Rand Pauls Defense of Trump on Corruption Goes Down in Flames During Contentious Interview – Rolling Stone

Posted on by

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told CNNs Jake Tapper that President Donald Trump should not be impeached because Trump is dedicated to rooting out corruption, and his motives for holding up the military funding to Ukraine were centered around those concerns. In his response, however, Tapper schooled the congressman in the facts.

Tapper asked Paul, So youre saying that you think that President Trump was actually doing this because he was combating corruption?

Paul replied, Well, yes, there are all kinds of accusations that Burisma and Hunter Biden and the company were corrupt and the founder of the company was corrupt.

Tapper then went in hard on the senator, listing the absurd amount of corrupt former aides and associates that the president seemingly had no problem surrounding himself with.

But this is a president whose former personal attorney Michael Cohen, former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn, former campaign adviser Roger Stone, former deputy campaign chair Rick Gates, former associate George Papadopoulos, all of them have been convicted of federal crimes, Tapper said.

The host continued by citing a corrupt business and charity that donned the Trump name, In addition, last year, Trump University settled a $25 million fraud lawsuit. Last month, President Trump admitted misusing his own charitable foundations money, was ordered to pay $2 million.

Tapper then drove home his point, asking, You really think President Trump is concerned about rooting out corruption?

Instead of answering the question, Paul pivoted and spoke about former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Republicans have seized upon this argument in defense of the president since the Justice Departments Inspector General report, released last week, concluded that the FBI made significant errors when surveilling Page in 2016.

So, Tapper put the focus back on his point and said, It was the Trump Justice Department that put all those people in prison or sentenced all those people. Its not me.

Again, Paul returned to Page, but Tapper replied, That doesnt absolve Paul Manafort of money laundering.

Tapper added, Im asking you about President Trump and corruption. I just listed a number of close associates of President Trumps who are either in prison or facing sentencing.

Paul replied by sounding a familiar note in our current political environment where seemingly everyone chooses their own facts, Right. But I think its based on opinion, Paul said.

See the original post here:

Rand Pauls Defense of Trump on Corruption Goes Down in Flames During Contentious Interview - Rolling Stone

David Shulkin speaks out about his time in Trump’s Cabinet and being fired by tweet – USA TODAY

Posted on by

David Shulkin, the former Secretary of Veterans Affairs, talks about Washington - and being fired by Tweet. USA TODAY

WASHINGTON He had been on the bubble with the president for more than a month. The White House was an enigma.

Entreaties to President Donald Trump and his chief of staff were met with reassurances, up to a fewhours before he was fired. In a tweet.

When it happens, not only is it a surprise, but its painful, David Shulkin, Trumps first secretary of Veterans Affairs, said about being axed in March 2018.

He was not the first and far from the last member of Trumps administration to be unceremoniously dispatched that way.But Shulkin is the first former Cabinet member to pen an insiders account.

The physician and one-time hospital administrator told USA TODAY he wantedthe public to know what its like to serve in Washington.He wanted to lay out the lessons he learned and the plans he left unfinished.

"Nobody asked me, What were you working on, did you have a plan? Was there a formula that was working?' Shulkin said. "I felt like I had spent three years learning and failing and learning and failing, and yet there was nobody to share that with."

Then-Veterans Affairs secretary David Shulkin appears before a congressional committee on March 15, 2018 in Washington, DC.(Photo: Mark Wilson, Getty Images)

His account, "It Shouldnt Be This Hard to Serve Your Country," is a mix of policy discussion, legacy preservation and score-settling. (Shulkin blames a group of political appointees for undermining him and ultimatelygetting him fired.) And of course there's a sprinkling of scenes with Trump.

During Shulkins interview for the Cabinet post at Trump Tower, he wrote,the president-elect remarkedthat hes a "good-looking guy." Trump sought advice onShulkin'shiring from Marvel Entertainment chairman andMar-a-Lago member Ike Perlmutter.

In a chapter titled "Team Chaos," Shulkin recountsOval Office meetings and nighttime phone calls in which Trump askedabout topics Shulkinhad no expertise in, such as what to do about North Korea or whether he should movethe American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. (He did.)

"He would talk about what was on his mind. Sometimes it would relate directly to the area that I had responsibility for, but oftentimes it was about world events or things on his calendar or schedule," Shulkin said in an interview last week. He said he had to get used to the "free flow of conversation."

Asked for comment, the White House referred to a statement provided to The Washington Post before the books release in October, criticizing Shulkin for profiting off his time in office and sharing "outlandish" claims about conversations with Trump.

For his part, Shulkin wont say what he thinks of the president, his fitness for office or whether he should be impeached."I do dance around this because Im trying to reserve my personal opinions,"he said.

Shulkin was the only holdover from the Obama administration in Trumps Cabinet. He became undersecretary for health at theVA in 2015 after runninghospitals in New York and New Jersey.

During his time at the VA, he increased the agencys capacity to treat veterans by expanding remote health careand instituting same-day services for urgent needs. He also increased transparency by posting wait times for VA facilities and comparisons to non-VA care.

Among the lessons Shulkin said he learned at the VA was thatthe way to make big changes in Washington is to publicly declare your intentions before checking with others, including Congress, the White House or even agency employees charged with carrying them out.

Thats what he said happened in 2016 with same-day services, whichinitially triggered pushback from outsideand inside the agency, where employees saidit couldnt be done.

The VAis "almost set up for a system to stay exactly the way it is," Shulkin said.

The White House soured on him when he didnt move quickly or farenough to expand veterans options for taxpayer-funded health care outside the VA, Trump has said. Shulkin maintains he was fired because he opposed privatizing the agency, which he said otherpolitical appointees were pushing.

Tensions escalated in early 2018 after the VA inspector general concluded Shulkin had misused taxpayer money on a European trip.

In his last phone call with President Trump, hours before he was fired, Shulkin said, they discussed the changes underway at the agency. Among those left unfinished were an overhaul of veterans disability benefits and a reorganization of the VA.

Then came the tweet.

"Not having a lot of time to prepare for that certainly not having a lot of time to make sure that you appropriately transition your responsibilities is not an ideal way to leave the government," Shulkin said.

While he wont take a position on impeachment, he said the process has laid bare the political divide inthe country.

"Im sad to see that the countrys going through this," Shulkin said. "The fact that people are viewing this through very different lenses is showing why its so difficult for us to make progress on the difficult solutions, on the difficult problems that are facing the country."

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/15/former-trump-cabinet-david-shulkin-fired-by-tweet/4415685002/

See the article here:

David Shulkin speaks out about his time in Trump's Cabinet and being fired by tweet - USA TODAY

Anthony Rendon wanted to go to White House ‘so bad’, says Trump ‘bailed’ on golf with Nationals stars – USA TODAY

Posted on by

Share This Story!

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Rendon just signed a seven-year, $245 million contract with the Los Angeles Angels.

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

What I'm Hearing: The hot stove was on fire during the Winter Meetings in San Diego, and as Bob Nightengale details, Scott Boras was the center of attention. USA TODAY

During his introduction Saturday as the newest member of the Los Angeles Angels, third baseman Anthony Rendon explained why he missed the Washington Nationals' controversial White House visitwith President Donald Trump after winning the World Series.

"I wanted to go so bad," Rendon said."Obviously being from Texas, I think you guys know which views we lean towards."

"I was actually told that the White House visit wasn't supposed to be until Wednesday ... I was already packing up the house, my wife was already back home in Houston, so I was going to fly back up Wednesday morning.

"Then the day of the parade (Sunday) they go 'Oh the White House visit has been changed to Monday.' Ihad something planned."

Rendon during his introductory news conference on Saturday.(Photo: Alex Gallardo, AP)

Rendon added that he was supposed to golf with Trump and teammates Ryan Zimmerman and Stephen Strasburg in Florida during spring training, butthe president didn't make it.

"He actually bailed on Strasburg and Zim and I in spring training," Rendon said."We were supposed to golf together, and he didn't show up. So that was a little (payback)for him. We were supposed to play at Trump International."

The 29-year-old third baseman was one of the top free agents available this winter and he signed a seven-year, $245 million deal with the Angels after spending his first seven seasons with the Nationals.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

See the original post:

Anthony Rendon wanted to go to White House 'so bad', says Trump 'bailed' on golf with Nationals stars - USA TODAY

The House Republicans Slimy Defense of Donald Trump – The New Yorker

Posted on by

Maybe, in some alternate universe, on the second day of the House Judiciary Committees hearing about the Democrats articles of impeachment against Donald Trump, Republicans on the committee would have presented a detailed and painstakingly constructed argument to show why the evidence doesnt support the charges against the President. But, in actuality, the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee spent much of their time talking aboutyou guessed itHunter Biden.

During the morning session, the committee voted along party lines to reject a G.O.P. effort to strike the first article of impeachment, which accuses Trump of abusing his Presidential power by pressuring the President of Ukraine to dig up dirt on his domestic political rivals. After that, Representative Matt Gaetz, a Republican whose district is in the Florida Panhandle, introduced a separate amendment. This one would have struck the reference to Joe Biden in the first article of impeachment and replaced it with a reference to his son and to Burisma, the Ukrainian company that added Hunter to its board for a time.

Gaetz, a Trump berloyalist and an N.R.A. favorite who once introduced legislation to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, began by rambling on about what Hunter Biden did or didnt do for Burisma. Then he brought up the younger Bidens history of drug problems, reading a passage from a lengthy Profile of him, by The New Yorkers Adam Entous, which describes how on one occasion a white powdery substance was found in a rental car he had driven. I dont want to make light of anybodys substance-abuse issues, Gaetz said. But its a little hard to believe that Burisma hired Hunter Biden to resolve their international disputes when he could not resolve his own dispute with Hertz rental cars over leaving cocaine and a crack pipe in the car.

Even by the base standards of todays House G.O.P., which often resembles a ragtag protest group more than a government party, this was a slimy effort at diversion. This is about distraction, distraction, distraction, the veteran Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee, of Texas, accurately pointed out. But it was left to Hank Johnson, a seven-term Democratic congressman from Georgia, to deliver the most effective put-down of Gaetz. The pot calling the kettle black is not something that we should do, Johnson said. I dont know what members, if any, have had any problems with substance abuse, been busted in a D.U.I.I dont know. But, if I did, I wouldnt raise it against anyone on this committee. The titters that went around the hearing room as Johnson was speaking indicated that at least some of those present knew what he was referring to.

Late one night in 2008, a police deputy stopped Gaetzs car, for speeding, not far from the congressmans home. In his incident report, the deputy said that Gaetz smelled of beer and that his eyes were watery and bloodshot, and he swayed and staggered when he got out of the car. The deputy arrested Gaetz and took him to a police station, where he was booked and photographed. For reasons that have never been entirely clear, the charges against Gaetz were later dropped. But, in an interview with the Tampa Bay Times, in 2014, Gaetz acknowledged that he had made bad decisions that resulted in an arrest and added, That is sort of something that we all live with.

If you think, for a moment, that Johnsons rebuke was sufficient to shame Gaetz into silence, you havent been paying attention for the past few months. In their fealty to Trump, many members of the House G.O.P. are entirely shameless and more than a bit bonkers. Given a second opportunity to speak, Gaetz brought up Hillary Clintonwhy not?and said he was just glad that the country now had a President who is concerned about corruption.

He wasnt the only Republican to speak in favor of his amendment, of course. Another was Louie Gohmert, the Texan who once issued a dire warning about terror babies and who, on Wednesday night, as the hearing started, read out the name of an official who has been identified, in some reports, as the intelligence whistle-blower. In weighing in on Gaetzs amendment, Gohmert followed his example and brought up Clinton. He also offered a novel theory that she was somehow responsible for the Democrats impeachment of Trump. What we continue to see is projection, Gohmert said. Someone on their side engages in illicit conduct and that is what they accuse President Trump of doing.

Within the confines of a supposedly serious congressional hearing, there is no wholly effective way to counter the sort of slime and gibberish that Gaetz and Gohmert were promoting. In any case, it wasnt directed at Americans who are undecided about the merits of impeaching Trump, if any such people exist. Its only purpose was to fire up the Trump faithful, go viral on right-wing Web sites, and, perhaps, even get picked up on Fox News. In other words, it was part of politics as a tribal ritual rather than politics as rational discourse, and, therefore, it was largely immune to rational counter-argument.

Some of the Democrats on the committee tried their best, anyway, to remind people why Joe Bidens name was the one included in the first article of impeachment. In doing so, these Democrats focussed on the actual acts at the center of the impeachment investigationacts that most of the Republicans on the panel had assiduously avoided or deliberately downplayed.

Jackson Lee pointed out that Trump had put aid to Ukraine on hold despite the fact that the State Department and other U.S. agencies had stated that the country was already in compliance with anti-corruption directives. Hakeem Jeffries, the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, read out a list of the names of witnesses, Trump appointees all, who confirmed that the President had pressured a foreign government to target a U.S. citizen: Biden. Zoe Lofgren, who represents a district in Silicon Valley, said that, although the behavior of Hunter Biden and of Trumps sons and daughters were things that voters could consider in a general election, here we are talking about the abuse of Presidential authority.

That final statement was a bit incomplete. In referring to we, Lofgren should have made clear that she wasnt including the Republicans on the committee. If there was one thing they were determined not to talk about, it was Trump abusing his power or doing anything wrong.

See the original post here:

The House Republicans Slimy Defense of Donald Trump - The New Yorker

Donald Trump Hits Out At Fox News Ahead of Network Airing Interviews with James Comey and Adam Schiff – Newsweek

Posted on by

President Donald Trump hit out at Fox News ahead of the network airing interviews with former FBI director James Comey and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, claiming "only pro Trump shows" on the network attract high ratings.

On Twitter, Trump claimed the conservative cable network is "trying sooo hard to be politically correct" by interviewing two of his critics. He dismissed Comey as "totally discredited" and branded Schiff, a Democrat from California, "corrupt."

"Hard to believe that @FoxNews will be interviewing sleazebag & totally discredited former FBI Director James Comey, & also corrupt politician Adam "Shifty" Schiff," the president tweeted late on Saturday night. "Fox is trying sooo hard to be politically correct, and yet they were totally shut out from the failed Dem debates!"

In a follow-up tweet, Trump likened the network to "Commiecast MSNBC" and "Fake News CNN" and claimed all three will "die together as other outlets take their place."

Trump also singled out former Fox News anchor Shepard Smith, who was often critical of Trump on his show. Smith abruptly announced he was leaving the network in October reportedly amid frustrations over the network's pro-Trump coverage.

The president also appeared to mock CNN anchor Chris Cuomo by calling him "Fredo," an apparent reference to the character from The Godfather. The president previously referred to Cuomo as "Fredo" while speaking to reporters at the United Nations in September, The Hill reported.

"Both Commiecast MSNBC & Fake News CNN are watching their Ratings TANK. Fredo on CNN is dying. Don't know why @FoxNews wants to be more like them? They'll all die together as other outlets take their place. Only pro Trump Fox shows do well. Rest are nothing. How's Shep doing?" Trump tweeted.

The president has recently attacked Fox over its critical coverage of his presidency and tweeted out his support for the lesser-known conservative One America News Network. "Thank you to @OANN One America News for your fair coverage and brilliant reporting. It is appreciated by many people trying so hard to find a new, consistent and powerful VOICE!" Trump tweeted in October.

Earlier this week, Fox announced that Comey and Schiff would be sitting for separate interviews with Chris Wallace that will air on Fox News Sunday. According to Fox, Comey is expected to discuss the recently released Justice Department inspector general's report and Schiff will speak on the week's impeachment hearings.

Democrats pushed the impeachment inquiry toward a vote by the full U.S. House after the Judiciary Committee approved two impeachment charges, of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, on Friday.

The White House, Fox News, CNN and MSNBC have been contacted for comment.

Here is the original post:

Donald Trump Hits Out At Fox News Ahead of Network Airing Interviews with James Comey and Adam Schiff - Newsweek

Why Trump is winning on trade in Iowa – POLITICO

Posted on by

The closest thing to a shout-out to trade policy came from Sen. Bernie Sanders the sixth and final candidate to speak who asserted he would stand up for workers abroad and stand up for workers in the United States of America.

Its par for the course in the Democratic primary. If the presidential contenders say anything at all about trade policy, its typically criticism of Trumps go-it-alone approach in fighting China, a passing acknowledgment that farmers are hurting from the presidents approach or a caution that the replacement deal for NAFTA needs to be strongly enforceable.

They arent even tackling the issue in their broader messaging. Out of the dozens of television ads Democrats have taken out in Iowa, not a single one has focused on trade.

Trump, meanwhile, has made trade a central focus of his presidency. The self-styled Tariff Man characterizes his fight against China as a wildly successful move that has crippled its economy, and lauded his own efforts to fix the long-criticized trade deal with Mexico and Canada as huge accomplishments enabled by his deal-making savvy.

Just this week the president, who argues his confrontational approach is ending the war on American workers, announced a preliminary trade deal with China. And his administration landed a deal with House Democrats to replace the 25-year-old NAFTA.

The Democratic field has been noticeably quiet on both issues here, leading some Iowa Democrats to worry it could cost the party here and in the battleground states they hope to claw back from Trump in 2020.

Its certainly a missed opportunity, Sean Bagniewski, chair of the Polk County Democrats, said.

I think trade is the area to show you care about whats hurting rural voters. But now with the caucus less than two months away, you could say the cake is already in the oven, Bagniewski added. Its a little too late.

Trump has imposed tariffs on more than $360 billion worth of Chinese goods, a move that resulted in harsh retaliation from Beijing, particularly on U.S. agricultural products like soybeans and pork. The pain has been felt acutely in Iowa, the nations number one pork producing state and second-leading soybean producer.

Iowans are quick to acknowledge that sales are down and farm communities from farmers to equipment manufacturers to the banks they put their money in are struggling due to Trumps actions.

But in countless trips to Iowa by 2020 Democrats, they arent spending much time talking in depth about an issue thats essential to the health of the state economy.

Wed expect them to speak up more, said Quentin Hart, mayor of Waterloo, Iowa.

Democrats at the local level, ranging from state and county leaders to Reps. Abby Finkenauer and Cindy Axne, have made trade a more central issue because they know Iowans are hurting, Hart said.

Its particularly important in places like Waterloo, but it hasnt been a main leading point in these conversations, Hart said recently after his city hosted a presidential forum attended by five candidates, none of whom mentioned trade policy.

At the Iowa Farmers Union annual meeting in Grinnell in early December, it was a similar story: Democrats made quick references to Trumps trade wars, without offering much detail on what their approach on trade would be.

Donald Trump is treating farmers like poker chips in one of his bankrupt casinos, Sen. Amy Klobuchar said to an audience of more than 100 farmers and agricultural industry members.

Klobuchar is often credited on Capitol Hill as one of the most trade-savvy lawmakers given that she represents Minnesota, a farm state that largely relies on trade, particularly with Canada, its neighbor to the north. Klobuchar is also a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, where she has been vocal in pressing the Trump administration to expand U.S. exports abroad.

Still, Sen. Elizabeth Warren is the only major candidate to roll out a comprehensive trade plan, which in some ways more closely resembles Trumps agenda than Barack Obamas. Her plan would overhaul how Democratic administrations have handled trade in the past and create a list of nine separate criteria a country would have to meet before negotiating a trade deal with the U.S

For decades, big multinational corporations have bought and lobbied their way into dictating Americas trade policy, Warren wrote, calling the policies across Republican and Democratic administrations a failed trade agenda.

But after announcing her vision days before the July Democratic debate in Detroit, Warren rarely makes reference to her grand plan for trade.

It would be a good thing for her to emphasize more, said Jeff Link, a longtime Iowa-based Democratic strategist.

Link pointed out that trade policy is coming up a lot more in congressional races, such as in Iowas 4th District where Democrat J.D. Scholten is running for Rep. Steve Kings seat. But he noted that stems from Scholtens ability to travel to towns with less than 1,000 people and really pick up a lot of material on trade from speaking to small towns.

Some Iowa Democrats believe candidates are steering clear from talking about trade because its a complicated subject and they dont want a blunder on the campaign trail to get amplified on social media. (Trump, by contrast, never shies from talking about trade at rallies.)

Theres a palpable fear of saying something wrong, Bagniewski said.

Democratic strategists argue that its likely trade policy will loom larger once the crowded field of candidates shrinks and the prospect of confronting Trump directly draws nearer.

Link observed that Buttigieg has more recently weaved trade into his stump speech in Iowa a move that comes as he has surged in the polls in the Hawkeye state.

Its an unavoidable issue because its a signature issue for Trump, said Bill Reinsch, a former Clinton administration official and trade expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Theyre going to have to deal with it, and they would be smart to practice in Iowa, but guess not.

Maya King contributed to this report.

The rest is here:

Why Trump is winning on trade in Iowa - POLITICO

‘It’s like the hearings have never happened’ New poll shows voters still divided on impeachment – CNBC

Posted on by

U.S. President Donald Trump hosts a roundtable discussion with small business owners and members of his administration in the Roosevelt Room at the White House December 06, 2019 in Washington, DC.

Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images

American voters are nearly evenly divided over the impeachment of President Donald Trump, views that have gone unchanged since last month despite weeks of long debates and public hearings, according to a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll.

Forty-eight percent of voters are against the president's impeachment, while 47% support it. Trump is accused of abusing his power by pressuring the Ukraine president to investigate political rival and former Vice President Joe Biden.

"It's like the hearings have never happened," said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion. "The arguments have only served to reinforce existing views and everyone is rooting for their side."

The poll also found that Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders are leading the Democratic presidential field. They collectively receive about half the support of Democratic voters and left-leaning independents.

Biden is leading the crowded field of candidates with 24%, followed by Sanders at 22%. Sen. Elizabeth Warren has 17%; Pete Buttigieg 13%; Andrew Yang 5%; and Mike Bloomberg, Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Sen. Cory Booker are at 4%.

Julian Castro, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and Sen. Michael Bennet all have 1%, the poll shows.

Biden is polling best with white women without a college degree, moderates, people earning less than $50,000 a year and people from the South. Sanders leads with nonwhite voters, progressives, people from urban areas and the Northeast and men, according to the poll.

About two-thirds of the people surveyed said that they are happy about the pool of Democratic candidates, though three-quarters said they could switch to supporting a different candidate.

The next presidential primary debate is scheduled for Thursday at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, but all seven Democrats who qualify have threatened to skip it as they pledge support for workers in a contract dispute at the school.

The survey of 1,744 adults was conducted between Dec. 9 and 11 by the Marist Poll using live telephone callers via cellphone and landline and has a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points. There were 1,508 registered voters surveyed, and where they are referenced, the poll has a margin of error of +/- 3.7 percentage points. There were 704 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents surveyed, and where they are referenced, results have a +/- 5.4 percentage point margin of error.

Follow this link:

'It's like the hearings have never happened' New poll shows voters still divided on impeachment - CNBC

A year in, Gavin Newsom is still fighting Trump. Is he doing enough to govern California? – USA TODAY

Posted on by

Gavin Newsom became governor of California a year ago. Now he weighs in on the 2020 presidential election and juggling his family and being governor. USA TODAY

SACRAMENTO Gavin Newsom, the 40th governor of the state of California, emerges from the door to his private office with a sigh.

Sorry Im late," says Newsom, 52. "I was watching the impeachment hearings."

For Newsom,President Donald Trump is often unavoidable these days. He and the president, who isthe focus of the hearings, continue to be at loggerheads. In fact,Newsom's position as leader of the so-dubbed California Resistance helped him get elected on Nov. 7, 2018.

But some critics contend the governor's first year in officehas been diluted by this feud, resulting ina lack of progress on huge issues a mushrooming homeless population, astronomical housing prices, a dangerous electrical grid that have led pundits to write eulogies forthe age-old California dream.

Newsom is resolute. The dream will live on in spite of Trump.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, 52, met recently with USA TODAY to discuss his first year in office, and how he has plans to tackle some of the state's most pressing problems, from homelessness to a broken electricity grid.(Photo: Martin E. Klimek, USA TODAY)

One of the biggest stories that hasnt gotten full media attention is the assault by the president on the American people who happen to be residents of the largest state of our union, Newsom says in an exclusive year-end interview with USA TODAY. But California is thriving despite him.

So far, polls say most Californians like the job Newsom has donesince being sworn in Jan. 7, with 44% approving and 32% disapproving, according to a survey by the Public Policy Institute of California.

But while Newsom campaigned last fall on the enduring attraction of the mythic and potent California dream egalitarianism, upward mobility, natural beauty that postcard image has taken a hit.

Homelessness is soaring; 25% of the nations 600,000 homeless live in California. In San Francisco alone, apps have sprouted up to track human waste on sidewalks, people with mental illnesses have attacked other residents, and some companies, most recently Oracle, have canceled downtown convention plans.

Housing costs are driving away the middle class; the median home pricein California is $550,000, twice the national average, according to Zillow. More than28,190 people departedCalifornia in the second quarter of 2019, almost double 2017's rate, according to a regular Migration Report from real estate brokerage Redfin.

And Californias already prevalent wildfires now have an added menace; this years days-long Pacific Gas & Electric power grid shutdowns wreaked havoc particularly on seniors and the poor. Along with fires, they cost the states economy $11.5 billion, according to Bank of the West chief economist Scott Anderson.

To Newsom's constituents, taking on Trump is one task. Governing the state is another altogether.

He ran as a leader of the Trump resistance, and hes been all-in there and gets full marks, says Thad Kousser, chair of the University of California, San Diego, political science department and author of The Power of American Governors." So the next step will be to really get a coherent policy agenda set and implemented.

Leading that resistance has been time consuming. And Trump is fighting back, in ways that affect the state's policies.

Over the past year, Trump has threatenedto withhold federal aid for wildfire recovery on grounds that the state isnt managing its forests, has suggested federal oversight is needed to fix the state's homelessness epidemic, and has vowed to revoke the state's authority to set strict auto emissions standards.

Most recently, Trump has ordered that federal lands in California be open to fracking-style oil drilling, just as Newsom halted all fracking permits so that their ecological impact could be studied first.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in Newsoms overwhelmingly Democratic Legislature passed a bill requiring Trump to turn over his tax records if he wanted to be on the ballot in 2020. That chess move was overturned by the California Supreme Court, but the jab landed.

California is a disgrace to our country, Trump told a Cincinnati crowd days after the bill was passed in July.

President Donald Trump talks with California's then-Gov. Elect Gavin Newsom during a visit to a neighborhood destroyed by the wildfires in Paradise, California on Nov. 17, 2018. The two have had an ongoing feud over issues such as forest management, homelessness and immigration, a duel that at times seems personal.(Photo: Evan Vucci, AP)

Some state lawmakers are concerned about Newsom's slow pace of progress on the traditional parts of his job.

Newsom has a Democratic majority in the Legislature, and what has he done with it? says Assemblyman Devon Mathis, a Republican from the Central Valley agricultural town of Visalia.

Conditions have gotten worse, and gorgeous cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles are cesspools, he says. And many of us are trying to take care of our families, praying to God we dont have a mishap and end up in the poverty line. Youre the governor; you have the ability to do something, not just talk.

Newsom says he is well aware of the criticism. And he asks for time.

We expect to be held accountable. We expect people to demand more. They want to see evidence of change, he says. All I can say is, we got here 11 damn months ago, and in the next few years if they dont see change, they can make a change at the ballot box. And they should if we dont produce real results.

Although Newsom doesnt offer a specific timeline, he says this coming year should bring progress as a result ofsteps taken over the past year.

These include releasing $650 million to municipalities to address homelessness, fining cities that push back against affordable housing initiatives, and signing 22 wildfire-related bills while increasing oversight over bankrupt utility PG&E, whose aging and faulty lines have sparked some of the deadly fires.

Newsom also points out that in his first yearhe has signed numerous laws that are in keeping with Californias progressive political track record. These include a ban on facial-recognition software in police body cameras, granting sexual assault victims more time to sue and expanding gun seizure rules.

Housing, Newsomadmits, is perhaps his greatest challenge, since it affectsboth the poorand the middle class, the engine of the state's massive economy, which totaled $3 trillion in 2018.

During his inauguration speech, Newsom promised a Marshall Plan for affordable housing, referencing U.S. aid to post-World War II Europe.He vowed to build 3.5 million new housing units by 2025. But in the first half of 2019, California cities approved 11% fewer residential building permits than the same period in 2018, according to a July report from the California Department of Finance.

This recent Santa Barbara fire was determined to be caused by Pacific Gas & Electric power lines coming into contact and sparking during high winds. California's fire season is beginning to extend year round as a result of climate change as well as housing developments that are in area indefensible by firefighters. Gov. Gavin Newsom is appropriating millions from the current budget to reassess the state's approach to mitigating such disasters.(Photo: Mike Eliason, AP)

He now calls the 3.5 million unit figure a stretch goal. Still, Newsom says the coming years should see growth in new affordable housing.

The housing issue, which is so key to that California dream, we have to hit that one head-on, Newsom says.

So we have $4.5 billion from the private sector, including $2.5 billion from Tim Cook at Apple,"in the form of land for affordable housing, first-time homebuyer assistance and more, he says."We put in $1.75 billion in state money. Were suing cities. We also putting up money to help cities plan for housing. Were looking at land-use policies. I hope in the next year or so well see movement, but theres no silver bullet. Nothing happens overnight.

As mayor of the Southern California surf-hub of Huntington Beach, Erik Peterson isnt so sure about Newsoms housing strategy.

Im not a fan, says Peterson, whose city Newsom sued early in his tenure as governor for failing to permit enough new housing.

Under him, were getting a more authoritarian Sacramento, says Peterson. The state says, 'Everyone will do what we say; you need to rezone your suburban neighborhoods to be urban centers.' Well, we get pushback on that from our residents.

Instead, Peterson says, Newsom should worry more about infrastructure and education, which are falling apart, and lets make California business-friendly again. If you have jobs, people can afford the houses.

In the northern California town of Chico, Mayor Randall Stone, an affordable housing developer, applauds Newsom for being the first governor in recent memory to put money and emphasis on housing.

Stone said he pulled Newsom aside when the governor visited earlier in the year to check on the recovery of nearby Paradise, which was decimated by fire in 2018. Stone told him: The reason theres no building of affordable housing is were disincentivized.

To blame, Stone says, are property and sales tax rates "that only go up 2% a year" and do not keep pace with employee salaries and other municipal costs. That often results in city halls being more likely to approve commercial building projects, like shopping malls and auto dealerships, because they bring in more tax revenue.

A homeless man sleeps in front of recycling bins and garbage on a street corner in San Francisco. California Gov. Gavin Newsom served as mayor of San Francisco, and tried to implement measures to help the homeless, even though their population has only grown since he left that office. Currently about 25% of the nation's 600,000 homeless call California home, a represent a pressing problem for the new governor.(Photo: Jeff Chiu/AP)

"But I'm not sure he can snap his fingers and fix that," Stone says. "Theyre longstanding systemic issues.

Newsom cautions that if a Not In My Backyard attitude persists at a municipal level,state-initiated housing assistance is moot.

All this NIMBY-ism, society becomes how we behave, he says. This cant be, 'I got mine; why dont you focus that over there? Weve got to own it. We have to transfer that energy of angst toward a real follow-through. And Im just getting started.

Some wonder where Newsom wants to end up. An entrepreneurial stint running his PlumpJack Winery company aside, Newsom has been in politics since becoming a San Francisco city supervisor at 29. He became mayor at age 36, and lieutenant governor at 42.

Many California political observers consider Newsoms presidential ambition to be one of the states worst kept secrets.

Both the bust of John F. Kennedy that sits on his desk as well asthe photo of his smiling late father William Newsom, a state appeals court judge,with former U.S. Attorney GeneralRobert F. Kennedy, seem to draw an invisible line between the photogenic governor and Camelot. But Newsom consistently shoots down the speculation that he is preparing for a White House run later this decade.

Honestly, no interest, he says.

Indeed, with its 40 million residents one in eight U.S. citizens calls California home Newsom presides over nothing short of a nation-state.

Laguna Beach, California, in the southern part of the state has beaches and weather that have come to epitomize California's mythic charm. But the state is facing epic problems in the form of growing homelessness, soaring housing costs and raging fires, all of which Gov. Gavin Newsom has been tasked to fix.(Photo: TraceRouda / Getty Images)

Despite Trump administration efforts, California still sets its own climate change goals, brokers its own deals with some of the worlds leading automakers on tailpipe emissions, and puts stakes in the ground when it comes to immigration policies such as its recent ban on privately run immigration detention centers.

Our role is potent and powerful, substantively so at this moment, says Newsom.

But while insisting that 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is not on his radar, Newsom said he feels confident about Democratic chances to take the White House in 2020.

Weve offered a lot of different flavors from progressive to conservative, and well be well-positioned to unite around somebody at a time when we need to do so to take out one of the worst presidents in American history, he says.

Newsom was supportive of longtime friend and sometime political rival, Sen. Kamala Harris, including planning an Iowa trip to tout her candidacy before it was scratched when Harris endedher campaign on Dec. 3.

Of her withdrawal, he says simply: She had the burden of high expectations that she set herself, after outperforming many people who have had far more years on the national stage.

Whether it was watching Harris soar then nosedive, or simply tacitly acknowledging success in his first term as governor is key to any presidential run, he says California has all his attention.

This is the office of the governor of California, the fifth-largest economy in the world, he says, looking around the room. Its Earl Warrens office. Ronald Reagans office. Pat Brown, not just Jerry Brown.Its the best job in the world.

Over the past 11 months, Newsom has kept up a busy travel schedule within the state, often away from Sacramento at least one or two days a week. He has visited those displaced by fires up north, comforted shooting victims down south, and talked about water scarcity with farmers in the Central Valley.

What little free time he has back in the capital he dedicates to his wife, filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, and their four kids, all under age 10. To unwind, the governor says he likes to take his kids to the local fish hatchery and, his favorite, the recycling plant.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom takes the oath of office from state Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Gorre Cantil-Sakauye as his wife Jennifer Siebel Newsom and children look on during his inauguration Monday, Jan. 7, 2019, in Sacramento, California. Newsom has been out of Sacramento touring the state an average of a day or two a week since taking office, which often leaves him little time for his family.(Photo: Eric Risberg, AP Images)

Im not sure what it is about seeing tens of thousands of things bouncing around, but you get into that space and relax and zone out, Newsom says, laughing.

But those who know him best suggest the governor relishes negotiating Californias many vexing issues.

Gavins the happiest in the eye of the storm, and thats where hes been all year long, says Nathan Ballard, founder of The Press Shop media relations firm and Newsoms former mayoral press secretary. He recalls the heat Newsom happily took for allowing same-sex couples to marry in 2004, a stand that anticipated a national movement.

The longtime friend and informal advisor says that while its not in Gavin'snature to relax, Ballardand a small group did manage to take Newsom away from Sacramento in October, hauling him off to a rustic Marin County restaurant to celebrate the governors birthday.

That was fun, but he knows that now its time for him not just to survive a crisis, but to make this state a better place to live, says Ballard. And the proof will be on the streets. Simple as that.

Newsom, a self-confessed policy wonk, says he plans to get results over the coming years by learning everything he can about as many thorny California issues as possible.

"Governing is all about nuance, the details," he says. "Simple program passing isn't problem solving. When everyone else is running off to the next thing, I have to dig into it all to be sure we can implement changes effectively. I'm accountable."

That approach has critics like Mathis, theVisalia Assemblymember, shaking his head.

Newsom seems like hes trying to solve every problem in the state by himself, says Mathis, whose fellow state Republican party officials recently endorsed long-shotefforts to get Newsom recalled as governor. He needs to step up and start to delegate authority out and do so by stepping across the aisle.

For Anthony Rendon, who has been Californias State Assembly speaker since 2016, Newsom stands apart from his predecessor Brown, who was uniquely not interested in many issues, precisely because he cares about more.

Newsom matter-of-factly sayshe is not capable of not trying to solve a problem. So if todays critique is were swinging at a lot of pitches, absolutely that is fair criticism.

But, he adds, do I tell a senior citizen, 'Sorry, I cant help with your prescription because my team says I just need to focus on a couple of things'? Do you tell kids, 'Preschool cant be a priority because my communications staff think I should stay on wildfires'? Do you tell wildfire folks, 'Listen, we did some polling, and it looks like this year its got to be housing and homelessness'?

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, pictured here in his office in Sacramento, has been at the helm of state for 11 months. He says he understands critics who say he is trying to tackle too many issues and hasn't gotten enough done to date. But he counters that as governor he is obliged to listen to the issues of all constituents, and vows that change on key issues will come during the rest of his first four-year term.(Photo: Martin E. Klimek, USA TODAY)

Newsoms eyebrows arch. My point is, he says, when you look at those trade-offs as governor, you just know it all has to somehow be on the agenda.

One thing is certain. With a 2020 to-do list as high-profile as Newsoms start building new affordablehousing, shelter the homeless across the state, fix a broken gas and electricity utility, engage the Republican president in battle it will be easy for voters here to keep score.

But what would he say to someone who has given up on California's golden dream and isnt willing to wait for Newsom to polish it?

I would tell those folks I have a sensitivity to that. Theyre not wrong: The median price of a home is comically high in California, he says, veering off into details on his team's deep dives on housing solutions with city officials in Vancouver and Singapore.

But then Newsom resets.

Im empathetic and sympathetic, and its disturbing to me, he says. But that said, I feel for them. Youre missing the opportunities this state can provide. We had a historic decade in venture capital investment, a historic decade of job creation. There is no Trump economy without Californias success. This is Florence in its golden age.

"Sure, there are costs associated with that success, yes. But if we can balance those out, boy, the skys the limit."

Follow USA TODAY national correspondent Marco della Cava: @marcodellacava

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/12/15/gavin-newsom-recall-donald-trump-california-governor/4412013002/

View original post here:

A year in, Gavin Newsom is still fighting Trump. Is he doing enough to govern California? - USA TODAY

Donald Trump’s Afghanistan Pullout Plans Threatened by ‘The Tweet of Damocles’ – The Daily Beast

Posted on by

PARISThe Washington Posts vast investigative report about the delusions and lies of successive American administrations in Afghanistan reads almost like a celebration of superpower humiliation. Drawing on hundreds of internal U.S. government interviews about lessons learned, it would reinforce anyones belief the best lesson would be to get the fuck out. Like, yesterday already.

Certainly the documents dovetail with U.S. President Donald J. Trumps promise that hell be the one to end this endless war. Amb. Ryan Crocker, one of the diplomats quoted extensively in the articles, told me after the series came out, the Post has just helped [Trump] immensely. And sure enough, NBC and other media reported Saturday night that Trump is preparing a drawdown of 4,000 more troops, to a level of 8,000 to 9,000 boots on the ground, with the aim of "ending" the war (for Americans) before the 2020 election.

But is complete withdrawalwhat the Taliban call a full American evacuation really the best option? In fact, the president has vacillated on that score. His preferred option is negotiation, he says. He even invited Taliban leaders to Maryland for his own historic "Camp David accords" just before the anniversary of 9/11, then rescinded the invite and canceled talks amid an uproar.

On Trump's surprise Thanksgiving visit to U.S. troops at Afghanistan's Bagram Airfield, he announced talks with the Taliban would resume. Were going to stay until such time as we have a deal [with the Taliban], or we have total victory.

To achieve that second option, he's hinted at nukes: "If I wanted to win that war, Afghanistan would be wiped off the face of the earth, it would be gone, it would be over literally in 10 days, he proclaimed in July, then said, I dont want to go that route. In September, he returned to the same theme: If we wanted to do a certain method of war, we would win that very quickly, but many, many, really, tens of millions of people would be killed, and we think its unnecessary.

So, what is the madman's plan?

Trump being Trump, he has left the Pentagon, the commanders in the field, and the Afghan government wondering when he will pick up his cell phone, punch in a declaration like the one that betrayed U.S. Kurdish allies in Syria, and let the blade fall that cuts all U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. As counterinsurgency expert David Kilcullen puts it, they all sit under the tweet of Damocles. Even if he then tries to reverse course, as he did with the Kurds, Trump will just amplify confusion, and that is the last thing Afghan policy needs.

Kilcullen, an Australian "soldier-scholar" recognized internationally as an authority on asymmetric conflicts and small wars, worked as an often contentious consultant with the George W. Bush and Obama administrations. He is the author most recently of The Dragons and the Snakes: How the Rest Learned to Fight the West, due for publication in March.

Ironically, since few people have a more granular sense of the problems faced in Afghanistan and their causes, Kilcullen was not among those interviewed for the U.S. governments lessons learned project that is the basis for the Post series.

For my part, I have been of the GTFO school regarding Afghanistan for about 17 of the 18 years since the U.S. invaded. But in phone conversations over the last few days, Kilcullen and Crocker offered several potentially useful insights to the current situation that I think deserve consideration.

They talked about not only what went wrong, but what could still go rightor at least right enoughto support a peace settlement without leaving Afghanistan entirely to the wolves, whether the Taliban or terrorists with global ambitions.

For us to do a complete withdrawal would be idiotic.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Ryan Crocker

Separately, Kilcullen and Crocker said the current level of commitment by the U.S., with 12,000 to 13,000 troops on the ground, possibly being drawn down to 8,000 to 9,000, is about right. So is the greatly reduced American spending. (There is less to steal, says Crocker.)

Kilcullen notes that while each American soldiers death is a tragedy, the numbers are nothing close to the levels of 2011 when there were some 100,000 troops in the country, and hundreds of them were killed. Since 2016, American combat deaths in Afghanistan have numbered fewer than 20 a year. The troops in place are there mainly in advisory and support roles.

The U.S. presence is an insurance policy that is sustainable, said Crocker, speaking before reports of the latest drawdown. Trump, he said, "is a minimalist in terms of overseas involvements. ... That is not a bad thing,[but] minimal is good. Zero is bad."

"For us to do a complete withdrawal would be idiotic given the low costs we have now," said Crocker. "Do we think the Taliban and al Qaeda have become kinder and gentler during their years in the wilderness?

From a Washington policy point of view, defeating defeatism was always going to be tough to do.

Maybe going into Afghanistan we read too much of what Rudyard Kipling wrote about the disastrous British experience there in the early 19th century. The poet laureate of British militarism and imperialismthe author of If and The White Mans Burdenhad a feel for the place and for the cost paid by the British troops who tried to subdue it:

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,

And the women come out to cut up what remains,

Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains

An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.

Blander histories of more recent events are full of lessons learned too late about the intractability of Afghanistans terrain and tribes. In the 1980s the Soviets broke their empire trying to hammer the country into a modern socialist mold. Americans gloated that it became Moscows Vietnam.

The United States, having supported the jihad against Moscow, walked away and watched as the Taliban, the students of radically retrograde Islam, rose to power in the 1990s. Then the U.S. government professed shock and horror when the Taliban sheltered Osama bin Laden, one of many Arabs who had volunteered in the U.S.-backed Afghan jihad.

In fact, we just suck.

Counterinsurgency expert David Kilcullen

After the 9/11 attacks in 2001, if the Taliban had surrendered Bin Laden and his minions their Afghan regime might have been allowed to survive, no matter the cost to the Afghan people. When the Taliban refused, it took only a few weeks of war at the end of 2001 and beginning of 2002 to end their rule and smash al Qaedas infrastructure. That done, there was little semblance of government left in Afghanistan, and the U.S. and its allies, faute de mieux, started trying to cobble things together.

Again, Kiplings poetry about frustration and failure among those who try to build occupied nations seemed as prescient as it was arrogant. In 1899 he had warned that the savage wars of peace may come to nothing because of sloth and heathen folly. And there certainly are echoes of that judgment 120 years later in the narrative developed from documents obtained by The Washington Post.

But Kilcullen, for one, takes issue with the notion that the war in Afghanistan was, from the beginning, unwinnable.

Over the phone from Norfolk, Virginia, where he had been talking at a NATO conference, Kilcullen spoke about Afghanistan with the kind of direct, unvarnished language Americans tend to appreciate from Australians.

From Kilcullens point of view, watching developments on the ground since the early days of the U.S. presence, there were plenty of mistakes, but there could have been much better solutions. The problems lay with the U.S. and its allies and their confused, often self-defeating approach to the conflict.

The Post' Afghanistan Papers series, starting with the headline "At War With The Truth," makes the case that U.S. officials deceived the American public with false tales of success on the battlefield.

"I don't think they were lying to the public, I think it's actually worse than that," said Kilcullen. "We are like a gigantic dinosaur with 60 million brain cells that don't talk to each other and every six months when a unit rotates out or every two years when a policymaker changes we forget everything that we learned and we go back to square one."

Taking issue with those who've written that the war in Afghanistan was "unwinnable from the outset," Kilcullen said. "Frankly, that's a cop-out. The war was not 'unwinnable,' it's still not 'unwinnable,' we're just not winning it. ... In fact, we just suck."

Kilcullen proceeded to cite several granular examples.

It was generally understood by counter-insurgency mavens, for instance, that the war would have to end with some kind of negotiations, but the "kinetic" action didn't support the diplomatic and political objective.

"We have focused on the military defeat of the Taliban and on disrupting Taliban networks, essentially. And then we say, okay now we want to negotiate with the Taliban. Well, we just spent 10 years disrupting their ability to control their own people," said Kilcullen.

He worked closely with Gen. David Petraeus in Afghanistan in 2010 and 2011. "At one point when Petraeus was commander, and it wasnt him doing this, we reduced the average age of Taliban commanders in the south of Afghanistan by a full decade," Kilcullen said. "We took them from an average age of 29 in 2010 to an average age of 20 in 2011. So that means we killed an entire generation of junior and middle level Taliban guys. And then the year after that we were, like, lets start a negotiation process. And the senior Taliban said, 'We cant deliver a peace deal because you killed the middle ranking guys. We dont have a unified structure anymore.' So, our kinetic targeting approaches didnt support our negotiating or political objectives for much of the war."

We basically fixed the Talibans internal cohesion problem overnight with a Hellfire missile.

David Kilcullen

Later, it turned out that Taliban leader Mullah Mansour had been telling his rank and file that he was just following orders from Taliban founder Mullah Omar for more than two years after Omars actual death in 2013. Not surprisingly, this revelation caused considerable dissension, even rebellion, in Taliban ranks and according to Kilcullen they were coming apart at the seamsuntil the U.S. tracked Mullah Mansour into Pakistan and droned him. We whacked the guy, said Kilcullen. We basically fixed the Talibans internal cohesion problem overnight with a Hellfire missile.

Another problem: at the beginning of the war, the American strategy for aid was to go into the hottest red areas to try to build infrastructure, education and prosperity. But that wound up being a thankless task, less effective than going into green areas that could be held up as positive examples.

Kilcullen noted that many of the most-cited interviews in the Post series are from 2015, relating to the surge and its aftermath: historical problems that are no longer relevant.

Okay, I said, asking him the same questions I asked Crocker: What about corruption? What about opium production? What about the huge losses in the Afghan National Army? And is it really possible to negotiate with the Taliban at all?

Tomorrow: Trump, Afghanistan, and the Tweet of Damocles: Part II

Link:

Donald Trump's Afghanistan Pullout Plans Threatened by 'The Tweet of Damocles' - The Daily Beast

‘That’s genocide’: ancient tribal graves threatened by Trump border wall – The Guardian

Posted on by

The Eli Jackson cemetery is the final resting place for Native Americans, war veterans, freed slaves and Christian abolitionists who shaped the cultural, spiritual and racial history of the Rio Grande Valley.

The historic graveyard is next door to the Jackson Ranch chapel, the oldest Protestant church still standing in the valley.

Both sites are only a mile or so from Mexico, on a long and dusty road flanked by sturdy mesquites. This is where, amid local protest and national condemnation, Donald Trump is pushing to start construction of a new border wall, with potentially disastrous consequences.

The wall will be built on top of a levee just north of the 145-year-old Methodist chapel and cemetery, placing them within the 150ft enforcement zone which the government has said it plans to raze. The church and cemetery, which are designated Texas Historical Markers, would be marooned between Trumps wall and the actual border, just to the south along the Rio Grande.

In an effort to stop the wall, leaders of the Carrizo/Comecrudo tribe and activists live in a makeshift tent village within the shady cemetery. For almost a year, they have burned a sacred log fire, ringed by tribal flags.

On Monday, the Washington DC district court will consider the governments motion to dismiss a case brought by the tribe and six other plaintiffs, challenging the constitutionality of Trumps executive orders which diverted billions of defense dollars to build a wall on the southern border by declaring a national emergency in February.

The plaintiffs say the wall would disturb unmarked native burial and sacred sites across the river delta where tribal clans lived, traded and buried their dead for centuries before colonization. The last stronghold of the Carrizo/Comecrudo nation an original Texas tribe whose ancestors have inhabited the Rio Grande Valley for at least hundreds of years was in Hidalgo county, where the cemeteries are situated.

The border with Mexico divided our people and now, this new wall shows no regard for our ancestors, beliefs or culture which are tied to these lands, Juan Mancias, 65, tribal chairman, told the Guardian at Yalui (Butterfly) Village campsite, which is monitored by border patrol agents who frequently drive past. Theyre trying to erase who we are, and thats genocide.

These Indian wars arent over, only the battlegrounds have changed. Now were in courtrooms, he added.

The lawsuit alleges that a national emergency was fabricated to seize emergency powers in an attempt to accomplish a longstanding campaign promise a big beautiful wall that Congress, since President Trumps inauguration, has repeatedly and explicitly refused to fund.

The government claims the constitutional challenge has no merit. The justice department declined to comment.

Just last week, a federal court in Oakland, California, ruled in a similar lawsuit that the president acted unlawfully by using emergency powers to divert $3.6bn in military construction funds for the wall.

The damning ruling, which the government will appeal, will be considered by the judge in Washington when deciding whether to dismiss the Texas case, or let it proceed, and therefore force the administration to provide the plaintiffs with confidential documents pertaining to the massive project.

Details about the planned wall are sparse as the government suspended 28 laws mandating protections and oversight, relating to clean air and water, endangered species, public lands and the rights of American Indians, in order to expedite construction. The waiver includes the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act and Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

Amid growing clamour about the plans, local CBP chiefs in Texas have said the cemeteries will be spared. But in the past few months, surveyors and other technicians have been observed working around the Eli Jackson cemetery, which is manned 24/7 by the tribe and their supporters camped out in the village.

The tribe has filed cease and desist orders to government agencies and private contractors, which stated: We do not want any more division being caused, any more digging of our ancestors. We dont own the land, the land owns us, thats why we lay claim to it. It identifies us.

Yet in what it considers the ultimate injustice, in the eyes of the US government, the Carrizo/Comecrudo tribe does not even exist.

The first documented contact with Carrizo/Comecrudo clans by colonial explorers dates back to the early 1500s. In the 1840s, the tribe fought alongside Texans against Mexico, in an ill-fated attempt to establish the border a hundred or so miles south of the Rio Grande. The Comecrudean language remains alive only through traditional songs.

But for the government, which has used varying criteria and conditions to officially recognize 573 Indian nations, this is not enough.

It can take a million dollars to hire consultants to find the physical documents for federal recognition, which, given the historical violence and displacement, is an almost impossible burden, said Gussie Lord, tribal affairs lawyer, from the legal not-for-profit EarthJustice.

Without federal recognition, the tribe has no official land base and few legal protections, even before the wall and the waiver.

This matters little to Mancias, who says his peoples history and spiritual identity are rooted across the valley. Thats why he has participated in protests and lawsuits to stop environmentally destructive natural gas pipelines, oil production and fracking.

The colonizers cut off our hands and feet, killed us, and took our land, and now the burden is on us to prove we are a tribe. Its the constant connection with our land and ancestors that sustains and strengthens our identity and culture, not what the US federal government decides, and thats what were struggling to save.

Eli Jackson, after whom the cemetery was named, was the eldest son of Nathaniel Jackson, a farmer and devout Protestant, and Matilda Hicks, an emancipated slave, who arrived in 1857 from Alabama as part of a caravan of mixed-race families escaping mounting hostilities against African Americans in the deep south as civil war edged closer.

The Jackson family established a ranch on the river bank, which became an important stop on the Underground Railroad a network of secret routes and safehouses used to help enslaved Americans escape to the free north and Canada.

Nathaniel built a small house of worship on the ranch, which was replaced in 1874 by the existing Jackson Ranch chapel, built by another son, Martin Jackson. The deed is currently held by Martins great grandson, Dr Ramiro Ramirez, a plaintiff, who grew up attending the church and learning about the family history from his grandmother.

The enforcement zone around the wall would extend to the third row of pews in the chapel, which is still used for funerals. This could mean the chapel is marooned in the no-go patrol area or bulldozed.

I grew up believing this would be where I am buried with my ancestors, and my children and grandchildren too. Now what will happen to us? It will be devastating, said Ramirez, 72, unable to stop the tears as he pointed to his future tombstone.

Ramirez added: I come here every week to be with my abuelos, and pray for a miracle, that the president shows a little compassion and understanding. Ive lived next to the river my whole life, this is not a dangerous place, the wall is not needed.

Environmentalists warn of potentially devastating consequences along the Rio Grande a 1,900-mile long international river that divides the US and Mexico, providing drinking water to about 6 million people, and habitat for hundreds of diverse species of birds, mammals, fish and insects.

Another of the plaintiffs, Elsa Hull, 51, lives with her daughters on a three-acre lot a stones throw from the river, 140 miles north-west of Mission in Zacapa county. The planned wall would cut off their access to the river which they use for leisure activities like kayaking, stargazing and birdwatching, disrupt wildlife, create light pollution, exacerbate flooding and reduce the value of her property.

The wall would affect every single aspect of our lives, said Hull, an environmental protection officer.

An entire river will be walled off, it will cause ecological destruction, disrupt communities and wildlife this is a beautiful safe place, people have to stop buying into the hype and do something.

After months of campaigning by the plaintiffs, next years homeland security budget proposed in the House of Representatives includes a clause blocking the use of funds for border wall construction in several areas, including historic cemeteries and the nearby National Butterfly Centre, which is trying to stop a separate, privately funded three-and-a-half-mile barrier on the riverbank.

So far, the Senate version doesnt include the cemeteries. The deadline to agree a compromise is 20 December. Regardless of the bill, if the wall is built on the levee as planned, it is unclear how the cemeteries could be spared from inclusion in the enforcement zone.

As the sun rose over the Yalui Village, Mancias was sleep-deprived and livid about the noisy industrial groundwater pump left running in a grassy plot over the road.

Theyre destroying everything native and natural, he said. Were here to educate people, and stand our ground were still here and not going anywhere, and have a right to speak out. This is our land.

Read the original:

'That's genocide': ancient tribal graves threatened by Trump border wall - The Guardian

Eric and Lara Trump Declare Victory in the War on Christmas: You’re Once Again Free to Put Up a Christmas Tree – Esquire.com

Posted on by

We're well into the 12 Days of the War on Christmas now, where the lead-up to the most ubiquitous holiday in the history of human civilization is punctuated by fears that the same holiday is under attack. The greeting, "Happy Holidays" is not, you see, a small and voluntary gesture meant to welcome many faith traditions to the American experience, predicated on the idea this is a nation for anyone willing to honor the values of a free society. Instead, the phrase is a heat-seeking missile launched at the Yuletide, an insidious plot to erase Christmas from American life.

Luckily, we've recently learned that Donald Trump, American president has already won the War on Christmas. A group of people which definitely exists were trying to stop other people saying, "Merry Christmas," but Donald Trump stopped them from stopping people from saying it. In conclusion, we're saying Merry Christmas again, folks. Yet such is the power of a mass delusion fueled by simmering resentment that somehow, even though the War was won, the defenders of Christmas still feel it necessary to constantly discuss the War, and how there was definitely a real time where you couldn't say, "Merry Christmas" in America.

Just ask Eric and Lara Trump, two members of the extended First Family, who celebrated the victory while holding on to the requisite level of bitterness about the whole thing on Fox News.

This is honestly a fascinating cultural artifact and could, someday, be a tool for historians to try to grasp the currents of delusion and disinformation flowing through the American body politic in this troubled time. For at least a decade now, beginning with Bill O'Reilly before he was forced out amid a torrent of sexual misconduct allegations, The Fox News Channel has been promoting the notion that the radicalsread: Communistsof the secular left were determined to destroy the holiday celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ. Talk radio echoed the chorus. It was a hit for digital outlets as well, particularly in the Age of Obama, when many conservatives began to feel the country shifting beneath their feet.

It was a deeply symbolic battle to maintain the notion that the United States is a nation built by and for white Christian peoplethough the proponents prefer to say things like Judeo-Christian Valuesand that everybody else should just be happy to be here. The attempt to include other traditions via "happy holidays," by decentralizing Christmas for even a second, was seen as just another attempt to undermine the centrality of Real Americans in a Christian Country. As usual, efforts to give more people a seat at the table were seen as efforts to remove the people already at the table, because as the saying goes, when you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. Not that our society was going to arrive at real equality by saying, "happy holidays" to each other anyway. It's really just a gestureagain, to make people feel welcome, at a time of year where we're meant to celebrate our common humanity through hospitality and generosity.

Fox News

It's hard to say whether Eric and Lara really believe there was a time in the near past where folks were attempting to outlaw Christmas trees or eating ice cream with your kids, or otherwise institute penalties for exhibiting Christmas Cheer. The holiday, as anyone with a grip on reality is aware, is alive and well. The default assumption should probably involve a healthy dose of cynicism at this point. For her part, the Fox News host they're speaking with, Jeanine Pirro, was suspended earlier this year for suggesting without evidence that Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a practicing Muslim, held allegiance to Sharia Law over the Constitution. It's clear Pirro has no idea what Sharia actually is, but the subtext was also clear: Islam is incompatible with American values, and Muslims cannot be Real Americans. Do we think this viewpoint is connected to the Christmas meltdowns?

Regardless, these folks have learned intimately the power of resentment and paranoia. They have mastered the art of channeling that fear and rage about the changing world into streamlined ideology and political allegiance. It's way easier than offering people policy solutions that will materially improve their lives. It doesn't matter that Christmas is, like, the first holiday anyone thinks of when they hear, "happy holidays." The phrase is an attack on Christmas, because it does not solely honor Christmas. The offense this caused runs so deep that even in declaring victory, the Christmas Defenders must linger on the outrage of having had to wage the war at all. The nerve of those people.

Anyway, next up: Thanksgiving.

Here is the original post:

Eric and Lara Trump Declare Victory in the War on Christmas: You're Once Again Free to Put Up a Christmas Tree - Esquire.com

Trump files for re-election in politically divided Ohio – WJW FOX 8 News Cleveland

Posted on by

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) Supporters of Republican President Donald Trump filed for his re-election in Ohio on Monday.

Ohio Republican Chairman Jane Timken said the party was excited to file the presidents required paperwork with the secretary of state and ready for the campaign ahead.

Timken appeared undaunted by the prospect of Trumps possible impeachment by the Democrat-led U.S. House later this week.

Look, Ohioans and everyone across this country know the Democrats and their impeachment inquiry its a hoax, Timken said. Theyve been trying to take this president out since he was elected in November 2016.

Timken predicted Trump will be elected because of promises made and promises kept, including on jobs, trade and the economy.

GOP U.S. Rep. Bill Johnson, a vocal Trump supporter, said his 18-county district along the Ohio River has seen falling unemployment and new job creation under Trump. Constituents there are fired up about re-electing the president, he said.

Ohio Democratic Chairman David Pepper said the positive economic picture described by Republicans ignored significant hits under Trump to the states manufacturing sector and negative impacts of Trumps trade war on Ohio farmers.

Theres a lot of people who listened to a lot of promises by Donald Trump and those have been broken, he said.

Originally posted here:

Trump files for re-election in politically divided Ohio - WJW FOX 8 News Cleveland

Donald Trump, Tom Holland and an egg among most-tweeted-about in 2019 – New York Post

Posted on by

2019 was a banner year for the K-Pop band BTS, actor Tom Holland, and a brown egg at least on Twitter.

The social media network has released its annual Year on Twitter report, which features the most talked-about politicians, movies, actors and athletes in the Twitterverse for the year. While some of the results are unsurprising President Trump was the most-tweeted-about politician, followed by Barack Obama but others are downright odd.

The most retweeted tweet was from the World Record Egg, which beat out a BTS boyband member dancing and a tweet by user @Aman9919, labeled Watch at your Own Risk, which featured a group of college students being terrorized by a bird.

Meanwhile, the most-used emoji was the laugh-till-you-cry emoji (beating out the sobbing emoji). The most popular news-related hashtag was #NotreDame (which beat out #Venezuela, #Brexit and #HongKong) and Tom Holland was the most-tweeted-about actor most likely due to his role in the MCU-Sony Spider-Man deal as well as his star turn in Spider-Man: Far From Home (the fourth most-tweeted-about movie of the year).

The full list is below:

Most tweeted-about TV shows

Most tweeted-about movies

Most tweeted-about actors

Most tweeted-about musicians

Most tweeted-about sports teams

Most tweeted-about female athletes

Most tweeted-about male athletes

Most tweeted-about politicians

Read the original post:

Donald Trump, Tom Holland and an egg among most-tweeted-about in 2019 - New York Post

Opinion | Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews – The New York Times

Posted on by

Back to the question of what makes U.S. Jews politically different. Much of the answer is historical memory. Most of us, I think, know that whenever bigotry runs free, were likely to be among its victims.

The Trump administration is, beyond any reasonable doubt, an anti-democratic, white nationalist regime. And while it is not (yet) explicitly anti-Semitic, many of its allies are: Jews will not replace us chanted the very fine people carrying torches in Charlottesville, Va. You have to be willfully ignorant of the past not to know where all this leads. Indeed, its happening already: anti-Semitic incidents have soared (and my hate mail has gotten interesting).

Jews arent the only people who have figured this out. Many Asian-American voters used to support Republicans, but the group is now overwhelmingly Democratic. Indian-Americans, in particular, are like American Jews: a high-income, high-education group that votes Democratic by large margins, presumably because many of its members also realize where white nationalism will take us.

In all of this, Republicans not just Trump, but his whole party are reaping what they sowed. Their strategy for decades has been to win votes from working-class whites, despite an anti-worker agenda, by appealing to racial resentment. Trump has just made that racial appeal cruder and louder. And one has to admit that this strategy has been quite successful.

But it takes, well, chutzpah, a truly striking level of contempt for your audience, to foment hatred-laced identity politics, then turn to members of minority groups and say, in effect, Ignore the bigotry and look at the taxes youre saving!

And some of the audience deserves that contempt. As I said, people are pretty much the same whatever their background. There are wealthy Jews who are sufficiently shortsighted, ignorant or arrogant enough to imagine that they can continue to prosper under a white nationalist government.

But most of my ethnic group, I believe, understands that Trump is bad for the Jews, whatever tax bracket we happen to be in.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Link:

Opinion | Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews - The New York Times

Echoes of the Clinton Legacy in Trumps Impeachment – National Review

Posted on by

Bill and Hillary Clinton arrive for the inauguration ceremonies of Donald Trump in front of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., January 20, 2017. (Rick Wilking/Reuters )

Making the click-through worthwhile: How the Clinton Foundation casts a shadow over impeachment and helps explain why Republicans feel so little pressure to turn against Trump; House Republicans gain a new member with a really unexpected voting record, speculating on the final vote in the House and an examination of the grand reversal of the parties from twenty years ago.

Republicans Look to Clinton When Evaluating Trump

Why do so many grassroots Republicans shrug at President Trumps efforts to strongarm Ukraine into investigating the Bidens? Because they believe, with some compelling evidence, that this is how the game is played that powerful figures in government blur their personal interest and the national interest all the time, with no consequence. The stories about the Clinton Foundation percolated and bubbled up for years but only at the height of the 2016 presidential campaign did most of official Washington notice, or even begin to object. The Clintons never believed the rules applied to them, and they shamelessly defied of previously agreed transparency and disclosure rules.

January 4, 2012, an emailfrom Doug Band to John Podesta: The investigation into [Chelsea Clinton] getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade, taxes on money from her parents . . . I hope that you will speak to her and end this.

December 2012: Huma Abedin is simultaneously employed in four different jobs official State Department employee, adviser to Teneo consulting, contractor to the Clinton Foundation, and privately-paid personal secretary to Hillary Clinton. This made it impossible for subsequent investigations and reviews to determine and verify what purpose and in what role Abedin was in when she met with associates relating to Clinton.

February 18, 2015: Many of the [Clinton Foundations] biggest donors are foreigners who are legally barred from giving to U.S. political candidates. A third of foundation donors who have given more than $1million are foreign governments or other entities based outside the United States, and foreign donors make up more than half of those who have given more than $5 million.

February 25, 2015: TheClinton Foundationaccepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clintons tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration. Foundation officials acknowledged they should have sought approval in 2010 from the State Department ethics office, as required by the agreement for new government donors, before accepting a $500,000 donation from the Algerian government.

April 23, 2015: As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium Ones chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors.

April 30, 2015: The foundation also acknowledged this week it did not disclose 1,100 mostly foreign donors to the Clinton-Giustra Enterprise Partnership.

August 17, 2016: Hillary and Bill Clintons ties to two influential Lebanese-Nigerian businessmen are raising fresh questions about whether the State Department showed favoritism to Clinton Foundation donors.

August 20, 2016: The Clinton Foundation has accepted tens of millions of dollars from countries that the State Department before, during and after Mrs. Clintons time as secretary criticized for their records on sex discrimination and other human-rights issues. The countries include Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Brunei and Algeria. Saudi Arabia has been a particularly generous benefactor. The kingdom gave between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation.

September 6, 2016: State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman gave the Clinton Foundation a pass on identifying foreign donors in its charitable filings making it impossible to know if it got any special favors while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, according to a report Tuesday.

October 26, 2016: Bill Clinton is enjoying the private residence above his presidential library in Arkansas at the expense of taxpayers and his charity foundation a potential violation of nonprofit regulations. The 5,000-square-foot penthouse which sits atop the William J. Clinton Library in Little Rock is largely funded by the National Archives in Washington, which pours nearly $6 million into program and maintenance costs for the entire institution every year . . . Costs are also offset by a $7 million endowment from the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

November 4, 2016: The Clinton Foundation has confirmed it accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar while Hillary Clinton was U.S. secretary of state without informing the State Department, even though she had promised to let the agency review new or significantly increased support from foreign governments.

The Clintons insisted that the large donations from foreign governments and donors had nothing to do with influencing U.S. policy. However, once Hillary Clinton was defeated, donations dropped like a stone: The Clinton Foundations $30.7 million revenue last year is less than half the $62.9 million it raised in 2016 as Clinton was at the height of her presidential campaign. Each of the two years since Clintons loss in the 2016 election has seen the organizations revenue drop to record lows, raising less than any fiscal year in more than a decade a sharp contrast to the $249 million raised during Clintons first year as secretary of state.

Perhaps you think that losing the presidency is sufficient punishment for Hillary Clinton.

But many Americans believe the evidence indicates that the Clinton Foundation offered the worlds wealthy a secret way to buy access to the Secretary of State and potential future president, in hopes of influencing current or future U.S. foreign policy, and that sleazy deep-pocketed power brokers from all across the globe homed in on it like moths to a flame. Whats more, just about all Democratic legislators, the rest of the Obama administration, the foreign policy professionals and think-tank types and a big chunk of the media pretty much just accepted it. Maybe they didnt like it; maybe they occasionally offered on or off-the-record quotes about how the optics looked bad or some other wet-noodle tsk-tsk. But almost no one in official Washington looked at the Clinton Foundation and saw it as an unacceptable form of corruption.

All of it was legal, or legal enough, or in a gray area, and not something any prosecutor wanted to waste time on. (How many juries would convict Hillary Clinton?) No one got arrested, no one got charged with crimes, and Bill and Hillary Clinton got away with it, other than the admittedly significant consequence of losing the presidency that she wanted so badly.

In this light, Trump fans find it easy to shrug off all kinds of allegations from trying to bring the G7 to his own resort, to foreign governments staying in Trump hotels and then gushing on Twitter to suck up to the president, to big checks to Stormy Daniels, to having a bunch of shady felons working on the campaign, campaigns and party committees spending millions at Trump businesses, to allegations of using his personal foundation to promote his own interests . . . all the way to everything with Ukraine. Every Trump fan can easily fall back on, hey, its no worse than what the Clintons were doing, and nobody even bothered to investigate them. Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate Biden, while the Clintons just wanted cash.

Do two wrongs make a right? No, not at all, and I would prefer a world with institutions that rebuked conflicts of interest wherever they found them in the Republican Party and in the Democratic Party, in Chappaqua and Mar-a-Lago, in the Clinton Foundation and the Trump Organization. But as long as grassroots activists feel like one side has gotten off scot-free for unethical behavior, they will convince themselves what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Theres just that lingering problem of whats actually good for the country.

Huge Supporter of Socialist Policies Switches Sides

Rep. Jeff Van Drew endorsed Cory Booker to be president, and he votes with the Trump administrations position a whopping seven percent of the time. He voted to overturn Trumps emergency declaration for border wall funding, to condemn Trumps statements about the Squad as racist, to create a path to citizenship for those who came to the U.S. illegally as children, to block the Trump administration from granting waivers to states regarding the Affordable Care Act, to restore Net Neutrality regulations, against a ban on transgenders serving in the military, to require the president to disclose his tax returns and for government funding bills that did not include wall funding. A month ago, the National Republican Congressional Committee called Van Drew a huge supporter of socialist policies.

And now hes a Republican, apparently almost entirely because he doesnt want to vote for impeachment. No doubt the president loves the symbolism of a Democrat switching sides and the NRCC loves the fact that they dont have to spend money to win back a top-tier swing district in 2020, but . . . how much did the GOP get with this flip?

How Many House Democrats Will Defect on the Impeachment Votes?

The impeachment vote is Wednesday; obviously Van Drew remains opposed and the other House Democrat who voted against starting the inquiry, Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota, told reporters Saturday he will vote against impeaching President Donald Trump. Peterson said he expects four or five other Democrats will do the same.

As of this writing, 60 House Democrats and one House Republican Tom Rooney have not stated publicly whether they will vote for the articles of impeachment.

If that comes to pass, it will be a small victory for President Trump and opponents of impeachment, but youll hear a lot about it. From the Democrats perspective, the impeachment hearings went about as well as they could have hoped but it will leave them with probably 228 or 227 votes to impeach, after 232 Democrats voted to start the inquiry. (Note that Elijah Cummings death and Katie Hills resignation leave two previously-Democratic seats open.) That handful of Democrats who voted for the inquiry but against impeachment think theyre saving their careers, but its easy to imagine that on Election Day 2020, the Republicans in their district are still mad as heck about the vote to start impeachment and at least a handful of Democrats will be still irked about letting the president off the hook.

As noted last week, if one of the aims of the impeachment hearings was to strengthen public support of impeachment, they failed. This morning, the FiveThirtyEight aggregation of public polling finds 47.6 percent support removal of the president, 46.2 percent do not about where its been, or perhaps a little tighter, for the past several weeks.

ADDENDUM: Over in the Article, I note that the parties have really switched sides on impeachment from 1998.

View original post here:

Echoes of the Clinton Legacy in Trumps Impeachment - National Review

Donald Trump Wanted Another Roy Cohn. He Got Bill Barr. – The New York Times

Posted on by

President Trump famously asked, Wheres my Roy Cohn? Demanding a stand-in for his old personal lawyer and fixer, Mr. Trump has actually gotten something better with Bill Barr: a lawyer who like Cohn stops seemingly at nothing in his service to Mr. Trump and conveniently sits atop the nations Justice Department.

Mr. Barr has acted more like a henchman than the leader of an agency charged with exercising independent judgment. The disturbing message that sends does not end at our borders it extends to countries, like those in the former East Bloc, struggling to overcome an illiberal turn in the direction of autocracy.

When Mr. Trump sought to have President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine announce an investigation of his political opponent, he likely expected a positive response. After all, politicized prosecutions had been part of Ukraines corrupt political culture for years.

On Monday, when Michael Horowitz, inspector general for the Justice Department, released a report that affirmed the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election was justified, Mr. Barr immediately turned on his own agency in defense of the president.

The F.B.I. launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken, he said.

Similarly, Mr. Barrs response to the report from Robert Mueller on Russian interference and Mr. Trumps purported presidential misconduct was to cast doubt on his own staff, questioning their work product as well as their ethics and legal reasoning. Even before he became attorney general, Mr. Barr questioned Mr. Muellers investigation of the president for obstruction of justice in a 19-page legal memo he volunteered to the administration.

And where he could have neutrally passed Mr. Muellers findings to Congress, he instead took the widely criticized and unusual step of making and announcing his own legal conclusions about Mr. Muellers obstruction inquiry. He followed up this Cohn-like behavior with testimony in the Senate, where he insinuated that the United States government spied on the Trump campaign. Mr. Barr apparently has decided that, like Cohn, he serves Donald Trump and not the Constitution or the United States, flouting his oath of office and corrupting the mission of the Justice Department.

In the past, the United States has, however imperfectly, advanced the rule of law and supported governments committed to an anti-corruption agenda. According to George Kent, a State Department official who testified in the House impeachment inquiry, Russia sees corruption as a tool to advance its interests. So when the United States fights a kleptocratic culture, it serves not only lofty humanitarian goals but also our national security. Mr. Zelensky ran a campaign and was elected on a platform that put fighting corruption at the forefront. He should have received extensive and unmitigated support in that effort.

In the former East Bloc countries, despite the hopes of many for a post-Soviet era where democracy would thrive, the parties and politicians in power have consolidated their control in a manner reminiscent of the Communist era.

Autocrats understand that supposedly independent institutions such as the courts and prosecutors are vital to locking in their power. In Romania, a crusading anti-corruption prosecutor who was investigating top government officials was fired at the same time as the government advanced legislation to cabin the ability of other prosecutors to pursue cases against political officials. Polands right-wing populist Law and Justice Party has attacked the independent judiciary and has sought to remove judges who do not follow the party line. Hungary has followed suit. Bulgarian politicians have persecuted civil society groups that have criticized their abandonment of the rule of law.

While several United States ambassadors have attempted to support anti-corruption efforts in the region, they have been continuously undercut by the White House. In addition to firing Marie Yovanovitch, who served as ambassador to Ukraine, in part because of her anti-corruption focus, Mr. Trump hosted Viktor Orban of Hungary in Washington over the objections of national security officials who did not want to elevate a corrupt leader with close ties to the Kremlin; furthermore, the president has tried to cut funding for anti-corruption programs.

Mr. Trumps focus on cultivating foreign leaders who can help his re-election has overwhelmed our national interests in the region. That is certainly a shame for the anti-corruption activists in former Communist countries who have depended on our help and leadership since the end of the Soviet era and who have seen their justice system turned to serve political ends.

But for Americans, we must worry that we face a similar domestic situation: a prosecutor who bends to the political needs of the president. Mr. Trump may no longer be able to call on Roy Cohn, but he now has a stronger ally in the United States top law-enforcement official, who thinks that if the president does it, it cant be wrong.

View post:

Donald Trump Wanted Another Roy Cohn. He Got Bill Barr. - The New York Times

Trumps Hanukkah Party Featured a Pastor Who Said Jews Are Going to Hell – Vanity Fair

Posted on by

In a 2009 sermon, Jeffress expounded on his bigotry, saying: Not only do religions like Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, not only do they lead people away from the true God, they lead people to an eternity of separation from God in hell. You know, Jesus was very clear. Hell is not only going to be populated by murderers and drug dealers and child abusers. Hell is going to be filled with good religious people who have rejected the truth of Christ.

For his part, Trump is obviously drawn to Jeffress thanks to the pastors ardent support. In September he claimed that impeaching Trump would lead to a Civil War-like fracture, and earlier this year he made it known that evangelicals who dont support the president are spineless morons.

More Great Stories From Vanity Fair

Wildly incriminating emails show the White House knew Trump was extorting Ukraine Is Rudy Giuliani truly in trouble? The secret life and strange death of Quadriga cofounder, Gerald Cotten The hunt for Jeffrey Epsteins alleged enabler Ghislaine Maxwell New polling suggests Democrats impeachment push could alienate key voters From the Archive: Inside Jeffrey Wigands epic multibillion-dollar struggle

Looking for more? Sign up for our daily Hive newsletter and never miss a story.

See the original post:

Trumps Hanukkah Party Featured a Pastor Who Said Jews Are Going to Hell - Vanity Fair

Jordan Brand’s Biggest Hater Admits It Had a Great Year – Complex

Posted on by

I never thought Id admit this, but its been a banner year for Jordan Brand. A past 12 months that should add a seventh ring to the collection. So here we are, the number one Jordan hater saying the brand has done a good job this year. Howd we get here? Lets take a look at this year.

My disdain for Jordan Brand is overstated at timesI dont hate the sneakers. Theyre just not for me. Its the same as how a pair of suede Adidas might be for the guy who loves Air Jordan XIIIssimple as that. I also used to think it was corny, seven or eight years ago, when people thought that if you preferred a New Balance 998 over a pair of Air Jordan IIIs that your opinions in sneakers didnt matter. Im glad things have changed.

This year has been big for Air Jordan purists, and thats something I can appreciate. The Air Jordan IV came back in its Black/Red (we dont do that Bred shit here) colorway. The Air Jordan VI dropped in the Black/Infrared colorway, and it had Nike Air on the back. Tomorrow the Air Jordan XI will hit stores in the Playoff version that Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls went 72-10 in.

Its impressive that Jordans giving its diehard fans, and the general public, the chance to buy versions of the shoes that made Jordans footwear legacy. And the brand is doing it the right way. People often talk about the glory days of 10 or more years ago, but lets be honest for a second. If you were into retro sneakers at that time, you were buying garbage. The Jordans werent true-to-form. The midsoles chipped and fell apart, and the majority of everything Nike made, that wasnt an Air Force 1 or a super-limited Tier Zero model, was crap. Wale even rapped about competition cracking like the paint on Steve Nashs Air Max 90s.

In the past few years the sneaker industry across the boardfrom Adidas, to New Balance, to Diadora, to Nikehas seen an increased focus on recreating sneakers from yesteryear that actually look like they did 20 or more years ago. And its been great. Ive been able to get Adidas ZX shoes that look like theyre from 1989, and I couldnt be happier.

Too many shoes that came out wonky looking, due to the fact that brands were trying to make retros without the proper lasts or sourcing the same materials. Its like trying to redraw a painting off memory, rather seeing the art in front of you.

Jordan Brand has remade its best-known models with accurate insoles, logos, and boxes. If I was into them, Id be happy, which makes me believe its consumers are at the moment.

The Black Cement Air Jordan IIIs from last year were really good, too. People were buying pairs by the boatload. It also looks like the Air Jordan 1 is coming back soon in its 1985 shape, as well as the Nike Air Shipthe shoe that Nike has lied about year after year saying that the Air Jordan 1 was the sneaker the NBA banned Jordan from wearing when it was actually the Ship. Now its coming back in the original White/Red colorway. I wont be buying a pair, but there are people who have wanted them for years who have expressed interest in them.

As the whole retro thing gets older and older, there are people who remember the wave of retro sneakers from the 2000s and want to make it better. They see the mistakes of the past (like releasing the Air Jordan VI with a Jumpman logo on the back) and are taking the time to make it right. Anyone should do that with their job really. Spend the extra effort to make sure everythings correct. Dont cut corners. Its deeper than sneakers, but thats another conversation. Jordan Brand hasnt been doing that lately, and its something I can respect. Yada, yada, something, something Travis Scotts sneakers were popular, too.

See the original post:

Jordan Brand's Biggest Hater Admits It Had a Great Year - Complex

First Look At The Jordan Why Not ZER0.3 – Sneaker News

Posted on by

Russell Westbrook, including his ill-defined and often chaotically described personality, is often difficult to truly encapsulate tangibly, yet with his Jordan signatures, the athlete has done well to give way to personal expression and subtle anecdotes on his life off the court. Though the line has ushered in many an impactful release prior, a new year means a new update, and his Why Not ZER0.3 delivers on the very aesthetic theyve tried to achieve since its inaugural silhouette years back.

Gracing the new decade almost immediately, the pair borrows heavily from its direct predecessor, taking the general shape and ironing out the kinks with reinforced paneling, extra stitching all around, and even a brand new midsole mold. The latter component, with an extra layering topped along the side walls, affixes the most colorful feature across the entire kit: a tread whose patterns and hues display an abashedly retro-inspired mosaic that the rest of the upper then follows quite loosely. Among this, grays see to the most frequent use, diverting in shade across mesh to smooth leather overlay with some even donning a white noise print or circular shapes. Linings adorn with sultry purples, pieces sew together with bright, neon threads eye stays doing the same in their looped webbing while more structural enhancements, such as the added strap across the midfoot or the two-piece tongue and ankle, sit in the background of this aptly energetic design.

Grab a detailed look at the GS set right here and find it rolling out to select retailers and Nike.com on January 2nd.

Jordan Why Not ZER0.3Release Date: January 2nd, 2019Color: White/White-Cool Grey-Wolf GreyStyle Code: CD5804-100

Continued here:

First Look At The Jordan Why Not ZER0.3 - Sneaker News

Closer Look at the Off-White x Air Jordan 5 – Sole Collector

Posted on by

Jordan Brand will reportedly extend itscelebratedpartnership with Virgil Abloh's Off-Whitelabel by releasingcollaborative Air Jordan 5snext year.

According to zSneakerheadz, wavegod_thelegend,andkickwhoshow, two newOff-White x Air Jordan 5 styles will arrive in February. Whilean early lookhas yet to surface, a mock-up photo suggeststhat standard Off-White details will be featured, includingthe trademark red zip tie and "AIR" branding printed on the midsole. If thereports prove to be true, this will mark the second Off-White x Air Jordan model to get a retail release.

The partnership between Off-White and Jordan Brand kicked off in 2017, featuringthe launch of a remixed "Chicago"Air Jordan 1 as part of "The Ten"collection.Prototypes of collaborative Air Jordan 4s were also on display at Abloh's'Figures of Speech' exhibit atMCA Chicago, but the pairs nevermade it to production.

As of now, twoOff-White x Air Jordan 5s arerumored to drop sometime in Februarybut keep it locked to Sole Collector for updates.

UPDATE (11/20):One of two pairs of next year's rumored Off-White x Air Jordan 5 collab has surfaced. This black-based iteration appears to feature a textile mesh on the upper as well as Off-White's signature "Shoelaces" branding used on the laces. As of now, Jordan Brand has yet to confirm this latest collab.

UPDATE (11/27):New images of the upcomingOff-White x Air Jordan 5 have surfaced courtesy of solebyjc along with new info fromzSneakerheadz.

UPDATE (12/10):Thanks to Hanzuying, here's a detailed look at the upcoming Off-White x Air Jordan 5 that's nowreportedly releasing sometimein April 2020 for $225, but official launch details have yet to be announced by Jordan Brand. Stay tuned for updates.

Off-White x Air Jordan 5Release Date:April2020Color:Black/Muslin/Fire RedStyle #:CT8480-001Price:$225

See the original post:

Closer Look at the Off-White x Air Jordan 5 - Sole Collector