump with Mark Levin, he wrotedeploying tried-and-true ways to pique Trumps interest. Nunberg emphasized Levins ratings history (In the first 18 months on the air, the program jumped to #1 in the time slot), the company he kept (considers Sean Hannity his best friend), his reach (books Liberty and Tyranny and Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America sold more than a million copies, Nunberg noted), and his compensation (a reported annual salary of $12.5 million a year). Nunberg mentioned, too, that what he said on the air often was disseminated on a variety of websites like TheRightScoop.com. People, in other words, some people, many people, a lot of people, were listening to what Levin was saying.

Armed with this advance work, the memo as well as the emails, Trump fit in well with Levin. In addition to shilling for the upcoming season of The Celebrity ApprenticeTrace Adkins, La Toya Jackson, Dennis RodmanTrump delivered to Levins listeners what they wantedwhich essentially was Levins ideas, studiously collected by Nunberg, consumed by Trump and regurgitated back to the host.

If the Republicans are going to win, Trump said, theyre going to have to break away from the Karl Roves of the world and, frankly, get more involvedyou know, the Tea Party, these people are great. Ive done some speeches in front of the Tea Party. They are great Americans, they love this country, they work so hard, and they have been so mistreated by the liberal media. They truly are not treated with proper respect.

And he landed especially hard on immigration and any notions of amnesty for undocumented immigrants.

I watched last night, he continued, referring to Obamas State of the Union that year, as Senator McCain and everybody were jumping up and down, you know, applaudingI never saw him move so fast, you know, nice guy, but he jumped upand was applauding as soon as the immigration became a part of the discussion, a part of the speech.

Immigration, Trump said, will be the next thing, based on what Im watching.

Trump and Levin wrapped up by exchanging compliments.

Im extremely impressed with what youre doing, Levin said.

You just have a great show, Trump said. Im always listening.

Donald Trump, Levin told his listeners after Trump signed off. See that, folks? Very solid. Very conservative. To the right of the Republican establishment. Strong supporter of the Tea Party. Im telling you. Ive been watching this. Ive been listening. People have been sending me his tweets.

There was a reason for that. Hes putting stuff out there, Nunberg told me of Trumps tweets at the time, some of which Nunberg was suggesting, that sounds like Mark Levin.

In the few months before his interview with Levin:

And in the few months after:

This ear-to-the-proverbial-ground political ramp-up wasnt limited to Levin and talk radio. It was around this time as well that Trump began to give more and more talks on the pre-presidential hustings, GOP chicken dinners in places like Iowa and New Hampshire.

He talked to Pat Caddell about what he was picking up on the trail. He would put forth his position or his feelings, and he would judge the level of the response to it, and that helped him organize, I suppose to whatever degree it was organized, his views about issues, Caddell told me in 2018. Things he said that didnt go over disappeared. Things that did stayed.

Twitter, too, increasingly served a similar purpose.

He glommed onto it like it was an oxygen source, Caddell explained. And he would tweet what he believed, and people would retweet or answer or whatever, and it was kind of his ongoing focus group.

He loved it, Nunberg said. He doesnt trust the political people who do the focus groups. Instead: What are we getting the most retweets on?

In 2014 and 15well before Trump came down the escalator and announced his intention to runNunberg sent Trump nearly daily updates of snippets of news and possible topics and wordings for tweets. At the tops of the documents he showed the number of Trumps Twitter followers ticking up (a snapshot from December of 2014: 2,751,488 2,753,548 2,757,190 ) and the number of days left until the GOP primary debate at the Reagan library and the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primaries ticking down.

A month into the presidential campaign, after the Vietnam-avoiding Trump insulted McCain by saying he was not a war hero and that he liked people who werent captured, he refused to apologize. That, Nunberg said, partly was because of what he had internalized by listening to Levin. Nunberg told Trump it was going to help him. (It certainly didnt hurt him.) He said, Why? Nunberg said. And I said, Because our people despise John McCain. They despise the fact that McCain hides behind his military record to shit on Republicans and you cant criticize him on anything because of his military record. I said, John McCainhe is hated almost as much as Barack Obama on talk radio. I said, He might as well be Barack Obama on talk radio.

Talk radio led the way. Trump followed.

Theoretically, Trump could have changed. As successful as this pattern of behavior had been in the years preceding his run and during the campaign itselfhe was, after all, elected presidentTrump could have adjusted once he took office, having at his disposal, suddenly and quite unexpectedly, the worlds preeminent intelligence-gathering apparatus. But nosticking to that gossip kind of mentality, said ODonnell, the casino exec, Trump has continued to mine Twitter, plucking what he wants, very comfortable with half thoughts, always looking for tidbits of information that he can use to his advantage.

He sees the ones that are the most popular, former Fox News anchor Eric Bolling, identified by Time as someone who speaks regularly to Trump, told the magazine in June of 2018, and getting the most [of the] zeitgeist, most attention on social media.

And then? The last and most important piece of this by now almost rote process?

He repeats it, Bolling said.

Read more:

Trump's Art of the Steal - POLITICO

Trump mocked Pelosi by saying shes not operating with a full deck, and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) as you little pencil neck" and then added He buys the smallest shirt collar you can get, and its loose!" He returned to his 2016 rival, Hillary Clinton, again dubbing her crooked Hillary and prompting the familiar Lock her up! chant from the crowd.

The president boasted of killing Irans top military commander, Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, as well the leader of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who died in a U.S. raid in northwestern Syria in October.

He was a bad guy, Trump said of Soleimani. He was a bloodthirsty terrorist, and hes no longer a terrorist. Hes dead, and yet now I see ... the radical-left Democrats have expressed outrage over the termination of this horrible terrorist. And you know, instead they should be outraged by Soleimanis savage crimes and the fact that his countless victims were denied justice for so long.

As he was talking, a man in the crowd yelled, Kill them all!

The president said: We stopped him quickly, and we stopped him cold.

Late last week, Trump ordered the killing of Soleimani in a drone strike in Iraq, prompting Iran to retaliate with a missile strike against Iraqi air bases housing U.S. troops. By Wednesday, the president sought to de-escalate the crisis in a White House address announcing sanctions rather than military retaliation.

So we seek friends, not enemies, Trump told the crowd in the 8,000-seat Huntington Center on Thursday. But if you dare to threaten our citizens, you do so at your own grave peril.

Democrats blame Trump for engaging in a confrontation with Iran as a way to distract from his impeachment. The House voted largely along party lines earlier Thursday evening to restrict the presidents authority for military action against Iran after intelligence briefings failed to satisfy several lawmakers on the justification for Soleimanis killing.

The violence between the U.S. and Iran came as the Senate is preparing to hold the impeachment trial, though the timing remains uncertain. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell plans to move forward on a set of trial rules without Democratic support.

The House approved the two articles of impeachment in a mostly party-line vote on Dec. 18 charging Trump with abuse of power for soliciting foreign interference in the 2020 election and obstruction of Congress for blocking the Houses efforts to investigate him making Trump the first president to face an impeachment trial while seeking reelection.

On Thursday night, the president lashed out at some of his 2020 Democratic rivals Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., for having a name that Trump says no one can pronounce, dubbing him Alfred E. Neuman and Howdy Doody; and Sen. Elizabeth Warren for inflating her Native American heritage, once again mocking her as Pocahontas.

But he saved the most criticism for Biden, the Democratic frontrunner, who he said didnt know the difference between Iran and Iraq because he mixed up the two countries when speaking this week. Hes gotten it wrong four times, Trump said.

Its, like, my job to try and watch whats the competition, but its like watching death, he said. Those debates are boring and boring. You got to sit through those things for two or three hours. You got to really be committed to the country to do that. I mean, you have some real beauties.

House Democrats officially launched an impeachment inquiry after learning that Trump had asked President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to investigate his Democratic rival Joe Biden and Bidens son Hunter.

Trump and his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani have accused Biden, while he was serving as vice president, of helping secure lucrative deals for his son, who at one time served on the board of a Ukrainian natural gas company, Burisma Holdings. Trump and Giuliani have defended their efforts, saying it was part of a broader effort to eradicate corruption in the former Soviet republic.

Then Trump laid into Hunter Biden, whom he accused of trading off his fathers name in Ukraine and China.

As soon as sleepy Joe became vice president, right, he made millions of dollars a year, Trump said. Ukraine took care of him. How about China? He walked out with 1.5 billion to manage and he never did it before, he didnt know anything about oil and gas, he was making a fortune.

Trump said he hoped Democrats would give Biden the nomination so the pressure would stay on his son.

So, wheres Hunter? Where the hell are you, Hunter? he said. But Ill tell you, I sort of hope its Joe, because he will hear Wheres Hunter? every single debate, nine times a debate.

President Donald Trump at the Toledo rally. | Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo

Trumps 90-minute speech veered from one issue to another from the booming economy to the increase of funding in the military, from the corrupt media to the Nobel Peace Prize, from the opioid epidemic to the wall on the southern border. He even boasted of completing what he said he would do and more. Ive completed more promises than Ive made, he said.

The president praised the first phase of a trade deal he made with China that will be signed next week at the White House.

Well sign that terrific and fully enforceable Phase One trade deal with China, he said. And again, were keeping the tariffs on because well use that for another one. We are taking billions you remember what I said: Were not paying for it, because China devalued their currency and they put a lot of money into the pot. Were not paying for it. And now theyre starting to say, I guess he was right.

Thousands of supporters at the Huntington Center, many wearing Make America Great Again hats and waving Trump-Pence signs, cheered. He was interrupted once by protesters in the arena, one who was holding a sign that said bone spurs alluding to the medical reason Trump has given for avoiding military service in Vietnam.

The arena, decorated in the typical way for a rally, was full. A large U.S. flag was erected on one side. Keep America Great! showed on blue digital monitors.

Hundreds of people protested outside, and hundreds more supporters stood in an overflow area with a large video screen showing the rally.

Trump is looking to repeat his 2016 victory in Ohio, a state that has voted for every presidential election victor but one since 1944 and is vital to Trumps hopes in November.

Ohio has trended Republican in more recent elections. Trump beat Clinton here in 2016 by 8 percentage points, though he lost Toledo the site of Thursdays rally and the surrounding county of Lucas.

The Trump campaign credits the president with helping bring 94,700 new jobs, including 14,700 manufacturing jobs, back to the state.

This is where they want to be, the president said on Thursday night. They want to be in the United States. Thats where the action is. Theyre all coming back. I used to go around and talk about how everyones leaving. Now theyre all coming back. New ones, old ones, theyre all coming back and many are coming right here to Ohio. And just in case you didnt know it, Ohio just had the best year economically in the history of your state.

But earlier this week, Toledo-area Democrats accused the Trump administration of implementing policies that have hurt the region failing to send money to the area for economic development and environmental restoration efforts.

Trump is expected to increase the number of rallies he headlines now that Democratic voters are beginning the process of choosing a nominee to face him in November. He has two others scheduled for this month in Wisconsin on the 14th and in New Jersey on the 28th.

The Democrats nominating process kicks off with the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 3, quickly followed by contests in New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, all leading to Super Tuesday on March 3, when a slate of states will vote.

Polls show Trumps approval rating hovering around 45 percent and in close competition with the leading Democratic candidates in the swing states that will likely determine the winner this year.

Matthew Choi contributed to this report.

Read more here:

Trump, in a raucous rally, takes on Democrats and touts Soleimani killing - POLITICO

WASHINGTON Tired of politics? Of politicians? Think elections dont matter?

Think again.

This years elections will be some of the most consequential in decades and Michigan is set up to be one of the most consequential states on the electoral map.

Consider:

Not only is it a foregone conclusion that Michigan will help decide whether President Donald Trump remains in office or not, its U.S. Senate race is expected to be one of the most contested in the nation and could help determine control of that chamber. There are also races in suburban Detroit congressional districts that could signal which party holds the majority in the U.S. House next year.

Not impressed?

Those elections will help shape decisions over access to health care, climate change, tax policy, the economy, immigration and U.S. relations with foreign powers, including Iran and North Korea. The people elected will manage or exacerbate a growing federal deficit. They will confirm Supreme Court justices who will decide questions about abortion, gun ownership, freedom of speech and expression. They will decide whether supermajorities will continue to be needed to pass legislation in the Senate. They will make policies affecting poor families, college students, automakers and business owners.

They could decide how to react to an economic slowdown if, as some experts believe, one is on the way. And they could be asked to respond to a foreign war or a nuclear threat to the U.S. or its allies.

War Powers Resolution: Rep. Slotkin to lead effort to rein in President Trump on Iran

Opinion: Trump needs a short leash as impeachment trial looms

I would consider it the most consequential election of my lifetime and Ive been watching politics since I was 13 years old, said Dee McBroom, a veteran Democratic campaign consultant.

Much of that is because ofTrump, who engenders fierce loyalty in those who see him as an antidote to trite traditions and political correctness, projecting American strength and decisiveness, and an equally fierce distaste in those who view him as a bully and a crackpot, spewing hate on Twitter and unfit for office.

But its not just about Trump, either.

Donald Trump takes shot at Debbie, John Dingell in Battle Creek rally

Donald Trump made a comment about Debbie Dingell and her late husband, John Dingell, during his "Merry Christmas" rally in Battle Creek.

Mandi Wright, Detroit Free Press

The elections will be a referendum on how divided the nation remains in what its people believe, what they want from their politics and politicians, and how they bothpoliticians and the people themselves comport themselves. It will help decide whether the nation believes a loss of civility in political discourse has been worth the upending of a status quo that, for many, wasn't working.

Is the Republican Party the party of Trump or is it the party of Romney or Bush? Is the Democratic Party the party of AOC (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) and Bernie Sanders or is it more Obama, Biden and Buttigieg? said Andrea Bitely, a consultant with Truscott Rossman, a communications firm in Lansing, who worked as spokeswoman for former state Attorney General Bill Schuette. Thats what this election is about:Who are we?

So, theres a lot riding on this years elections and Michigan will be at the center of it along with Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and a handful of other states. Heres a look at whats comingbetween now and Election Day, Nov. 3.

Unless youre really trying to avoid politics, you already know that President Trump, despite being impeached by the House in December, is running for reelection and has the Republican nomination in the bag. Even with recent dropouts, the Democrats have a cast of more than a dozen running to be their partys nominee.

Michigans presidential primary is Tuesday, March 10, and its at a potentially auspicious spot on the election calendar.

As the national polls stand now, the race for the Democratic nomination is really among a handful of candidates former Vice President Joe Biden, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Those same four also hold the polling lead, though not necessarily in that order, in the first four states to vote: Iowa, on Feb. 3; New Hampshire, on Feb. 11; Nevada, on Feb. 22,and South Carolina, on Feb. 29.

Show caption Hide caption Democratic Presidential candidates line up waving to the crowd before the start of the debate at the Fox Theatre in Detroit, Michigan on Tuesday, July...Democratic Presidential candidates line up waving to the crowd before the start of the debate at the Fox Theatre in Detroit, Michigan on Tuesday, July 30, 2019. (L to R) Marianne Williamson, Tim Ryan, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Beto O'Rourke, John Hickenlooper, John Delaney and Montana Governor, Steve Bullock.Eric Seals, Detroit Free Press

The outcome in those races will further narrow the field, though two billionaires former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who sits just behind the leaders in national polling,and entrepreneur Tom Steyer have enough cash of their own to stay in as long as they want. Then, on Tuesday, March 3, the race for the nomination will explode with 14 states including California, Texas and some other sizable states among themvoting, awarding about 40% of the total number of delegates available to the candidates.

If one candidate has taken over the race by then, it could be all but over. But if Super Tuesday leaves anunsettled nomination, the next weeks primary calendar includes six states, the biggest prize of which is Michigan.

It is impossibleto guess who will be in the lead at that point the early polling hasnt been conclusive and if some candidate takes a clear lead in the early voting, it could help swing support to him or her later.But if there is still a race, Michigan could matter and in unexpected ways.

Remember, in 2016, it was Sanders, not the favorite, Hillary Clinton, who won Michigans primary despite polls showing her ahead by double digits the weekend before the voting. Clinton ended up winning the nomination but her loss in Michigan's primary may have presaged her close loss to Trump in the state that November.

It's also worth mentioning: Any Michigan resident who is 17 1/2 or older (and will be 18 or older by Election Day) can registerto vote in person at their city or township clerk's office up to 8 p.m. the day of the election. If he or she wants to register by some other method, such as online or by mail, the deadline is 15 days before the election. There is no party declaration in Michigan, so in the March 10 primary, you can ask for whichever partys ballot you want to vote in the primary, regardless of whether you consider yourself a Democrat, a Republican or an independent. And under state law, you can now ask for an absentee ballot without giving any reason and submit your vote early, if you like.

As with any primary, however, an early vote makes it possible you'll be voting for someone no longer in the race by Election Day. If that happens and the candidate gets more than 15% of the vote, his or her delegates will be divided proportionallyamong the remaining candidates.

Even if the Democrats settle on a nominee early,Michiganders should reconcile themselves to being at the center of what is going to be a long, fractious and, at times, hard-to-stomach campaign.

Trump won Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania three states that together hadnt gone for a Republican presidential candidate since 1984 by about 77,000 votes combined in 2016, giving him an Electoral College edge but by the slimmest of voting margins. Itwill be difficult, if not impossible, for him to win in 2020 without doing well once again in the Rust Belt.

And while there has been little recent polling, the Real Clear Politics average of polls as of October showed Trump trailing Biden, Sanders and Warren in the state(there haven't been enough head-to-head polls between Trump and Buttigieg to say).

That could also explain why Trump reversed earlier threats to slash funding to clean up the Great Lakes and promised to green-light a new navigational lock at Sault Ste. Marie, as well as why he was in Toledo this week for a rally and will be back in Wisconsinnext week as he tries to boost his standing in the industrial Midwest.

But, as always with the president, expect him not only to come bearing praise for himself but attacks on his enemies,such as U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Detroit, who called for his impeachment the day she was sworn into office, and U.S. Rep. Justin Amash, I-Cascade Township, a former Republican who has repeatedly called Trump unfit.

Once the Democratic nomineeis determined, he or she will be barnstorming Michiganas well, given that Clintons campaign was widely criticized for taking the state for granted in 2016. But even before then, the shadow campaign iswell underway, with groups targeting voters and spending on outreach. Priorities USA, a pro-Democratic group, early last year announced a $100 million effort in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Florida; America First Action, a group supporting Trump, said last May it was spending $250 million in Michigan,Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Georgia.

Expect groups tofloodthe state with ads and social media posts, the major parties attacking each other and claims, true and false, flying through the airways.

The Republicans and the Trump campaign snuck up on the Democrats in the 2016 campaign by whatever means. But the Democrats will be more prepared in 2020, said Mike Traugott, with the Center for Political Studies at the University of Michigan.

In other words, buckle up. Its going to be a bumpy ride.

One thing about Trumps 16 win in Michigan:It came in a year when no U.S. Senate seat was up for grabs, meaning that while Clintons campaign was doing little in the state, there was no other statewide race going on for Democrats and their allies (such as labor unions) to pump up voter turnout.

That wont be the case this year.

U.S. Sen. Gary Peters, who was the only Democrat to win an open Senate seat in 2014, is up for reelection, and, as it stands now, will likely face off against John James, an African American businessman who lost in the 2018 election as the Republican nominee against Peters Democratic colleague, U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow.

U.S. Senator Gary Peters talks with media during visitation of former US Representative John D. Dingell at the Ford Community and Performing Arts Center in Dearborn on Monday, February 11, 2019.Ryan Garza, Detroit Free Press

There is much that makes it a compelling race. Peters is often ranked as one of the least known members of the Senate while James has made a name for himself appearing on Fox News as a pundit and proved himself an able fundraiser, raising $3.5 million to Peters' $2.5 million in the last three months of 2019 (though it's expected Peters has a good deal more cash on hand; the full finance reports won't out until the end of January.)

But James has also embraced Trump and after a long silence finally came out against impeachment and could be inextricably linked with the president and his fortunes, whatever they are in Michigan.

Peters, meanwhile, has long touted his bipartisan bona fides, calling for cuts in government waste and urging help for small businesses while at the same timeremaining a reliable Democratic vote. Heleaves little to chance when it comes to elections, however, winning his last four three to the U.S. House and one to the Senateeven in Republican wave years.

Show caption Hide caption Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., left,and challenger John James shake hands after their debate at the Detroit Economic Club, Monday, Oct. 15, 2018, in Detroit. Stabenow...Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., left,and challenger John James shake hands after their debate at the Detroit Economic Club, Monday, Oct. 15, 2018, in Detroit. Stabenow is seeking a fourth term and has led comfortably in polls, and James, a business executive and combat veteran, participated in their second debate before the November election.Carlos Osorio, AP

Still, for Republicans looking to keep control of the Senate, Peters seat is seen as a possible opportunity with James in the field. Some polls have shown James within striking distance of Peters, though the Real Clear Politics average of polls shows the incumbent ahead by about 8 percentage points.

As far as the impact of this race, meanwhile, its potentially huge: Republicans have a three-seat margin in the Senate and are defending 23 seats to the Democrats 12. Whichever party holds majority control, it will determine lifetime confirmations to the Supreme Court with two conservative justices, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, already being confirmed during Trumps first term.

There alsoremain questions about whether either party could move to get rid of the filibuster that requires 60-vote margins on some of the most consequential pieces of legislation. If that happens, it means the party in control will have a much easier time enacting policy though that, in turn, could also make for an even-more volatile political situation.

In the House, Democrats hold a 36-seat majority after taking control of the chamber last year. The 2018 election saw the party flip 43 seats (and lose three of its own) nationally, including two districts in Michigan, both representing parts of Detroits western suburbs.

And while two may not sound like a lot, those seats could be a bellwether for Democrats in the House nationally.

The question will be whether U.S. Reps. Elissa Slotkin, D-Holly, and Haley Stevens, D-Rochester Hills, can hold on to them. Both districts have historically been Republican strongholds; both were drawn to protect Republican incumbents after the 2010 Census.

The Democratic women who won in each did so by talking about the need to protect health care, support businesses, invest in the state not by attacking Trump. But now they face Republican attacks carping on their support for impeaching Trump after he asked the Ukrainian president to investigate Biden, without any evidence that Biden had had done anything wrong. Its against federal law to solicit foreign aid in a U.S. election.

Slotkin, a former intelligence official and acting assistant defense secretary, has also been thrust into the limelight over Trumpordering a drone strike that killed an Iranian general and Iran's retaliatory strikes against U.S. personnel in Iraq, cautioning that escalation could lead to war. After speaking from experience over multiple tours of duty, Slotkin wasalso given the responsibility for managinga resolution calling for limits on the president's authority in taking military action in the Middle East.

Trump is almost assured of being acquitted by the Republican majority in the Senate, but the House impeachment could still be an issue for Slotkin and Stevens re-elections.

Helping them, however, are several factors. First, both are in districts where Trump struggled relative to other Republican presidential candidates and that have been trending more Democratic. Second, no big-name, top-tier candidates with independent wealth or overwhelming Republican connections have stepped forward to face them possibly because a whole new set of congressional district lines will be drawn after this years Census, leaving anyone who runs now looking at a whole new district by 2022.

Third, both Slotkin and Stevens can raise plenty of money: As of the end of the last official reporting period on Sept. 30, Stevens, who worked on President Barack Obamas auto task force, had raised close to $2 million total. Slotkin had raised close to the same and said that as of the end of the year, she had raised another $1.28 million. (Official tallies for the third quarter arent due until Jan. 15.)

Much will ultimately depend on who wins the nominations to face them.

U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin speaks to a crowd while holding a constituent community conversation on Monday, December 16, 2019 at the Oakland Center at Oakland University in Rochester.Ryan Garza, Detroit Free Press

In Slotkins district, which includes northern Oakland County and Ingham and Livingston counties, the announced GOP candidates so far include state Board of Education member Nikki Snyder, who lives just outside the district boundaries in Dexter (a congressional candidate can legally live outside the district he or she is running for as long as he or she lives in Michigan); Paul Junge, a former Lansing TV anchor who also worked for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in Washington, D.C.; Kristina Lyke, a criminal defense and divorce lawyer in Lansing; Alan Hoover, whose website says he is an entrepreneur in Ortonville, and Mike Detmer of Howell, who works for an automotive supplier.

Running for the Republican nomination in Stevens district, which includes parts of Oakland and western Wayne counties, at present are former U.S. Rep. Kerry Bentivolio of Milford; Whittney Williams of Canton, who is an official with a local Republican group and first-generation immigrant from Taiwan;Frank Acosta, a Northville entrepreneur,and Birmingham lawyer Erick Esshaki.

More candidates could enter the races, however, with the filing deadline for the Aug. 4 primary which is for any offices other than president on April 21.

Outside of the state, Michigans two best-known members of Congress could well be Amash and Tlaib, given their loud, pointed criticisms of Trump and the presidents documented history of hitting back via Twitter.

Of the two of them, though, Amash faces the tougher road ahead.

As it stands now, no one with deep pockets, widespread support or high name recognition has stepped forward to challenge Tlaib in the Democratic primary, which will all but determine who wins in this predominantly Democratic district.

Its a much different case for Amash, a former Republican who last year broke with his party over the question of impeachment, believing, after a close reading of special counsel Robert Muellers report, that Trump obstructed justice. He later abandoned the party calling both parties toxic and became the Houses sole independent member.

As of now, Amash, of Cascade Township in west Michigan, is presumably running for reelection and not something else (such as a third-party bid for president). But hes something of a long shot despite being the incumbent.

Republicans have put forward a strong slate of candidates for their partys bid in a district that still favors the GOP, including Joel Langlois, who owns the DeltaPlex Arena in Grand Rapids; Peter Meijer, whose last name is synonymous with the grocery store chain started by his family; state Rep. Lynn Afendoulis, R-Grand Rapids, and former Sand Lake Village President Tom Norton.

Some Democrats, meanwhile, believing they could finally flip this district, have entered the race as well, including lawyer Nick Colvin, who worked in the Obama White House and for the city of Chicago, and Hillary Scholten, who worked in the Justice Department while Obama was president and with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center. And then there is Amash, who has represented the district since 2011.

The Cook Political Report, a political handicapping site in Washington, lists the race as Lean Republican, which suggests an advantage for the GOP but, especially with Amash in the race, not a necessarily insurmountable one inthree-way balloting.

As for other congressional seats in Michigan this year, the only one that looks like a possible race is in southwestern Michigan, where U.S. Rep. Fred Upton, R-St. Joseph, has been in office since 1987.

The genial Upton is a well-liked politician, including by many Democrats in Congress, but this has also been a district that has trended more Democratic in some years, offering a pickup opportunity. Several Democrats are vying for the nomination but the one receiving the most attention is state Rep. Jon Hoadley of Kalamazoo, a member of the House Appropriations Committee who has pushed for getting rid of partisan redistricting and reducing the influence of money in politics.

The Cook Political Report still lists it as Likely Republican.

As for other races around the state, most are expected to stand pat the only congressman who has said he wont run for reelection is Rep. Paul Mitchell, R-Dryden, in a predominantly Republican district. With redistricting around the corner, it doesnt look at this early stage that many big name candidates will enter the races and challenge the incumbents.

Retired Brigadier Gen. Doug (Odie) Slocum, who previously commanded Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Harrison Township, andstate Rep. Shane Hernandez. R-Port Huron, areamong a group of candidates who have filed for Mitchell's seat. Former state Rep. Gretchen Driskell, D-Saline, will try for a third time to knock off U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton.

But anything can happen, especially given the volatility of the president, an uncertain economy,andthe potential for instability in the Middle East and elsewhere.

All 110 seats in the state House of Representatives will be up for grabs as well this year, with Republicans hoping to keep the majority theyve held since 2011.

But the GOP, which currently has a58-52 majority in the House, lost five seats in the 2018 election and Democrats are hoping to flip the chamber this year.

It's also worth noting that, because of term limits, 12 Democrats and 10 Republicans will be leaving regardless.

In terms offundraising, meanwhile, Republicans have a distinct cash advantage with $2.2 million available cash in the House Republican Campaign Committee account, while the House Democratic Fund is far lighter at about $517,000.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is particularly interested in helping flip the Housein order to make more progress on herDemocratic agenda. But given the way districts have been drawn across the state, she could have a tough time doing so unless there is a Democratic wave election that swamps even local races.

Control of the Michigan Supreme Court, where Republican-nominated justices currently hold a 4-3 majority, is also at stake.Two seats on the court are up for election those filled by Chief Justice Bridget Mary McCormack, a Democratic nominee, and that of Justice Stephen Markman, a GOP nominee.

Markman cant run againbecause of the court's age limit of 70 at the time of a justice's election. That means it will be an open seat, and if Democrats win it while retaining McCormacks seat, they would have a 4-3 majority on the court.

While nothing has been certified for the November ballot yet, a number of ballot proposals are making the rounds.

A coalition of businesses, politicians and social justice leaders earlier this week proposed a ballot question that would expand the states civil rights law to protectmembers of the LGBTQ community from discrimination in housing and hiring.

The group could get the signatures it needs to get on the ballot. But it will still face opposition from some religious and conservative leaders, who have pledged to campaign against it. Former state Rep. Gary Glenn, R-Midland, is president of the American Family Association, which promotes what it calls traditional family values, and hassaid such measures have been used "to discriminate against and violate religious freedom.

Meanwhile, Right to Life of Michigan has been gathering signatures to ban an abortion procedure known asdilation and evacuation that isused to end some pregnancies in the second trimester, but voters may never see that question on their ballots.

If the Republican-led Legislature in Lansing approves it, then it bypasses Whitmer who has threatened a veto andit will go intoeffect without the referendum being held. On the other hand, legislators could do nothing and then it would be put to voters.

Finally, Voters Not Politicians, the group that won passage of a state constitutional amendment creating an independent redistricting commission in 2018, has been looking at a possible proposal requiringfinancial disclosure for elected state officials, as well as potentiallyextending Michigans legislative term limits.

Michigan currently requires no financial disclosures by state lawmakers and consistently ranks at or near the bottom of state rankings for transparency and ethics laws. Though no specific term limits plan has been unveiled, one reform proposal would allow lawmakers to serve a combined 20 years in the House and Senate. Currently, lawmakers are limited to six years in the House and eight years in the Senate.

There has also been talk of a constitutional amendment to create a graduated income tax or an initiative or bond proposal to fix the roads, thoughneither appears to be definite.

Voters in metro Detroit arealso going to face questions on public transit and the arts.

On the March 10 presidential primary ballot, voters in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties will be asked to support or reject a 0.2-mill renewal ballot proposal to support the Detroit Institute of Arts for 10 years.

The ask already has raised hackles in the region because the DIA had previously said it wouldnt request a millage hike again when it first asked in 2012 and now it is making the request two years before the initial millage is set to expire.But museum officials say it's needed to handle costs and that a lot such as the city of Detroit's trip through bankruptcy has happened in the meantime.

Another issue that will probably face voters in Wayne, Oakland and Washtenaw counties in November is a ballot proposal to improve and expand public transit in southeast Michigan. Some work is needed before that can be put on the ballot, however. Changes in the state law that govern municipal partnerships have to happen before the measure can get on the ballot.

As for the parties, both are gearing up for an explosive campaign season.

Last week, at a "Fems for Dems" event in Pontiac, Whitmer whipped up the troops saying, that the word important "doesn't even go far enough to explain how critical this year is."

"The world is going to be looking to Michigan," she said.

That is one of the few things in which she may agree with state Republican Party Chairwoman Laura Cox.

"The 2020 elections will be fought over the values that define our nation," Cox said. "Michigan will be center stage in the fight to preserve our American way of lifeand the Michigan Republican Party is ready."

Read the original here:

A second term for Donald Trump? Michigan is at the center of the political universe - Detroit Free Press

LJUBLJANA, Slovenia A wooden statue mocking U.S. President Donald Trump was burned to the ground Thursday in Slovenia, the birthplace of his wife Melania, authorities said.

The nearly eight-meter (26-foot) high construction, erected last year in a village in northeast of Slovenia, showed Trump with his trademark hair style, blue suit, white shirt and a long red tie. His right arm fist clenched was raised high like that of New Yorks Statue of Liberty.

Slovenian police are looking for the arsonist.

Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.

When triggered, a mechanism inside the statue opened a red-painted mouth and shark-like teeth used to appear.

Like all populists, the statue has two faces, its creator, Tomaz Schlegl, said when he unveiled the statue last August. One is humane and nice, the other is that of a vampire.

Although the construction quickly became a tourist attraction, some local villagers were unhappy with its appearance, pledging to torch it by Halloween, Oct. 31. It had to be moved to another village in the area.

Milan Balazic, the mayor of Moravce where the statue ended up, said that unknown arsonists burned it.

He said the torching of the statue "is symbol of intolerance toward artistic projects in our society."

Its not the first time in Slovenia that a member of the Trump family has been carved in wood.

A life-size sculpture of the U.S. first lady cut from the trunk of a linden tree was unveiled in her hometown of Sevnica last June, drawing mixed reactions from residents.

The first lady, born Melanija Knavs, changed her name to Melania Knauss when she started modeling. She settled in New York in 1996 and met Trump two years later.

There are mixed feelings about Melania in Slovenia where hopes were high that she would promote her picturesque Alpine home country after Trump took office. But she has rarely mentioned Slovenia in her public appearances, and hasn't visited the small central European country since Trump's inauguration.

Original post:

Statue mocking Donald Trump torched in Slovenia - NBC News

On October 6, 1980 Donald Trump was interviewed by Rona Barrett, one of Americas most famous gossip columnists, on NBC. It was several weeks before Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter in the presidential election and near the end of the Iran hostage crisis in which the Iranian regime took 52 American diplomats and citizens prisoner after the embassy was stormed and then held them for 444 days.

It was a long and meandering interview about Trumps story to date (he was then 34). About half way though, Barrett asked Trump if he could make America perfect how would he do it. Trump replied that America should really be a country that gets the respect of other countries. The exchange continued:

Donald Trump: .The Iranian situation is a case in point. That they hold our hostages is just absolutely, and totally ridiculous. That this country sits back and allows a country such as Iran to hold our hostages, to my way of thinking, is a horror, and I dont think theyd do it with other countries. I honestly dont think theyd do it with other countries.

Rona Barrett: Obviously youre advocating that we should have gone in there with troops, et cetera, and brought our boys out like Vietnam.

Donald Trump: I absolutely feel that, yes. I dont think theres any question, and there is no question in my mind. I think right now wed be an oil-rich nation, and I believe that we should have done it, and Im very disappointed that we didnt do it, and I dont think anybody would have held us in abeyance.

As historians Brendan Simms and Charlie Laderman have observed, this interview is the first known comment by Trump on U.S. foreign policy.

Fast forward to January 4, 2020, a day after the U.S. drone strike that killed Qassem Soleimani. Trump tweeted:

One of the puzzles about Trumps strike on Soleimani is why he did it and what he will do next. His administration has pursued a very hawkish policy on Iran beginning with the travel ban, tough new sanctions, walking away from the Iran nuclear deal, and ratcheting up pressure in the year that followed. But, in recent months Trump tacked in a different direction. He did not fire back after the September attacks on Saudi oil facilities. He has professed not to care about the Middle East beyond the oil and ISIS. He seems to want to avoid war, particularly in an election year. And, he was desperate for talks with the Iranian leadership, going so far as to try to surprise the Iranians by dialing into a meeting between President Rouhani and President Macron on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly.

The historical record offers an answer. The Iranian revolution, which led to the hostage crisis and an energy crisis, was one of Trumps formative experiences in thinking about Americas role in the world. In the years that followed, he became obsessed with the symbolism of respect (and the acquisition of oil). He was furious that allies did not pay fealty to the United States. He was outraged when foreign leaders did not meet the American president at their plane. The only time he became frustrated with Vladimir Putin in office was when he looked as if he was disrespecting Trumps military strength such as when Russian planes buzzed Americas ships or when the Russians produced a map showing Mar-a-Lago within range of their nuclear weapons. Trump does not hate Iran per se his desire for talks is evidence of that but he does have an obsession with avoiding a humiliation. For Trump, the embassy protests looked like a mash-up of 1979 with Benghazi the ultimate challenge to his own perception of himself as a strongman.

There are contradictory reports of the decisionmaking process around the Soleimani strike. Some reports say that the Pentagon added the option as a throw-away to make the other option seem more reasonable. A report in the Washington Post says Mike Pompeo and Mark Esper had been trying to get Trump to sign on for some time. The Post report may be an attempt by Pompeo and Esper to claim credit and defuse charges of incompetence, but in any event, a consistent element of all reports is that Trump did not sign on to the strike until after the Iranian backed protests outside the embassy.

Trump often lashes out at people after he thinks they criticized him, even if a fight does not serve his interests think about his attack on the parents of the fallen U.S. soldier Humayun Khan or his cruel comment about Debbie Dingel. He has the same reaction to actions that undermine his own image of America as a strong and unrivaled nation while he is at the helm. He would almost certainly not have responded the same way if Iran had continued to hit U.S. allies or to make strategic gains in Iraq.

The killing of Soleimani is a strategic error. It provides short-term gratification upon the demise of a man responsible for the deaths of many Americans, but it damages U.S. interests in the region and beyond. However, many of the downsides mean very little to Trump. He does not care that Iraq might kick U.S. troops out as long as they pay him back for the base. Likewise for Iran abrogating elements of the nuclear deal. He does not mind that this undermines the protest movement in Iraq or in Iran. He cannot envisage the return of ISIS. He couldnt care less that that the Saudis now feel in imminent danger and want a de-escalation. As for international law and creating a precedent for targeted killings of government officials, forget it.

And yet, having killed the second most important person in Iran, Trump now finds himself in a bind. If Iran reacts by attacking Americans, Trump will feel compelled to respond, but that runs the risk of the wider war that he wants to avoid. So he is trying to put the genie back in the bottle by threatening fire and fury if Iran retaliates, just as he is bombastic domestically when in a tight spot. It is unlikely to succeed and, paradoxically, makes all-out war with Iran more likely. In the Barrett interview, Trump spoke about a sparkle of war in the Middle East. The phrase is an apt one to sum up Trumps approach to foreign policy he likes the sparkle and hopes others will be scared into submission. But bluster does not always work.

All-out war between the United States and Iran is unlikely, primarily because it would not serve Irans interests. Iran may bide its time, target U.S. allies instead of Americans, or press the United States in other ways (such as by forcing it out of Iraq). If it does directly attack Americans, Trump might try to wriggle off the hook he has hoisted himself upon.

However, its easy to imagine how the situation could easily spiral into a war. There is little doubt that Trump is uniquely ill-suited to be a commander-in-chief during war time. He has no attention span, does not process information normally, is particularly prone to bad advice, and is deeply insecure. He has one of the weakest and least experienced national security teams since the United States became a global power. He will be fighting this war without many allies. Even the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was careful to distance himself from Trumps drone strike. Given his demonstrated proclivity for war crimes, if he were to decisively win the war, he would very likely do so in a way that would leave a permanent stain on the nations honor.

Trumps Iran crisis fits perfectly within his narrative arc. His administration has had three identifiable phases. The first was the age of constraint, as the so-called Axis of Adults shaped and limited Trumps options. The second was the age of hubris as Trump got rid of anyone who stood up to him so he could act as he wished this came in two variants, maximum pressure and deal-making. The third is the reckoning as Trump is forced to face the consequences and contradictions of his own actions. There have been inklings of this third phase for some time. It has now well and truly arrived.

Read the rest here:

How Donald Trump thinks about Iran - Brookings Institution

michael barbaro

From The New York Times, Im Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily.

Today: In the streets of Tehran, Iranians are mourning the loss of General Qassim Suleimani. My colleague Farnaz Fassihi on what they feel theyve lost.

Its Tuesday, January 7.

[CHANTING]

Monday morning was the start of the official state funeral for General Qassim Suleimani.

[SINGING]

By 8:00 a.m., there were millions of people out in downtown Tehran. He was being celebrated as a national hero, but also as a religious martyr and a saint.

[SINGING AND DRUMMING]

There were families. There were men, women, children. They had the symbolic Shia ritual symbols out feathers, swords, drums, music, eulogies, songs.

[CHANTING]

And the crowd also had a very anti-American and defiant mood. People were sad, but they were also very angry, and we heard a lot of revenge, revenge, and no more negotiations with the U.S., its time for battle, chanted by the crowd.

[SPEAKING]

Irans supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, recited the Muslim prayer of the dead on General Suleimanis coffin.

[SPEAKING]

In the middle of the prayer, several times he paused and openly cried.

[SPEAKING] [CROWD MOANING]

And the crowd also wept very loudly with him. As a reporter whos covered Iran for over 25 years, what struck me was that the people who had attended were not just supporters of the regime, but a lot of people who were generally very critical of the regime.

Hmm.

To be clear, there are plenty of Iranians who did not love or respect General Suleimani. But there were activists, there were opposition figures who had been jailed by the regime who attended. And when I asked them, why are you there? Why are you going? The response was, General Suleimani protected our national security. He transcended politics. He was a national hero. And I was talking to some young people who had attended his funeral, and I spoke to a 22-year-old young man, a university student, and I asked him, why are you at the funeral? And he said, knowing General Suleimani was out there made me feel safer. He was like a security umbrella above our country. And thats a sentiment that I heard over and over.

You know, what youre describing feels like the kind of unified national outpouring that is reserved for a small handful of figures in any country, right? I mean, a beloved president, a civil rights leader like Martin Luther King in the United States, not for what our colleagues have described as a general who specializes in covert operations in Iran.

I think its difficult for most people in the United States and outside of Iran, and perhaps the region, to grasp the unique place and role that General Suleimani played in Iran and in regional politics. He was singlehandedly the most revered and influential character in Iran.

So how did Suleimani cultivate that role? How did he make Iranians feel that way? Where does that story start?

In many ways, General Suleimanis story begins with the story of Irans revolution in 1979.

He was a young man working construction jobs in the small city of Kerman in the southwest, from a low-income family.

Mm-hmm.

His education was high school diploma level, and he got swept up in the revolution, in the promise of Islam becoming the foundation of a government, and of promises to empower the oppressed and low-income class in Iran, which had been neglected and sidelined under the pro-Western monarchy of the shah. So General Suleimani gets a job at the local water plant and volunteers for the local chapter of the Revolutionary Guards, and quickly rises up and shows a lot of promise as a military man. When the war with Iraq happened in the 1980s, he was a commander for eight years. And after the war ended, he was named the commander of the Quds Forces. And that was really the beginning of the Quds Forces, and the Islamic Republics ambition to create a paramilitary in the region, and to kind of export the idea of an Islamic revolution of Shia dominance outside of the borders of Iran.

And why does Iran, and someone like Suleimani, want to export this revolution?

The Islamic Republic theocracy was the first time that a Shia government had come to power in the Middle East. The Islamic faith is divided along Sunnis and Shias, and the division and rivalry go back all the way to the early days of Islam and the succession of Prophet Muhammad. And Shias have always been a minority in the faith. With Saudi Arabia sort of as the custodian of the Sunni faith, Iran has, for centuries, wanted to establish itself as the protector of the minority Shias. And the theocracy of the Islamic Republic gave them the foundation and the structure to do that. And as soon as they had established their government in power in the country, they started looking externally. And General Suleimani was pivotal in expanding the ambitions of Irans military and political apparatus in the Middle East.

And how exactly does he do that?

So General Suleimani was instrumental in elevating Irans strategy in the region through the proxy militia groups that it had created. And he started in Lebanon, where Iran had already created two Shia militia groups, Amal al-Islami and Hezbollah, and he helped them in their fight with Israeli soldiers that were occupying Lebanon, and later on in the battles that Hezbollah and Lebanon fought. General Suleimani also becomes very involved with Palestinian militant groups Hamas, Islamic Jihad who also see an alliance between their ideologies and Islamic Republic of Iran.

And when you say that Suleimani becomes involved in these groups, what does that actually mean? What is he doing?

He helps them come up with battlefield plans, and he dispatches his underlings to go and train and fund and form these groups, providing them with weapons, providing them with money, and providing them with strategy. And he gains this reputation of being the shadow commander, the man whos everywhere but nowhere. If General Suleimani is present on the ground, then Iran is present.

So under Suleimani, Iran is making itself felt across the Middle East through these relationships to these militias. Does that strategy succeed?

Irans strategy succeeds, but its limited to the shores of the Mediterranean with Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. But that changes in 2003 with the United States invasion of Iraq.

Well be right back.

U.S. warships and planes launched the opening salvo of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The attack came in waves

So Farnaz, how exactly did the U.S. invasion of Iraq provide an opportunity for Suleimani and for this strategy that hes pursuing for Iran?

Until the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the country was ruled by Saddam Hussein and Sunnis, and Shias who were aligned to Iran were marginalized. When the United States toppled Saddam Hussein, Shias rose to power, and many of these Shia leaders and political and religious figures had very close ties to Iran. And Iran really seized that opportunity. It used these contacts and networks and relationships to gain influence and penetrate Iraqi society. And General Suleimani once again becomes the pivotal character in helping realize this strategy and this aspiration.

So an unintended consequence of America invading Iraq is that it ends up empowering Iran.

When I was living and working in Iraq in those early days after the invasion, most of the Sunni Iraqis that we would meet and interview would say that the U.S. invasion delivered Iraq on a golden platter to Iran.

Wow. So what does Suleimani do with this opening that he sees in Iraq?

General Suleimani uses the opening to further expand Irans influence in Iraq and in the region. He helps create Shia militia. He recruits allies, a network of politicians, religious men and militant groups who were loyal to Irans ambitions in Iraq. The Shia militia that he helped create were also responsible for attacks on U.S. soldiers, for the killing of U.S. soldiers, and for civilian deaths.

When the Civil War started in Syria in 2011, Iran vowed to keep President Bashar al-Assad in power. Mr. Assad and his constituents are an offshoot of Shia Islam, and religiously and politically aligned with Iran. This is where Iraq comes in. Because of the relationships and networks and influence that General Suleimani had in Iraq, he was able to use Iraq by land and by air to funnel support for Syrias war. Weapons, missiles, even soldiers that were trained in Iran were shipped to Syria by way of Iraq.

So Suleimanis strategy in Iraq it doesnt just fend off the Americans who have invaded there. It means that Iran and Suleimani could use Iraq to assist allies like Assad in Syria and in all these other battles throughout the region.

Exactly. Iraq becomes a geographic extension of Iran and its interests in the region. And by the time ISIS takes over parts of Syria in Idlib and parts of Iraq in Mosul, the Iraqi government and even the Americans were at wits end on what to do to battle this growing threat of ISIS.

So what does the rise of ISIS mean for Iran, and what does that mean for Iranian influence and for Suleimanis role?

The rise of ISIS was a threat to Iran. It was an existential threat to the Shia government of Iran, because ISIS represented the most extreme version of Sunni faith. And again, General Suleimani mobilizes. He goes to Iraq and he repeats a true and proven formula once again by recruiting volunteers, the instrumental ground force in helping the United States and Iraqs army to battle ISIS. Therefore, Mr. Suleimani, although hes seen as a foe of the United States, in the battle of ISIS actually becomes a default ally. For General Suleimani, the rise of ISIS was a turning point. He went from being a commander in the shadows, a mystery figure, to being a household name.

Hmm. And why is he suddenly a public figure because of ISIS?

Because Iran wanted to counter ISISs propaganda machinery.

ISIS is using its cash and media-savvy Western militants to recruit and radicalize.

The branded content. Theyre mixing graphics, moving images, music, chants, all the

cataloging and posting in near real time their war crimes.

They utilize social media and Twitter and Facebook to recruit, to spread their propaganda to target their messaging.

And this is a mujatweet, a short, promotional video which shows a softer side of jihad. Here, a Belgian hands out ice cream to excited Syrian children.

And they create a personality around their leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the same way that Al Qaeda had created a personality around Bin Laden. So in response to ISISs very successful propaganda campaign, Iran decides to turn General Suleimani into the public face of the so-called resistance, and somebody that Shias could love and emulate and respect.

Enter Qassim Suleimani.

Here he is, celebrating gun in hand.

His pictures began appearing in public in battlegrounds, videos of him visiting soldiers unannounced.

Hes been up and down the country in the North, in the South, in the capital, checking up on the defenses, mobilizing the Shia militias, making sure that the Iraqi states are able to confront the threat from ISIS.

Videos of him reciting poetry, saying that he wants to become a martyr, the highest honor in Islam, and join his friends.

General Suleimani is increasingly being elevated and recognized as a key player on the world stage as Iranian influence in the region grows.

So by 2014, Mr. Suleimani is so well-known that his pictures are being printed on T-shirts, and his posters are sold in shops in Damascus and Beirut and Tehran.

Wow.

And that summer, his mother passed away, and the funeral of his mother in Tehran became the whos who event of every militant group in the Middle East. From the head of Hamas, to Islamic Jihad, to senior members of Hezbollah, all showed up to pay respects to the general that they saw as the patron of their cause and movement.

Hmm. So this is vivid evidence that he is very much the source of power in the Middle East that all these groups owe him. Theyre literally showing up at his door.

It was like watching a king hold court. And that was really the first public glimpse that we got of his status regionally, and what he means to these groups.

So at this point in 2014, how is Suleimani viewed by the U.S.? Im struck that all of these figures and groups that youre describing as turning out to pay respects to Suleimanis mother at this funeral, they are all pretty much mortal foes of the U.S.

So the U.S. was watching him, but not really taking action. And that was really in line with the previous administrations policies of engagement with Iran, and not escalating confrontation. That changed with the election of Donald Trump as president.

Right, and the withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal that President Trump ordered.

Yes. Since the withdrawal of the Iran nuclear deal by the U.S., Iran and the U.S. have been on a collision path, increasingly taking provocative actions and policies toward one another.

The past 48 hours saw a dangerous escalation in the feud between Washington and Tehran.

Culminating these past few weeks of violence in Iraq

An American contractor was killed on an Iraqi base.

The Department of Defense took offensive actions by launching F-15 Strike Eagles against five targets.

Protesters stormed the American Embassy, and the U.S. says Iran is responsible.

that ultimately led to the decision by President Trump to assassinate General Suleimani.

Right. Because in the minds of U.S. officials, Suleimani is very much responsible for those actions.

Exactly.

And Farnaz, how much do you think that the very public role that Suleimani occupied, and that Iran created for him and wanted for him how much do you think that that played a role in the Trump administrations decision to take him out, the understanding of what it was he represented to Iran?

I think the Trump administration may have not known what he represented to Iran.

Hmm.

I think that they miscalculated the level of admiration, perhaps, or nationalistic sentiment that weve seen pouring out of Iran. I think the White House probably thought that it was taking out a military commander, that it may not be very popular with ordinary Iranians, that theres been a lot of discontent in November against the government, and maybe Iranians would support this decision. For sure, we have voices in Iran, outside and inside Iran, among Iranians, who think that taking Mr. Suleimani out is justified, and they didnt like him, but what weve seen is that the U.S. has effectively turned General Suleimani into a martyr.

So this response that we saw at the funeral on Monday are you saying that the United States may not have expected this? Because it sounds like the U.S. understood one aspect of Suleimanis role in Iran, as the leader of this military strategy, but perhaps they didnt understand something thats equally as important, which is what he meant in the hearts of Iranians.

I think thats absolutely right. And I think, you know, we have to remember Iran has been an island of stability in a region ablaze with terrorism and car bombs and beheadings and kidnappings and women being sold by ISIS. And Iranians have, like, watched the whole region unravel around them refugees and displacement for the past 20 years. And by and large, they credit General Suleimani for that. They say that they trusted him and respected him for protecting Iran, for keeping Iran safe. And I think the outpouring of emotion we see is related to that sentiment.

Help me understand this idea, because the strategy that you have described over the past decade of violence and provocation that Suleimani oversaw and he came to personify, it doesnt feel protective. Why did it feel that way to Iranians in a way that the U.S. might not have understood?

You know, Michael, thats a really good question, and its one that Ive struggled to understand myself. This is a man who was responsible for a lot of violence and a lot of mayhem in the region, and a lot of activity that most Iranians may not agree with, that do not like. But because they felt that it gave them a buffer between their day-to-day lives inside Iran and the instability and violence happening all around the Middle East, they came to respect him and view him as a protector.

What does Suleimanis meaning to people in Iran what does that mean for the response we should expect from the government there?

The public momentum is building, and pressure is building, on Irans leadership to take action. At the funeral this morning, millions of people were out.

[CHANTING]

They were carrying the red flag of Shia Islam, which is a call to battle. They were chanting, No to negotiations, no to a deal, only war with the United States.

[CHANTING]

And the combination of the publics defiant mood and calls for revenge, and the rhetoric were seeing from Iranian officials, increases the possibility that in the next few days or next few weeks, Iran will respond and retaliate. How it will do it, what it will do, we dont know.

Farnaz, thank you very much.

Thank you so much for having me, Michael.

The Times reports that Irans supreme leader has told advisors that the retaliation against the United States for General Suleimanis death should be carried out openly by Irans military, not through proxies or militias. Such a direct reprisal would be a major departure from Iranian tradition, and highlights the desire by the supreme leader to honor Suleimanis status and satisfy the mourners who have flooded the streets of Tehran.

Well be right back.

Heres what else you need to know today. In a surprise statement on Monday, former National Security Adviser John Bolton, said he is willing to testify at President Trumps impeachment trial if he is subpoenaed by the Senate. The announcement puts new pressure on Senate Republicans to call witnesses at the trial, something they have so far resisted doing. Bolton was blocked by the White House from testifying before House impeachment investigators, but is considered a vital witness in the case, because he has direct knowledge of Trumps actions and conversations regarding Ukraine. And in Los Angeles on Monday, prosecutors charged Harvey Weinstein with sex crimes just hours after prosecutors in New York began a trial against Weinstein on similar charges. The allegations in Los Angeles are from two women who allege that Weinstein sexually assaulted them in hotel rooms in 2013. The latest charges mean that even if Weinstein is acquitted in New York, he will face a second trial in California.

Thats it for The Daily. Im Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.

Read this article:

For Trump, the Burden May Be Proving This Is Not the Moment His Critics Predicted - The New York Times