content stringlengths 186 41.5k | id stringlengths 17 19 |
|---|---|
Today , September 8 , I am holding a prayer vigil and rally for liberty in Grayson , Kentucky . I will call on Judge David Bunning to release Kim Davis on the grounds that her right to religious liberty has been grossly violated under the Constitution of these United States of America .\nWhen I warned that the Supreme Court ’ s decision on marriage would lead to the criminalization of Christianity in America I was dismissed by many as an alarmist and my comments were mocked by the chattering class . Now , just two months after the court 's lawless ruling , an elected county clerk has been put in jail by an unelected judge for refusing to issue a “ marriage '' license to a same-sex couple , removing all doubts about criminalization of Christianity in this country .\nWhen the people of Kentucky elected Democrat Kim Davis as county clerk , the state ’ s constitution affirmed that marriage is between one man and one woman . The amendment passed with 75 percent of the people ’ s vote .\nToday , I ask on behalf of Kim : “ Under what law is she authorized to issue homosexual couples a marriage license ? ” Can you site the specific right in the Constitution ? Is there a statute , passed by Congress that actually says that the five unelected lawyers in the majority of the court ’ s opinion were right to throw out the very definition of marriage and make up one on their own ?\nToday , I ask on behalf of Kim : “ Under what law is she authorized to issue homosexual couples a marriage license ? ” Can you site the specific right in the Constitution ?\nIn the Obergefell decision , the Supreme Court ruled same-sex couples have the right to get married . Whether you personally agree with that or not does n't matter in Kim ’ s case . What does matter , is that the Supreme Court can not and did not make a law . It only made a ruling on a law .\nKim 's stand for religious liberty is a pivotal moment in our nation 's history . Will we continue to pretend as though the Supreme Court is the `` Supreme Branch '' with the authority and ability to make laws ? It most certainly is not . The Supreme Court is one of three co-equal branches of government under our Constitution . It is no more the `` Supreme Branch '' than it is the `` Supreme Being '' with the authority to redefine the laws of nature or of nature 's God !\nWhat we know for sure is that The Judicial Branch is constitutionally prohibited from writing laws , there are religious liberty protections in the Kentucky constitution and Kentucky statute and the plaintiffs in the case did not seek Kim ’ s incarceration . Despite these facts , Kim Davis was thrown in jail for contempt , which means she was given no possibility of bail .\nThat seems even more ludicrous when you consider many of the America 's most evil and notorious serial killers , murderers , rapists , mafia bosses and presidential assassins were actually let out on bail :\n? John A. Gotti : Son of Gambino crime family leader\nAll of these dangerous criminals were given bail . A Democrat county clerk in Kentucky who is a Christian was not .\nNo one went to jail when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom ordered city clerks to issue same-sex marriage licenses in direct disobedience to California law . More recently , No one went to jail when San Francisco was set up as a sanctuary city – sheltering dangerous illegal immigrant felons in defiance of federal law . Not only did Newsom NOT go to jail , he ’ s now the lieutenant governor of the state !\nI am appalled at our government ’ s willingness to accommodate the religious beliefs of all religions , but Christianity .\nWhen I traveled to Guantanamo Bay , I was amazed by how well we treated foreign Muslim terrorist detainees . The U.S. government provides prayer mats and special meals that conform to Islamic restrictions , but we can ’ t accommodate the religious beliefs of a popularly elected Christian county clerk in Kentucky ? We have lost our moral compass as a country when our government accommodates militant Muslims but not conservative Christians .\nAs a governor for ten and a half years , I followed the Constitution of my state and of the United States . The rule of law is a foundation of our democracy .\nBut the reason why our laws are respected by the American people is because our Constitution guarantees reasonable safeguards to protect the rights of dissenters .\nI refuse to sit silently as our Constitution is torched and the courts violate our fundamental rights . We did not fight a revolution against the tyranny of one unelected monarch so we could surrender our freedoms and abandon our Constitution to the tyranny of five unaccountable , unelected lawyers .\nThis shredding of the most fundamental civil rights of our citizens can not stand . I will fight for , and protect , the religious liberty of every American . This will go down as a seminal moment in American history if we do not free Kim Davis now and make sure this never happens again . | allsides-corpus-400 |
Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday voiced concerns about President Trump 's comments on NFL players taking a knee during the national anthem to protest racial injustice , saying Trump should not have the power to dictate who can kneel during the anthem .\n`` There ’ s a part of this story that ’ s starting to make me nervous , and it ’ s this : I am very uncomfortable with the president of the United States being able to dictate the behavior and power of anybody . That ’ s not where this should be coming from , '' Limbaugh said on his show .\nLimbaugh said he believed Trump 's motives were `` pure , '' but he argued that the president 's actions were unhelpful in the broader debate on players kneeling .\n`` Trump is continually tweeting — I know what he ’ s doing , and I understand why he ’ s doing it , and his motives are pure ; don ’ t misunderstand . But I don ’ t think that it is useful or helpful for any employee anywhere to be forced to do something because the government says they must , '' he continued .\n`` We don ’ t want the president being able to demand anybody that he ’ s unhappy with behave in a way he requires , '' Limbaugh added .\nLimbaugh 's comments come after the president said on Wednesday that `` it is about time '' NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is `` demanding '' players stand for the national anthem after the NFL chief said in a statement that he believed that everyone should stand during the anthem .\nIt is about time that Roger Goodell of the NFL is finally demanding that all players STAND for our great National Anthem-RESPECT OUR COUNTRY — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) October 11 , 2017\nHowever , the NFL issued a statement later saying Trump 's tweet was not accurate .\n`` Commentary this morning about the Commissioner 's position on the anthem is not accurate , '' the statement read .\n“ The NFL is doing the hard work of trying to move from protest to progress , working to bring people together . '' | allsides-corpus-401 |
Yesterday , the Supreme Court issued a 7-2 decision in Murphy v. NCAA , striking down a federal law that blocks states from legalizing sports gambling under their own state laws . The ruling is a major victory for federalism , and has important implications that go beyond the issue of sports gambling .\nMurphy invalidates a provision of the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act ( PASPA ) , which mandates that states may not `` sponsor , operate , advertise , promote , license , or authorize by law or compact '' sports betting . A coalition of sports leagues , including the NCAA , the NBA , the NFL , and Major League Baseball , filed a lawsuit arguing that New Jersey 's laws partially legalizing sports gambling within the state qualifies as `` authorization '' and thus violates PASPA . New Jersey argued that that PASPA violates the `` anti-commandeering '' principles of the Tenth Amendment . Under several longstanding Supreme Court precedents , the Tenth Amendment prevents the federal government from compelling the states to enforce federal law , including by forcing state legislatures to enact laws of their own . The Supreme Court majority ruled that PASPA is unconstitutional .\nMore : Winners & losers in Supreme Court sports betting decision : Vindication for Donald Trump ?\nMore : Listen up Supreme Court : Warrantless tracking of smartphones violates our rights\nTo get around the anti-commandeering rule , the sports leagues and the Trump administration claimed that there is a distinction between commandeering and federal laws blocking `` affirmative authorization '' of gambling under state law . By this reasoning , PASPA is not `` commandeering '' because it does not prevent complete legalization of sports gambling . It only bans state laws that affirmatively authorize gambling in some way , as New Jersey supposedly does by restricting it to some types of locations and limiting the range of teams that gamblers can bet on . Writing for a 7-2 Supreme Court majority , Justice Samuel Alito correctly concluded that “ this distinction is empty ” because laws banning affirmative “ authorization ” still violate `` the basic principle … that Congress can not issue direct orders to state legislatures . ”\nJustice Alito is right . The distinction between legalization and `` authorization '' makes little sense , because virtually any law that legalizes a previously banned activity , but does not completely abolish all restrictions on it , can be described as affirmative authorization . A decision upholding PASPA would essentially have gutted the anti-commandeering rule , as the federal government could easily get around it by adopting regulations preventing states from legalizing previously forbidden behavior , so long as the legalization law did not completely eliminate all legal constraints on it .\nThe ruling has obvious implications for sports betting , which states are now largely free to legalize as they see fit . Many may follow New Jersey 's example . Murphy is also significant for state policies legalizing other activities that the federal government may oppose , including marijuana , possession of some types of firearms , and others . The federal government can no longer block state legalization by passing laws that require states to continue to bar these activities under their own laws .\nMore : Supreme Court clerks are overwhelmingly white and male . Just like 20 years ago .\nThe federal government can still ban many such activities by making them directly illegal under federal law . But if it can not rely on the backing of the states and their own laws , enforcing such federal prohibitions in dissenting states can be expensive and difficult . In practice , federal prohibition of gambling , drugs and other activities relies heavily on state cooperation and support . Today 's decision reinforces the constitutional rule that empowers states to deny such assistance by refusing to enact state laws reinforcing federal prohibition . It also prevents the federal government from forcing the states to ban activities that Congress , for political reasons , does not want to forbid directly .\nPerhaps most importantly , Murphy v. NCAA makes clear that a solid majority of the Court is strongly committed to the anti-commandeering principle . The majority includes both the conservative justices and two liberals ( Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan ) . That bodes well for state efforts to oppose commandeering ( and perhaps other types of federal coercion ) in other areas . The most notable current examples are the sanctuary cities cases , in which the Trump administration has been trying to force state and local governments to assist federal efforts to deport undocumented immigrants .\nLegal battles over federalism will surely continue . We are still a long way from where we should be on enforcing constitutional constraints on federal power . But today 's ruling is an important step in the right direction .\nIlya Somin is a law professor at George Mason University , and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute . He is the author of Democracy and Political Ignorance : Why Smaller Government is Smarter . | allsides-corpus-402 |
“ “ I have never been in a more hostile , manipulative , passive-aggressive environment … and I worked in politics . ” ”\nThat ’ s Julia Payne , a former vice president of communications with Washington , D.C. ’ s , NFL team , quoted in a Washington Post report late Thursday describing a “ nightmare ” workplace for women amid a team culture of misogyny and rampant sexual harassment .\nFifteen women told the Post they were harassed while working in the NFL team ’ s front office between 2006 and 2019 , 14 of whom requested anonymity because they were fearful of legal reprisals from the team . The Post cited interviews with more than 40 current and former team employees , as well as internal documents and text messages .\nSee also : Two ways Washington changing its ‘ Redskins ’ nickname could make the team money\nOne woman who agreed to be named , former marketing coordinator Emily Applegate , told the Post she cried at work daily due to the constant harassment and verbal abuse she and other women experienced from top team executives , and the indifference she received after she complained .\n“ It was the most miserable experience of my life , ” she said . “ And we all tolerated it , because we knew if we complained — and they reminded us of this — there were 1,000 people out there who would take our job in a heartbeat . ”\nApplegate and the other women gave the Post numerous examples of receiving unwelcome sexual comments or overtures , and being told to wear revealing clothing and to flirt with clients . “ I was propositioned basically every day at training camp , ” one woman told the Post , claiming a coach and staffers invited her to their hotel rooms .\nThree male members of the team ’ s front office have left their jobs in the past week , all of whom were named in the Post report . Two other executives who were named left their jobs in 2015 and 2018 .\nThe team said Thursday it has hired a law firm to review the allegations .\nWhile team owner Daniel Snyder was not accused of harassment , many of the women said he set a poor example and tolerated a toxic corporate atmosphere , claiming he verbally abused top executives , even allegedly forcing a male executive to do cartwheels for his entertainment during a staff meeting .\nA number of women said their experiences with the team ruined lifelong ambitions . “ I am done with the NFL , ” one anonymous woman told the Post , saying it “ has killed any dream of a career in pro sports . ”\nLast week , the team dropped its longtime nickname following decades of complaints that it was racist , following a revolt by team sponsors . | allsides-corpus-403 |
The 2018 women 's U.S. Open final ended in unsettling fashion and controversy Saturday night , with both the winner and loser choking back sobs after an explosive sequence of events unlike anything witnessed in recent memory . Serena Williams was defeated in two sets by 20-year-old Japanese player Naomi Osaka , narrowly missing a chance to tie the all-time record for Grand Slam singles titles .\nWilliams ' defeat came after she was issued a questionable code violation for receiving coaching . She was then docked a point for breaking her racket , followed by a pivotal penalty in which she gave up a game because she accused the chair umpire of lying .\nRarely , if ever , have we seen Serena Williams , arguably the best player to ever step on the court , reduced to tears during a match . We 've seen her fiery . We 've seen her enraged . But eye filled with tears , voice cracking , as she defiantly defends her position and demands the respect she has more than earned ? This was new .\nSparring repeatedly with chair umpire Carlos Ramos , Williams refused to back down , and in doing so , highlighted the double standard in expectations and discipline that exists for men and women on the biggest stages in professional tennis . Several of her male peers took to Twitter to lament the unfortunate discrepancy .\nWorst refereeing I ’ ve ever seen ...... the worst ! ! ! — andyroddick ( @ andyroddick ) September 8 , 2018\nI will admit I have said worse and not gotten penalized . And I ’ ve also been given a “ soft warning ” by the ump where they tell you knock it off or I will have to give you a violation . He should have at least given her that courtesy . Sad to mar a well played final that way . https : //t.co/xhBzFZX8Wq — James Blake ( @ JRBlake ) September 9 , 2018\nNo matter how you think professional athletes should behave , Williams is right to be angry . Male players are often excused — celebrated , even — for putting their emotions on display in the heat of the moment . In fact , Ramos — the very same umpire who penalized Williams a game for calling him a `` thief '' and accusing him of lying — has tolerated similar , and arguably worse , outbursts from male players on numerous occasions .\nAt the 2016 French Open , Australian player Nick Kyrgios blew up at Ramos after he was given a warning for raising his voice at a ballboy . `` That 's bulls * * t. Are you kidding ? '' Kyrgios shouted at the official . `` Bulls * * t , f * * * ing bulls * * t. '' He was given neither a point penalty , nor a game penalty .\nAt the 2017 French Open , former world No . 1 Rafael Nadal threatened Ramos , `` Give me the warnings you can , because you will not referee me anymore , '' he said . Nadal referenced his comments in a post-match press conference . No penalties were given .\n“ Give me the warnings you can because you will not referee me any more. ” Rafael Nadal to Carlos Ramos . Not surprisingly , no point taken against Nadal . Thanks Ramos and @ usopen for this master class on what it costs to be an assertive black woman . https : //t.co/GFchpFmiga — AnnieEllison ( @ AnnieEllison ) September 8 , 2018\nThat same tournament , defending champion Novak Djokovic got into an impassioned argument with Ramos , approaching the chair to tell him , `` You 're losing your mind . '' The skirmish came after Djokovic was docked a first serve for taking too long in the fourth set . He glowered at Ramos , motioned with his racket while uttering something in Serbian , then approached the chair to call the official 's sanity into question .\nWhile Djokovic was issued a warning for unsportsmanlike conduct , he was never officially penalized and ultimately went on to stage a five-set comeback . Perhaps Ramos considered Djokovic and Nadal 's outbursts as somehow less offensive than that of Serena Williams . Perhaps there is some sort of subconscious bias at play . But these sort of double standards extend far beyond a single chair umpire . They have been rampant for decades .\nDuring a semifinals match at the 2016 Cincinnati Masters in Ohio , British tennis star Andy Murray quite literally kicked a ball at the chair umpire 's head . And despite the ATP rulebook clearly stating that `` players shall not violently , dangerously or with anger hit , kick or throw a tennis ball while on the grounds of the tournament site except in the reasonable pursuit of a point during a match , '' Murray was not disqualified . The umpire simply hit him with a pointed look and Murray went on to win the match , advancing to the final .\nAt the 1991 U.S. Open , five-time champion Jimmy Connors got into a series of heated exchanges with chair umpire David Littlefield . Connors called Littlefield 's decisions `` bull crap '' and repeatedly shouted that Littlefield himself was `` an abortion . '' After each of Connors ' tirades , the crowd can be heard enthusiastically cheering along with him . Littlefield can be seen raising his eyebrows , occasionally extending prolonged , disapproving glances in Connors ' direction , but otherwise remaining measured and letting the outbursts slide . No penalties are given . No points taken . No games sacrificed . Connors goes on to win the match .\nPerhaps even more indicative of the gender disparity in this arena , is the fact that , at the start of the match , the CBS Sports commentator can be heard nonchalantly predicting , `` There will be some shouting and some emotional moments in this one . ''\nFor male players fired up by the heat of competition , this sort of behavior is simply shrugged off as normal . A testosterone-driven reality of the game . If you are one of the world 's top athletes , you have spent your entire life preparing for the highest level of competition . You have pushed your body to its limit . Of course you will become emotional when a pivotal point is on the line . Of course you will shout and call the umpire names . Those very same qualities got you to the top in the first place .\nIn fact , trash-talking is tolerated among male athletes in all sports . For athletes like MMA fighter Conor McGregor and NBA forward Draymond Green , it 's become an integral part of their persona . But when Hope Solo called the Swedish national team `` a bunch of cowards '' after a heated Women 's World Cup match , she was banned from U.S. soccer . Male athletes have done far worse and are still allowed to return . Numerous NFL players like Adrian Peterson , Michael Vick and Ray Lewis , have weathered controversies over child abuse , dog fighting and even a murder case , returning to multi-million dollar contracts and , in the case of Lewis , being inducted into the Hall of Fame .\nUnlike Solo , whose entire career and legacy were torpedoed by an instance of disciplined trash-talking , male players who achieve notoriety on the same grounds often go on to fame and fortune despite their unsportsmanlike behavior . What could serve as a better example than the fact that John McEnroe can be heard as a commentator in the Connors match above ?\nAfter years of quietly frustrating women around the world , this year 's Grand Slam tournaments — and the U.S. Open in particular — have thrust the issue of sexism in sports to the forefront . First , there was the controversy over Williams ' medically necessitated catsuit at the French Open . Then there was the penalty issued to Alize Cornet for taking off her shirt in the scorching heat at the U.S. Open , after her male peers were permitted to sit on the court shirtless for prolonged periods of time . Now Serena Williams has been fined 17,000 dollars for Saturday night 's polarizing code violations .\nThe stakes are dramatically high for all female athletes . However , they are even higher for Williams , who is barely a year out from nearly dying during childbirth , after yet again having to go above and beyond to be given equal treatment and receive the medical attention she desperately needed .\nSo , yes . She 's emotional . She 's frustrated . Williams is at , quite literally , the most important and hard-fought moment of her career , with the weight of viral ad campaigns and young players everywhere on her shoulders . The amount of criticism , disrespect and hardship she has overcome to dominate this sport would be enough to break other players , yet she has consistently proven herself in the face of it all .\nSo when she 's accused of cheating , of course she is angry . Who would n't be ? And when that accusation creates a domino effect that culminates in penalties dealt far less frequently to her male counterparts ? Of course she wants to scream at the top of her lungs .\nOn Saturday night , Naomi Osaka may have won the trophy , but tennis lost . And now sports fans across the globe are simply hoping this is the break point . | allsides-corpus-404 |
President Donald Trump was greeted by a thunderous round of applause and cheers on Saturday in Tuscaloosa , Alabama , during the college football match-up between rival SEC teams LSU and Alabama .\n“ I love Alabama , ” Trump said Friday . “ I ’ m going to go watch a very good football game , which is tomorrow with LSU , and it ’ s going to be great . ”\n“ Ahead of an expected visit from President Donald Trump , Alabama ’ s Student Government Association sent a letter to students warning that they could lose their block seating for the rest of the season if they ‘ engage in disruptive behavior ’ during the LSU game , ” The Tennessean reported . “ Jason Rothfarb , the SGA ’ s vice president of student affairs , sent out a letter citing the increased security at Saturday ’ s game between the second-ranked Crimson Tide and No . 1 LSU . President Donald Trump is expected to attend the game , and Alabama is warning fans to arrive early and expect longer waits getting into Bryant-Denny Stadium . ”\nThe letter stated in part : “ Any organizations that engage in disruptive behavior during the game will be removed from block seating instantly for the remainder of the season . ”\nMultiple reporters noted that there were repeated chants of “ USA ! ” after the crowd saw the president .\nDonald Trump and Melania in suite at 50 yard line behind LSU bench . Crowd cheers and chants USA . pic.twitter.com/1HAVzWHZ6s — Clay Travis ( @ ClayTravis ) November 9 , 2019\nAnother video from a different angle showed how the crowd reacted once the president arrived at his box suite to watch the game .\nNewsBusters ’ Vice President Dan Gainor tweeted , “ Welcome to real America ! ! ! ”\nWelcome to real America ! ! ! https : //t.co/Y4oSkEY9WA — Dan Gainor ( @ dangainor ) November 9 , 2019\nThe response that Trump got from the crowd is very different than the response he got while attending a Washington Nationals baseball game late last month , where the fans in the most Democrat part of the country booed him loudly on the same day that he announced that a military operation that he approved resulted in the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi .\n“ His reception at the showdown between LSU and Alabama contrasted with the scene last month at Game 5 of the World Series in Washington , where was booed , and the mixed response to his appearance at UFC 244 in New York a week ago , ” ESPN reported . “ Trump , sitting one tier above the field , waved as fans turned around to look up at the president . He smiled , gave a thumbs-up a few times and threw a couple of fist bumps into the air as the Alabama fans waved red and white pompoms in response . First lady Melania Trump got an equally enthusiastic welcome . ”\nScotty Amos from Bossier City , Louisiana , told The Shreveport Times , “ It ’ s a big game . He ’ s a sports fan . Why would he not come ? The fans are excited . They are his people . Just imagine being a 19-year-old and getting to play in this game and the leader of the free world is here to watch you play . He wants to be here — to experience a big-time college game like this . ”\nWhen news broke that Trump was attending the game , LSU quarterback Joe Burrow said , “ You know , regardless of your political views , that ’ s pretty cool having the president at the game . Doesn ’ t matter whether you ’ re a Democrat or a Republican , the president at the game ’ s pretty cool . ” | allsides-corpus-405 |
The Philadelphia Eagles hadn ’ t planned on fielding a 40-year-old quarterback in Sunday ’ s wild-card game against the Seattle Seahawks . But after starter Carson Wentz left with a concussion in the first quarter , all eyes turned to Josh McCown , who became the oldest part-time high school football coach to make his NFL playoff debut .\nPhiladelphia lost , 17–9 , but McCown performed about as well as you could expect from a quarterback of his caliber and age ( about as good as Tom Brady on Saturday , anyway ) . Coming into the game , the Eagles were already quite thin on offense , suffering injuries to their receivers and linemen throughout the season , so whoever was under center would ’ ve been dealt a tough hand . As shown with this surprisingly electric option play in the second quarter , head coach Doug Pederson placed no limitations on McCown—except for , you know , the fact that he ’ s 40 and had never been in the playoffs before .\nMcCown was 18-for-24 for 174 passing yards and no touchdowns or turnovers . The Eagles had a chance at a game-tying drive before the two-minute warning , but McCown was sacked on fourth down and that was basically that . Despite exceeding the expectations of everyone but possibly his mother , McCown took the loss hard . It was very clear that he cared .\nJosh McCown & Zach Ertz share a moment after @ Eagles season ends . pic.twitter.com/d2zflRRLtU — Dan Gelston ( @ APgelston ) January 6 , 2020\nWhat ’ s interesting about McCown ’ s case is that before this season , the Eagles basically had to coax him out of a short retirement . In June , he had gone through the standard steps of a tenured NFL player ’ s send-off : a Players ’ Tribune article and an analyst gig on ESPN . The only thing missing was a CBD sponsorship . He signed with Philadelphia in August , when the Eagles were desperate for an able-bodied backup . McCown agreed to join because Philly is somewhat close to Charlotte , where his family lives , and the team allowed him to continue coaching football at Myers Park High School . The Eagles agreed to this because they were using him as an insurance policy , and besides , Myers Park ’ s season ended in November . ( The Mustangs went 11–0 in the regular season but lost in the third round of the playoffs to Richmond . Those teens and McCown can now commiserate . ) During the regular season , as ESPN ’ s Tim McManus reported , McCown usually took private jets on Mondays to help out with the Mustangs ’ game plan and would head back to the high school team on Fridays for the actual games before returning to the Eagles on Saturday morning .\nThere ’ s nothing wrong with any of this . If anything , McCown ’ s competent performance in the wild-card round shows the league places too much emphasis on absolute , 24/7 commitment from its players . Sunday ’ s Seahawks-Eagles game should silence the notion that players must eat , sleep , breathe , and puke football in order to succeed in the NFL . That argument has been a principal excuse that league defenders have proffered to explain why Colin Kaepernick is still a free agent . Kaepernick , observers may notice , does not coach a high school football team . Nor has he threatened to start coaching any high school sports teams should he acquire an NFL job . And yet , unlike McCown , he ’ s regularly accused of not wanting to play in the NFL , this despite his continued avowals that he does really , truly want to be a professional football player .\nThere ’ s no valid reason as to why Kaepernick isn ’ t on an NFL roster . The “ he ’ s been out of the league too long ” argument became void when Josh Johnson signed with Washington in 2018 after a five-year layoff between actual game snaps and led the team to a win in his first start . The “ he ’ s not good enough ” argument has been debunked given that Nathan Peterman and many more bad QBs have been signed and re-signed over the past few seasons . The “ he ’ s not committed ” argument should ’ ve been dead when he held his own workout in November and looked like a fresh-armed quarterback ready to compete for a roster spot . But McCown ’ s retirement and unretirement really seals the deal . If a veteran quarterback can prepare for his primary job while also maintaining a coaching gig on the side , Kaepernick could surely handle his various interests . A pro football player doesn ’ t need to be a north-south meathead with blinders on to succeed , as has been proved not only by McCown but by Kenny Stills ( who ’ s on the Houston Texans and still in the playoffs ) , Eric Reid , Arian Foster , Chris Long , and others .\nThe NFL has gone to great lengths to pretend that Kaepernick—who became the target of every Facebook uncle ’ s ire when he began taking a knee during the national anthem and spoke out against social injustices against black Americans—is being held back only by his own skills . Meanwhile , someone like McCown is able to play competently and maintain an immensely more complicated work-life balance with little to no backlash from NFL personnel or fans . What , pray tell , could be the difference here ? | allsides-corpus-406 |
( CNN ) -- Like misery , failure loves company . Look at the immigration debate and how both liberals and conservatives -- and elected officials in both parties -- bungle it .\nPresident Barack Obama has failed on immigration policy . But now that he appears to be poised to take executive action to fix some of what 's broken with the country 's immigration system , Republicans in Congress sound like they 're about to overreact and join him in that failure .\nConservatives love to stir their flock by pushing the narrative that Obama is a staunch supporter of `` amnesty '' and that the President has always been in lockstep with immigration reform advocates .\nThat 's fiction . It 's been a rocky relationship . That 's because Obama belongs to that wing of the Democratic Party that has n't been interested in legalizing the undocumented and creating more competition in the job market for U.S. workers .\nObama broke his campaign promise to make reform a top issue and eroded trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement by expanding 100-fold the program known as Secure Communities , which ropes local police into enforcing federal immigration law . He tried to fend off critics who wanted him to slow deportations by claiming that he did n't have the power to act `` as a king , '' only to later flip-flop and do just that during his 2012 re-election campaign when he unveiled Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ( DACA ) .\nObama deported a record 2 million people in five years , divided hundreds of thousands of families , failed to deal effectively with thousands of child refugees who streamed across the U.S.-Mexico border last summer and then broke another promise when he said he would take executive action on immigration before the midterm elections but blinked .\nNow , according to news reports that look like a trial balloon from the White House , Obama might , as early as this week , take unilateral action to offer several million illegal immigrants a temporary reprieve from deportation and perhaps even give some of them work permits .\nIf it materializes , I 'll be proved wrong . A few months ago , I said this would never happen and now it looks like it might .\nOptions include some common sense items : Eliminating Secure Communities ; broadening DACA by eliminating restrictions on how old applicants can be and when they had to have arrived ; restating that the enforcement priority should be to remove violent criminals and not housekeepers and students ; and expanding visa programs for immigrant spouses of U.S. citizens .\nBut it 's the final item on the list that could really upset the apple cart : deferred action for parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents , which could result in as many as 4 million to 5 million people getting a temporary reprieve from deportation . When those undocumented college students known as DREAMers first argued for special treatment , the claim was based on the simple idea that they were brought here as children and thus did n't intentionally choose to break the law .\nFair enough . But the same thing ca n't be said of their parents , who did intentionally break the law . Now what ? Is there a new argument ?\nBesides , if Obama offers deferred action to parents , it will validate what conservatives have always insisted about how the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants can be used to keep their parents from being deported .\nThat has never been the case . Parents get deported all the time , and their U.S.-citizen kids either go with them or stay on this side of the border and get put in foster care . Republicans have been wrong all along . Now , if he goes too far , Obama could prove them right .\nIf the President follows through on the proposed course of action , both sides will need to calm down .\nThose on the left should hold their applause . By ending the deportation juggernaut , the President would merely be putting out a fire that he started . Besides , this is just a temporary reprieve that would require the undocumented to surrender to law enforcement officials , get fingerprinted and all the rest . And it could all be revoked by the next president .\nFinally , this is not what Obama promised way back when -- that he would work aggressively with Congress to pass legislation that would permanently improve the lives of millions . This is n't reform . It 's `` reform lite . ''\nYet at the same time , those on the right need to rein in their scorn . In the post 9/11 era , conservatives should n't need a reminder of something they 've been telling us for years : how sweeping can be the executive power of the president . As head of the executive branch , Obama naturally has the power to set priorities for the enforcement of immigration law .\nRepublicans have no trouble deflecting criticism by reminding Latino voters that Obama is in charge of deportations . So , instead of threatening the suicidal tantrums of a government shutdown or impeachment , conservatives should pipe down and let him be in charge of deportations . That does n't just mean deciding who goes but also who stays .\nBesides , Republicans like to talk tough about illegal immigration and the need to uphold the `` rule of law '' but that slogan would mean more coming from them if they did n't always run away from enforcing those laws that target the root of illegal immigration : U.S. employers who hire the undocumented , many of whom contribute to the re-election campaigns of Republican lawmakers .\nWhat Obama has in mind is n't some kindhearted miracle or the coming of the apocalypse . It 's just a legitimate exercise of the power that any president would have under the Constitution and our system of government .\nI know that is n't sexy , or inspiring , or inflammatory . It wo n't help the parties fundraise . But it does have the advantage of being true . | allsides-corpus-407 |
Sen. Chuck Schumer ( D-NY ) wants to shift $ 350 billion from an untapped Treasury Department virus relief program to help Black Americans during the coronavirus pandemic and beyond .\nAccording to The Grio , Schumer said moving some of the $ 500 billion previously approved for Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin would lead to immediate and long-term changes to address systemic racism .\n“ Long before the pandemic , long before this recession , long before this year ’ s protests , structural inequalities have persisted in health care and housing , the economy , and education , ” Schumer said in a statement . “ COVID-19 has only magnified these injustices . ”\nSchumer ’ s proposal would shift $ 135 billion from the Treasury ’ s fund to child care and health care needs of people of color during the pandemic . The plan would also move $ 215 billion over five years into longer-term investments , including a housing down payment program , Medicaid expansion , and other services .\nSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) is preparing to release its $ 1 trillion coronavirus relief package as soon as next week . The plan is a counteroffer to the $ 3 trillion proposal that House Democrats approved in May .\nFor months , McConnell has pushed aside requests for more money , saying the government should wait to see how the first infusion of money helps . However , the coronavirus pandemic has only gotten worse , and now red states such as Texas , Florida , and Kentucky are being overwhelmed .\n“ There were some that hoped this would go away sooner than it has , ” McConnell said Wednesday during a hospital visit in Kentucky , where he urged people to wear masks and social distance . “ The straight talk here that everyone needs to understand : This is not going away . ”\nAs the coronavirus pandemic continues to get worse in the U.S. , McConnell is trying to keep costs down . Both the House and Senate want to help schools reopen , provide unemployment benefits , and ramp up coronavirus testing , treatments , and a vaccine . However , they differ on how much money it will cost .\nIn their bill , the House provided $ 100 billion for school reopenings in an education stabilization fund they say could swell to $ 430 billion to include more money for child care , colleges , and other needs . Republicans are trying to spend significantly less , $ 50 to $ 75 billion , on education .\nThe White House has promised to open up more money for education as it continues to urge for schools across the country to open . White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said on Thursday that reopening schools remains a priority , even if the science says otherwise .\n“ The science should not stand in the way of this , ” McEnany said , adding it is “ perfectly safe ” to fully reopen all classrooms . | allsides-corpus-408 |
Enough women — and men — have chosen political ideology over protecting gender equality , and that ’ s shameful .\nLast week , Virginia became the 38th state to pass the Equal Rights Amendment — which would be enough to finally ratify the amendment . But enough women and men have snubbed it for nearly five decades that now this milestone may already be legally DOA .\n“ In so many areas , we still have a long way to go , ” Democratic Virginia state Sen. Jennifer McClellan said .\nMcClellan , one of the ERA ’ s sponsors , was referring to the plight of women in today ’ s corporate boardrooms and top political offices , but she may as well have applied those comments to the amendment itself .\nThe constitutional amendment , which Congress approved in 1972 , states that “ equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex . ”\nSupporters say the amendment is needed to provide explicit protection against discrimination based on sex . They say federal and local laws providing that protection can easily be changed .\nMore than an optics problem : Trump 's white , male team is a bad look for America and bad for national security , too\nSo , why did it fail to be ratified in at least 38 states by Congress ’ s imposed deadlines in 1977 and , later , 1982 ?\nWomen alone could have made this happen but didn ’ t . Too many of them have chosen political ideology over enshrining the protection in the U.S. Constitution . There is no other way to explain the fact it took 48 years to get the 38th state to ratify the amendment — and only because Democrats took control of Virginia ’ s Legislature .\nCritics , who happen to be primarily Republicans , say they don ’ t like it because the amendment would grant protections for abortion . Further , they say , it is no longer necessary because women already enjoyed “ equal protection ” under the 14th Amendment .\nUnder that logic , women would have no obstacles in the 21st century . But that ’ s just laughable . Women in America still make about 82 cents for every dollar men earn . Men are still kings of corporate boardrooms . No woman has ever occupied the White House . And things aren ’ t much better at the local and state level .\nNominating a woman can be a boost to Democrats : Is presidency out of reach for women ? Warren-Sanders tiff ends silence on insidious myth\nThere are enough women — and enough progressive men — in state legislatures to ratify this amendment and send a strong message . Arizona , Alabama , Arkansas , Florida , Georgia , Louisiana , Mississippi , Missouri , North Carolina , Oklahoma , South Carolina and Utah have not ratified it .\nBut don ’ t hold your breath because enough Republican women are against it , leaving it to the courts to determine whether the ERA is really dead . A legal showdown is expected over how to proceed or whether too much time has passed since the congressional deadline , forcing supporters to start from scratch .\nAnd that ’ s just a pity and shameful , especially this year when the country celebrates the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment that gave U.S. women the right to vote .\nElvia Díaz is an editorial columnist for The Republic and azcentral , where this column originally appeared . Follow her on Twitter , @ elviadiaz1 . | allsides-corpus-409 |
The attorneys general of Illinois , Virginia and Nevada filed a lawsuit Thursday demanding the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment ( ERA ) .\nThe lawsuit , filed against the archivist of the United States in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia , said the ERA should be ratified after Virginia became the 38th state to approve it earlier this month , despite the Justice Department issuing guidance that says the deadline for ratification has long since passed .\nThe vote in Richmond in support of the ERA crossed the threshold necessary for it to be added to the U.S. Constitution and set the stage for a constitutional convention .\n“ At that moment , the process set forth in Article V of the U.S. Constitution was complete , ” the lawsuit reads .\n“ After generations of effort , the women of this country are entitled to their rightful place in the Constitution . This Court should compel the Archivist to carry out his statutory duty of recognizing the complete and final adoption of the Equal Rights Amendment . ”\nThe ERA would add language to the Constitution ensuring that “ equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. ” It would also grant Congress the power to enforce the amendment .\nOpponents of the ERA have promised to fight it in court , citing a 1982 ratification deadline set by Congress . The Justice Department issued an opinion earlier this month saying the ERA is no longer legally pending before the states because the deadline has passed .\nThe National Archives and Records Administration , which oversees the ratification of constitutional amendments , said it would abide by that opinion .\nWomen ’ s rights advocates have led the nationwide effort for the amendment ’ s ratification , arguing it will protect women from discrimination and gender-based violence .\n“ For nearly 150 years , the Constitution did not acknowledge the existence of women . Now , 231 years since our country was founded and on the centennial anniversary of the nineteenth amendment , the American people have shown that they are as committed as ever to true equality by adopting the Equal Rights Amendment , ” said Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring ( D ) .\n“ Women have always been endowed with equal rights , even though our country has wrongly failed to recognize them , ” added Nevada Attorney General Aaron D. Ford ( D ) . “ The gravity of this movement should not be underplayed — today we are advocating for women ’ s rights here in Nevada and all over the country , and we are taking an essential stride towards inclusivity . ” | allsides-corpus-410 |
In our founding documents , Billy Graham explains that ███ will help evangelical Christians interpret the news in a manner that reflects their faith . The impeachment of Donald Trump is a significant event in the story of our republic . It requires comment .\nThe typical CT approach is to stay above the fray and allow Christians with different political convictions to make their arguments in the public square , to encourage all to pursue justice according to their convictions and treat their political opposition as charitably as possible . We want CT to be a place that welcomes Christians from across the political spectrum , and reminds everyone that politics is not the end and purpose of our being . We take pride in the fact , for instance , that politics does not dominate our homepage .\nThat said , we do feel it necessary from time to time to make our own opinions on political matters clear—always , as Graham encouraged us , doing so with both conviction and love . We love and pray for our president , as we love and pray for leaders ( as well as ordinary citizens ) on both sides of the political aisle .\nLet ’ s grant this to the president : The Democrats have had it out for him from day one , and therefore nearly everything they do is under a cloud of partisan suspicion . This has led many to suspect not only motives but facts in these recent impeachment hearings . And , no , Mr. Trump did not have a serious opportunity to offer his side of the story in the House hearings on impeachment .\nBut the facts in this instance are unambiguous : The president of the United States attempted to use his political power to coerce a foreign leader to harass and discredit one of the president ’ s political opponents . That is not only a violation of the Constitution ; more importantly , it is profoundly immoral .\nThe reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration . He has hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals . He himself has admitted to immoral actions in business and his relationship with women , about which he remains proud . His Twitter feed alone—with its habitual string of mischaracterizations , lies , and slanders—is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused .\nTrump ’ s evangelical supporters have pointed to his Supreme Court nominees , his defense of religious liberty , and his stewardship of the economy , among other things , as achievements that justify their support of the president . We believe the impeachment hearings have made it absolutely clear , in a way the Mueller investigation did not , that President Trump has abused his authority for personal gain and betrayed his constitutional oath . The impeachment hearings have illuminated the president ’ s moral deficiencies for all to see . This damages the institution of the presidency , damages the reputation of our country , and damages both the spirit and the future of our people . None of the president ’ s positives can balance the moral and political danger we face under a leader of such grossly immoral character .\nThis concern for the character of our national leader is not new in CT . In 1998 , we wrote this :\nThe President 's failure to tell the truth—even when cornered—rips at the fabric of the nation . This is not a private affair . For above all , social intercourse is built on a presumption of trust : trust that the milk your grocer sells you is wholesome and pure ; trust that the money you put in your bank can be taken out of the bank ; trust that your babysitter , firefighters , clergy , and ambulance drivers will all do their best . And while politicians are notorious for breaking campaign promises , while in office they have a fundamental obligation to uphold our trust in them and to live by the law .\nUnsavory dealings and immoral acts by the President and those close to him have rendered this administration morally unable to lead .\nUnfortunately , the words that we applied to Mr. Clinton 20 years ago apply almost perfectly to our current president . Whether Mr. Trump should be removed from office by the Senate or by popular vote next election—that is a matter of prudential judgment . That he should be removed , we believe , is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments .\nTo the many evangelicals who continue to support Mr. Trump in spite of his blackened moral record , we might say this : Remember who you are and whom you serve . Consider how your justification of Mr. Trump influences your witness to your Lord and Savior . Consider what an unbelieving world will say if you continue to brush off Mr. Trump ’ s immoral words and behavior in the cause of political expediency . If we don ’ t reverse course now , will anyone take anything we say about justice and righteousness with any seriousness for decades to come ? Can we say with a straight face that abortion is a great evil that can not be tolerated and , with the same straight face , say that the bent and broken character of our nation ’ s leader doesn ’ t really matter in the end ?\nWe have reserved judgment on Mr. Trump for years now . Some have criticized us for our reserve . But when it comes to condemning the behavior of another , patient charity must come first . So we have done our best to give evangelical Trump supporters their due , to try to understand their point of view , to see the prudential nature of so many political decisions they have made regarding Mr. Trump . To use an old cliché , it ’ s time to call a spade a spade , to say that no matter how many hands we win in this political poker game , we are playing with a stacked deck of gross immorality and ethical incompetence . And just when we think it ’ s time to push all our chips to the center of the table , that ’ s when the whole game will come crashing down . It will crash down on the reputation of evangelical religion and on the world ’ s understanding of the gospel . And it will come crashing down on a nation of men and women whose welfare is also our concern . | allsides-corpus-411 |
Sen. Kamala Harris launches her campaign for president in Oakland , Calif. , January 27 , 2019 . ( Elijah Nouvelage/Reuters )\nUnmediated mass democracy would lead to the serfdom of minority groups and the smallest , poorest states .\nThe Senate . The Electoral College . The First Amendment . The Second Amendment . The Supreme Court . Is there a part of our constitutional order that the Democrats have not pledged to destroy ?\nThere are some Democrats out there in the sticks — a lot of them , in fact — who simply don ’ t understand the constitutional order . They believe that the United States is a democracy , John Adams et al . be damned , and , in fact , they often are confused by the frankly anti-democratic features of the American order , because they have been taught ( theirs is a pseudo-education consisting of buzzwords rather than an actual education ) that “ democratic ” means “ good ” and “ undemocratic ” means “ bad . ”\nBut the Democrats in Washington are a different story . Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris went to law school . They understand the American constitutional order just fine .\nThe American order is complex — it is much more sophisticated than “ democracy , ” which assumes that nothing stands between the individual and the national state except aggregation , that might ( defined as 50 percent + 1 ) makes right . The American order is based on the idea that the United States consists of many different kinds of people in many different kinds of communities , and that each of these has interests that are legitimate even when they conflict with the equally legitimate interests of other communities . The densely populous urban mode of life is not the only mode of life , and the people of the urban areas are not entitled by their greater numbers to dominate their fellow citizens in the less populous rural areas .\nThe basic units of the United States are , as the name suggests , the several states . The states created the federal government , not the other way around . The states are not administrative subdivisions of the federal government , which is their instrument , not their master . In this , the United States is fundamentally different from countries such as the United Kingdom and Japan , which have unitary national governments under which provincial distinctions are largely irrelevant .\nIn our system , the states matter . Under the Democrats ’ vision , some states matter : California , Texas , Florida , New York , Pennsylvania , Illinois , and Ohio , which , without the institutions of federalism , have among them the numbers and the power to effectively dominate the rest of the country .\nAt the time of the Founding , the people of the smaller states did not desire to enter into a union in which they and their interests would be dominated by the larger ones . The people of the smaller states still do not wish to be politically dominated by the larger ones . For that reason , the interests of the states as such — not mere aggregates of voters — are taken into consideration . The Senate , as originally organized , existed to preserve the interests of the states as such against the opportunism and predation of the more populous House of Representatives — and against the ambitions of the executive , too . Turning the Senate into an inflated version of the House was one of the progressives ’ first great victories against the Constitution of the United States and an important step toward the sort of mass democracy that our constitutional order is explicitly designed to prevent .\nBut the states have other protections as well , one of which is the Electoral College , which helps to ensure that the president — the Founders were right to fear presidential ambition — is not a mere tribune of the plebs , a rider upon “ the beast with many heads ” empowered by the mob at his back to abuse and dominate members of minority groups — smaller states , religious minorities , political minorities , etc .\nThe rights of minorities are further protected — from democracy — by the Constitution ’ s limitations on the power of the federal government and specifically by the Bill of Rights , which places some considerations above democracy : freedom of speech , freedom of religion , freedom of the press , the right to keep and bear arms , the right to security in one ’ s home and papers , etc . One of the main constitutional functions of the Supreme Court is to see to it that the federal government does not violate the Bill of Rights , even when We the People demand that it does — especially then , actually : Rights that enjoy wide popular support require very little constitutional protection . It is the unpopular rights that require protection .\nOf course there were blemishes and oversights . Even the enlightened minds of the 18th century were hostages of their time , and the interests of African Americans and women were not taken into consideration . Those defects were corrected , partly by the shedding of blood but to a great extent by constitutional amendments that abolished slavery , enfranchised women , and brought the American people at large more fully into the constitutional system . The preamble to the Constitution describes a “ more perfect union , ” which is not the same thing as a perfect union . The genius of leaders such as Susan B. Anthony and the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. was that their calls to radical change ran against the grain of American society at their time but were perfectly in tune with the American idea and the principles of the American order .\nThe Democrats ’ calls to radical change in 2019 are precisely the opposite : They are very much in keeping with the transient passions of the time but fundamentally opposed to the American constitutional order .\nThe Electoral College ensures that the citizens in the less popular states are not reduced to serfdom by the greater numbers ( and greater wealth ) of the people in the more populous states . This balancing of minority rights with democratic processes is a fundamental part of the American order ( properly understood , the value of plebiscitary democracy is not substantive — majorities are at least as likely to be wicked and oppressive as virtuous and just — but purely procedural ) , and the Electoral College is the instrument by which that principle is applied to the election of presidents . The Democrats desire to abolish the Electoral College for purely self-interested reasons of partisanship : They think that there would be more Democratic presidents under unmediated mass democracy .\nThe First Amendment ensures that all Americans have the right to engage in political speech . Democrats wish to put political speech under heavy regulation , so that the people holding political power set the rules under which they may be criticized and debated . The Democrats have attempted to gut the First Amendment under the guise of “ campaign finance ” regulation , as though the right of free speech could be separated from the means of speech . It is worth bearing in mind that the Democrats ’ latest attack on the First Amendment was occasioned by the desire of a political activist group to show a film critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the run-up to a presidential election — a film whose circulation the Democrats sought to prohibit as a “ campaign finance ” matter .\nThe Supreme Court stepped in to stop that , finding that the First Amendment means what it says . And now the Democrats propose to corrupt the Supreme Court , expanding the number of justices from nine to whatever number it takes for a future Democratic president to create a majority of Democratic partisans on the Court . They are counting on the same court-packing scheme to give them the power to effectively repeal the Second Amendment without having to bother to propose and ratify a constitutional amendment — a political fight that the Democrats would surely lose .\nWhat the Democrats are proposing — abolishing the constitutional protections afforded to smaller states and political minorities , perverting the Supreme Court , gutting the Bill of Rights — amounts in sum to a revolution , replacing our government with a government of a very different character and structure .\nThey are doing this mainly because the Constitution prevents them from achieving their immediate short-term political goals . And we should be clear about what those immediate political goals actually are : muzzling their political opponents and those with unpopular political views , disarming the citizenry , stripping minority groups of political power , and rigging the political system in favor of their own constituents . They would , if given the power , burn down the American constitutional order and replace it with something closer to ordinary mob rule , plain and unapologetic ochlocracy . The United States is not drifting into fascism or socialism — it is drifting into anarchy .\nThat ’ s quite a fit to throw over Mrs. Clinton being denied her tiara .\nThe Republican party likes to position itself as the defender of the Constitution . But with a few exceptions ( Senator Ben Sasse prominent among them ) , Republicans in elected office demonstrate very little appreciation for the actual stakes on the political table . For the moment , they are more concerned with defending the Trump administration — which , whatever you think of it , is a short-term concern — than with defending something that is far more important , far more precious , and , in all likelihood , impossible to replace . If 2016 taught us anything , it is that the Jeffersons and Madisons of this generation apparently are otherwise occupied , that our political leadership is for the time diminished , and that the institutions the Democrats propose to incinerate could not be rebuilt by contemporary Americans any more than modern Iraqis could successfully revive the Code of Hammurabi . | allsides-corpus-412 |
The Tabqa airforce base , which was previously the Assad regime ’ s lone garrison in the northern region of Syria , has fallen to ISIS rebels , according to the Associated Press :\nIslamic State fighters captured a major military air base in northeastern Syria on Sunday , eliminating the last government-held outpost in a province otherwise dominated by the jihadi group , activists and state media said . Tabqa airfield -- home to several warplane squadrons , helicopters , tanks , artillery , and ammunition bunkers -- is the third military base in the area to fall to the extremists since last month . Those victories are part of the Islamic State group 's aggressive push to consolidate its hold on northern and eastern provinces , while also expanding the boundaries of its self-styled caliphate straddling the Syria-Iraq border .\nISIS ' raison d'etre is to establish an Islamic caliphate across the Middle East ; and in order to accomplish this , they have committed unspeakable war crimes to consolidate power . The fall of Tabqa , therefore , was no different :\nThe group 's trademark brutality was on full display after those victories . They killed army commanders and pro-government militiamen , decapitating them before putting their bodies and heads on display . The Observatory reported similar acts following the fall of Tabqa Sunday . In the neighboring province of Deir el-Zour , Islamic State fighters also have overwhelmed outposts held by Syrian rebels , systematically picking off towns and villages one by one through force and intimidation .\nThis victory is no doubt a symbolic and strategic one for ISIS , although it seems ISIS forces didn ’ t get everything they wanted :\nThe warplanes from the base had already been taken to other locations before ISIS took control , the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported . It said ISIS fighters were seen carrying the heads of Syrian regime soldiers . Both sides were reported to have suffered heavy losses in the battle for the base .\nMeanwhile , this latest development intensifies the debate about whether the U.S. should extend its airstrike campaign across the Iraqi border into Syria . President Obama , for his part , has n't yet made up his mind on this score -- but has n't fully ruled out the possibility , either .\nPresident Obama is considering U.S. airstrikes in Syria against militants of the Islamic State , the White House said Friday . “ We ’ re not going to be restricted by borders , ” said Ben Rhodes , a national security adviser to the president . “ We ’ re actively considering what ’ s going to be necessary to deal with that threat. ” The bombing of targets in Syria would mark a significant expansion of Mr. Obama ’ s three-week-old air war against the Islamic State , which has been limited to targets of the militant group in northern Iraq . The U.S. has conducted nearly 100 airstrikes against the militants in Iraq since Aug. 8 , and some lawmakers have warned the White House against “ mission creep . ”\n“ Mission creep ” is indeed a cause for concern for this administration . But if the airstrikes could maybe make a significant difference on the ground ( as they seemingly did in Iraq ) such measures should at least be seriously debated . | allsides-corpus-413 |
President Obama on Thursday downplayed the prospect of any imminent U.S. airstrikes in Syria , saying `` we do n't have a strategy yet '' and stressing that military advisers are still reviewing options for confronting Islamic State militants .\nAt the same time , the president bluntly ruled out U.S. military action for dealing with another international crisis -- mounting evidence of Russian incursions into eastern Ukraine . `` We are not taking military action to solve the Ukrainian problem , '' Obama said .\nThe president addressed both crises during remarks in the White House briefing room late Thursday afternoon , as Congress prepares to return from the summer recess . In recent days , lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have demanded that the U.S. strategy for targeting the Islamic State be put to a vote on Capitol Hill , amid speculation the military campaign might expand into Syria .\nBut Obama stressed Thursday that `` we do n't have a strategy yet '' and pushed back on reports that , he said , suggest the country is about to go `` full scale on an elaborate strategy '' in the Middle East .\n`` The suggestion , I guess , has been that we 'll start moving forward imminently and somehow Congress , still out of town , is going to be left in the dark , '' he said . `` That 's not what 's going to happen . ''\nWhite House Press Secretary Josh Earnest later clarified on CNN that the president referred specifically to Syria when he said there was no strategy yet .\nObama indicated that for the time being , the U.S. will continue to conduct airstrikes in northern Iraq and humanitarian missions , while working politically and diplomatically to `` cobble together '' a coalition for whatever the long-term strategy is .\nTo that end , he said he is sending Secretary of State John Kerry to the region to build a `` coalition '' to confront the threat .\nReports about a potential expanded military campaign follow calls by some lawmakers to strike the Islamic State , also known as ISIS or ISIL , in Syria as well as Iraq . Military leaders have also said the organization will have to be dealt with in some way on the Syrian side of the border .\nObama acknowledged Thursday that he 's directed military leaders to prepare a `` range of options '' on ISIS . He was heading next into a National Security Council meeting where he was expected to discuss the strategy with advisers .\n`` ISIL poses an immediate threat to the people of Iraq and the people of the region , '' Obama said , while calling for a `` broader , comprehensive strategy . ''\nBut he said he does n't want to `` put the cart before the horse . ''\nThe president said , once a strategy is formed , there `` will be a military aspect to that '' and might be a role for an `` international coalition '' providing air support .\nBut he was vague on the question of what to do in Syria . Amid speculation over whether the U.S. would ever partner with Bashar Assad to fight ISIS on that side of the border , Obama reiterated his view that `` Assad 's lost legitimacy . ''\nHe said the U.S. would continue to support the `` moderate opposition '' in the country , giving people a choice other than just Assad or ISIS .\nSenate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell , after Obama 's remarks , urged the president to develop a `` regional strategy '' for the Islamic State and present it to Congress and the American people .\n`` If the President is prepared to engage Congress with a strategic plan to protect the U.S. and our allies from ISIL , I believe he will have significant congressional support , '' he said . `` But do n't forget , the threat from ISIL is real and it 's growing -- and it is time for President Obama to exercise some leadership in launching a response . ''\nThe president 's remarks also came amid increased tensions between Russia and Ukraine . Officials in Ukraine say two Russian military columns rolled into the southeastern part of the country after missiles were fired at a border post .\nObama on Thursday blamed Russia for the unrest , saying the country deliberately and repeatedly has violated Ukraine 's sovereignty . He said Russia is training , arming and funding pro-Russian separatists in Russia .\nObama , though , said a `` military solution to this problem is not going to be forthcoming . ''\nRather , he said he wants to continue to mobilize the international community to bring pressure on Russia . `` This ongoing Russian incursion into Ukraine will only bring more costs and consequences for Russia , '' Obama said .\nObama said Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko will visit the White House next month , in what would be his first visit since becoming president . Obama said he also spoke by phone Thursday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel .\nIn a written statement , though , Sens . John McCain , R-Ariz. , and Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , said Russia 's actions can only be described as a `` cross-border military invasion , '' adding : `` To claim it is anything other than that is to inhabit President Putin 's Orwellian universe . ''\nThey urged broader `` sectoral '' sanctions and U.S. and European military support for Ukraine .\n`` This is a moment to speak and act with clarity . A sovereign nation in the heart of Europe is being invaded by its larger neighbor , '' they said . `` If we will not or can not defend our own values now , as well as friends who share them , the future will be dark and dangerous indeed , not just for Ukraine but for us too . ''\nAt the end of Thursday 's remarks , Obama briefly addressed ongoing deliberations over possible executive action on immigration .\nRepublicans have voiced concern he 'll issue a mass reprieve in the coming weeks for illegal immigrants .\nObama did not indicate what he might decide but said : `` In the absence of congressional action , I 'm going to do what I can to make sure the system works better . '' | allsides-corpus-414 |
President Barack Obama said the U.S. and its allies must strip away any legitimacy that Islamic State and al-Qaeda claim by portraying themselves as religious movements .\nObama , who has come under criticism from Republicans who say he avoids acknowledging the Muslim roots of extremist groups , said terrorists use religion as a recruiting tool by portraying the U.S. and European nations as being at war with Islam .\n“ We must never accept the premise they put forward , because it is a lie , ” Obama said Wednesday in Washington on the second day of a White House summit on combating extremism . “ They are not religious leaders . They ’ re terrorists . And we are not at war with Islam . We are at war with people who have perverted Islam . ”\nDeadly attacks in Paris , Sydney and Copenhagen by individuals of Muslim background and possibly inspired by the brutal tactics of Islamic State , along with the group ’ s spread in Syria , Iraq and now Libya , have raised alarms in Europe and the U.S. about the danger of lone-wolf terrorists , driven by extremist ideology and difficult to detect before they act .\nAt the summit , the Obama administration is convening representatives of Muslim organizations , law enforcement officials and local political leaders to swap ideas about how to stem root causes of extremism . It also has invited leaders from overseas to take part .\nObama said civic leaders must recognize that Islamic State and al-Qaeda “ deliberately target their propaganda in the hopes of reaching and brainwashing young Muslims ” through videos , social media and other online outlets . He said the one way to counter that is to alleviate the alienation and poverty that are the extremists ’ best recruiting tool .\nIn the U.S. , he said , local and federal authorities must make sure that Muslims aren ’ t isolated and that they are welcomed and integrated into society .\n“ Muslim Americans feel they have been unfairly targeted , ” he said . “ We have to be sure that abuses stop , are not repeated , that we do not stigmatize entire communities . ”\nFormer Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore , who is chairman of a political action committee aimed at electing Republicans , called the conference a “ farce ” in a statement and said the administration should be targeting terrorists rather than offering “ pie-in-the-sky social welfare programs ” to Muslims here and overseas .\nThe administration ’ s strategy is also aimed at drawing in the domestic Muslim leaders who Obama is leaning on to identify and isolate potentially violent extremists . Yet some groups say they remain suspicious about the administration ’ s motivation .\nThe Muslim Advocates , an Oakland Calif.-based group that that was invited to a White House meeting earlier this month , expressed concern that Obama ’ s requests for “ partnerships ” with Muslim community and religious leaders is code for requiring leaders to play a law enforcement role .\nThey also blasted Obama for focusing too narrowly on Muslims , a decision that the group says reinforces a negative stereotype that Islam and terror are linked .\n“ This whole day is focused on American Muslims , frankly , ” Farhana Khera , the group ’ s executive director , said in a telephone interview . “ It strikes at the core of what we are as Americans . ”\nObama is speaking on the topic again tomorrow at the State Department during a session that includes representatives from overseas , including France , Belgium , Mexico and Japan . | allsides-corpus-415 |
The attack on a tunnel complex in remote eastern Afghanistan with the largest non-nuclear weapon ever used in combat by the US military left 36 Islamic State group fighters dead and no civilian casualties , Afghanistan officials said Friday .\nThe attack was carried out in a remote mountainous area of Nangarhar province near the Pakistan border where there had been heavy fighting in recent weeks between Afghan forces and ISIS militants . The Ministry of Defense said in a statement that several ISIS caves and ammunition caches were destroyed by the giant bomb , which terrified villagers on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border with its `` earsplitting blast . ''\n`` This is the right weapon for the right target , '' said US Gen. John W. Nicholson , NATO commander in Afghanistan , at a news conference .\nThe bomb , known officially as a GBU-43B , or massive ordnance air blast weapon , unleashes 11 tons of explosives .\nGen. Daulat Waziri , spokesman for the Afghanistan Ministry of Defense , said the death toll of ISIS fighters could rise . He said the bombing was necessary because the tunnel complex was extremely hard to penetrate , with some as deep as 40 meters ( 43 yards ) .\n`` It was a strong position and four times we had operations ( attacking the site ) and it was not possible to advance , '' he said , adding that the road leading to the complex `` was full of mines . ''\nPakistani villagers living near the Afghan border said the explosion was so loud they thought a bomb had been dropped in their village by US warplanes targeting terrorists in Pakistan .\n`` I was sleeping when we heard a loud explosion . It was an earsplitting blast , '' said Shah Wali who lives in the village of Goor Gari , 15 kilometers ( 9 miles ) from the border with Nangarhar . `` I jumped from my bed and came out of my home to see what has gone wrong in our village . ''\nMr. Wali said dozens of other villagers also came out of homes and later he went near the border , where he met with other residents . He said he could see smoke in the sky .\nThe US estimates 600 to 800 ISIS fighters are present in Afghanistan , mostly in Nangarhar . The US has concentrated heavily on combatting them while also supporting Afghan forces battling the Taliban . President Trump called Thursday 's operation a `` very , very successful mission . ''\n`` I want a hundred times more bombings on this group , '' said Hakim Khan , a resident of Achin district , the site of the blast .\nInamullah Meyakhil , spokesman for the central hospital in eastern Nangarhar province , said the facility had received no dead or wounded from the attack .\nDistrict Gov . Ismail Shinwari said there is no civilian property near the airstrike location .\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nThere was no immediate comment from the Islamic State group on the attack .\nThe Site Intelligence Group , which tracks extremist organizations , reported Friday on a statement from the Afghan Taliban condemning the US for its `` terrorist '' attack . The statement said it is the responsibility of Afghans to remove the Islamic State group from the country not the US . | allsides-corpus-416 |
The discovery of the large camp attacked in October raised questions about the American military ’ s ability to detect and destroy a major Qaeda stronghold in the country , more than 14 years after the American-led invasion of Afghanistan drove out Al Qaeda and toppled the Taliban government that supported them .\nGeneral Campbell said at the time of the October raid that the camp was used by a new Qaeda offshoot called Al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent , or AQIS . Ayman al-Zawahri , Al Qaeda ’ s overall leader , announced the creation of the affiliate in September 2014 largely in response to the rise of its rival , the Islamic State , which is also known as ISIS or ISIL . The wing , which American analysts say has several hundred fighters , is believed to be based in Pakistan and focused on India , Pakistan and other nations in southern Asia .\nAQIS fighters began migrating from sanctuaries in North Waziristan and eastern Afghanistan to the country ’ s southern provinces of Helmand and Kandahar last year , after Pakistan launched a military offensive in the region , said Seth Jones , an Afghanistan specialist at the RAND Corporation . Kandahar and Helmand have not typically been havens for Al Qaeda .\n“ It ’ s been a relatively recent expansion to the south , ” Mr. Jones said .\nAfghan security officials say many of these foreign fighters filtering in are from Central Asia , and in many cases their affiliations are unknown . In the past , some of the groups have been affiliated with Al Qaeda , but there have also been reports of some of these fighters pledging allegiance to the Islamic State .\nOne American intelligence official sought to play down the menace from the new Qaeda offshoot , calling it “ a regional threat that is currently focusing on plotting attacks in Pakistan and establishing a presence in South Asia . Despite its safe haven , the group has not been seen conducting attacks against Afghan or Western targets in Afghanistan . ”\nThe emergence of new Qaeda training camps comes amid a widespread erosion in security in much of the country . “ In the second half of 2015 , the overall security situation in Afghanistan deteriorated , with an increase in effective insurgent attacks and higher A.N.D.S.F . and Taliban casualties , ” the Pentagon said in a report issued two weeks ago , using the initials for the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces .\nGeneral Campbell told lawmakers that the Pakistani-based militancy , the Haqqani network , remains an important “ facilitator ” for Al Qaeda in Afghanistan . The two groups , he said , share a goal of “ expelling coalition forces , overthrowing the Afghan government , and re-establishing an extremist state . ” | allsides-corpus-417 |
America ’ s rapidly-expanding war against ISIS won ’ t involve large numbers of U.S. troops on the ground , President Obama is promising . And it ’ s clear that airstrikes alone won ’ t beat back the extremist group . Which means that if the President wants to have any hope of meeting his far-reaching goal of destroying ISIS , he ’ s going to have to rely on private military contractors .\nAt the height of the Iraq war , these firms hired hundreds of thousands of people : guns-for-hire , IT geeks , logistics specialists , interrogators , and short order cooks to ladle out the slop at the military cafeteria . Over time , some of those contractors became the symbol for everything that was wrong with the Iraq war : hugely expensive , ineffective , and indifferent to Iraqi life . Contractors were at the middle of the war ’ s biggest scandals , from Abu Ghraib to Nissour Square . And it was the abductions and murder of Blackwater contractors that sparked one of Iraq 's biggest battles .\nNone of the five current and former contractors who spoke with The ███ expected a replay of last decade ’ s Iraq war . But they all said a major opportunity was coming—both for them , and for Obama , who could use the private armies as a way to conceal just how many people will be fighting in this new conflict .\n“ Iraq this time around is not going to be as big as it was before , ” said Roger Carstens , a former special operations officer who has served as a contracted military adviser in Somalia and Afghanistan . “ That said , this new war will present an opportunity for the companies that have a resident train and advising capability to contribute to this new effort . ”\nPresident Obama has asked Congress to authorize $ 500 million to train a new Syrian opposition out of Saudi Arabia . That money would be part of a $ 5 billion fund Obama requested this spring from Congress to help train and equip U.S. allies to fight terrorists .\nOne U.S. military contractor working in Iraq who asked not to be named said , “ I can tell you the contractor-expat community is abuzz thinking this will lead to more work . We expect a much larger footprint than he is showing right now . ”\nThose expectations were whet earlier this summer , as ISIS was gaining ground in northern Iraq and the first U.S. special operations teams were arriving in Iraq , when the Pentagon asked military contractors to participate in two important surveys .\nThe first one , issued in July , asked the industry to give a rough estimate of the costs associated with building a new network of ten ground based communications satellite stations , known as VSATs in military lingo . VSATs were used by the U.S. military in the last decade throughout Iraq to provide forward operating bases with secure internet and voice communications .\nThe second one was more specific . It asked for estimates of the cost for “ Security Assistance Mentors and Advisers ” for Iraq ’ s ministry of defense and the Iraqi Counterterrorism Service .\nA Pentagon spokeswoman told the ███ that the notice was not meant to be a request for proposal or the formal opening of the bidding process , but rather a chance to gauge the interest and capabilities of contractors down the road .\nBut contractors tell The ███ that these bureaucratic notices—plus a pledge from Obama to wage a long war against ISIS and train up Syrian and Iraqi fighters—represent a business opportunity for an industry that has shrunk in recent years .\nIn 2008 there were 242,558 contractors working in the countries for U.S. Central Command , the area that includes Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Somalia , Pakistan and Yemen , three countries where the United States has helped train local forces and conducted air strikes , according to the Pentagon ’ s official estimate .\nThat was during the height of the last round of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan . By this July , that number had shrunk to 66,123 , according to the Pentagon ’ s latest estimate of military contractors working in the countries covered by Central Command , with only 14,634 contractors operating outside of Afghanistan .\nBut that ’ s only a fraction of America ’ s privatized security apparatus operating overseas . The State Department also offers billions of dollars to conduct security for diplomats and other officials . In 2011 , the State Department awarded Triple Canopy a four year deal worth up to $ 1.5 billion to provide security for the airport in Baghdad , U.S. diplomats and other Americans in the country . A State Department audit of the contract ( PDF ) found that at a minimum the State Department overpaid for those services by millions .\n“ There has been consolidation after conflicts , ” said Doug Brooks , the president emeritus of the International Stability Operations Association , a trade association for professional military contractors . “ There is going to be business , you could say these are shoes instead of boots on the ground . But as in most cases these are going to be local faces who will be hired by these companies , who bring professionalism and training . They have been there already helping to build up the air force in Iraq . It won ’ t be like the past ten years , but there will be growth in services . ”\nThe shrinking market for military contractors led some of them to seek new patrons . In 2010 , for example , an African based military contractor named Saracen began training an anti-piracy force in Somalia with funding from the United Arab Emirates . When this reporter visited the base in 2012 , it was a privately-run outpost in Puntland with its own electricity generator , barracks , armory with former South African military officers giving basic training to locals .\nBut that experience led to some instability . After one of the South African trainers was murdered in 2012 by one of the recruits , the United Arab Emirates pulled out of the project .\nOne reason why the new war on ISIS won ’ t be like the old one against al Qaeda is because for now Obama has promised not to send ground forces to Iraq or Syria . The presence of U.S. forces overseas presents a number of opportunities for military contractors in providing everything from the dining facilities to the logistical transport for U.S. soldiers at war .\nAlso the budgets to fight al Qaeda and other groups expanded dramatically after 9/11 when many government institutions did not know exactly how to fight the new war . Blackwater—the private military firm founded by former NAVY SEAL Erik Prince—became a virtual extension of the CIA ’ s special activities division working to develop the deadly capability to target and kill al Qaeda operatives all over the world .\nIt was also Blackwater contractors working in Iraq to protect diplomatic convoys that shot what the Iraqi government said were 17 innocent protestors in the heart of Baghdad at Nisour Square . ( This summer , in the U.S. trial of the contractors , former employees of the company said they were responding to fire from the crowd . )\nThe legacy of Nisour square contributed to the decision of the Iraqi government in 2011 to decline to offer legal immunity to U.S. soldiers and military contractors . Carstens said that any new military contracts for Iraq that would involve training units of soldiers would have to include iron-clad guarantees that the contractors themselves would not be targeted by Iraqi courts . “ The companies will need to know that their contractors in Iraq and other places will have legal protections in case anything happens , ” he said .\nIraq recently promised immunity for U.S. troops—and it ’ s likely Baghdad will do the same for contractors too . After all , Iraq ’ s government has also formally requested U.S. assistance in fighting ISIS and that help was clearly going to include military contractors .\n“ They are looking for the next big meal ticket and this could be it , ” said Sean McFate , a former military contractor for Dyncorp and the author of The Modern Mercenary : Private Armies and What They Mean for World Order . “ The things they will provide are logistical support , training or retraining security forces . ”\nMcFate said contractors gave Obama the opportunity to accomplish tasks normally associated with the U.S. military without sending boots on the ground . He said the training missions in particular “ would look like Iraqi military boots on the ground and not the U.S. military. ” But he said , “ It ’ s a political disguise . This is an industry that is a proxy , it is creating the environment of security and protection without too many U.S. soldiers on the ground . ” | allsides-corpus-418 |
Less than a day after North Korea threatened that the United States would pay dearly “ thousands of times ” for pushing new sanctions to cripple the rogue nation 's economy , U.S . Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley told Fox News that America has the iron-clad upper hand .\n“ It was a gut-punch to North Korea , to let them know the international community is tired of it and we ’ re going to start fighting back , ” Haley told Dana Perino Monday on “ The Story , '' in reference to the sweeping U.N. sanctions . “ Every dollar of revenue that the North Korean government gets , they ’ re not feeding their people with it . They ’ re using it toward a nuclear weapons system . Going after these sanctions is going after their ability to build these missiles . ”\nThe U.N. Security Council on Saturday voted unanimously to introduce a set of punishing sanctions that could cost the communist dictatorship some $ 1 billion off its $ 3 billion annual export revenue . The resolution , deemed the harshest since its first nuclear experiment in 2006 , was payback for Pyongyang ’ s testing of two intercontinental ballistic missiles last month , which for the first time showed a capacity to hit the U.S. mainland .\nThat wasn ’ t the only victory for Haley , who was one of the frontrunners in applying pressure to permanent members China and Russia to join them – rather than veto the resolution . She acknowledged that it was no easy feat , but remained confident that China – North Korea ’ s central trading partner – would fulfil its obligations and ensure the sanctions decree is upheld .\n“ Ninety percent of the trade that North Korea has is with China . So that ’ s why they were so important to this resolution , ” she emphasized . “ China stepped up and said , we will follow through on these sanctions . And they encouraged the international community to follow it . When that missile test took off , they felt it in China . And they ’ re disturbed enough to say that they now have to do their part . ”\nNorth Korea responded Monday with threats and backlash , seemingly suggesting that the dictator Kim Jong Un was doubling down on his objective of developing a nuclear-armed missile that could reach the continental U.S. Haley , however , maintained that “ we are not going to run scared from them . ”\nU.S. SPY SATELLITES DETECT NORTH KOREA MOVING ANTI-SHIP CRUISE MISSILES TO PATROL BOAT\nThe ambassador , who has made global human rights at the forefront of her positions since starting the job earlier this year , also characterized the chaos in Venezuela as “ tragic . ”\n“ We are watching a democracy go directly into a dictatorship , ” Haley said , noting that an emergency hearing on the country in crisis was called two months ago after she proclaimed it a “ serious human rights ” concern .\nVenezuela has been in a state of conflict for months , with almost daily anti-government protests targeting iron-fisted President Nicolas Maduro have been engulfing through the increasingly impoverished country . The situation has deteriorated even further over the past few days since a controversial constituent assembly was sworn in on 4 August .\n“ The Security Council ’ s response was that this should go to the Human Rights Council . The reason it hasn ’ t gone to the Human Rights Council is because Venezuela is on the Human Rights Council , ” she added , indicating that the matter will likely need to return to the Security Council . “ We ’ re going to continue sanctions , at least from the U.S. side , but we have to be loud about this . ”\nHaley said that North Korea is the largest “ threat ” facing the United States at this point in time , but acknowledged the “ lack of stability around the world . ”\n“ You can ’ t take your eye off of any part of the world , ” Haley said on Fox & Friends Tuesday . “ We are anywhere and everywhere , which is what the United States Does . When we lead , people follow . ” | allsides-corpus-419 |
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is praising President Trump ’ s “ realistic ” approach to negotiations with Pyongyang , North Korea ’ s leading state-run newspaper reported Wednesday after the landmark summit between the two leaders .\nMr. Kim “ highly praised the president ’ s will and enthusiasm to resolve matters in a realistic way through dialogue and negotiations , away from the hostility-woven past , ” the newspaper Rodong Sinmun reported in extensive coverage of the summit .\nThe paper also reported that Mr. Kim and Mr. Trump “ gladly accepted each other ’ s invitation ” to visit Pyongyang and Washington , respectively , in follow-up meetings from the denuclearization summit .\nAt their meeting in Singapore , Mr. Kim pledged the “ complete denuclearization ” of the Korean Peninsula , although the agreement lacks details of how that could be achieved .\nThe coverage in the state-run paper , including 33 images of Mr. Trump , Mr. Kim and others at the summit , praised the “ will of the top leaders of the two countries to put an end to the extreme hostile relations between the DPRK and the U.S . ”\nAccording to a summary in NK News , the coverage in North Korea highlighted Mr. Trump ’ s promise to end joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises , but didn ’ t mention Mr. Kim ’ s promise to destroy a major missile-engine test site in North Korea .\nMr. Trump , who returned to the White House Wednesday morning , said as a result of the summit , “ everybody can now feel much safer than the day I took office . ”\n“ There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea , ” he tweeted . “ Meeting with Kim Jong Un was an interesting and very positive experience . North Korea has great potential for the future ! ”\n“ This is truly delusional , ” tweeted Sen. Chris Van Hollen , Maryland Democrat . “ It [ North Korea ] has same arsenal today as 48 hours ago . Does he really think his big photo-op ended the [ North Korea ‘ s ] nuclear program ? Hope does not equal reality . ” | allsides-corpus-420 |
South Koreans cheered , Iran warned that President Trump should not be trusted and China said it may be time to discuss lifting sanctions on North Korea as Mr. Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un held an unprecedented summit Tuesday in Singapore .\nAround Asia and the world , many have welcomed the flurry of diplomacy in recent months between the two adversaries , after a year of mounting tension , threats and name-calling . Hopes for peace on the long-divided Korean Peninsula , however , remain tempered by the many failed attempts in the past .\n`` The United States and North Korea have been in a state of antagonism for more than half a century , '' Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said . `` Today , that the two countries ' highest leaders can sit together and have equal talks , has important and positive meaning , and is creating a new history . ''\nChinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang later said that United Nations sanctions against North Korea could be suspended or lifted in accordance with the North 's actions . `` We believe the Security Council should make efforts to support the diplomatic efforts at the present time , '' he said .\nTrump said at a post-summit news conference that he has held off from imposing additional sanctions , but that the US would remove sanctions when the North 's nuclear weapons `` are no longer a factor . ''\nIran , meanwhile , reminded Mr. Kim that Trump should not be trusted because he could nullify any nuclear deal with North Korea , just as he had pulled out of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran .\n`` We are facing a man who revokes his signature while abroad , '' government spokesman Mohammad Bagher Nobakht , according to the semi-official Fars news agency .\nSouth Korean President Moon Jae-in said he `` could hardly sleep last night '' in anticipation of the meeting and expressed hope for `` complete denuclearization and peace . ''\nJapanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe welcomed Kim 's written commitment to complete denuclearization in an agreement signed with Trump at the end of their meeting in Singapore .\nNew Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad , on a visit to Tokyo , said that `` both sides must be prepared to give in certain issues if they expect to reach a good conclusion . ''\nAt a train station in Seoul , the South Korean capital , people cheered and applauded as televisions screens broadcast the Trump-Kim handshake live .\n`` I really , really hope for a good outcome , '' said Yoon Ji , a professor at Sungshin University in Seoul . `` I am hoping for denuclearization and a peace agreement and also for North Korea 's economy to open up . ''\nNot everyone was optimistic . `` Trump 's words that the process of denuclearization on the Korean peninsula will start 'very , very soon ' is more of a wish than a fact , '' Konstantin Kosachev , chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the upper house of Russia 's parliament , wrote on his Facebook page .\n`` The role of the international community is important here . We must take the two leaders at their word and push them further , '' he wrote .\nJapan 's largest newspaper , the Yomiuri , printed a one-page `` extra '' edition in both Japanese and English that was distributed free in major cities 90 minutes after the meeting began .\nPassers-by outside a Tokyo train station snapped up 500 copies . They generally welcomed the meeting as a good first step but wondered if progress would be made on the fate of Japanese abducted by North Korea in the 1970s and 1980s .\n`` I have no idea how much the abduction issue is being taken up at the summit , but I hope it will be a good start for that issue , too , '' said 70-year-old retiree Tomoaki Kenmotsu .\nSakie Yokota , the mother of Japan 's iconic abduction victim Megumi Yokota told Japanese public broadcaster NHK that it seemed like a `` miracle '' that Trump had raised the abduction issue with Kim . `` I feel , we 've finally come this far . ''\nMegumi was 13 when she was kidnapped on Japan 's northern coast in 1977 , on her way home from school . She is one of the 17 abductees officially recognized by the Japanese government .\nMr. Abe , meanwhile , thanked Trump for raising the abduction issue with Kim and said that `` Japan will deal firmly with North Korea face-to-face '' to resolve it .\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nThe hard work remains to come , said Momoko Shimada , a 20-year-old student : `` After the handshake and political show will be the real action . I believe that wo n't be easy . '' | allsides-corpus-421 |
Story highlights South Korea does n't consider latest threat `` new , '' its unification ministry says\nNorth Korea threatens `` all-out war and nuclear war '' on its enemies , state news reports\n`` We will first target and dissolve '' the mainland U.S. , Hawaii and Guam , the report adds\nPyongyang has been defiant in the face of efforts to halt its nuclear program\nNorth Korea has entered a `` state of war '' with neighboring South Korea , according to a report Saturday from the state-run Korean Central News Agency that included a threat to `` dissolve '' the U.S. mainland .\n`` Any issues regarding North and South will be treated in accordance to the state of war , '' North Korea 's government said in a special statement carried by KCNA . `` ... The condition , which was neither war nor peace , has ended . ''\nNorth Korea and South Korea technically remain at war since their conflict between 1950 and 1953 ended with an armistice and not a peace treaty . On March 11 , the North Korean army declared the armistice agreement invalid .\nThis report represented Pyongyang 's latest salvo aimed at South Korea and its ally the United States . Tensions in the area have been ratcheting up for months , with North Korea remaining defiant and , in some opinions , belligerent in the face of international efforts to halt its nuclear program .\nSaturday 's report included a direct threat to the United States , while also asserting Pyongyang `` will not limit ( itself ) to limited warfare but to all-out war and nuclear war . ''\n`` We will first target and dissolve mainland United States , Hawaii and Guam , and United States military based in South Korea . And the ( South Korean presidential office ) will be burned to the ground , '' the KCNA report said .\nIn a statement later Saturday , South Korea did not treat their neighbor 's latest threat as anything new .\nSeoul noted scores of its personnel had entered the Kaesong Industrial complex -- a joint economic cooperation zone between the two Koreas situated on the North 's side of the border -- on Saturday morning with hundreds more set to join them later in the day , seemingly suggesting they were going about business as usual .\n`` The announcement made by North Korea is not a new threat , but part of follow-up measures after North Korea 's supreme command 's statement that it will enter the highest military alert '' on Tuesday , South Korea 's Unification Ministry said in a statement .\nA day earlier , same official North Korean news agency reported its leader Kim Jong Un had approved a plan to prepare standby rockets to hit U.S. targets .\nIn a meeting with military leaders early Friday , Kim `` said he has judged the time has come to settle accounts with the U.S. imperialists in view of the prevailing situation , '' KCNA reported .\nThe rockets are aimed at U.S. targets , including military bases in the Pacific and in South Korea , it said .\n`` If they make a reckless provocation with huge strategic forces , ( we ) should mercilessly strike the U.S. mainland , their stronghold , their military bases in the operational theaters in the Pacific , including Hawaii and Guam , and those in South Korea , '' the report said .\nJUST WATCHED North Korea puts rockets on standby Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH North Korea puts rockets on standby 02:50\nJUST WATCHED North Korean war map targets Texas Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH North Korean war map targets Texas 02:43\nJUST WATCHED Kim : 'Time has come to settle accounts ' Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Kim : 'Time has come to settle accounts ' 02:41\nJUST WATCHED How far can North Korean missiles go ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH How far can North Korean missiles go ? 01:10\nNorth Korean state media carried a photo of Kim meeting with military officials Friday . In the photo , the young leader is seated , leafing through documents with four uniformed officers standing around him .\nOn the wall behind them , a map titled `` Plan for the strategic forces to target mainland U.S. '' appears to show straight lines stretching across the Pacific to points on the continental United States .\nSouth Korea and the United States are `` monitoring any movements of North Korea 's short , middle and middle- to long-range missiles , '' South Korean Defense Ministry Spokesman Kim Min-seok said Friday .\nU.S. official : We 're 'committed ... to peace , ' unlike N. Korea\nU.S. officials have said they 're concerned about the torrent of threats coming out of Pyongyang in recent weeks .\n`` I think their very provocative actions and belligerent tone , it has ratcheted up the danger , and we have to understand that reality , '' Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Thursday .\nSome observers have suggested that Washington is adding to tensions in the region by drawing attention to its displays of military strength on North Korea 's doorstep , such as the flights by the B-2 stealth bombers .\n`` We , the United States and South Korea , have not been involved in provocating anything , '' he said . `` We , over the years , have been engaged with South Korea on joint exercises . The B-2 flight was part of that . ''\nWashington and its allies `` are committed to a pathway to peace , '' Hagel said . `` And the North Koreans seem to be headed in a different direction here . ''\nAmid the uneasy situation , China , a key North Korean ally that expressed frustration about Pyongyang 's latest nuclear test , also called for calm .\n`` We hope relevant parties can work together to turn around the tense situation in the region , '' Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hong Lei said Friday , describing peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula as `` a joint responsibility . ''\nBehind North Korea 's heated words about missile strikes , one analyst said , there might not be much mettle .\nJUST WATCHED Little : We will protect South Korea Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Little : We will protect South Korea 03:52\nJUST WATCHED How real is North Korea 's new threat ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH How real is North Korea 's new threat ? 01:49\nJUST WATCHED B-2 exercise over Korean Peninsula Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH B-2 exercise over Korean Peninsula 02:31\nJUST WATCHED South Korea honors 'Day of Terror ' Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH South Korea honors 'Day of Terror ' 01:52\n`` The fact is that despite the bombast , and unless there has been a miraculous turnaround among North Korea 's strategic forces , there is little to no chance that it could successfully land a missile on Guam , Hawaii or anywhere else outside the Korean Peninsula that U.S. forces may be stationed , '' James Hardy , Asia-Pacific editor of IHS Jane 's Defense Weekly , wrote in an opinion column published Thursday on CNN.com\nTensions escalated on the Korean Peninsula after the North carried out a long-range rocket launch in December and an underground nuclear test last month , prompting the U.N. Security Council to step up sanctions on the secretive government .\nPyongyang has expressed fury about the sanctions and the annual U.S.-South Korean military exercises , due to continue until the end of April .\nThe deteriorating relations have killed hopes of reviving multilateral talks over North Korea 's nuclear program for the foreseeable future . Indeed , Pyongyang has declared that the subject is no longer up for discussion .\nThe recent saber-rattling from Pyongyang has included threats of pre-emptive nuclear strikes against the United States and South Korea .\nMost observers say North Korea is still years away from having the technology to deliver a nuclear warhead on a missile , but it does have plenty of conventional military firepower , including medium-range ballistic missiles that can carry high explosives for hundreds of miles .\nNorth Korea has gone through cycles of `` provocative behavior '' for decades , Pentagon spokesman George Little said Thursday .\n`` And we have to deal with them . We have to be sober , calm , cool , collected about these periods . That 's what we 're doing right now , '' he said . `` And we are assuring our South Korean allies day to day that we stand with them in the face of these provocations . '' | allsides-corpus-422 |
`` The global chorus of condemnation has been loud and clear , '' after North Korea 's successful launch of a long-range rocket that carried a satellite into space , NPR 's Louisa Lim said today on Morning Edition .\nFrom Beijing , Louisa reported that `` Japan was quick off the mark , saying the launch was intolerable and calling for an emergency meeting of the United Nations security council later today . Even North Korea 's traditional ally , China expressed its displeasure , albeit mildly . ''\nAs Louisa added , `` North Korea is banned under U.N. resolutions from pursuing missile and nuclear-related technology . '' But it 's difficult for the international community to deter North Korea , Louisa said : `` There 's little left to sanction , and so far , international condemnation has done little to sway Pyongyang from its path . ''\nNot surprisingly , the reaction to the launch was quite different in North Korea , The Associated Press reports from Pyongyang : `` North Koreans danced in the streets of their capital Wednesday . ''\n`` The rocket launch will enhance the credentials of 20-something leader Kim Jong Un at home a year after he took power following the death of his father Kim Jong Il . It is also likely to bring fresh sanctions and other punishments from the U.S. and its allies , which were quick to condemn the launch as a test of technology for a missile that could attack the U.S. mainland . Pyongyang says it was merely a peaceful effort to put a satellite into orbit . `` The White House called it a 'highly provocative act that threatens regional security . ' ``\n`` The three-stage rocket was launched from a site on North Korea 's west coast. `` 'The launch of the second version of our Kwangmyongsong-3 [ Unha-3 ] satellite from the Sohae Space Centre ... on December 12 was successful , ' state news agency KCNA said . 'The satellite has entered the orbit as planned . ' `` The rocket had been scheduled to pass between the Korean peninsula and China , with a second stage coming down off the Philippines . ''\nAs the AP notes , the successful launch `` was a marked contrast to an attempted launch in April , which broke up soon after liftoff . ''\nThere are elections in South Korea next week , and that country 's Yonhap News says the North 's rocket launch `` took center stage on the South Korean presidential campaign trail Wednesday as both ruling party candidate Park Geun-hye and main opposition contender Moon Jae-in condemned the blast-off . '' | allsides-corpus-423 |
( CNN ) The last time South Korea hosted an Olympic Games , the North went so far in its attempt to best the attention Seoul was getting that it drove its economy into perdition and its people into starvation .\nThis time around , however , the North has gotten the kind of publicity money ca n't buy .\nYesterday , on the first official day of the Games , Kim Yo Jong , the younger sister of leader Kim Jong Un , took center stage when she met with President Moon Jae-in at South Korea 's presidential palace known as the Blue House , where she delivered an invitation to Moon to travel north and meet her brother .\nHer historic visit to the South -- the first of any member of the ruling Kim family -- generated significant media attention , gracing news broadcasts and front pages across the world .\nNorth Korea spent billions to put on the But it was far different 30 years ago . Then , North Korea spent billions to put on the World Youth Festival in July 1989 , a year after Seoul hosted the Summer Olympics . Pyongyang refused to attend the 1988 Games and called for an international boycott , one that was albeit ignored by its communist patrons in Beijing and Moscow .\nThe 105-story Ryugyong hotel in Pyongyang began construction in 1987 but remains unfinished and unoccupied .\nAnd while the Summer Games , precipitated by pro-democracy demonstrations and free elections marked a new era of success for South Korea , the 1989 festival practically bankrupted North Korea months before Berlin Wall fell , taking with it communism in much of Eastern Europe and ushering in the end of the Cold War .\nThe withdrawal of food subsidies in the early 1990s from China and the Soviet Union , the disastrous effects of collective farming and major flooding followed by drought all led to food shortages and a subsequent famine that killed between 2 million and 3 million North Koreans .\nJUST WATCHED North Korean delegation visits Seoul Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH North Korean delegation visits Seoul 01:48\nBefore the Pyeongchang Olympics even began , North Korea has been part of the story .\n`` It 's pretty brilliant , and if it was n't Kim Jong Un and North Korea you 'd have to admire what they 're doing , it 's pretty amazing , '' said David Maxwell , associate director of the Center for Security Studies at the Walsh School for Foreign Service at Georgetown University .\n`` The North is masterful at getting something for nothing , '' he told CNN . `` They 're going to get recognition , legitimacy , resources , without giving anything up . ''\nNorth Korean military parades , fantastical in their displays and sheer numbers , take months to prepare . It is n't clear whether the one that occurred the very day before Seoul 's opening ceremony was scheduled to deliberately upstage the South 's moment in the global spotlight .\nOn February 8 , military hardware was rolled out to celebrate a rarely-marked event , the day in 1948 when Kim Il Sung created the country 's armed forces out of the Korean People 's Revolutionary Army .\nBut this year 's parade was a subdued affair , a marked contrast to the shows North Korea put on in April 2017 . While ICBMs were part of the parade , there was no new technology or missiles shown off to the audience at home or those watching from abroad .\nJUST WATCHED North Korea releases video of military parade Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH North Korea releases video of military parade 01:01\n`` I think the military parade is a sideshow , I think they 're calculating the resolve of the Western powers and any chance to drive a wedge between the South Korean people is a worthy exercise , '' said Joseph Siracusa , professor of human security and international diplomacy at RMIT University in Melbourne , Australia .\nThe North , he said , has nothing to lose with its Olympic gambit . It 's only task , he argues , is to look `` normal . ''\n`` If they come across as normal human beings , if they look normal and South Koreans treat them as normal , it 's a great diplomatic victory . It wo n't solve a single problem though , as long as they continue with their nuclear weapons and ICBMs , '' he told CNN .\nIndeed the party looking most belligerent at the moment is the one Pyongyang is seeking to alienate from Seoul -- the United States . Before arriving in the South to attend the Winter Games , US Vice President Mike Pence warned that Pyongyang 's charm offensive was n't fooling anyone .\n`` We will not allow North Korean propaganda to hijack the message and imagery of the Olympic Games , '' Pence said after meeting with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Tokyo on Wednesday . `` We 'll be there to cheer our athletes , but we 'll also be there to stand with our allies and remind the world that North Korea is the most tyrannical and oppressive regime on the planet . ''\nU.S. Vice President Mike Pence inspects a PAC-3 interceptor missile system with Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera in Tokyo .\nOn Thursday he visited the Yokota Air Base in Japan , whose troops likely be among the front line in a military confrontation with North Korea .\n`` As the Old Book says , 'the soldier does not bear the sword in vain , ' and we will defeat any attack and meet any use of conventional or nuclear weapons with a response that is rapid , overwhelming and effective , '' he said .\nHe also said there were more sanctions coming for Pyongyang , but did n't outline what they would be .\nSouth Korean President Moon Jae-in , who , during his presidential campaign , said he wanted to be the leader `` who built a peaceful relationship '' between the two Koreas , will face a quandary of catastrophic proportions should a member of the North Korean contingent decide to defect to the South .\nJUST WATCHED Defection fears at the Winter Olympics Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Defection fears at the Winter Olympics 02:29\n`` The position that would put Moon in : Am I going to send that person back ? That 's what the Chinese do . Or do I allow them to stay and suffer the wrath of the North ? '' Maxwell from Georgetown University hypothesized . `` North Korea would have an excuse to scuttle any agreement , withdraw from the Olympics , accuse the South of kidnapping . ''\nSiracusa says the South is already on high alert . It has thousands of security forces providing protection for the Games . `` They 're worried about an act of terrorism . They 're worried about a drone . They 're preparing . They 're looking for something to happen , '' he told CNN . The South has mobilized at least 60,000 policemen , military and other forces to maintain security during the Games . A spokesperson for the Games told CNN that number also included 600 firefighters and 2,400 private security officers .\nThe stage for the next two weeks is set for more moments of one-upmanship . Pence initiated his own propaganda push while he visits South Korea for the Games . He brought along the father of Otto Warmbier , the American student who was jailed in North Korea and died upon his return to the US last year after suffering extensive brain damage . On Friday the pair met with North Korean defectors including Ji Seong-ho . Pence told the group that `` we ourselves have stood and looked across that demilitarized zone , that line across which you fled . You fled to freedom . '' He called Fred Warmbier `` a great champion '' for the freedom of the people in North Korea .\nAnd US President Donald Trump 's daughter Ivanka is scheduled to attend the closing ceremony , bringing her own quotient of glamor and celebrity to the proceedings .\nKim Yo Jong , sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un , arrives in South Korea , Friday , Feb. 9 , 2018 .\nMeanwhile , the visit of Kim Yo Jong -- - the 30-year-old is blacklisted by Washington -- - is one of the most powerful people in the Hermit Kingdom\nTelevision footage of sporting events has been interspersed with scenes of buses pulling up and North Korea 's brightly-uniformed cheering squads and art troupes filing out .\nAs the Olympic program progresses , another competition plays out beside it in parallel . A charm offensive versus a propaganda drive , with nuclear ambitions at stake . What remains to be seen is whether any of the players will be ready for another round once the other Games are finished . | allsides-corpus-424 |
As investigators focus on what or who motivated San Bernardino shooters Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife , Tashfeen Malik , to open fire at the Inland Regional Center , a report about Malik 's comments on social media before she moved to the U.S. is raising questions about how thoroughly she was vetted .\nLaw enforcement sources confirmed to ███ that Malik made radical postings on Facebook as far back as 2012 -- the year before she married Farook and moved to the U.S. , reports ███ correspondent Carter Evans . According to a report in the New York Times , Malik spoke openly on social media about her support for violent jihad and said she wanted to be a part of it . But none of these postings were discovered when Malik applied for a U.S. K-1 fiancé visa .\n`` If you 're going to start doing a deeper dive into somebody and looking at their social media postings or other things , you really want to focus your effort on the high-risk traveler , the person that you 're really worried about being a threat to the United States , '' said James Carafano , national security expert and vice president of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation . `` The question is , how do you identify them ? ''\nMalik was not identified as a threat despite being interviewed at the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan and vetted by five different government agencies that checked her name and picture against a terror watch list and ran her fingerprints against two databases .\n`` This is a case where , in retrospect , we know that this is a person that had lots of red lights and red flags . How come they did n't stand out as a high risk traveler ? That 's a really , really good question , '' Carafano said .\nOver the weekend , dive teams from the FBI and local police finished searching the bottom of a muddy lake three miles from the site where the couple opened fire and killed 14 people . They pulled multiple objects from the water , but it is unknown if they recovered a computer hard drive that Farook and Malik may have discarded in the lake before they were killed in a shootout with police .\nInvestigators hope to search that hard drive for information on potential connections between the couple and foreign terror groups .\nThey also continue to question Enrique Marquez , Farook 's friend who we know purchased the two semi-automatic rifles that were used in the attack . It is likely that Marquez will be charged with something once authorities finish speaking with him , but so far sources tell ███ he has waived his rights and is being very cooperative . | allsides-corpus-425 |
Washington ( CNN ) The forced resignation of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is not just the usual story of an administration racked by chaos and the short shelf life of almost everyone who works for an imperious and grudge-bearing President .\nNielsen was hardly a moderate out of step with President Donald Trump on his signature issue of immigration . She became the administration 's public face of the zero-tolerance policy that caused widespread outrage after hundreds of migrant children were separated from their parents .\nBut she is nonetheless paying the price for a crisis exacerbated by the President 's decision-making amid a major surge in migrants crossing the border .\nIt 's a sign of a government stocked with acting secretaries and hampered by thin personnel benches , stretched beyond functionality by Trump 's impulses and the most prodigious staffing burn rate of any modern President .\nNielsen 's ouster fits with a pattern of Trump forcing out officials who have pushed back against his more radical instincts or been unable to carry them out , or who have earned his ire for being unwilling to match his defiance for governing practice and convention . They include former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson , ex-Attorney General Jeff Sessions , former national security adviser H.R . McMaster and former chief of staff John Kelly .\nYet there is also a more fundamental reason for Nielsen 's departure that gets closer to the heart of Trump 's behavior and political strategy than almost all of the many , previous exits from his administration .\nNielsen 's demise is the clearest indication yet of the impossibility of reconciling Trump 's ideological and emotional instincts on immigration -- which helped make him President -- with legal , humanitarian and international realities .\nNielsen `` believed the situation was becoming untenable '' with Trump `` becoming increasingly unhinged about the border crisis and making unreasonable and even impossible requests , '' a senior administration official told CNN 's Jake Tapper on Sunday .\nHer departure mirrors that of former Defense Secretary James Mattis last year , whose authority was shredded by a sudden , and apparently spontaneous announcement of a Syria withdrawal by the President , but who had gradually grown apart from his boss .\nIn both cases , the complexity of serious policy problems , often in life or death situations , clashed with the political instincts of a President who abhors detail and prefers to govern from the gut , while ignoring conventional expertise -- even from subordinates that in no way could be considered moderates .\nAs the crisis on the US-Mexico border worsened , Trump 's tolerance for Nielsen snapped .\nAnd the President might also have gone looking for a scapegoat .\nLast week , he was forced to climb down on a public threat to close the southern border after officials , business groups and political leaders warned of a pending economic disaster if he went ahead .\nHe covered his blushes by going on a tear on immigration , with some of the most unconstrained rhetoric on the issue ever heard by an American president , that was scorching even by the standards of Trump himself .\n`` Ca n't take you anymore . Ca n't take you . Our country is full ... Ca n't take you anymore , I 'm sorry . So turn around . That 's the way it is , '' Trump said in a message to asylum seekers during a trip to the border on Friday .\nA day later , Trump mocked those fleeing persecution seeking a better life in the United States , portraying asylum seekers as criminals and gang members , rather than the families Nielsen described in a CNN interview last week .\n`` ' I am very fearful for my life , ' '' Trump said mockingly during a speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition on Saturday . `` I am very worried that I will be accosted if I am sent back home . No , no , he 'll do the accosting ! ''\nJUST WATCHED Secy . Kirstjen Nielsen is leaving , Trump tweets Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Secy . Kirstjen Nielsen is leaving , Trump tweets 00:40\nNielsen 's departure , confirmed in a tense White House meeting with Trump on Sunday afternoon , came after days of speculation and was in retrospect a logical consequence of the President 's boiling frustration .\nHe had been dissatisfied with Nielsen for months , though their relationship appeared to improve marginally during the government shutdown that spanned the turn of the year and turned into another political reverse for Trump .\nSpeculation about her status ballooned last week , after Trump suddenly declared that he would halt hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Honduras , El Salvador and Guatemala , accusing them of sending migrants to the US border .\nThe move utterly undercut Nielsen who had just days before signed what her department called a `` historic , regional compact '' to tackle undocumented migration at its source .\nImmigration experts said that the aid cutoff would ultimately make the situation far worse as it would exacerbate the deprivation and lawlessness in Central America that is a key driver of migration and asylum claims .\nNielsen 's departure comes as more critical moments loom for the administration that are likely to test Trump 's equilibrium at a time when he is already furious about the border situation .\nWhen he was not fulminating about immigration over the weekend , he was lashing out at special counsel Robert Mueller and Democratic demands that all of his report should be released .\nAttorney General William Barr , caught between an angry President and Democrats in Congress after finding there was no evidence to support election collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia , has pledged to release a redacted version of the report by mid-month .\nThe White House is also trying to escape a self-imposed snafu over health care policy after sending confusing signals of whether the President wanted a new bid to replace Obamacare before or after the 2020 election .\nAnd this week , the administration is expected to significantly escalate tensions with Iran by against throwing caution to the wind by designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization , a move some in the defense and intelligence communities fear could expose US personnel in the Middle East to reprisals .\nJUST WATCHED Cuomo to DHS Sec : Why 's Trump viewing fencing , not kids ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Cuomo to DHS Sec : Why 's Trump viewing fencing , not kids ? 01:32\nAs he seeks to manage the immigration crisis , the President now has a chance to insert a like-minded replacement in what in the wake of Nielsen 's departure looks like an increasingly impossible job .\nTrump has already signaled that he will make immigration a centerpiece of his 2020 re-election bid and has every political incentive , since he is basing his hopes of a second term on energizing his base , to turn up the heat on the issue .\nThe new secretary will also face the same limits as Nielsen . As much as Trump rages against asylum claims , they are codified in US and international laws that he in practice can not just disregard .\nHe recently found out that his preferred , dramatic solution of just closing the border would cause a swift and massive economic backlash that in itself could harm his hopes of winning a second term .\nThe President is already pushing his power to the limit , and possibly beyond it by seeking to use a national emergency declaration to redirect money already allocated by Congress for other projects to the border wall that was at the symbolic center of his 2016 campaign .\nFor all his fiery speeches , it is difficult for Trump to argue that his hardline approach on immigration is actually working .\nAfter years of declines , the tide of asylum seeking and undocumented migrants crossing the border has climbed dramatically .\nThe White House says US Customs and Border Protection engaged in more than 100,000 border enforcement actions in March -- the most for one month in more than a decade .\nIt argues that Trump has reassigned customs officers to the border and directed them to return as many migrants as possible to Mexico to wait for immigration proceedings on the southern side of the border .\nBut ultimately , there will be no solution to the border problem and the chronic glut in the asylum and court systems , without action by Congress .\nNielsen did `` everything she could to make the problem better , '' a senior Department of Homeland Security official told CNN 's Geneva Sands on Sunday .\n`` Worst place for you to be is where you need Congress to act , '' the official said .\nThe White House wants asylum law tightened and the power to detain families traveling with children -- a practice Democrats have branded inhumane .\nTrump named Kevin McAleenan , the commissioner of US Customs and Border Protection , as acting replacement for Nielsen at the Department of Homeland Security .\nMcAleenan is not seen as an ideologue and served former President Barack Obama -- so there must be considerable doubt about how long he will also be in the post -- but he has less problematic ties with Congress than Nielsen .\nAttempts at reaching a broad political solution on the border have been complicated by Trump 's choice to use immigration as a rallying call for his base and his adoption of rhetoric that stains any political common ground .\nHe has several times pulled out of immigration deals with Democrats that might have helped mitigate the situation at the border apparently because he feared a backlash from his most fervent supporters and cheerleaders in conservative media .\nDemocrats complain that the so-called master of the art of the deal wants to win on all his immigration priorities while offering nothing in return -- for example a path to legal status for people brought to the US illegally and who are protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ( DACA ) program .\nThey also argue that his rhetoric is incompatible with the founding principles of a nation built on immigration .\n`` When even the most radical voices in the administration are n't radical enough for President Trump , you know he 's completely lost touch with the American people , '' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday , remarking on Nielsen 's departure .\nYet while there is evidence that Trump 's flame throwing commentary on immigration hurt Republicans in swing districts and helped Democrats win the House in midterm elections , Trump 's warning that the US is under assault by marauding caravans of immigrants is widely backed by his supporters .\nThat 's why ultimately , even Nielsen , who was reviled on the left over the family separations policy and attempted to shape the President 's instincts into a workable policy always seemed doomed .\nTrump has shown that he will always , eventually side with the themes and voters that powered his political rise even faced with insurmountable political and practical obstacles . | allsides-corpus-426 |
Ever since Budapest ’ s Keleti train station became the epicenter of Europe ’ s migration crisis last fall , Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has led the charge among former communist states of the European Union to reject Muslim refugees in Europe .\nHe sought to shore up that position – and his role as provocateur to Brussels and its aims to relocate asylum-seekers fairly across the bloc – in a referendum on Sunday . But while those who voted overwhelmingly rejected the EU ’ s redistribution scheme , not enough voters turned out to cast ballots , invalidating the results .\nMr. Orbán is trying to spin the referendum as a victory . But the vote also revealed a majority who disagree with him – either his position on migration or his leadership itself – or do not believe that the question of migration is sufficiently important to head to polls .\nWhile Hungary is often cast off as simply anti-migrant , the vote shows a nation whose views are far from monolithic , and that will ultimately make it harder for Orbán to offer a simplistic message of dissent in Europe .\n“ This outcome will make it harder for Orbán to stand up for his immigration policy in the EU , because EU leaders can say , ‘ Orbán , now what do you want ? The referendum was invalid , ’ ” says Attila Tibor Nagy , a political analyst in Budapest at the Center for Fair Political Analysis .\nThat will come as a relief both to the powers in the EU facing an existential crisis after Britain opted to leave the union in June , and amid the rise of right-wing populists , who are peddling an anti-EU message that has gained a deeper foothold during the refugee crisis .\nAmong the most provocative have been the Visegrad countries : Hungary , Poland , Slovakia , and Czech Republic . Leaders have sued the bloc over the mandatory relocation plan . They have said outright that they would take in Christian refugees but not Muslim ones , and butted heads with Brussels and particularly German Chancellor Angela Merkel , arguing that migration should be a national , not surpranational , issue .\nOrbán led the group when he sealed Hungary ’ s southern border and militarized it with police and the Army last year . His referendum campaign explicitly linked the refugee crisis to Europe ’ s terrorism threat . “ Did you know ? Since the beginning of the migration crisis more than 300 people died in terrorist attacks in Europe , ” read one advertisement .\nThe vote required 50 percent turnout in this country of just under 10 million , but only 3.25 million went to the polls . Nonetheless , Orbán called it a victory Sunday night , pointing out that more Hungarians voted yesterday than they did in the referendum about joining the EU in 2003 .\nWith almost all votes counted , more than 98 percent rejected the EU plan . `` Thirteen years after a large majority of Hungarians voted at a referendum to join the European Union , today Hungarians made their voices heard again in a European issue , '' Orbán said . `` We have achieved an outstanding result , because we have surpassed the outcome of the accession referendum . ”\nA counter-campaign by the Two-Tailed Dog Party , a registered political party of street artists that parodies the ruling elite , put up their own spoof posters . “ Did you know ? Hungarians see more UFOs in their lifetime than migrants , ” read one . Opposition parties urged voters to abstain from the vote . But no party came out supporting the EU ’ s relocation plan .\nMr. Nagy says the referendum does not show a turnabout on migration : He sees Hungarian society as decidedly anti-migrant . But he believes voters stayed home because they didn ’ t want to contribute to Orbán ’ s influence as prime minister . They also may have been over-saturated by the campaign blitz . And he says that perhaps they don ’ t see migration as a sufficiently big enough problem in their daily lives .\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nWhile hundreds of thousands of migrants crossed through Hungary last year – many of them barred from entering Keleti station on their westward march , which ultimately led Ms. Merkel to welcome them – the numbers have plummeted this year . That is due to many factors , including the EU-Turkey plan to dissuade refugees from coming , as well as the walls Hungary erected . Under the relocation plan , Hungary was only to accept 1,294 asylum-seekers .\n“ I can imagine that the vast majority of people could feel that this problem was not so big in their everyday lives , because migration is not seen so directly in Hungary , ” Nagy says . | allsides-corpus-427 |
Most of the illegal immigrant criminals Homeland Security officials released from custody last year were discretionary , meaning the department could have kept them in detention but chose instead to let them onto the streets as their deportation cases moved through the system , according to new numbers from Congress .\nSome of those released were the worst of the worst — more than 3,700 “ Threat Level 1 ” criminals , who are deemed the top priority for deportation , were still released out into the community even as they waited for their immigration cases to be heard .\nHomeland Security officials have implied their hands are tied by court rulings in many cases , but the numbers , obtained by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte , showed 57 percent of the criminals released were by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ’ s own choice , and they could have been kept instead .\n“ Put aside the spin , and the fact is that over 17,000 of the criminal aliens released last year were released due to ICE discretion , representing 57 percent of the releases , ” said Mr. Goodlatte . “ The Obama administration ’ s lax enforcement policies are reckless and needlessly endanger our communities . ”\nIn a statement to The ███ , ICE said it takes release decisions seriously and makes a judgment in each case . That holds true even for Threat Level 1 criminals .\n“ Not all Level 1 criminal aliens are subject to mandatory detention and thus may be eligible for bond , ” the agency said , pointing to mitigating circumstances that can convince agents to release the most serious criminals .\n“ ICE personnel making custody determinations also take into consideration humanitarian factors such as deteriorated health , advanced age , and caretaking responsibilities . All custody determinations are made on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration the totality of circumstances in each case , ” the agency said .\nICE officials insist that those who are released are still monitored , often by electronic ankle bracelets but also through a system of phone checks or by paying a bond .\nHowever , nearly all of those released under electronic monitoring broke the terms of their release , according to ICE numbers .\nIn fiscal year 2014 , ICE put about 41,000 immigrants through electronic monitoring , and more than 30,000 of them broke the terms of their release — many of them racking up multiple violations . All told , they notched nearly 300,000 violations in one year alone , or an average of 10 instances per violator .\nThe rate has gone down slightly so far in fiscal year 2015 . Of the 34,002 immigrants put into electronic monitoring , 27,317 have broken the rules a combined 162,322 times .\nICE said violations can include what they deem minor problems , such as someone lacking a strong enough cell signal for voice verification by phone or someone calling in too early or a few minutes late . Low batteries or jostling an electronic bracelet during sports can also cause a monitoring alarm to go off incorrectly , ICE said .\nOf the more than 30,000 detainees who broke the conditional terms of their release and monitoring in 2014 , only 2,420 were deemed to have been serious enough breaches to rearrest them .\nPart of ICE ’ s problem is that it doesn ’ t have enough beds to go out and pick up violators , according to an inspector general ’ s report released earlier this year .\nAgency officials said they would like to be able to hold those who willfully break the rules , but they haven ’ t requested more beds . Indeed , Mr. Obama ’ s 2016 budget request actually asked for fewer beds to hold detainees next year , arguing that he wants to put more emphasis on the very alternatives that are being violated .\nICE ’ s treatment of those awaiting their deportation proceedings has been controversial for several years .\nIn 2013 , the agency released 36,007 convicted criminals who were awaiting the outcome of their deportation cases . Those released had amassed 116 homicide convictions , 15,635 drunken driving convictions and 9,187 convictions stemming from what ICE labeled involvement with “ dangerous drugs . ”\nThe total dropped to about 30,000 in 2014 — but the seriousness of the offenses increased , with 193 homicide convictions among the detainees and 16,070 drunken driving convictions . There were also 426 sexual assaults and 303 kidnapping convictions , ICE said .\nHomeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and ICE Director Sarah Saldana said the numbers were unacceptable and imposed new rules requiring releases to be vetted by senior agency officials to make sure they were correct .\nBoth Mr. Johnson and Ms. Saldana also said many of the releases are required and give them little discretion — particularly those made under a 2001 Supreme Court decision known as the Zadvydas case , when the justices ruled that immigrants couldn ’ t generally be detained indefinitely .\nThat means that if a home country won ’ t take someone back , ICE must release them after about six months .\nBut the new numbers obtained by Mr. Goodlatte suggest Zadvydas-related releases were fewer than 2,500 in 2014 , or only about 8 percent of the total — compared to the 57 percent that ICE admits were completely discretionary .\nThe rest of the releases were divided between cases where an immigration judge ordered bond or where ICE was unable to obtain travel documents but it wasn ’ t considered a mandatory release under the Zadvydas ruling . | allsides-corpus-428 |
WASHINGTON—The Trump administration , facing criticism for its response to the devastation in Puerto Rico , sent a three-star general to the island Thursday to ramp up relief efforts in the wake of Hurricane Maria .\nLt. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan , a commander of U.S. Army North , had already been overseeing the effort from San Antonio , the White House said , but is being sent to the U.S. territory to “ have his eyes on it and make sure he ’ s comfortable with the interaction between his forces , and the governor and the municipal forces , ” said White House homeland security adviser Tom Bossert .\nAsked why Gen. Buchanan wasn ’ t deployed to Puerto Rico when the hurricane first hit , Mr. Bossert said : “ It didn ’ t require a three-star general eight days ago. ” He added that he didn ’ t expect the general to “ stay there long . ”\nGen. Buchanan will join a one-star Army general—Brig . Gen. Rich Kim , the operations officer for U.S. Northern Command—who arrived on the island Wednesday .\nMore than a week after the Category 4 storm ravaged Puerto Rico , destroying roads and its electrical grid , most residents remain without power and struggle to find food and clean water .\nAt a White House briefing , press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders , speaking to the storm victims , said : “ We are praying for you . We are working for you . And we will not let you down . ”\nAlso Thursday , President Donald Trump agreed to a 10-day waiver of the Jones Act , which had blocked foreign-flagged vessels from shipping relief supplies to Puerto Rico , in response to a request from Puerto Rico Gov . Ricardo Rossello . The 1920 law requires ships carrying cargo between U.S. points be owned and managed by U.S. citizens and have American crews .\nMr. Rossello on Wednesday evening called Mr. Bossert , who said he relayed the request to the president . “ He thought that was the right thing to do , and we waived it right away , ” Mr. Bossert said .\nA day earlier , the president told reporters he was hesitant to waive the Jones Act because of opposition from the shipping industry .\nMr. Bossert on Thursday pushed back on criticism of the administration ’ s relief efforts , calling complaints that the president hadn ’ t waived the Jones Act sooner “ unfounded ” and suggested news media coverage was incorrectly “ giving the appearance that the government is not moving fast enough . ”\n“ There ’ s nothing that can happen fast enough ” due to the “ understandable degree of devastation ” in Puerto Rico , Mr. Bossert said .\nEarlier in the day , Sen. Marco Rubio ( R. , Fla. ) called on the Pentagon to take over relief operations and said the Federal Emergency Management Agency wasn ’ t equipped to handle the disaster because the island isn ’ t set up like a U.S. state with a well-established disaster-relief network .\n“ In a traditional setting you would have the emergency operations officials in a jurisdiction , ” Mr. Rubio said . “ In the case of Puerto Rico , that ’ s not working because those emergency officials have no communication , don ’ t have full situational awareness , are already overwhelmed—they just recovered from one storm—and have significant fiscal constraints . ”\nThe Pentagon said Thursday that the Defense Department “ continues ongoing relief operations ” in Puerto Rico with a focus on what the department said are FEMA ’ s immediate goals of assessing hospitals there .\nCongress is waiting on the Trump administration to determine how much it will seek in additional disaster relief spending . House Speaker Paul Ryan ( R. , Wis. ) said he estimates that request will come next month and that “ we will quickly act on that request because we need to get help to people who need it . ”\nFEMA ’ s disaster-relief fund stands at $ 4.6 billion . About $ 900 million so far is obligated for Hurricane Maria relief , according to a congressional aide . FEMA will get an additional $ 7 billion Oct. 1 when the new fiscal year starts .\nBut some lawmakers worry that the administration doesn ’ t have enough people on the island to rebuild the infrastructure and speed medical supplies , food and water to communities there .\n“ Rather than 5,000 , there should be 50,000 ” military personnel there , Sen. Richard Blumenthal ( D. , Conn. ) said Thursday on the Senate floor . “ Not to enforce martial law , but to make sure that the logistics , the transportation , the means of delivery , the lifeblood of that island in food and fuel and medicine and water and other basic necessities are sufficient to move those basic supplies to places that they are needed . ”\nIn Puerto Rico , 47 of 69 hospitals identified for assessment have been checked , with much of the transportation provided by Defense Department helicopters , according to the Pentagon statement .\nAll but one of the island ’ s nine airports are open , and of the six FEMA-designated priority ports only one remains closed .\nA dozen National Guard armories are part of a network of more than 100 distribution locations for crucial supplies , including fuel . The Army Corps of Engineers is helping to shore up the Guajataca Dam spillway , a crucial infrastructure weak spot , with 900 oversize sandbags used for flood control .\nThe Navy ’ s hospital ship , the USNS Comfort , is slated to leave its port Friday in Norfolk , Va. , and arrive in Puerto Rico sometime next week . The Comfort is a tanker converted into a floating hospital , which is typically manned by a skeleton crew in port but can be activated and under way in five days , according to the Navy .\nThe Transportation Department said Thursday it was making immediately available $ 40 million for road and bridge repairs in Puerto Rico . The money comes from a program the Federal Highway Administration used after hurricanes Harvey and Irma and more recently in Oregon after wildfires in that state .\nAlso Thursday , Congress passed a bill to give relief to taxpayers in areas damaged by recent hurricanes in Texas , Florida and Puerto Rico by giving them larger deductions for property losses and penalty-free access to retirement accounts . | allsides-corpus-429 |
Janet Napolitano is resigning as head of the Homeland Security Department and seeking a post as president of the University of California , the long-time Obama confidant announced Friday .\nOfficials told Fox News that Napolitano does not plan to leave her post until September . But she announced the move on Friday after it began to break in the media , revealing that she has been nominated to lead the California university system .\n`` For more than four years I have had the privilege of serving President Obama and his Administration as the Secretary of Homeland Security , '' she said in a statement . `` The opportunity to work with the dedicated men and women of the Department of Homeland Security , who serve on the frontlines of our nation 's efforts to protect our communities and families from harm , has been the highlight of my professional career . We have worked together to minimize threats of all kinds to the American public . ''\nNapolitano has ridden out a rocky tenure , having endured a string of lawsuits and multiple controversies regarding the agencies that DHS oversees . Among the complaints , Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents accused the department leadership in a lawsuit of failing to properly enforce immigration law . Their complaints center on the practice of using `` prosecutorial discretion '' -- allowing department lawyers to selectively determine which immigrants to pursue for deportation , and which to let go . Her aides claimed it was a matter of prioritizing resources , though some agents claimed it ran afoul of immigration law .\nNapolitano 's department later enacted a Dream Act-style policy giving young illegal immigrants a reprieve .\n`` Secretary Napolitano 's tenure at the Department of Homeland Security was defined by a consistent disrespect for the rule of law , '' Sen. Jeff Sessions , R-Ala. , one of her chief critics , said in a statement .\nThe news of her departure apparently caught Napolitano 's staff by surprise , Fox News is told . Officials , though , said the view among many at the department is that Napolitano has been `` out of sight , out of mind '' for a while -- particularly since she declared `` the system worked '' after a terrorist tried , unsuccessfully , to set off a bomb on a Detroit-bound flight in 2009 . She came under criticism for that comment , and again for saying several months later that the attempted bombing in Times Square was merely a `` one-off . ''\nThe secretary had a knack for attracting Republican ire , for times when she appeared to downplay the global terrorist threat . She once , for instance , described terrorism as `` man-caused disasters . ''\nThe agencies within the DHS have also been a popular target of lawmakers . Most recently , the Transportation Security Administration was compelled to back off a policy allowing small knives on planes after intense pushback from Congress .\nAt the same time , Napolitano has been working with other agencies to pump more resources to the border regions to curb illegal immigration , and has been tasked with responding to a series of major natural disasters .\nObama , in a written statement , praised Napolitano for her service .\n`` She 's worked around the clock to respond to natural disasters , from the Joplin tornado to Hurricane Sandy , helping Americans recover and rebuild . Since day one , Janet has led my administration 's effort to secure our borders , deploying a historic number of resources , while also taking steps to make our immigration system fairer and more consistent with our values , '' he said .\nNapolitano , a former Arizona governor , has led the Homeland Security Department since the start of the Obama administration . She is one of the handful of Cabinet members to have stayed with the administration this long .\nThe California university system announced late Friday morning that Napolitano had been nominated for president . She was recommended on a unanimous vote . The Board of Regents will vote next Thursday -- if confirmed , Napolitano will be the first female president of the university . | allsides-corpus-430 |
Seven months after the military began an investigation into the disappearance of Army Sgt . Bowe Bergdahl and his capture by the Taliban , which held him for five years , a new report indicates Army officials have determined Bergdahl — for whom the administration traded five top Gitmo-held terrorists — will be charged as a deserter .\nRetired Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer , a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research , made the startling claim during an appearance on `` The O'Reilly Factor '' on Fox News :\nBergdahl ’ s attorney has received the charges , according to Shaffer , who claims the Obama administration is withholding the report .\nBut the Army Times claims the Army says there 's no truth to claims a decision has been made on the Bergdahl case . Paul Boyce , spokesman for Forces Command , told the Army Times there is no charge sheet and the Fox News story `` seems to be speculative in nature . ''\n`` What they are reporting is untrue – there has been no update to what we provided in Dec. Investigation is still with [ General Mark ] Milley who will determine appropriate action – which ranges from no further action to convening a court martial . We can not discuss or disclose the findings of the investigation while disciplinary decisions are pending before commanders , '' the Army said in a statement provided to CNN Tuesday .\nLikewise , Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby posted the following statement on Twitter : `` Contrary to media reporting , no decision made by Army leadership with respect to Sgt . Bergdahl 's case . The process will be respected . ''\nO ’ Reilly said the White House has had this information for a while but has been delaying it under the auspices of Ben Rhodes , assistant national security adviser .\n`` This is shaping up to be a Titanic struggle behind the scenes , '' Shaffer said . `` Believe me , the Army here wants to do the right thing . Factually , there ’ s no way they can not do the right thing regarding Bergdahl . And the White House , because of the political narrative , President Obama cozying up to the parents and because he , President Obama , releasing the five Taliban . … The narrative is what the White House does not want to have come out . ''\nNBC News is separately reporting that a decision on the desertion charge is imminent and may come within a week , according to an anonymous senior defense officials .\nBergdahl was recovered in Afghanistan by U.S. troops in a controversial swap for five Taliban officials on May 31 . He had disappeared from his small patrol base on June 30 , 2009 , under a cloud of suspicion and fear as it became clear he been captured by militants .\nThe Army in June launched a new investigation into Bergdahl ’ s disappearance and capture , amid a raft of accusations from his fellow soldiers that he walked away from his unit on the battlefield and questions about whether the Obama administration handled the prisoner swap legally .\nOn Jan. 11 , the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , Gen. Martin Dempsey , said he anticipated a decision `` fairly soon '' on whether the Army would court martial Bergdahl for deserting his post .\n`` In White House terms , not charging Bergdahl means that he was indeed worth the trade for the Taliban Five . But charging him on any level means that releasing the five Taliban was an error of monstrous proportions , one the administration will never be able to explain away satisfactorily , '' said retired Lt. Col. Bill Cowen in a commentary written for the Fox News site .\nFormer Sgt . Matt Vierkant told CNN last year , `` Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war , and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him . ''\n`` I do n't understand , '' Vierkant added , `` why we 're trading prisoners at Gitmo for somebody who deserted during a time of war , which is an act of treason . ''\nA full 54 percent of Americans agreed in a June 2014 poll , saying Obama ’ s swap for Bergdahl amounted to providing aid to terrorists – which violates federal law . And they said impeachment is deserved .\nIn June , WND reported an explosive charge emerged – that Bergdahl 's fellow soldiers had orders to shoot him on sight as a deserter .\nA number of damning charges against Bergdahl came from soldiers who served with him . Some were posted on Facebook .\nThe soldiers wrote anonymously , saying the Pentagon had them sign nondisclosure statements after Bergdahl disappeared from his post in Afghanistan in 2009 . Some said they were still on active duty .\nWND also reported a four-year-old claim by a Taliban commander that Bergdahl was n't just a deserter but also a traitor who converted to Islam and taught jihadi fighters how to make bombs and ambush convoys .\nAfghan intelligence officials believed Bergdahl was `` cooperating with the Taliban '' and advising fighters at a base in Pakistan .\nA comment posted by a soldier who says he served with Bergdahl confirmed the charge .\n`` What you have is pretty well spot on , '' the post says . `` All I know is that our orders were kill on contact and then we came back and it was covered up . I ’ ve personally been threatened a few times that discussing it in half the detail you already have was considered an act of treason . ''\nAnother post made clear the Army considered Berdahl not just a deserter but a defector .\n`` My battalion took over the AO from 25th . The story of Bergdahl being a defector is exactly what was briefed to us and I also read the debrief report about the situation . The story is 100 % correct . I ’ ve personally been on a few missions following up on Bergdahls location but we never found anything . I currently live an hour away from his family ’ s location . Hailey , Idaho , is a resort town frequented by movie stars etc . They typically side with the anti-war side of politics in that area and is a perfect spot for him to live in solitude . ''\nAnother post that said Bergdahl deserted came from someone who said he was directly involved in the attempted recovery of Bergdahl .\n`` Here is what I know , not from hearsay , but because I was there . Bergdahl became a sympathizer , walked off his post to seek out the Taliban in order to join their ranks , to help and live with them . In exchange for his release , the United States released the following 5 known Taliban ; Khairullah Khairkhwa , Mullah Norullah Noori , Mullah Norullah Noori , Abdul Haq Wasiq , Mohammed Nabi who were immediately welcomed back into the Taliban network . The Taliban are currently seeking the release of additional prisoners , but will not state specifics . Now that they have the blue print on how to accomplish this by simply capturing an American soldier and with the troop number drawing down to 9,800+ , I can only hope our service men and women keep their heads on a swivel . '' | allsides-corpus-431 |
As the armed forces shrink and withdraw from some global hot spots , their agenda for the battle of the sexes grows .\nThe Pentagon under the Obama administration has devoted considerable hours in public and private to sorting out same-sex relationships , the roles of women in the foxhole and ways to stop sexual assaults . Now , another issue has arisen : gender transformation .\nThe sexual revolution has some traditionalists wondering whether the Pentagon is taking its eye off the ball — the enemy .\n“ Every conceivable form of PC is being enforced upon our hard-pressed military with a zeal that only a Russian army zampolit — a political officer — would truly appreciate , ” said Ken Allard , a retired Army colonel and commentator . “ We are seemingly concerned about everything except the most basic thing : how to fight and win the nation ’ s wars . If we have forgotten that constraint , let me assure you that our enemies have not , from the Taliban to the drug cartels to the Iranian Quds Force . ”\nDefense Secretary Chuck Hagel has made stamping out sex abuse a top priority , having met with President Obama , delivered public statements and appointed a board to recommend fixes .\nMeanwhile , the Army , Marine Corps and U.S. Special Operations Command have immersed themselves in surveys and studies to evaluate physical standards for direct ground combat . It ’ s a two-year lead-up to putting women in infantry , tank and commando units .\nThe process is time-consuming and daunting . The Pentagon has made it clear that it does not want to retain irrelevant standards that women can not meet — and it wants women introduced into combat units in sizable numbers to develop mentoring and female camaraderie .\n“ Yes , there is too much focus on social issues in the armed forces driven by external proponents with special interests , focused agendas and , in many cases , lack of knowledge about the armed forces , ” said retired Gen. Carl Mundy , Marine Corps commandant from 1991 to 1995 . “ The military services are without question the most open element in our society , and the very nature of that openness , together with the fishbowl in which they exist , make them ripe and easy targets for activists with an agenda . ”\nThe Marines in particular face a challenge in finding enough women , who make up 7 percent of the Corps . Women account for 14 percent of Army soldiers .\nBefore retiring as Marine commandant in 2010 , Gen. James Conway testified before a congressionally created commission on military diversity . He said he doesn ’ t believe Marine women want to be in land combat .\n“ I don ’ t think you will see a change because I don ’ t think our women want it to change , ” Gen. Conway testified . “ There are certain demands of officers in a combat arms environment that our women see , recognize , appreciate , and say , ‘ I couldn ’ t do that . In fact , I don ’ t want to do that because I don ’ t think it best prepares me for success if I am trying to do those things against the male population at lieutenant , captain , major and lieutenant colonel [ ranks ] . ’ ”\n“ Now that ’ s not to say that we don ’ t have women doing a tremendous job in combat where you have a pretty amorphous environment , no real front lines in a counterinsurgency environment . And their contributions are appreciated and recognized and rewarded , ” the commandant added .\n“ In talking to them , I think they feel like that ’ s probably enough . So I don ’ t see the day coming where we would change our culture necessarily and , in the process , go against what I think the vast majority of our women would want to see — stay pretty much like it is . ”\nSince autumn , six female Marine officers have tried to complete the mandatory combat qualification course . All failed or dropped out because of injuries . The Corps now is attempting to compile a checklist of physical attributes that identifies female officers who can perform direct ground combat . It plans to apply the same inventory to enlisted Marine women .\nThe combat debate was preceded by and now coincides with a running debate on openly serving gays . The Pentagon spent a year preparing every unit for open homosexuals in the ranks . Now it is churning out regulations on gay marriage , authorized leave for same-sex weddings and domestic benefits .\nTold of complaints from combat veterans , a Pentagon spokesman said that , in the case of same-sex marriage , the Defense Department is complying with a Supreme Court decision that struck down most of the federal Defense of Marriage Act , which defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman .\n“ The Department of Defense remains committed to ensuring that all men and women who serve our country , and their families , are treated fairly and equally , ” the spokesman said . “ Expeditious implementation of the decisions announced in Secretary Hagel ’ s memorandum will help the Department remain true to its commitment . ”\nElaine Donnelly , who runs the Center for Military Readiness , keeps track of the Pentagon ’ s sex-related bureaucracy — and she says it is growing .\nBesides a committee that advises the defense secretary on women ’ s issues and a task force devoted to surveying sex-abuse victims , the services themselves are setting up satellite organizations to do the same things .\n“ There is also a task force that deals with the service academies alone , ” Ms. Donnelly said . “ And lots of individual committees set up within each service , which spend countless hours conducting internal meetings and writing reports .\n“ Then there are outside contractors such as Rand Corp. , and even entertainers who do shows like ‘ Sex Signals , ’ which include edgy language and scenarios that are inconsistent with standards of professional propriety , ” she said .\nNow another social debate is emerging . Army Pvt . Bradley E. Manning , convicted of leaking thousands of classified documents to WikiLeaks , wants to undergo a sex change while serving his sentence at a military prison at Fort Leavenworth , Kan . The Army says it does not provide such hormone therapy .\nBut the gay-rights movement , a big supporter of Mr. Obama , has demanded that the military ranks be open to transgenders as well as gays .\nThe social focus has emerged amid a military drawdown and retrenchment . The last combat troops left Iraq in December 2011 , and most are due to leave Afghanistan next year . Mandatory budget cuts known as sequestration are squeezing a force already slated to shrink .\n“ It appears to me as if neither the administration nor much of the Congress is focused on military readiness , ” said retired Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin , a former Delta Force commando and Pentagon intelligence official . “ Yet they tell me that I must sacrifice constitutional liberties in the interest of national security .\n“ Give that line a rest , because if they care one whit about national security , they would stop the sequestration and social engineering of the most important element of national security . ”\nGen. Raymond T. Odierno , Army chief of staff , announced in June that he was eliminating 10 brigade combat teams , with an aim of trimming 80,000 soldiers over four years .\nThe Navy said it lacked the money to send a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf , even though the commander in charge requested it .\nThe Air Force jet fighter inventory has shrunk by more than 500 over the past 10 years to about 2,000 planes as it consolidates units . Retired fighter jocks have taken to calling it a “ geriatric Air Force . ”\nEven though women have piloted fighter aircraft for nearly 20 years , Air Combat Command is not immune to the social agenda . It conducted sweeping inspections of work and living spaces to root out any digital or hard-copy material deemed offensive to women .\nThe week of Aug. 12 illustrated the Pentagon ’ s dual role as war fighter and social engineer : It held a press briefing on the Afghanistan War on Aug. 14 . That same day , it announced policies extending benefits to same-sex spouses of service members .\nThe Pentagon had to work through the circumstance that not all military couples live in states that permit same-sex marriage . The answer : Those personnel will be granted extra leave time to travel to states that allow same-sex weddings .\n“ We recognize that same-sex military couples who are not stationed in a jurisdiction that permits same-sex marriage would have to travel to another jurisdiction to marry , ” the Pentagon said . “ That is why the department will implement policies to allow military personnel in such a relationship non-chargeable leave for the purpose of traveling to a jurisdiction where such a marriage may occur . ”\nThe next day , Aug. 15 , top officials briefed the press on sexual assault prevention and response .\nThat afternoon , the Pentagon put out two statements from Mr. Hagel within seconds of each other .\nOne dealt with war — the secretary ’ s call to Egyptian Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah el-Sisi as the military cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood . The second : sexual harassment .\n“ Eliminating sexual assault from the armed forces remains one of the Defense Department ’ s top priorities , ” Mr. Hagel said .\nSaid Gen. Mundy : “ My greatest concern is the impact on the morale and steadfastness to service among some of the finest and most selfless leaders this nation produces , together with the equally fine young men and women they lead who are barraged with being branded as or tolerating sexual predators or anti-equal opportunity . I can not help but believe that there is long-term impact on the effectiveness of our armed forces from this in terms of morale , recruiting , retention and public confidence and support . ” | allsides-corpus-432 |
I have spent the past 20 or so New Years ’ Eves glued to the SyFy channel ’ s “ Twilight Zone ” marathon . My wife and I love the writing , the plots and picking out famous actors in their one-off roles for the classic television series .\nMaybe I ’ ll write an episode of my own , complete with a Rod Serling-worthy opening monologue : “ The year is 2017 . Donald Trump is inaugurated as president of the United States , and mass amnesia has washed over America . Half the country can no longer remember anything that happened before Jan. 20 . The former president , Barack Obama , is literally sitting right there . Yet , his own party can not remember one thing about his eight years … ”\nIt is one of the strangest phenomena of the Trump era — the memory-holing of Obama ’ s executive powers . Democrats continuously act as though they ’ ve just fallen off the Washington turnip wagon when Trump does anything .\nTrump ’ s illegal immigration policies are draconian ! He ’ s deporting too many , they screamed , forgetting that … Obama deported more . A lot more . And , you know those cages on the southern border ? Obama built them , not Trump .\nTrump ’ s defying congressional subpoenas ! No president has ever stonewalled Congress , they screamed , forgetting that Obama ’ s attorney general , Eric Holder , was held in contempt of Congress for … defying subpoenas related to the `` Fast and Furious '' gun operation scandal . There were at least eight other times when Obama ’ s administration defied congressional oversight , even preventing people from testifying ( sound familiar ? ) .\nMore from Scott Jennings : Which 2020 Democrat can beat Donald Trump ? Do n't bet on Biden , Warren or Sanders .\nWhen Trump announced his “ America First ” policy during his inaugural , Democrats apparently took it as literally as one can .\nNow , they howl over Trump ’ s latest outrage : The airstrike that killed Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani , the general who was in Iraq fomenting attacks against the U.S. Embassy and , evidently , plotting future hits on American targets .\nWashington Democrats whined about Trump authorizing a drone strike without their notification or consent . This , after Obama authorized at least 2,800 drone strikes in Iraq and Syria without congressional approval .\n“ When Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in December 2009 , he had authorized more drone strikes than George W. Bush had approved during his entire presidency . By his third year in office , Obama had approved the killings of twice as many suspected terrorists as had ever been imprisoned ( at ) Guantanamo Bay , ” Newsweek reported .\nObama practically invented modern push-button warfare , for goodness ’ sake ! Eventually , the American people will have to choose between partisan disingenuousness or rank stupidity to explain Democratic reaction to Trump ’ s perfectly precedented decisions .\nOn Iran , Trump made a bold choice and sent a strong message that we aren ’ t going to take the regime ’ s provocations and hostility anymore . Obama sent them pallets of cash . Trump sent an MQ-9 Reaper .\nAnyone who knows how this will all shake out is lying . They don ’ t . But the commander in chief took out the world ’ s most notorious terrorist , one with plenty of American blood on his hands . Trump is the good guy here , not the terrorist .\nYet , Democrats couldn ’ t wait to pounce . How many statements included perfunctory “ yeah , Soleimani was a bad guy , but … ” construction before hammering Trump ?\nHere ’ s a pro tip : If your statement has a “ but ” in the middle ( I ’ m looking at you , Elizabeth Warren ) , just eliminate the throat-clearing , political pablum that came before it and say what you really mean . We get it : Iranian Guy Bad , Orange Man Worse .\nThis attitude will cost Democrats in the upcoming election . Not just on foreign policy , but across the board ( they speak of the economy as though we are in another Great Depression ) . They just can ’ t give Trump an inch no matter how safe or prosperous the world is , thanks at least in part to the president ’ s decisions .\nIt hasn ’ t always been this way . After the death of Osama bin Laden , Republicans praised Obama ’ s decision to get him .\n“ Former Vice President Dick Cheney declared , ‘ The administration clearly deserves credit for the success of the operation. ’ New York ’ s former mayor , Rudolph W. Giuliani , said , ‘ I admire the courage of the president. ’ And Donald J. Trump declared , ‘ I want to personally congratulate President Obama , ’ ” according to The New York Times .\nBut no such allowance is given to President Trump when he kills a terrorist . As commentator Guy Benson tweeted , “ The U.S. auto industry is alive , and ( Abu Bakr ) Baghdadi/Soleimani are dead , ” referencing the Islamic State leader Trump had killed a few months ago and recalling Obama ’ s reelection slogan .\nOr , as Rod Serling might say , “ Democrats will soon wake up from their amnesia to an old lesson : Past is prologue . And it ’ s a Shakespearean seminar most acutely taken … in The Twilight Zone . ”\nScott Jennings is a Republican adviser , CNN political contributor and partner at RunSwitch Public Relations . Follow him on Twitter @ ScottJenningsKY . This column first appeared in the Louisville Courier Journal . | allsides-corpus-433 |
McMaster ’ s point appears to be that what Trump really meant to do was get after the Russians for supporting bad guys .\nMCMASTER : [ Trump ] feels as if he 's been unable to find areas of cooperation with Russia , even as he confronts them in key areas where they 're being disruptive , like Syria for example , and the subversive activities across Europe . Their support for the—not only the Assad regime but for Iran and its activities across the Middle East .\nWhat McMaster doesn ’ t explain ? How Comey ’ s actions affected any of that . Or why Trump agreed to a meeting with Foreign Minister Lavarov and Ambassador Kislyak , by special request of Vladimir Putin , just one day after firing Comey . Or why Trump shut the US press out of that meeting while leaving Tass handy to take a few snaps of Trump laughing it up with the Russians over taking out that troublesome “ nut job . ”\nAnd hey , if Trump held the meeting to “ confront ” the Russians , how about confronting them on the one issue that is front and center for America ?\nStephanopoulos : So , did the president confront them on their interference in our election ? This was their first meeting ? McMaster : Well , there already was too much that 's been leaked from those meetings . And one of the things that I 'm most concerned about is the confidence , the confidentiality of those kind of meetings , as you know , are extremely important . And so , I am really concerned about these kind of leaks , because it undermines everybody 's trust in that kind of an environment where you can have frank , candid , and often times unconventional conversations to try to protect American interests and secure the American people .\nThe answer is : No , Trump didn ’ t confront the Russians on interference in our elections . But hey , leakers are bad . So bad .\nThere was one place where McMaster was absolutely consistent with his previous statements : Donald Trump ’ s spill of intelligence from the Israelis was spurred , in part , by Trump ’ s ignorance on the source .\nMcMaster : Well , as you know , the initial leak that came out was a leak about concerns about revealing intelligence source and methods , information that 's not even part of the president 's briefing .\nWhy would Trump ’ s briefing not include the crucial information that this intelligence came from an ally and was not to be shared with anyone , not even other allies ? Maybe it was because of this :\nA classified memo instructs intelligence analysts to keep their daily intelligence briefings with President Donald Trump short , according to Mother Jones . The guidance recommends that analysts limit themselves to three topics , include essential facts that support their findings , and to try to keep their findings to a page . The memo also suggests that conflicting views or information should not be shared with the president in different briefings , according to the report .\nSo , H. R. McMaster blames Trump spilling classified information from an ally on the fact that Trump was ignorant of the source . Trump was ignorant of the source because his own staff has reduced his briefings down to “ essential facts . ”\nThere ’ s someone to blame for Trump ’ s spew of delicate information . In fact , there ’ s more than one someone . It ’ s both Donald Trump , and it ’ s everyone who enables him . | allsides-corpus-434 |
The Pentagon has said US troops are being deployed to Saudi Arabia to defend American interests from `` emergent credible threats '' .\nThe move comes amid heightened tensions with Iran over the safety of shipping lanes in the Gulf .\nSaudi Arabia confirmed that King Salman had approved the move `` to strengthen regional security and stability '' .\nThe kingdom has not hosted US combat forces since 2003 , when Donald Rumsfeld announced their withdrawal .\nThe US presence in Saudi Arabia started with Operation Desert Storm in 1991 , when Iraq invaded Kuwait .\nBBC North America correspondent Peter Bowes says the US is understood to be deploying Patriot air defence missile batteries manned by 500 soldiers to Prince Sultan Base in Saudi Arabia .\nThe US also plans to send a squadron of F-22 stealth fighters to the base .\n`` This movement of forces provides an additional deterrent and ensures our ability to defend our forces and interests in the region from emergent , credible threats , '' a statement from US Central Command said .\nTensions between the US and Iran have worsened since Washington unilaterally withdrew from a landmark 2015 nuclear deal . The US has since tightened sanctions it re-imposed on Iran 's oil sector .\nLast month , Iran shot down a US surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz , accusing it of violating Iranian airspace . The US insisted the drone had been over international waters at the time , and condemned it as an unprovoked attack .\nThe US has also called on Iran to release a Panamanian-flagged tanker and 12 of its crew , which was seized by Revolutionary Guards on Sunday during a naval patrol . Iran said the vessel had been smuggling fuel .\nThen on Thursday President Donald Trump said a US warship had destroyed an Iranian drone that came too close . Iran has denied losing a drone .\nOn Friday tensions ratcheted up even higher when Iranian forces seized the UK-flagged oil tanker Stena Impero in the Gulf saying it was in breach of regulations .\nUK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt demanded the tanker 's release , saying there would be `` serious consequences '' if Iran continued to detain it .\nThe US has also blamed Iran for two separate attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman in May and June - an allegation Tehran has denied . | allsides-corpus-435 |
‘ Donald is right , ’ says Russian president , as US-backed Kurdish-led force warns fight against Islamic State not over\nThe Kurdish force that has led the ground war against Islamic State in Syria has condemned the White House ’ s surprise decision to withdraw US troops from the country and claimed it will spark a revival of the terror group .\nThe Syrian Democratic Forces , a group of Kurdish and Arab units raised by Washington specifically to fight Isis , said the US ’ s move would have “ dangerous implications for international stability ” .\nDonald Trump has told the Pentagon to extricate its estimated 2,000 troops as soon as possible , with a target of accomplishing the task in less than a 100 days , according to officials in Washington , but defence staff are trying to make the argument for more time and leaving a residual counter-terrorist force of a few hundred .\nReuters reported on Thursday that the Trump administration was also planning to cut short the air war against Isis in Syria . An official told the news agency that a final decision had not been made .\nTrump stuck to his decision in the face of fierce criticism from within his own party on Thursday , but changed his justification . On Wednesday , he had argued that Isis was defeated . But 24 hours later , the US president said the withdrawal was to save US soldiers ’ lives and dollars .\nDonald Trump 's Syria withdrawal could reverberate for years Read more\n“ Why are we fighting for our enemy , Syria , by staying & killing ISIS for them , Russia , Iran & other locals ? , ” Trump asked on Twitter . “ Time to focus on our Country & bring our youth back home where they belong ! ”\nThe planned US pullout was announced as Turkey was preparing to send its military into Syria to confront Kurdish militias that it says threaten its sovereignty . The US-backed Kurds are drawn from the same Kurdish groups – a point that has caused friction between Ankara and Washington throughout the four-year campaign against Isis .\nThe SDF and the YPG , a partner Kurdish militia , described the move as a “ blatant betrayal ” . One Kurdish leader contacted by ███ said the fight against Isis in Syria ’ s far east would be abandoned immediately , and all SDF units on that front would redeploy closer to the Turkish border .\nThe SDF responded to the announcement with a blunt statement . “ The war against Islamic State has not ended and Islamic State has not been defeated , ” it said . Any withdrawal would “ create a political and military vacuum in the area , leaving its people between the claws of hostile parties ” .\nOther Kurdish leaders said the mooted abandonment would cause damage to Kurdish movements elsewhere in the region .\n“ We have every right to be afraid , ” Arin Sheikmos , a Kurdish journalist and commentator , told the Associated Press . “ If the Americans pull out and leave us to the Turks or the [ Syrian ] regime , our destiny will be like the Kurds of Iraqi Kurdistan in 1991 . Neither the regime , nor Iran nor Turkey , will accept our presence here . ”\nBy contrast , Vladimir Putin , the Russian president whose military intervened in the Syrian war in 2015 , turning the tide in favour of the Assad regime , welcomed the US move .\nIsis not defeated in Syria despite Trump claim , says UK Read more\n“ If the USA made that decision then it ’ s the right one , ” Putin said during a nationally televised press conference on Thursday , repeating complaints that US troop deployments in Syria were illegal because they were not agreed upon with the Assad government . He said he agreed with Trump that a “ serious blow ” had been struck against Isis , saying : “ Donald is right , I agree with him . ”\nUS allies were not consulted before the announcement of the withdrawal , and have been scrambling since then to find out what it will mean in practice . Ministers from the UK and France , countries with their own special forces in northern Syria , have contradicted Trump ’ s assessment that Isis had been defeated .\n“ There is not just the real risk that it lets Daesh off the hook and allows them to re-establish some control , but it could mean foreign fighters held by the SDF are released , and the Iranians and Russians are left a free hand , ” a European official said .\nFrance has said its forces will remain in place and the country ’ s armed forces minister , Florence Parly , expressed French determination to fight on in Syria .\n“ Daesh [ Isis ] has lost more 90 % of its territory , ” Parly said on Twitter . “ But Daesh had not been cleared off the map , nor , for that matter , have its roots been cleared . The last pockets of this terrorist organisation must be beaten in a definitive manner by military means . ”\nHowever , the few hundred British and French troops in the area are dependent on US logistical support to operate and it would be very hard for them to stay after the US have left .\nAt the UN , the UK ’ s ambassador , Karen Pierce , told the security council : “ Much remains to be done in the global campaign … and we must not lose sight of the threat Daesh continues to pose , even when they no longer hold territory . ”\nIn August this year , the Pentagon assessed there were as many as 14,500 Isis fighters still in Syria .\nTrump ’ s order for a full , rapid withdrawal of more than 2,000 US troops from Syria , and his declaration of victory over Isis , left Pentagon and state department officials scrambling to interpret an abrupt change in course . In the summer , the policy was to keep forces in Syria to ensure the “ enduring defeat of Isis ” and act as a bulwark against Iranian influence .\nThe move appeared to blindside Trump ’ s most senior officials , many of whom were invested in an ongoing partnership with the SDF .\nThe US secretary of state , Mike Pompeo , on Thursday rejected reports that the president ’ s decision had come out of the blue .\n“ This was a decision that was made with lots of consultation between all the senior-level officials , including myself , with the president . So yes , did I – I had more than a heads-up , ” Pompeo told a radio show .\nHas Isis been defeated in Syria , as Trump claims ? Read more\nAdministration officials had previously characterised the objective in Syria as “ the enduring defeat of Isis ” . Since Trump announced his decision , they have said it was the destruction of the “ territorial caliphate ” .\nThroughout the Syrian war , Turkey has prioritised managing Kurdish ambitions in Syria , and potential implications for its own Kurdish populations , above all else . Ankara sees the YPG in Syria as indistinguishable from Kurdish Workers ’ Party ( PKK ) militants inside Turkey . Ankara views the militant groups as dangerous subversives who threaten its borders despite Syria ’ s Kurds saying they have no interest in full autonomy , and the PKK having said it no longer aspires to an independent state . | allsides-corpus-436 |
Reps. Brad Sherman of California and Al Green of Texas have brought forward a formal article of impeachment against President Donald Trump for “ high crimes and misdemeanors . ”\nIt does not go without laughing , however . Years and years and years ago , there was this show about animal research and the scientist had placed a soccer ball or something in the middle of a ring of monkeys . Every few seconds , a monkey would reach a hesitant hand toward the ball , only to be slapped away by the researcher . This went on — and on and on and on . Monkey reach , monkey slapped , monkey retreat — monkey reach again . The point was to show just how limited in brain development the monkeys really were , because their instincts to touch overcame their instincts to listen to their pain . It really did become comical after a while .\nThat ’ s how the Democrats are on impeachment . They just can ’ t help themselves .\nAfter months and months and months of listening to the left call for Trump ’ s ouster from office — a call that laughingly began before Trump even took over the White House — the mantra has become monkeyish .\n“ For starters , ” wrote CNN ’ s digital director of politics , Z. Byron Wolf , there ’ s no indication that Trump is anywhere near to being impeached . ”\nWell , yeah . There is that . Typically — and this is just an opinion , from someone who ’ s not an attorney — there must be a crime committed before the charges are affixed .\nThe order of operation goes like this : Crime . Charge . Conviction — or acquittal . Sadly , the order for Democrats on Trump has been this — Charge . Move to convict . Now go find the crime .\nAnd thanks to a very , very complicit and biased media , Democrats have been able to move forward with frightening speed on this order . But now they ’ ve lost a key asset — CNN . You know it ’ s bad for your leftist side when CNN reports in favor of a Republican .\nThe article of impeachment accuses Trump of interfering with the FBI ’ s investigation of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn , and alleges the president “ sought to use his authority to hinder and cause the termination of such investigations . ”\nWell , once again , good luck with that fellas . The House , controlled by Republicans , isn ’ t likely to pass the article . Democratic leaders , looking ahead to 2018 elections and realizing the crazy Rep. Maxine Waters has brought with her Tourette Syndrome-like call for impeachment , have distanced themselves from such talk — at least in earshot of the media . And the American people , even those who wouldn ’ t consider themselves in the Trump camp , aren ’ t at all ready for a Bill Clinton Redeux — that is , impeachment .\nBack in May , he made it clear from the House floor : “ This is where I stand . I will not be moved . The president must be impeached . ”\nHe said it — that was his plan all along . Impeach Trump , facts , evidence and truth be danged . On one hand , it ’ s refreshing to see a politician actually honor a promise . On the other , going down in political history as one of the monkeys who couldn ’ t stop touching the soccer ball , despite the constant slap-down and sting , is not really all that commendable after all . Here ’ s a bit of advice for Democrats pursuing impeachment : Wait for the crime . The wheels of justice generally turn better that way . | allsides-corpus-437 |
Deputy general Rod Rosenstein also authorized investigation of former Trump campaign chair ’ s financial dealings in Ukraine\nThe deputy attorney general , Rod Rosenstein , explicitly authorized special counsel Robert Mueller to investigate allegations that the former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort colluded with the Russian government , according to a court filing made late on Monday night .\nMueller ’ s prosecutors included that detail in a memo defending the scope of their investigation , which so far has resulted in criminal charges against 19 people and three Russian companies .\nManafort , who led the Trump campaign for several months in 2016 , is one of four aides charged in the Mueller investigation . Former national security adviser Michael Flynn , Manafort ’ s deputy , Rick Gates , and the foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos have entered plea deals .\nManafort has challenged Mueller ’ s authority and asked a judge to dismiss an indictment charging him with crimes including money laundering conspiracy and false statements .\nHe said Mueller , who was assigned to investigate potential coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign , overstepped his bounds by charging him for conduct that occurred years before the 2016 election .\nBut in their new filing , prosecutors revealed that Rosenstein – who appointed Mueller after the attorney general , Jeff Sessions , recused himself , over contacts with Russians during the election campaign – wrote a memo last August that outlined the scope of Mueller ’ s appointment .\nThe memo , which remains redacted in parts , said that Mueller was empowered to investigate allegations that Manafort “ committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials ” to interfere with the presidential election .\nNone of the charges Manafort faces alleges coordination with the Kremlin , and Manafort ’ s attorneys had used that point to argue that Mueller exceeded his authority by accusing him of financial crimes and acting as an unregistered foreign agent on behalf of Ukrainian interests .\nBut Monday ’ s filing appears to undercut that argument . In addition to authorizing the Russia collusion investigation of Manafort , Rosenstein also authorized Mueller to investigate any crimes related to payments Manafort received from the Ukrainian government under former president Viktor Yanukovych .\nFBI questions Ted Malloch , Trump campaign figure and Farage ally Read more\nThe description largely outlines the charges against Manafort , which mostly relate to allegations he conspired to launder tens of millions of dollars received from Ukrainian political consulting including his work on Yanukovych ’ s behalf . Manafort has pleaded not guilty and denied any wrongdoing related to Russian election interference .\nProsecutors say in their court filing that given their mandate to investigate links between Trump associates and Russia , it was appropriate to investigate Manafort for ties to Russia-backed politicians and oligarchs .\n“ It would also naturally look into any interactions they may have had before and during the campaign to plumb motives and opportunities to coordinate and to expose possible channels for surreptitious communications , ” they wrote . “ And prosecutors would naturally follow the money trail from Manafort ’ s Ukrainian consulting activities . ” | allsides-corpus-438 |
On Tuesday , Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt announced the state of Missouri was filing a lawsuit against the Chinese government , Chinese Communist Party , and other Chinese officials and institutions for the actions they took that triggered deaths and economic chaos across Missouri . In the lawsuit , Schmitt writes bluntly , “ This COVID-19 pandemic is the direct result of a sinister campaign of malfeasance and deception carried out by Defendants . ”\nCiting Alfred L. Snapp & Son , Inc. v. Puerto Rico , Schmitt pointed out the legitimacy of his lawsuit : “ As a sovereign State , Missouri has ‘ a quasi-sovereign interest in the health and well-being—both physical and economic—of its residents in general. ’ … A state like Missouri , through its Attorney General , may act as ‘ a representative of the public ’ in ‘ complaining of a wrong which , if proven , limits the opportunities of her people [ and ] shackles her industries . ’ ”\nHe also explained why the Chinese Communist Party was not immune from prosecution :\nDefendant People ’ s Republic of China ( “ PRC ” or “ China ” ) is a communist nation in Asia . Defendant Communist Party of China ( “ CPC ” or “ Communist Party ” ) is the sole governing party within China , and the Communist Party ’ s General Secretary becomes the president of the PRC . On information and belief , the Communist Party is not an organ or political subdivision of the PRC , nor is it owned by the PRC or a political subdivision of the PRC , and thus it is not protected by sovereign immunity .\nCOVID-19 has done irreparable damage to countries across the globe , causing sickness , death , economic disruption , and human suffering . In Missouri , the impact of the virus is very real — thousands have been infected and many have died , families have been separated from dying loved ones , small businesses are shuttering their doors , and those living paycheck to paycheck are struggling to put food on their table . The Chinese government lied to the world about the danger and contagious nature of COVID-19 , silenced whistleblowers , and did little to stop the spread of the disease . They must be held accountable for their actions .\nAn appalling campaign of deceit , concealment , misfeasance , and inaction by Chinese authorities unleashed this pandemic . During the critical weeks of the initial outbreak , Chinese authorities deceived the public , suppressed crucial information , arrested whistleblowers , denied human-to-human transmission in the face of mounting evidence , destroyed critical medical research , permitted millions of people to be exposed to the virus , and even hoarded personal protective equipment ( “ PPE ” ) —thus causing a global pandemic that was unnecessary and preventable .\nThe lawsuit continues with more regarding the efforts by the Chinese government to suppress information regarding the coronavirus :\nWhen their actions began to kill hundreds of thousands of people across the globe , Defendants sought to minimize the consequences , engaging in a coverup and misleading public relations campaign by censoring scientists , ordering the destruction and suppression of valuable research , and refusing cooperation with the global community , all in violation of international health standards .\nSchmitt also noted that the Chinese government did not act to stop the spread of the virus soon enough :\nWhile denying human-to-human transmission , Chinese officials took little to no steps to contain the outbreak . By January 13 , the Chinese government was aware of spread to Thailand . For the next week , they began treating COVID-19 as a serious and contagious virus without advising the public . During that time , millions of people traveled through Wuhan , and many thousands were infected , making a worldwide outbreak almost inevitable . A potluck event for 40,000 people went forward in Wuhan on January 16 . The Chinese government took no serious steps to contain the outbreak until January 23 —when it was far too late .\nFurther , “ According to data gathered by The New York Times , nearly 175,000 individuals left Wuhan on January 1 alone to travel for the Lunar New Year . The Chinese government also continued with New Year celebrations , despite the risk for potential further infections . ”\nPJ Media noted , “ According to unpublished , unconfirmed Chinese government reports seen by the South China Morning Post , the first recorded case of the coronavirus dates to November 17 , 2019 , weeks before The Lancet ‘ s claim that the first recorded case came on December 1 . By December 8 , the SCMP documents recorded between 1 and 5 new cases . By December 27 , the SCMP documents showed 181 confirmed cases , and a friend of coronavirus whistleblower Dr. Li Wenliang recalled that his medical department first reported the new outbreak to the Wuhan Center for Disease Control on the 27th . ” | allsides-corpus-439 |
A $ 100,000 real-estate brokerage fee that was part of former Trump attorney Michael Cohen ’ s guilty plea Tuesday came from representing a company owned by a member of the Qatar royal family , according to interviews and real-estate documents .\nMr. Cohen admitted to failing to pay taxes on more than $ 4 million in income , among other felonies . That income included what prosecutors described as $ 100,000 in 2014 from “ brokering the sale of a piece of property in a private aviation community in Ocala , Florida . ”\nThe community is a fly-in development named Jumbolair , said Frank Merschman , who owns the development . Mr. Merschman said he bought some property in 2014 from a Qatari company , and Mr. Cohen represented the seller , Abdul Aziz Althani Holdings Inc .\nThat company is owned by a member of the Qatar royal family , Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Jassim bin Hamad Al-Thani , 62 years old , according to the Panama Papers , documents from a Panamanian law firm obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung , and shared with The Wall Street Journal .\nSheikh Abdul Aziz and his attorneys didn ’ t respond to requests for comment . He was described in the Panama Papers as a major shareholder in two Qatari banks .\nLanny Davis , an attorney for Mr. Cohen , didn ’ t respond to a request for comment .\nThe Journal reported in May that Mr. Cohen helped a major donor to President Trump ’ s inauguration pitch a nuclear-power investment to the Qatari sovereign-wealth fund . The pitch came in early April , shortly before federal authorities raided Mr. Cohen ’ s office , apartment and hotel room .\nMr. Merschman said the Qatari company owned several properties adjacent to Jumbolair , and he initially bought one through a tax-foreclosure auction . He said he then received a call from Mr. Cohen , who said the owner , being in Qatar , hadn ’ t realized taxes were overdue and wanted to repurchase the property .\nWhen Mr. Merschman declined that offer , he said , Mr. Cohen later offered to sell him two other properties owned by the Qatari company . “ I don ’ t know how they knew each other , but [ Mr. Cohen ] knew all the people , ” Mr. Merschman said . “ He had done work for Mr. Aziz . ”\nIn 2005 , Abdul Aziz Althani Holdings paid Mr. Trump ’ s company $ 6.2 million for a fourth-floor condominium in Trump Park Avenue , New York property records show . Mr. Cohen owns a condo on the 10th floor of that building .\nMr. Merschman ’ s company in May 2014 paid $ 650,000 for the two additional properties , county real-estate records show . Mr. Merschman said he didn ’ t pay Mr. Cohen ’ s brokerage fee directly , but understands the fee was paid through a former owner of the property who was working for him at the time .\nMr. Merschman said the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed him a few months ago about the transaction , and “ I cooperated with them 100 % . ” | allsides-corpus-440 |
WASHINGTON—President Trump said he has put off the decision about whether to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions , a frequent target of his ire , until at least after the November congressional elections .\n“ I just would love to have him do a great job , ” Mr. Trump said about Mr . Sessions on Thursday in an interview with Bloomberg News . Mr. Trump declined to say whether he ’ d keep Mr . Sessions on the job beyond November .\nMr. Trump has publicly criticized Mr . Sessions for months , and recently told one Republican lawmaker that he wanted to fire him before the midterm elections , according to a person familiar with the matter . But top Republican lawmakers have urged Mr . Sessions to resist pressure to quit and have pushed Mr. Trump to stand down for now .\nMr. Trump ’ s statement on Mr . Sessions came after the president surveyed advisers earlier this week about the potential political blowback from firing Mr . Sessions , telling one person that he didn ’ t believe there would be much , according to a person familiar with the matter . Inside the White House , senior officials gave Mr. Trump legal and political reasons for not removing Mr . Sessions , but those advisers weren ’ t sure earlier this week what Mr. Trump would ultimately decide .\nOne factor for Mr. Trump ’ s decision to keep Mr . Sessions for the coming months is that there is no obvious replacement . White House officials and others Mr. Trump has spoken to about firing Mr . Sessions said the president has not inquired about potential successors , these people said .\nFueling Mr. Trump ’ s anger is his view that Mr . Sessions erred in recusing himself from the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections , White House aides have said . That investigation is looking into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia , as well as possible obstruction of justice . Mr. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and has called the probe a “ witch hunt. ” Russia also has denied any involvement .\nLast week , President Trump issued the latest in a series of attacks on Mr . Sessions , suggesting that Mr . Sessions is allowing the special counsel ’ s Russia investigation to proceed while permitting “ real corruption ” to go “ untouched . ”\nIn response , Mr . Sessions issued a rare public statement defending his leadership of the Justice Department . “ While I am attorney general , the actions of the Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations , ” he said .\nThe tweets put renewed pressure on Mr . Sessions , who is in the delicate position of both fending off attacks from Mr. Trump while carrying out the president ’ s tough-on-crime policies . | allsides-corpus-441 |
( CNN ) A highly unusual and racially charged episode from the 2016 campaign suddenly resurfaced this week when a federal judge whom President Donald Trump repeatedly criticized was assigned to hear the case of a man who claims he was improperly deported .\nJudge Gonzalo Curiel , who was born in the US but is of Mexican heritage , was attacked by Trump last year over his handling of a lawsuit against Trump University . Trump claimed Curiel could not impartially hear the case because of his background and Trump 's hardline immigration policies . The case was eventually settled .\nNow , Curiel is assigned to hear the case of Juan Manuel Montes Bojorquez , 23 , who his lawyers allege was deported from California to Mexico earlier this year despite having active protection under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program , also known as DACA .\nAnd Trump 's comments toward Curiel last year -- he called the Indiana-born judge a `` hater '' and a `` Mexican '' -- drew some of the loudest accusations of racism that the then-candidate faced during his campaign and several repudiations from prominent Republicans .\nThe lawsuit , which is brought under the Freedom of Information Act , has already become a flashpoint in the Trump administration 's immigration policy and the President 's murky position on DACA .\nCuriel 's involvement is sure to increase the publicity surrounding the case , which is already shaping up to be one of the more high-profile challenges to execution of Trump 's immigration agenda . The White House did not immediately respond to an inquiry about whether the President feels Curiel will be a fair judge in the matter .\nThe President 's own position on DACA has evolved . Trump pledged to end DACA during the 2016 campaign , but the Department of Homeland Security has continued issuing permits and he has since spoken about how sympathetic he finds the people in DACA -- undocumented immigrants brought to the US as children who , in many cases , know no other home .\n`` We 're going to show great heart , '' Trump said at a news conference in February . `` DACA is a very , very difficult subject for me , I will tell you . ''\nBut he also spoke of possible abuses of the DACA program in the same thought , saying in `` some of the cases , having DACA and they 're gang members and they 're drug dealers , too . But you have some absolutely , incredible kids , I would say mostly . They were brought here in such a way -- it 's a very -- it 's a very , very tough subject . ''\nHomeland Security Secretary John Kelly has insisted the administration has not detained or deported anyone with an active DACA status , but several former DACA recipients have been detained and , in some cases like Montes ' , the government has maintained that a violation of the program forfeited the status .\nLawyers for Montes say their client was apprehended by Border Patrol and deported on February 18 . DHS said Wednesday that never happened .\nWhile DHS initially said Tuesday they had a record of Montes ' DACA status expiring in 2015 , they released further information Wednesday saying he did , in fact , have DACA status until 2018 , agreeing with lawyers for Montes .\nJUST WATCHED Donald Trump 's full CNN interview with Jake Tapper Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Donald Trump 's full CNN interview with Jake Tapper 07:20\nThe problem , though , is on the part of the story both sides agree on : Montes tried to sneak back into the US on February 19 and was caught by Border Patrol . DACA requires individuals to get pre-clearance to leave the country , and so Montes ' re-entry then showed he had left without authorization and voided his status , DHS said . He was sent back to Mexico the following day , where he is now staying .\nThe administration has said that it respects DACA and that no one with active status would be deported , but advocates are using the Montes case and others to call into question whether DHS is being honest about its position .\nThe lawsuit is seeking records about Montes ' interactions with Customs and Border Patrol , and also any appropriate relief for Montes including attorney fees .\nTrump was condemned by Democrats and Republicans alike last year after he criticized Curiel 's rulings in the Trump University case and attacked Curiel personally .\nOne of Trump 's harshest rebukes came from House Speaker Paul Ryan , who described the language as `` sort of like the textbook definition of a racist comment . '' Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called Trump 's remarks `` offensive and wrong '' and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich , a staunch ally of Trump , called the comments `` inexcusable '' and `` one of the worst mistakes Trump has made . ''\nTrump later defended himself in a written statement , saying he did not believe `` one 's heritage ( made ) them incapable of being impartial . ''\n`` Based on the rulings that I have received in the Trump University civil case , I feel justified in questioning whether I am receiving a fair trial , '' Trump said . He also referenced `` the core issues of my campaign that focus on illegal immigration , jobs and unfair trade '' in explaining his criticism .\nIn a memorable exchange with CNN 's Jake Tapper in June , Trump vociferously -- and repeatedly -- defended his claims that Curiel was biased .\n`` He 's proud of his heritage . I respect him for that , '' Trump said , dismissing charges that his allegation was racist . `` He 's a Mexican . We 're building a wall between here and Mexico . ''\nAt the end of a lengthy exchange , Tapper asked : `` If you are saying he can not do his job because of his race , is that not the definition of racism ? '' | allsides-corpus-442 |
He even suggested that the threat was not real or was exaggerated by putting the word “ bomb ” in quotes — language that edged close to that of conspiracy theorists on the alt-right , who claimed without evidence that it was a false flag operation by Democrats to mobilize their voters .\n“ Republicans are doing so well in early voting , and at the polls , and now this ‘ Bomb ’ stuff happens and the momentum greatly slows - news not talking politics , ” the president said in a tweet . “ Very unfortunate , what is going on . Republicans , go out and vote ! ”\nIt was not clear how much he knew about the case before he posted this tweet , but he had received briefings throughout the week .\nMr. Trump has never troubled himself with keeping a presidential mien during times of national crisis , whether it was wildfires in California , shootings in Chicago or the racial clashes in Charlottesville , Va . But even by his standards , his remarks in the White House before a crowd of a few hundred mostly African-American activists were discordant .\nIn the same week that bombs were mailed to a former Democratic president , a vice president , a first lady , a senator and a congresswoman , Mr. Trump ridiculed the Democratic Party , saying its policies had led to unsafe communities , failing schools and overcrowded prisons . He even claimed erroneously that the party ’ s name was “ Democrat , ” adding , “ I hate it . I hate just saying it . ”\nIn the same week that a bomb was mailed to the suburban New York home of Mr. Soros , the philanthropist and Democratic donor — also the same week that Hungary ’ s increasingly authoritarian government expelled a university founded by Mr. Soros — Mr. Trump inveighed against “ globalists , ” whom he accused of cheating American workers .\nAnd in the same week that two explosives were mailed to CNN ’ s New York offices — one addressed to John O. Brennan , the former C.I.A . director ; the other to James R. Clapper , the former director of national intelligence — Mr. Trump said the news media attacked him relentlessly and never covered his successes . | allsides-corpus-443 |
WASHINGTON – Secretary of State Mike Pompeo used the `` F-word '' and other expletives after a testy interview with a National Public Radio host on Friday , the news outlet said .\nPompeo unloaded on NPR 's Mary Louise Kelly after an interview in which she questioned him on Ukraine and Iran , among other issues . He grew extremely irritated by Kelly 's Ukraine questions , according to NPR .\n`` 'Do you think Americans care about Ukraine ? ' '' Pompeo apparently shouted at Kelly after the interview .\nOn Saturday , Pompeo responded by calling Kelly a liar and suggesting she was unable to point out Ukraine on an unmarked map .\n`` NPR reporter Mary Louise Kelly lied to me , twice , '' Pompeo said in a statement released by the State Department .\nHe said she lied last month when setting up the interview and again on Friday . He suggested that Kelly had agreed to keep Friday 's post-interview conversation off the record .\n`` It is shameful that this reporter chose to violate the basic rules of journalism and decency , '' Pompeo said . `` This is another example of how unhinged the media has become in its quest to hurt President Trump and this Administration . ''\nPompeo is scheduled to travel to Ukraine next week for a meeting with that country 's president , Volodymyr Zelensky , a central figure in the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump . Ukraine is a pivotal U.S. ally in the effort to counter Russian aggression .\nThe State Department said Pompeo is going to Kyiv to `` highlight U.S. support for Ukraine ’ s sovereignty and territorial integrity . '' The Eastern European country is at war with Russia .\nIn the impeachment proceedings , House Democrats have charged Trump with abuse of power for soliciting foreign interference in the 2020 election , one of two articles of impeachment currently being tried in the Senate . Trump pressed Zelensky to open two investigations that would have helped his re-election campaign . As part of that pressure campaign , Trump ousted former U.S . Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch , a career foreign service diplomat .\nYovanovitch was targeted by Trump 's personal lawyer , Rudy Giuliani , and Trump has publicly attacked her .\n`` Do you owe Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch an apology ? '' Kelly asked Pompeo , who has declined to publicly defend the diplomat .\n`` You know , I agreed to come on your show today to talk about Iran , '' he responded .\nKelly pressed him . `` I just want to give you another opportunity to answer this , because as you know , people who work for you in your department , people who have resigned from this department under your leadership , saying you should stand up for the diplomats who work here , '' she said .\nPompeo said he had defended `` every State Department official , '' to which Kelly said : `` Sir , respectfully where have you defended Marie Yovanovitch ? ''\n`` I 've said all I 'm going to say today , '' he responded .\nShe then asked if he tried to block Giuliani 's `` shadow foreign policy '' in Ukraine .\n`` The Ukraine policy has been run from the Department of State for the entire time that I have been here , and our policy was very clear , '' he asserted . Numerous other State Department officials have testified that Giuliani and other Trump associates used irregular channels to pressure Zelensky .\nAfter the interview , Kelly said she was taken to the secretary of State 's private living room , where Pompeo was waiting for her . `` He shouted at me for about the same amount of time as the interview itself . He was not happy to have been questioned about Ukraine , '' Kelly said , in an account released by NPR with the interview transcript .\nShe said he used the F-word and `` many others '' when he asking her if Americans cared about Ukraine . He then asked her if she could find Ukraine on a map .\n`` I said yes , and he called out for aides to bring us a map of the world with no writing . I pointed to Ukraine , '' she recounted .\nIn Saturday 's statement , Pompeo suggested Kelly had pointed to Bangladesh , not Ukraine , on the map .\n`` It is worth noting that Bangladesh is NOT Ukraine , '' he said . | allsides-corpus-444 |
Rapper Kanye West could receive a sizable `` protest vote '' if he goes forward with his quixotic presidential campaign , University of Maryland African-American Studies Professor Jason Nichols told `` Tucker Carlson Tonight '' Friday .\n`` I do n't think there 's any chance he 's going to win but I think people need to understand the power of a protest vote , '' Nichols told host Lisa Boothe . `` There are many people who are completely dissatisfied with the direction the country is going under Donald Trump and there are people who do n't like Joe Biden or do n't think that he 's coherent or competent , or whatever it is that 's the narrative , and they 're looking for someone who 's another option . ''\nNichols told guest host Lisa Boothe that West 's impact could be comparable to Jill Stein , the 2016 Green Party nominee who received more than 1.4 million votes in the general election .\nKANYE WEST TWEETS PICTURE OF HIS FACE ON MOUNT RUSHMORE AMID 2020 PRESIDENTIAL BID\n`` I do n't know anybody who actually agreed with Jill Stein , '' Nichols said . `` She 's an anti-vaxxer , she 's kind of a strange character . But at the same time , they voted for her because they were dissatisfied with Hillary Clinton and they did n't like Donald Trump . I think it could very well happen with Kanye West , which will etch him into the history books , which I think is part of his purpose here . ''\nEarlier this week , West filed Statement of Candidacy and Statement of Organization documents with the Federal Election Commission ( FEC ) . The latter document authorizes a political committee to raise and spend money on West 's behalf , while the former indicates that West has raised at least $ 5,000 through campaign activity .\nOn Wednesday , the Oklahoma State Election Board announced that West had qualified for the ballot in the Sooner State .\nWest famously visited Trump at the White House in October 2018 and his wife , Kim Kardashian , sucessfully lobbied Trump to commute the sentence of Alice Johnson .\n`` I think that 's a big reason why he could be trouble for Donald Trump , '' Nichols said . `` I think people who saw Donald Trump and said , 'Oh , well , all the claims that Donald Trump is racist , they are offset by the fact that he 's an advocate for criminal justice reform ' -- and I use 'advocate ' very loosely .\n`` At the same time , Kanye West can take that from him . The Alice Johnson commutation was more [ Kardashian 's ] work , arguably , than Donald Trump . '' | allsides-corpus-445 |
DES MOINES , Iowa ( AP ) — A top aide to Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer in Iowa privately offered campaign contributions to local politicians in exchange for endorsing his White House bid , according to multiple people with direct knowledge of the conversations .\nThe overtures from Pat Murphy , a former state House speaker who is serving as a top adviser on Steyer ’ s Iowa campaign , aren ’ t illegal — though payments for endorsements would violate campaign finance laws if not disclosed . There ’ s no evidence that any Iowans accepted the offer or received contributions from Steyer ’ s campaign as compensation for their backing .\nBut the proposals could revive criticism that the billionaire Steyer is trying to buy his way into the White House . Several state lawmakers and political candidates said they were surprised Steyer ’ s campaign would think he could purchase their support .\nTom Courtney , a former Democratic state senator from southeastern Iowa who ’ s running for reelection to his old seat , told The ███ that the financial offer “ left a bad taste in my mouth . ”\nMurphy said concerns about his outreach were the result of a “ miscommunication . ”\nAs Steyer met with voters in Bluffton , South Carolina , on Thursday , the first question posed to him was about the AP report . He said that he learned about the allegations while driving to the event and that no payments had gone to officials in Iowa .\n“ We haven ’ t given any money to anyone in Iowa , nor are we planning to , ” he said . “ There ’ s no way we would ever do that . ”\nCourtney declined to name Murphy as the Steyer aide who made the offer , but several other local politicians said they received similar propositions , and all confirmed the proposal came from Murphy himself . Most spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the issue freely . Iowa state Rep. Karin Derry said Murphy didn ’ t explicitly offer a specific dollar amount , but made it clear Derry would receive financial support if she backed Steyer .\n“ It was presented more as , he has provided financial support to other down-ballot candidates who ’ ve endorsed him , and could do the same for you , ” she said .\n“ Tom , I know you ’ re running for Senate . I ’ m working for Tom Steyer , ” Courtney recalled hearing from the aide . “ Now you know how this works . ... He said , ‘ You help them , and they ’ ll help you . ’ ”\n“ I said , ‘ It wouldn ’ t matter if you ’ re talking monetary , there ’ s no amount , ’ ” Courtney continued . “ I don ’ t do that kind of thing . ”\nAlberto Lammers , Steyer ’ s campaign press secretary , said the candidate hasn ’ t made any individual contributions to local officials in Iowa and won ’ t be making any this year . In an email , Lammers said Steyer ’ s endorsements “ are earned because of Tom ’ s campaign message , ” and distanced the candidate from Murphy .\n“ Our campaign policy is clear that we will not engage in this kind of activity , and anyone who does is not speaking for the campaign or does not know our policy , ” Lammers said .\nIn a separate statement , Murphy said that “ as a former legislator , I know how tricky the endorsement process can be for folks in Iowa . It was never my intention to make my former colleagues uncomfortable , and I apologize for any miscommunication on my part . ”\nThe overtures do not appear to have made much of a difference for Steyer . Aside from Murphy ’ s support , Steyer has received the endorsement of just one Iowan since entering the race in July — former state Rep. Roger Thomas .\nThomas did not respond to phone calls , but in a statement provided by the campaign , he said that he endorsed Steyer “ because he ’ s the outsider who can deliver for Iowans on the issues that matter most : getting corporate corruption out of our politics and putting forth a rural agenda that revitalizes communities across Iowa . ”\nThomas ’ endorsement was issued in October after the close of the most recent campaign finance reporting period , which ended Sept. 30 . The disclosure Steyer filed offers no indication that he directly gave Thomas any money .\nExperts say a campaign could violate campaign finance laws if they don ’ t disclose payments for endorsements .\n“ It ’ s legal if you disclose a payment for an endorsement on your campaign finance report , ” said Adav Noti , a former Federal Election Commission attorney who now works for the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center in Washington . But , he added , “ It would be unlawful if you don ’ t disclose it , or you disclose it but try to hide who the recipient is , or try to hide what that purpose was . ”\nA trio of former Ron Paul aides faced legal trouble in 2016 over similar issues during the 2012 Iowa Republican caucus campaign . Campaign chairman Jesse Benton , campaign manager John Tate and deputy campaign manager Dimitri Kesari were convicted in 2016 of charges related to arranging and concealing payments for then-Iowa state Sen. Kent Sorenson , who switched his support from Michele Bachmann to Paul just six days before the Iowa caucuses . Sorenson served 15 months in jail for his role in the scheme .\nIt ’ s unclear whether Murphy could face a similar legal complaint , but the issue could revive scrutiny of how Steyer is deploying his financial resources . The billionaire businessman built his fortune in banking and investment management before turning to politics , and though he ’ s never held public office , he invested tens of millions of dollars in political activism and electoral politics before launching his presidential bid this year . Before his presidential run , Steyer ’ s most recent focus was a multimillion-dollar , pro-impeachment campaign , and as the U.S. House takes up the issue , he ’ s argued he ’ s put it on the national agenda .\nSteyer has largely self-funded his presidential campaign , spending $ 47.6 million of his own money in the first three months since launching his bid , much of that on online fundraising and advertising . Steyer has qualified for the November debate , but he remains at the back of the pack in early-state and national polls .\nSteve Bullock , who as Montana ’ s governor and attorney general spent years pushing for stricter regulation of money in politics , was quick to criticize Steyer , saying an attempt to buy endorsements undermines the democratic process .\n“ Tom Steyer ’ s campaign is built on writing the biggest checks , not on building genuine grassroots support - and proves why it ’ s so important to get Big Money out of our elections , ” Bullock , who is also running for president , said in a statement .\nIt ’ s not the first time Bullock , who has failed to meet the donor and polling thresholds for most of the Democratic debates , has slammed Steyer . In September , he accused the wealthy philanthropist of bankrolling his way onto the debate stage after spending $ 12 million on advertising in his first six weeks as a candidate . | allsides-corpus-446 |
After his round of golf on Saturday , it seems the president went back home and started scrolling Twitter . President Donald Trump then proceeded to go on a spree that was bizarre even for his standards as he retweeted posts mocking several big-name female Democrats all while he peddled baseless conspiracy theories regarding MSNBC ’ s Joe Scarborough . In one particularly shocking message , the president shared a tweet by John Stahl , a conservative who got a whopping 4 percent in the 2012 open primary to represent California ’ s 52nd District , that called Hillary Clinton a “ skank . ”\nThe president just retweeted someone calling the first woman nominee of either major political party in the US “ a skank ” a few hours after another Scarborough murder allegation on the weekend the country closes in on 100K coronavirus deaths . pic.twitter.com/5H2E63kWOn — Maggie Haberman ( @ maggieNYT ) May 24 , 2020\nThat wasn ’ t the only time Trump amplified Stahl on Saturday . The president also retweeted two other messages by Stahl in which he insulted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and mocked the way she looks . And he also shared yet another Stahl post in which he made fun of Stacey Abrams ’ weight .\nThe president called one prominent female Democrat fat and another a `` skank '' tonight and it wo n't get nearly the coverage of Joe Biden saying something dumb because the bar for Trump is subterranean and we 've normalized having an ignorant monster as president — Aaron Rupar ( @ atrupar ) May 24 , 2020\nThe president shared the mocking tweets on the same day as he continued to push a conspiracy theory that suggests Scarborough may have had something to do with the 2001 death of an intern who worked for him . “ Keep digging , ” Trump wrote , “ use forensic geniuses ! ” This isn ’ t the first time the president has peddled that particular theory and it ’ s unclear what exactly set him off this time . But earlier in the day , the Morning Joe Twitter account noted there would be a “ special Sunday morning edition ” of the show “ as the New York Times Dedicates Page One to All Those Who Have Lost Their Lives in the Pandemic . ”\nA blow to her head ? Body found under his desk ? Left Congress suddenly ? Big topic of discussion in Florida ... and , he ’ s a Nut Job ( with bad ratings ) . Keep digging , use forensic geniuses ! https : //t.co/UxbS5gZecd — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) May 24 , 2020\nFormer Vice President Joe Biden also made a mention of the shocking front page that was devoted entirely to listing some of the almost 100,000 Americans who have died of COVID-19 , calling it “ jarring ” and “ heartbreaking. ” Trump ’ s Twitter spree also came on the same day that Biden released an attack ad against the president , blasting his decision to play golf over the weekend as the coronavirus death toll kept rising . “ The death toll is still rising , ” notes the ad . “ The president is playing golf . ” | allsides-corpus-447 |
Democratic presidential candidate and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg is being called out for appearing to emulate former President Barack Obama in his speech — to the point that the former mayor is now being accused of plagiarism in more than one instance .\nFox News pointed to a tweet Buttigieg sent out over the weekend , where he wrote : `` If we can light up a high school gym—we can light a neighborhood . If we can light up a neighborhood—we can light a city . If we can light up a city—we can light up our country . ''\nA number of Twitter users compared it to a tweet from Obama in 2012 , where the president wrote : `` One voice can change a room . And if it can change a room , it can change a city . And if it can change a city , it can change a state . ''\n`` The View '' co-host Meghan McCain replied , `` Oh COME ON ! I know Pete thinks he 's the next Obama but this is ridiculous . ''\nThe Buttigieg campaign told Fox News his tweet was in reference to an event earlier on the campaign trail where the lights went out and attendees used their cellphones as lights .\nParkland survivor and conservative activist Kyle Kashuv on Monday night accused Buttigieg of making a habit of mimicking Obama and further claimed the presidential candidate was plagiarizing while sharing a mash-up of similarities between Buttigieg and Obama 's speeches .\nKashuv tweeted a video made by The Recount with the message , `` So it turns out Pete Buttigieg is just blatantly plagiarizing Barack Obama . Cmon man at least come up [ with ] your own platitudes ... ''\nLiberals noticed a pattern , too . Another clip of Buttigieg using similar language to Obama was shared by a writer for Common Dreams , a publication that touts itself as `` providing breaking news & views for the progressive community . '' | allsides-corpus-448 |
Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort pleaded guilty in federal court Friday as part of a plea agreement that involves cooperation with Special Counsel Robert Mueller and allows him to avoid a second trial .\n“ I plead guilty , '' Manafort , 69 , told U.S. District Judge Amy Berman in Washington .\nProsecutor Andrew Weissmann told the judge that Manafort 's deal includes a cooperation agreement with prosecutors , who are investigating whether any Trump associates played a role in Russia 's meddling in the 2016 election . That could include interviews with prosecutors and testifying in court .\nA defense attorney for Manafort told Fox News the deal includes `` full cooperation . ''\nBut the president 's team downplayed the significance of Manafort 's plea .\n“ Once again an investigation has concluded with a plea having nothing to do with President Trump or the Trump campaign , '' Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani said in a statement to Fox News . `` The reason : the president did nothing wrong . ''\nWhite House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Friday that Manafort 's decision is `` totally unrelated '' to the president .\nManafort , in a trial set to begin Sept. 24 , had been facing seven counts of foreign lobbying violations and witness tampering in federal court in Washington .\nIn August , in a separate trial in Virginia , a federal jury found Manafort guilty on eight counts of federal tax and banking crimes .\nManafort faces up to 10 years on these charges in Washington . He still faces sentencing for his guilty verdict in Virginia .\nAs part of this agreement , Manafort has forfeited multiple bank accounts and several properties in New York . However , he will keep his properties in Florida and Virginia , where his family live .\nManafort attorney Kevin Downing told reporters after the court hearing it was a “ tough day ” for his client , “ who has accepted responsibility. ” He said Manafort “ wanted to make sure that his family was able to remain safe and live a good life . ”\nThe case was brought by Mueller 's team , which is probing potential crimes related to the 2016 election . But Manafort has not been charged with anything related to the campaign .\nIn August , Manafort ’ s bank and tax fraud conviction made him the first campaign associate of Trump found guilty by a jury as part of Mueller ’ s probe .\n“ I feel very badly for Paul Manafort , ” Trump told reporters after the August verdict , adding that it had `` nothing to do with Russian collusion . '' The president has called Mueller 's probe a `` witch hunt . ''\nTrump also said he had “ such respect ” for Manafort and called him a “ brave man. ” In comments interpreted to mean he was open to pardoning Manafort , Trump commended Manafort , saying he “ refused to break ” and “ make up stories in order to get a deal . ”\nIn the Virginia trial , prosecutors said Manafort hid income earned from political work overseas from the IRS while fraudulently obtaining millions in bank loans . Manafort had pleaded not guilty to all counts .\nThe prosecution ’ s star witness , Rick Gates – Manafort ’ s former business partner who struck a plea deal to cooperate with the government -- testified during the trial that he and Manafort committed bank and tax fraud together .\nDowning , Manafort 's attorney , suggested after the guilty verdict in August that Manafort was open to striking a deal before the second trial .\n“ He is evaluating all of his options at this point , ” Downing said of Manafort . | allsides-corpus-449 |
Russia 's government has resigned , hours after President Vladimir Putin proposed sweeping constitutional changes that could prolong his stay in power .\nIf approved by the public , the proposals would transfer power from the presidency to parliament .\nMr Putin is due to step down in 2024 when his fourth term of office comes to an end .\nBut there is speculation he could seek a new role or hold on to power behind the scenes .\nMr Putin put forward his plans in his annual state of the nation address to lawmakers . Later , in an unexpected move , Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev announced that the government was resigning to help facilitate the changes .\nRussian government sources told the BBC that ministers did not know about the government 's resignation ahead of the announcement .\nThe Russian leader said during a speech to both chambers of parliament that there would be a nationwide vote on changes that would shift power from the presidency to parliament .\nConstitutional reforms included giving the lower house of parliament , the State Duma , `` greater responsibility '' for the appointment of the prime minister and the cabinet .\nCurrently , the president appoints the prime minister , and the Duma approves the decision .\nMr Putin also suggested an increased role for an advisory body called the State Council . The council , which is currently chaired by Mr Putin , comprises the heads of Russia 's federal regions . Mr Putin said it had proved to be `` highly effective '' .\nAmending the rules that limit presidents to two consecutive terms\nStrengthening laws that prohibit presidential candidates who have held foreign citizenship or foreign residency permits\nMr Medvedev made his announcement on state television with President Putin sitting next to him .\n`` These changes , when they are adopted ... will introduce substantial changes not only to an entire range of articles of the constitution , but also to the entire balance of power , the power of the executive , the power of the legislature , the power of judiciary , '' Mr Medvedev said of Mr Putin 's proposals .\n`` In this context ... the government in its current form has resigned . ''\nMr Putin thanked Mr Medvedev for his work but said `` not everything '' had been accomplished .\nHe asked Mr Medvedev to become deputy head of the National Security Council , which is chaired by Mr Putin .\nThe president later nominated tax service chief Mikhail Mishustin to replace Mr Medvedev as prime minister .\nMr Medvedev has been prime minister for several years . He previously served as president from 2008-2012 , switching roles with Mr Putin - a close ally - after the latter served his first two terms as president . Russia 's constitution only allows presidents to serve two consecutive terms .\nEven when he was prime minister , Mr Putin was widely seen as the power behind then President Medvedev .\nOpposition leader and leading Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny said he believed that any referendum on the constitutional changes would be `` fraudulent crap '' . He said Mr Putin 's goal was to be `` sole leader for life '' .\nThe last time Russia held a referendum was in 1993 when it adopted the constitution under President Boris Yeltsin , Mr Putin 's predecessor .\nMr Putin became acting president following Mr Yeltsin 's resignation in 1999 and was formally inaugurated a year later . He has held the reins of power - as president or prime minister - ever since .\nPresident Putin likes stability . It 's his thing . So the newsflash that the entire government had resigned was a big surprise . From the online chatter , it seems even the cabinet ministers did n't see it coming . For a moment it was like a flashback to Russia of the 1990s , when President Yeltsin changed prime ministers as readily as his socks . Vladimir Putin is no Yeltsin , though , and this move looks like part of some bigger plan that 's all about consolidating - and extending - his hold on power .\nUnder the current rules , Mr Putin must step down as president in 2024 and it 's never been clear what he 'd do next . That 's still true . But the constitutional tweaks he 's proposed are hints at some options . He 's bumped up the status of the little-known State Council , which he already heads . Or he could become PM again , now he 's slightly weakened the powers of Russia 's president .\nIf he is sticking around , perhaps he needs to make that palatable to people given all the social and economic problems he had to list once again in his annual address to the nation . If Mr Putin were to blame for their woes , Russians might well wonder why they should swallow him staying on , post-2024 . Dmitry Medvedev - so often useful to Mr Putin - for now looks like a handy scapegoat .\nIn his address to parliament , the president unveiled a series of plans to increase the number of children being born in Russia . Like several Eastern European states , Russia has been struggling with a declining birth rate .\nLast year Mr Putin promised tax breaks for bigger families .\nOn Wednesday he pledged state funding for new mothers in a bid to increase the number of children being born from an average of fewer than 1.5 per woman to 1.7 within four years .\nSo-called `` maternity capital '' has until now only been paid to families with at least two children .\nWelfare benefits will also be paid for children aged three to seven in low-income families , and free school meals will be provided for the first four years of school .\nRussia 's population has struggled to recover from a dramatic decline in the 1990s . | allsides-corpus-450 |
Police in Moscow arrested more than 750 people during a demonstration outside city hall on Saturday , where they were calling for fair elections after the upcoming city council elections on Sept. 8 excluded opposition candidates from being on the ballot , according to a Russian organization that monitors political arrests .\nOVD-Info said 779 people were detained . Moscow police earlier said 295 people had been taken in , but did not immediately give a final figure .\nThe protest was organized by opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny , 43 , who was arrested Wednesday and sentenced to 30 days in jail . Other opposition politicians were detained on Saturday , including Ilya Yashin , Dmitry Gudkov and Ivan Zhdanov .\nYashin 's Facebook page said that 10 masked officers took him from his apartment in Moscow the night before the demonstration . After being arrested , Navalny said on Instagram , `` I have been detained and am now at a police station wearing shorts like a stupid man , ''\nMoscow police estimated the number of protesters at 3,500 . They were originally set up near the mayor 's office before being relocated by police towards the side streets . The protest was reportedly unauthorized by the government , and people were seen scrapping with police officers and shouting `` Russia will be free ! '' and `` Who are you beating ? ''\nThe opposition politician names were reportedly not included on the ballot because they had not received enough signatures to qualify , according to election officials . Supporters of the opposition party say the government is forcing them out , so they wo n't be able to participate in the elections .\nHelmeted police barged into Navalny 's video studio as it was conducting a YouTube broadcast of the protest and arrested program leader Vladimir Milonov . Police also searched Dozhd , an internet TV station that was covering the protest , and its editor in chief Alexandra Perepelova was ordered to undergo questioning at the Investigative Committee .\nRUSSIAN SUSPECT IN $ 4B BITCOIN FRAUD IS SUED IN CALIFORNIA ; US , RUSSIA SEEK HIS EXTRADITION FROM GREECE\nThere was no immediate information on what charges the detainees might face .\nOnce a local , low-key affair , the September vote for Moscow 's city council has shaken up Russia 's political scene as the Kremlin struggles with how to deal with strongly opposing views in its sprawling capital of 12.6 million .\nThe decision by electoral authorities to bar some opposition candidates from running for having allegedly insufficient signatures on their nominating petitions had already sparked several days of demonstrations even before Saturday 's clashes in Moscow .\nThe city council , which has 45 seats , is responsible for a large municipal budget and is now controlled by the pro-Kremlin United Russia party . All of its seats , which have a five-year-term , are up for grabs in the Sept. 8 vote .\nOver 22,000 people gathered for a protest in downtown Moscow last Saturday , the largest in years . | allsides-corpus-451 |
Attorney General William Barr speaks about the release of a redacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller 's report during a news conference , Thursday , April 18 , 2019 , at the Department of Justice in Washington . ( AP Photo/Patrick Semansky )\nAttorney General William Barr speaks about the release of a redacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller 's report during a news conference , Thursday , April 18 , 2019 , at the Department of Justice in Washington . ( AP Photo/Patrick Semansky )\nWASHINGTON ( AP ) — The Justice Department has informed the House Judiciary Committee that Attorney General William Barr may skip a Thursday hearing on special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s report if committee lawyers seek to question him .\nThe Democratic-run committee plans to allow counsels from both sides to ask Barr about the Russia probe after the traditional round of questioning by lawmakers . Department officials also told the committee that they opposed a plan to go into a closed session if members wanted to discuss redacted portions of Mueller ’ s report , according to a senior Democratic aide on the committee , who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the confidential communications with the department .\nJustice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said given that Barr had agreed to testify , lawmakers “ should be the ones doing the questioning . He remains happy to engage with members on their questions regarding the Mueller report . ”\nBarr is scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday and the House panel on Thursday . The GOP-led Senate committee is expected to have normal rounds of member questioning .\nIt is unusual for committee counsels to question a witness . But committees can generally make their own rules , and other panels have made similar exceptions . In a confirmation hearing for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh last year , for example , Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee hired an outside prosecutor to question a witness who had accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault .\nThe dispute comes as tensions have escalated sharply between House Democrats and the Trump administration over full access Mueller ’ s report and government witnesses who have defied congressional subpoenas to testify . Democrats have been eagerly anticipating the hearing with Barr as they try to build on Mueller ’ s findings with their own investigations into the president .\nHouse Democrats have subpoenaed the Justice Department for the unredacted version of the Mueller report and underlying material gathered from the investigation . In response , the Justice Department has said they will make the full report , minus grand jury material , available to a limited group of members — an offer that Democrats have so far refused . The dispute could eventually end up in court .\nA spokeswoman for the top Republican on the committee , Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia , noted that Barr ’ s testimony is voluntary and criticized the Democrats for not reading the full report . “ Democrats have yet to prove their demands are anything but abusive and illogical in light of the transparency and good faith the attorney general has shown our committee , ” Jessica Andrews said .\nDemocrats have criticized Barr for drawing his own conclusion that Trump did not obstruct justice after Mueller found he couldn ’ t exonerate the president on that point . House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said Barr is involved in a “ staggering public effort ” by the Trump administration to put a positive face on Mueller ’ s findings .\nHouse Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler , D-N.Y. , has also invited Mueller to testify and subpoenaed former White House counsel Don McGahn . McGahn was a vital witness for Mueller in the report , which recounted the president ’ s outrage over the Mueller investigation and his efforts to curtail it . The White House has asserted it will fight the McGahn subpoena . | allsides-corpus-452 |
“ These cyber actors are using social media platforms to spread disinformation — ” “ and set Americans against each other — ” “ targeting both sides of a country ’ s most divisive issues. ” You ’ re watching a recent Senate Intelligence Committee hearing about how foreign internet trolls are using social media to influence American politics . In the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election , Russian trolls used disinformation campaigns to sow discord . Experts are now seeing similar activity heading into the 2018 midterms . “ The trolls are trying to improve their tactics . They ’ re trying to get better at hiding their traces . So it ’ s going to be a game of cat and mouse. ” Ben Nimmo is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council ’ s Digital Forensic Research Lab . He works to identify and analyze online disinformation . “ The way these accounts work has always been a combination of infiltration and radicalization. ” He walked us through some of the imagery and strategies used by notorious online trolls from Russia and , perhaps , elsewhere . First , they pick a hot-button issue . “ There are certain very high-profile problems that American society has , which are well-known abroad . And it tended to be those ones which are targeted . So the original troll factory accounts were very heavily engaged in the debate on gun control and the Second Amendment , on women ’ s rights and abortion rights . They were heavily engaged on Black Lives Matter. ” A slew of inauthentic accounts that Facebook recently deleted took the same approach , updated to fit the latest top news . They use identity politics and emotion to appeal to followers . Next step , tap into a community . “ So you start off by making positive comments about the target group . Let ’ s say you want to masquerade as a Black Lives Matter supporter . You start by making lots of positive comments about the African-American community . You talk about how beautiful the girls are . You talk about their glorious cultural history and you try and engage with real activists who are busy on this subject. ” Now it ’ s time to ramp it up . “ Once you ’ ve established your credentials , you start slipping more and more toxic content into the mix . So , rather than saying positive things about your community , you start saying negative things about other communities . The war against colonialism is a theme that comes up on this page time and again . It ’ s a hint at violence . And last , they try to move from the online world into real life . “ And then maybe you slip into the mix a suggestion : ‘ Let ’ s have a protest . Let ’ s get real people out on the streets. ’ And then , because you ’ re operating probably from some time zones away , you need to think , ‘ Well , how do we get this to happen ? ’ And you start trying to reach out to genuine local organizations . Maybe you say , ’ Well , we can ’ t turn up on that day because we ’ ve got something else going on . Why don ’ t you organize this for us ? ’ ” In 2016 , Russian trolls organized political events for and against both presidential candidates . At an Islamic center in Houston , they organized a protest and the corresponding counterprotest . “ Down with the racists ! Down with the Nazis ! ” So why go to such lengths ? These bad actors are trying to polarize the American public by exploiting existing tensions in our society . The goal ? Make Americans see each other as enemies , especially during high-stakes events such as elections . If people feel they can ’ t trust their neighbors or their government , democracy falters . “ There is a massive , sophisticated , persistent campaign on multiple fronts to misinform , divide and ultimately manipulate the American people . Is that accurate ? ” “ Yes . ” | allsides-corpus-453 |
As the fired FBI director makes headlines , the bureau ’ s raid on the offices of Trump ’ s lawyer signals peril for his presidency\nThe first big interview with the fired FBI director James Comey is blazing toward a broadcast on Sunday night , but for the Donald Trump presidency , multiple meteors have already hit .\nIn Comey ’ s book , A Higher Loyalty , obtained by ███ on Thursday from a bookseller in New York before publication , the former official casts Trump as both “ unethical ” and “ untethered to truth ” and compares his presidency to a “ forest fire ” .\nLikening Trump to a mafia boss , Comey describes a meeting in the Oval Office which gave him flashbacks to his career as a young prosecutor .\n“ As I found myself thrust into the Trump orbit , I once again was having flashbacks to my earlier career as a prosecutor against the Mob , ” Comey writes . “ The silent circle of assent . The boss in complete control . The loyalty oaths . The us-versus-them worldview . The lying about all things , large and small , in service to some code of loyalty that put the organization above morality and the truth . ”\nThe Republican party has launched a concerted effort to get its rebuttal in before the book is published , with a Trumpian web site dedicated to branding the former director “ Lyin ’ Comey ” .\nThe key points from James Comey 's explosive book Read more\nBut A Higher Loyalty is an instant bestseller online and will be supported by a media blitz to begin Sunday night with an hour-long broadcast on ABC News .\nTrump called Comey a “ weak and untruthful slime ball ” on Friday in a Twitter response to the first reports from the book .\nBut Comey is not the only former FBI chief giving Trump a migraine – the special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation into possible Russian collusion with the Trump campaign has been accelerating and is also enraging the president .\nThe sky began to fall in for Trump on Monday , when FBI agents raided the offices and a hotel room used by Trump ’ s lawyer Michael Cohen . The raids were a strong sign that prosecutors might soon charge one of Trump ’ s fiercest loyalists with a serious crime or crimes , legal experts said .\n“ It ’ s a disgraceful situation , ” Trump said . “ It ’ s a total witch-hunt … It ’ s an attack on our country , what we all stand for . ”\nAs the implications of those raids continue to sink in , Trump may be lured towards the kind of drastic action that would send fissures through the executive branch and beyond , multiple former White House and justice department officials interviewed by ███ said .\n“ The raid of Michael Cohen ’ s office was a seismic event , for any presidency , ” said Andrew Wright , a former White House associate counsel and a professor at Savannah Law School . “ I think he [ Cohen ] is in very serious trouble .\n“ And sure enough , the president appears to have really come pretty unhinged at that news , so I think that ’ s incredibly significant . ”\nEven for a White House that can seem to cycle from crisis to extreme crisis , the current pressure on Trump , and the resulting peril for his presidency and the country , is acute , according to seasoned prosecutors .\n“ The pressure on the president is actually unimaginable to me , ” said Betsy de la Vega , who was a federal prosecutor for more than 20 years .\nWhile the public has no way of knowing how far along Mueller is in his work , De la Vega said , the decision to conduct the Cohen raids , given their high stakes , could indicate that prosecutors had completed significant work behind the scenes .\n“ They would have to know that setting it in motion would cause great consternation , to say the least , on the part of Donald Trump and his pals , so that gives me the sense that the pace is increasing . ”\nCohen , who has denied all wrongdoing , could face charges including bank fraud , wire fraud , campaign violations , tax crimes or other charges relating to payments made to multiple women in advance of the 2016 election , and communications thereafter with at least one of those women .\nThe prospect of such an indictment is clearly weighing on the president ’ s mind . In the week since the Cohen raids , Trump has lashed out at Mueller and his superior , the deputy attorney general , Rod Rosenstein .\n“ Mueller is most conflicted of all ( except Rosenstein ... ) , ” Trump tweeted in a Wednesday morning tirade against “ the Fake & Corrupt Russia Investigation , headed up by the all Democrat loyalists , or people that worked for Obama ” .\nMueller has indicted or reached plea agreements with 19 individuals , including four former senior Trump campaign aides , plus three companies in Russia . He is a Republican , as is Rosenstein . So are Comey and Jeff Sessions , the attorney general .\nPlay Video 0:46 Firing Comey one of Trump 's 'greatest achievements ' , says White House – video\nBut none of Mueller ’ s targets has been as close to Trump as Cohen , who is a friend of the family , has been involved with the Trump children on real estate deals around the world , and who could have a lot to tell prosecutors about operations inside the Trump Organization .\nThe visceral threat of a prosecution so close to his company and his family could drive the president to take a step that the White House asserted last week was within his power : removing Mueller , or perhaps Rosenstein .\n“ There ’ s a clear pattern of the president seeming to think that the department of justice belongs to him , ” said Alex Whiting , a Harvard Law School professor specializing in criminal prosecution issues . “ And that ’ s deeply concerning . These threats to fire Sessions or fire Mueller or fire Rosenstein all fit into that .\n“ It ’ s a remarkable disregard for the rule of law . The precedent that this is setting , what this means for our country and our future , is very concerning . ”\nThe combined pressures from the investigation , and a media cacophony with outlets such as Fox News touting an imminent Trump “ personnel decision , ” could be driving Trump toward a dangerous step , said Wright .\n“ It feels like there are people that are really trying to tempt the president to take drastic action to try and shut down these investigations , and I think that would just really send us into political convulsions in this country , and I think that would not solve the president ’ s problems , it would worsen them , ” Wright said .\nJames Comey : high-profile former FBI chief with a reputation for integrity Read more\n“ I ’ m quite concerned about the precarious situation we find ourselves in right now . ”\nMembers of congress in both chambers have said they support passing legislation to protect the special counsel , but such legislation is moving slowly .\nTrump , meanwhile , appears not to have been shaken in his basic faith that the best way to handle the prosecutions swirling around him is to fight back with all the power the presidency can muster .\n“ No Collusion or Obstruction ( other than I fight back ) , so now they do the Unthinkable , and RAID a lawyers office for information ! BAD ! ” Trump tweeted on Wednesday .\n“ It ’ s the thing he hasn ’ t learned from the beginning , ” said Wright , discussing Trump ’ s relationship with the prosecution .\n“ It ’ s like being wrapped by a boa constrictor . The more you struggle , the more likely you ’ re going to die quickly . And the less you struggle , the more likely you might be able to slip out of its clutches .\n“ And instead the president is just wiggling and wiggling and wiggling . ” | allsides-corpus-454 |
WASHINGTON – House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal escalated the fight over President Donald Trump 's tax returns Friday afternoon when he issued subpoenas for the documents to Department of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Internal Revenue Service ( IRS ) Commissioner Charles Rettig .\nThe Treasury Department had previously rejected Neal 's request for six years of the president 's tax returns .\n`` While I do not take this step lightly , I believe this action gives us the best opportunity to succeed and obtain the requested material , '' Neal said in a statement . `` I sincerely hope that the Treasury Department will furnish the requested material in the next week so the committee can quickly begin its work . ”\nOn Monday , Mnuchin rejected Neal ’ s request for the president ’ s tax returns in a letter .\n`` In reliance on the advice of the Department of Justice , I have determined that the Committee 's request lacks a legitimate legislative purpose , and pursuant to section 6103 , the Department is therefore not authorized to disclose the requested returns and return information , '' Mnuchin wrote .\nNeal made the original request for Trump 's 2013-2018 tax returns to the IRS , which is part of the Treasury Department . He invoked a law allowing a select few members of Congress to review individual tax returns for legislative purposes and cited legislative proposals and oversight related to federal tax laws as his basis for the request .\nIt was the first such demand for a sitting president ’ s tax information in 45 years .\nNeal also demanded copies of tax returns for Trump 's trust and for his golf club in Bedminster , New Jersey .\nThe subpoena comes as part of a broader effort from Congress to obtain documents and bring administration officials and allies in for questioning .\nOn Wednesday , the GOP-led Senate Intelligence Committee subpoenaed Donald Trump Jr. to answer more questions .\nEarlier that day , Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee voted to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt of Congress over his refusal to hand over an unredacted copy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller 's report on the Russian interference in the 2016 election . | allsides-corpus-455 |
Lois Lerner , the IRS official at the heart of the scandal involving the targeting of Tea Party groups , is retiring .\nLerner , who headed the division in the tax-collecting agency that handles applications for tax-exempt status , had been placed on paid administrative leave in May . Calls for her dismissal came almost immediately following allegations she had participated in unfairly targeting conservative groups .\nThe IRS confirmed on Monday that she has resigned , though it 's unclear how that decision might affect the ongoing congressional investigations into the scandal .\n`` Since May , the IRS has taken decisive actions to correct failures in Exempt Organizations management , replacing top leadership throughout the chain of command , '' the agency said in a written statement announcing her retirement . `` In addition , IRS Acting Commissioner Danny Werfel created an Accountability Review Board to fully review information to ensure proper oversight in handling personnel issues . ''\nThe announcement has not quieted calls for a thorough probe into the agency 's actions . It 's also not clear what kind of government-paid retirement benefits Lerner might be receiving .\n`` Just because Lois Lerner is retiring from the IRS does not mean the investigation is over . Far from it . In fact , there are many serious unanswered questions that must be addressed so we can get to the truth , '' Sen. Orrin Hatch , R-Utah , top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee , said in a written statement .\nRep. Darrell Issa , R-Calif. , chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee , said : `` Lois Lerner 's exit from the IRS does not alter the Oversight Committee 's interest in understanding why applicants for tax exempt status were targeted and inappropriately treated because of their political beliefs . ''\n`` We still do n't know why Lois Lerner , as a senior IRS official , had such a personal interest in directing scrutiny and why she denied improper conduct to Congress . Her departure does not answer these questions or diminish the Committee 's interest in hearing her testimony , '' he said .\nLerner first disclosed the IRS targeting at a May 10 tax law conference .\nLerner then infamously refused to testify at a hearing before Issa 's committee , citing her constitutional right not to incriminate herself . Three congressional committees and the Department of Justice , though , launched investigations into the IRS and its actions .\nEventually , the agency acknowledged that while she was in charge , IRS agents improperly targeted Tea Party groups for extra scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status from 2010-2012 .\nEarlier this month , newly released emails seemed to support accusations against the embattled IRS official and her role in scrutinizing applications .\nThe agency had initially tried to spin the story , claiming the unfair targeting was the work of rogue Ohio-based employees .\nOne email dated February 2011 from Lerner said , `` Tea Party Matter very dangerous '' - before going on to warn that the `` matter '' could be used to go to court to test campaign spending limits .\nThe email was released by the House Ways and Means Committee and parts were redacted . | allsides-corpus-456 |
Lois Lerner , the Internal Revenue Service official under fire for her department ’ s targeting of tea party groups , has retired effective Monday , according to the IRS .\nBut that development does not end the scandal that burst into the open last May , when Ms. Lerner revealed that tea party groups were undergoing extra scrutiny in their applications for tax exemption . Lerner , who was director of the IRS ’ s section on tax-exempt organizations , had been placed on paid administrative leave , and remains under subpoena by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee , which is investigating the scandal .\n“ Lois Lerner ’ s exit from the IRS does not alter the Oversight Committee ’ s interest in understanding why applicants for tax exempt status were targeted and inappropriately treated because of their political beliefs , ” Rep. Darrell Issa ( R ) of California , chairman of the committee , said in a statement .\nSen. Orrin Hatch of Utah , the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee , also signaled his continued interest in the IRS targeting scandal .\n“ Just because Lois Lerner is retiring from the IRS does not mean the investigation is over , ” Senator Hatch said in a statement . “ Far from it . In fact , there are many serious unanswered questions that must be addressed so we can get to the truth . ”\nThe brouhaha has been a political boon to conservatives , who had long suspected they were being targeted by the government in an effort to undermine their activities . The issue is likely to figure in efforts to energize conservatives for the 2014 midterms . Republicans already control the House , but have a shot at taking over the Senate .\nLerner emerged early as a key figure in the targeting scandal . In fact , it was she who brought the practice to light in public on May 10 , when she responded to an audience question – later revealed to be planted – at a legal conference . She stated that the targeting was “ absolutely incorrect , ” “ insensitive , ” and “ inappropriate , ” and that “ the IRS would like to apologize for that . ”\nAt a congressional hearing on May 22 , Lerner said she was proud of her government service , and had done nothing wrong . Then she refused to testify , citing her constitutional right against self-incrimination .\nStarting in 2010 , the IRS began subjecting groups with names that contained conservative keywords , such as “ tea party ” and “ patriot , ” to additional scrutiny in their requests for tax exemption , which delayed their applications . It was later revealed that some progressive groups , such as those associated with the Occupy movement , had undergone similar targeting , but not nearly as many as the tea party groups .\nA report by the Treasury Department ’ s inspector general for tax administration ( TIGTA ) released on May 14 found that inappropriate criteria were used to identify tax-exempt applications for review , and that Lerner herself had been briefed on the targeting in June 2011 .\nBloomberg News reported Monday that an internal IRS board was going to propose starting the process of firing Lerner , though it had not concluded that she had acted with political bias or willful misconduct . The report also indicated her pension would not have been different had she been fired .\nIn a statement Monday confirming Lerner ’ s retirement , the IRS sought to reassure the public that the agency had reformed its procedures .\n“ The IRS is making important progress on fixing the underlying management and organizational deficiencies in the EO [ exempt organizations ] area identified by TIGTA , ” the statement said . “ Our goal is to restore the public ’ s faith and trust in the tax system . ”\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nThe statement continued : “ We have sent nearly 400,000 pages of documents to Congress and facilitated dozens of employee interviews . We look forward to continuing to cooperate with Congress and other investigations . ”\nPublic faith in the IRS is especially critical as the Affordable Care Act ( ACA ) is about to go into effect . It will be the IRS ’ s responsibility to determine whether individuals have health insurance , as mandated under the ACA . | allsides-corpus-457 |
Hedge funds are essentially defined by their ability to slip through the cracks of the American financial regulatory system . They do n't do banking , so they do n't need a license from a bank regulator . They do n't underwrite securities , so they do n't warrant scrutiny from market regulators . And they are n't open to the mass public , so they evade consumer protection regulation too .\nOne big goal of post-crisis financial regulation was to create a council of all the different regulators — the Financial Stability Oversight Council — to make sure that individual regulators ' focus on the trees does n't lead them to miss a forest of potential disaster . That 's why FSOC decided to look at hedge funds , and its initial findings suggest a big possible problem in hedge land .\nOr , rather , two different and related problems . One is that an excessively indebted hedge fund could go bust , leading to problems at the institutions that loaned it money . The other is that a large hedge fund could be forced into a “ fire sale ” of the assets it owns . In either case , the fund itself going bust wouldn ’ t necessarily be a problem for the economy , but the ripple effects it causes might be .\nThanks to new regulations put in place in the wake of the 2007- ’ 08 financial crisis , regulators are now able to see the outlines of where trouble might arise . But the Treasury Department is warning that unless regulators are able to persuade or cajole more information out of the industry , they could be left flying blind into the next financial crisis . And with a new administration coming to power in Washington , there ’ s a strong risk that these warning signs will go unheeded .\nIt ’ s easy to forget that the first great bailout of our era involved a hedge fund rather than an enormous `` too big to fail '' bank . The fund at issue , Long-Term Capital Management , had made some big debt-financed bets that went badly awry primarily as a result of Russia defaulting on its national debt in August 1998 .\nThis was an embarrassing failure for some of the hottest names on Wall Street , but also a potentially catastrophic situation for a wider range of economic actors . A number of East Asian countries had entered a financial crisis situation the previous year , and the Russian default had markets across the board jittery . Policymakers feared that LTCM ’ s total collapse would lead to a run on other similar firms and an escalating series of losses — and that this , in turn , could cause the entire credit system to freeze up the way it ultimately did in 2008 . In response , the Fed and the Treasury Department organized a rapid-fire $ 3.625 billion bailout of LTCM by a consortium of major banks as an alternative to an extended bankruptcy process .\nAt the time , it was widely remarked that since hedge funds had revealed themselves as being in need of occasional bailout , they should probably be brought under the regulatory umbrella .\nBut though this bailout involved the participation of government officials as organizers and guarantors , no actual taxpayer funds were expended and no congressional action was needed . Consequently , the political system moved on . Then when a financial crisis did hit in 2008 , it had very little to do with hedge funds . So we got a politically ambitious regulatory overhaul that did not specifically target hedge funds . But it did create FSOC with an institutional mandate to see the whole playing field , and FSOC officials are trying to draw attention to this piece of unfinished business .\nJonah Crane , the deputy assistant secretary in the Treasury Department who serves as the executive of FSOC , spoke on November 16 about two different forms of risk that hedge funds could pose to the broader economy .\nOne is forced asset sales , in which problems at a fund force it to rapidly sell its assets in a way that disrupts other markets . For example , “ positions held by a relatively small group of funds ” could constitute “ a meaningful share of certain key markets , relative to both market size and trading volume. ” This raises the risk that a failure at one fund could drastically drive down the value of other funds ’ assets , setting off a chain reaction in which an entire key market is devastated by mass selling .\nThe other is counterparty risk . Hedge funds that are not themselves significant to the overall operation of the economy nonetheless owe money to larger institutions . A hedge fund failure could end up “ transmitting stress to counterparties that are large , highly interconnected financial institutions . ”\nCrane says that on both fronts the situation requires continued monitoring by FSOC , as well as a range of areas in which it could use more and better data from industry to understand exactly what ’ s going on .\nOne of the main areas in which Dodd-Frank has made advances relative to the pre-crisis situation is in providing much more data and situational awareness to regulators at various agencies so that they can better understand where risks exist . Ongoing data gaps are particularly worrying because financial regulation is a bit like squeezing a balloon , and the odds are good at any moment that the most alarming risks will have migrated to wherever it is you can ’ t see . This current work has been years in the making , and if momentum evaporates as a result of the transition , it could leave a significant lingering risk to the overall global economy . | allsides-corpus-458 |
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen was in the hot seat on Capitol Hill yesterday over a massive data breach and hacking of highly sensitive taxpayer information , including social security numbers . A number of taxpayers whose information was stolen have also lost their identities .\nInformation and testimony given by Inspector General Russell George revealed the IRS was given multiple warnings and recommendations about how to prevent an attack or breach . The IRS failed to implement all of the recommendations given . More from Americans For Tax Reform ( bolding is mine ) :\nOver the last decade the IRS has failed to implement numerous recommendations that would make taxpayer information more secure . At a Senate Finance Committee hearing today Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration ( TIGTA ) Chief J. Russell George revealed that the IRS failed to implement 44 recommendations that would improve the IRS ’ s ability to protect taxpayer information from hackers . Of these 44 , ten recommendations were from audits over three years old .\nIf the IRS had implemented these recommendations , taxpayer information would be better protected and last week ’ s hack may have been prevented . As George said during today ’ s hearing , “ It would have been much more difficult had they ( IRS ) implemented all of the recommendations that we made . ”\nSince 2007 , the IRS has been warned at least seven times by watchdog groups that it needed to strengthen its protections of taxpayer information .\nIn a 2014 report , TIGTA warned that if stronger protections are not implemented , “ taxpayers could be exposed to the loss of privacy and to financial loss and damages resulting from identity theft or other financial crimes. ” The report was the latest in a series of warnings about the agency ’ s inability to protect taxpayer information .\nA 2013 report found that the IRS had failed to fully implement eight recommendations that would increase security over taxpayer data despite telling TIGTA they had been implemented . A 2011 report found that taxpayer data was vulnerable to hackers and stronger security measures were needed and in 2010 , TIGTA found that the agency had inadequate safeguards to protect taxpayer information from contract workers .\nInstead of modernizing its system to protect taxpayer information from hackers , the IRS wasted taxpayer dollars by purchasing Nerf footballs that were never used , the world ’ s largest crossword puzzle , $ 100 lunches , and Thomas the Tank Engine Wristbands .\nThe IRS also spent millions of tax dollars on the production of a series of Star Trek , Gilligan 's Island and dance videos .\nAs Senator Tim Scott mentions in the interview above , the IRS receives $ 1 billion each year for IT work .\nMeanwhile , despite the breach and likely identity theft of 200,000 taxpayers thanks to the negligence of IRS officials , Americans are still required by law to submit personal information to the tax agency or face penalties , fines and in some cases , prison time . | allsides-corpus-459 |
Lerner retired from the agency effective Monday . Lerner still Hill 's favorite piñata\nLois Lerner is the political piñata that Congress still loves to whack months after she awkwardly acknowledged that the IRS wrongly scrutinized conservative groups for years .\nHer sudden retirement on Monday after 12 years at the agency won ’ t change that .\nShe ’ s still a central figure in three congressional investigations into the political targeting scandal that embroiled the IRS — and the Obama administration — in May . House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa ( R-Calif. ) has an outstanding subpoena to compel her testimony before his panel .\nAnd as a 30-year veteran of the civil service , Lerner is still eligible for a pension — something that is sure to further anger critics in Congress .\n“ Her departure does not answer these questions or diminish the committee ’ s interest in hearing her testimony , ” Issa said in a statement .\nUtah Sen. Orrin Hatch , the top Republican on the Finance Committee , said Lerner ’ s retirement “ does not mean the investigation is over . ”\n“ Far from it , ” he said . “ In fact , there are many serious unanswered questions that must be addressed so we can get to the truth . ”\nEven Democrats who have slammed the GOP for politicizing congressional probes into the IRS didn ’ t pull their punches .\n“ Lois Lerner is being held responsible for her gross mismanagement of the IRS tax-exempt division , which led to improper handling of applications for tax-exempt status , whether conservative [ or ] progressive , ” said Michigan Rep. Sander Levin , the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee .\nA Democratic congressional aide said the IRS was moving toward terminating Lerner after completing an investigation into her role in the targeting controversy .\nThe IRS found that Lerner , who led the agency ’ s unit that reviewed requests for tax exemptions , mismanaged her department and was “ neglectful of duty ” but found no evidence of political bias , the aide said .\nWilliam Taylor , Lerner ’ s attorney , did not immediately return a request for comment .\nLerner sparked the IRS scandal in May when she told an American Bar Association conference that the agency wrongly targeted tea party groups applying for a tax exemption . The admission threw the White House into crisis mode , forcing Treasury Secretary Jack Lew to ask then-IRS chief Steven Miller to step down .\nPresident Barack Obama later replaced Miller with Daniel Werfel , a former Office of Management and Budget official .\nLerner was placed on administrative leave later in May after an explosive appearance before the House Oversight Committee in which she boldly declared her innocence before invoking her Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination and refused to answer questions from lawmakers .\n“ I have not done anything wrong , ” she said at the May 22 hearing . “ I have not broken any laws . I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations , and I have not provided false information to this or any other committee . ”\nIssa and committee Republicans disagreed . They later voted to recall Lerner and said she waived her Fifth Amendment rights by declaring her innocence without allowing lawmakers to question her . Issa hasn ’ t indicated when he plans to call Lerner back to Capitol Hill .\nTaylor , Lerner ’ s attorney , has told ███ that his client is interested in immunity in exchange for testifying before Issa ’ s panel again .\nLerner quickly became the public face of the IRS scandal . She initially blamed mid-level IRS employees in Cincinnati for the targeting but congressional investigators have rejected that explanation . Emails and documents released by the House Oversight Committee show that Lerner and other senior IRS leaders in Washington knew of the targeting early on .\nDemocrats and Republicans joined together to call for Lerner ’ s ouster in the early days of May , saying she misled them about the scope of the targeting and the extent to which IRS ’ s top brass knew the details .\nMore recently , congressional Republicans have labored to keep public pressure on the agency by releasing emails and documents from Lerner and other key IRS officials .\nLerner ’ s private and public emails discussing the IRS from her tenure are still fair game for congressional investigators and she can still be asked to testify before interested committees .\nThe IRS said in a statement on Monday that it has taken “ decisive actions to correct failures in exempt organizations management . ”\n“ As Werfel has made clear , the behavior cited in the May [ inspector general ’ s ] report was the result of mismanagement and poor judgment , ” the statement said . “ The IRS is making important progress on fixing the underlying management and organizational deficiencies in the [ exempt organizations ] area identified by [ the inspector general ] . Our goal is to restore the public ’ s faith and trust in the tax system . ” | allsides-corpus-460 |
In November , 64 percent of Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment allowing former felons to regain their right to vote . Three weeks later , a Republican state representative introduced legislation that would require constitutional amendments to earn 67 percent of the vote to pass .\nIn Missouri , voters passed measures to raise the minimum wage , legalize medical marijuana and take legislative redistricting out of the hands of legislators . A month later , state House Republicans introduced a bill to nearly double the number of signatures needed to qualify an initiative for the ballot .\nIn Idaho , 60 percent of voters approved an initiative to expand Medicaid to cover low-income residents . Last week , a Republican state senator introduced legislation to increase both the number and geographic spread of signatures required to qualify an initiative .\nRepublican legislators in states across the country have introduced dozens of bills that would make significant changes to the initiative and referendum process , tightening rules and raising requirements after their voters approved progressive proposals that legislators opposed or refused to take up .\nCritics of the proposals say they are a Republican end run around the direct democracy process , meant to stifle popular progressive policies before they get to the ballot .\n“ This is , combined with what we saw after the success of many of these ballot initiatives in 2018 , state legislatures undermining the will of the people , ” said Chris Melody Fields Figueredo , who runs the progressive Ballot Initiative Strategy Center . “ Rather than listen to the will of the people , elected officials are undermining the will of the people . ”\nConservative groups such as the Republican State Leadership Committee and the American Legislative Exchange Council have advocated for tightening ballot rules .\nAnd some Democrats have supported similar measures in states such as Oregon and Washington , where low signature requirements have led to crowded ballots .\nFields said her group was watching about 90 bills around the country that would tighten ballot access .\nThe nonpartisan political website Ballotpedia is tracking about 140 pieces of legislation introduced in 31 states related to ballot measures , though some of those bills would loosen requirements .\nSome of the Republicans behind this year ’ s bills say they are necessary to curb the influence of big-money groups that increasingly fund some of the most expensive ballot measure campaigns across the country .\nIn Arizona , voters rejected an initiative that would have required the state to generate 50 percent of its energy from renewable sources , which made the ballot with the help of millions of dollars from California billionaire Tom Steyer .\nAfter that measure , state Sen. Vince Leach ( R ) introduced a bill regulating who could collect signatures for a ballot initiative and giving counties more time to inspect signatures once they have been turned in .\n“ It ’ s pretty clear to see that over the last six years , we ’ ve had any number of initiatives that have started from outside of the state of Arizona , ” Leach said in an interview . “ We need to protect one of the most precious things we have , and that ’ s the ability to go to the ballot and vote . ”\nLeach said he does not oppose the initiative process but that the legislature has a responsibility to guard the rights of its own citizens to determine the state ’ s direction .\n“ The citizens have a right to initiate laws and not only initiate laws but veto laws we pass . All that ’ s good . My effort is not to slow that down . I don ’ t want to take that opportunity or that responsibility away from the people , ” Leach said . “ It just needs to be fine-tuned . ”\nOther legislators said easy access to the ballot has led to a raft of ill-considered public policy that does not face the same scrutiny as legislation reviewed and scored by trained legal analysts .\nIn Arkansas , the state constitution now runs more than 100 pages , thanks in part to a bevy of recent voter-approved amendments .\n“ In the last seven elections , we ’ ve actually changed our constitution 20 times . We ’ re averaging three changes every other year , ” said Mat Pitsch , a Republican state senator in Arkansas . “ Things that normally are voted on by elected representatives were making their way through constitutional ballot measures . ”\nPitsch authored a bill that would increase penalties on those who forge signatures on petitions and shift responsibility for approving measures for the ballot from the state attorney general to the state board of elections . Arkansas Gov . Asa Hutchinson ( R ) signed his bill earlier this year .\nSome liberal states are also considering changes that would take power away from voters . In California , the legislature will debate a bill to allow some local governments to issue bonds without a popular vote ; currently , those governments must ask voters for approval before issuing the bonds .\nThe tradition of direct democracy in America is older than the Republic itself .\nMassachusetts held its first statewide referendum in 1778 . Most states that allow citizens to place legislation on the ballot adopted the practice during the Progressive Era in the early 1900s , in part to fight the influence of major corporations in the timber , railroad and oil industries .\nToday , 27 states and the District of Columbia allow some form of direct democracy , either through citizen-initiated propositions and constitutional amendments or through ballot measures authored by the legislature that then go to voters for approval or rejection .\nConservative groups , especially anti-tax organizations , used ballot measures to limit states ’ abilities to levy new taxes in the last several decades , beginning with California ’ s Proposition 13 , which passed in 1978 .\nMore recently , liberal groups have increasingly turned to ballot measures to raise the minimum wage , expand health care coverage and protect union rights — especially in states where Republicans won control of legislatures after the 2010 midterm elections .\nBallot measures have become a booming political business . Supporters and opponents spent more than $ 1 billion on propositions put before voters in each of the last three even-numbered election years . Several propositions in California generated nearly $ 100 million in spending in 2018 . | allsides-corpus-461 |
On Tuesday , the Dhillon Law Group , where I serve as an election law attorney , filed a lawsuit against the state of California . This lawsuit alleges that California is violating federal law by not ensuring that only citizens are on the state ’ s voting rolls . Three California voters brought this lawsuit : Roxanne Hoge , Ali Mazarei , and Corrin Rankin . Both Hoge and Mazarei are legal immigrants who earned the privilege to vote by becoming citizens of the United States .\nIn 1993 , a Democrat-controlled Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed into law the National Voter Registration Act ( NVRA ) . This law mandated that states create more options for individuals to register to vote . This law also placed restrictions on the states on how they were to maintain their voter rolls . Under the NVRA , the state has a duty to regularly maintain the voter rolls by removing those individuals who had died or moved away .\nThe NVRA also requires a state ’ s secretary of state to determine the eligibility of each applicant before placing him or her on its voter rolls . Eligibility throughout the NVRA means that there is citizenship . Thus , the NVRA requires the states to ensure that someone is a citizen prior to placing him or her on the voter rolls .\nState records show that before the California secretary of state ’ s office places an applicant on the voter rolls , it checks with state administrative records to ensure the individual is not a felon and that the voter application is not a duplicate . The state admits that it does not review state administrative records to determine if an applicant is a citizen of the United States . If California does not even bother to check the citizenship status of voter applicants , it can continue to claim to the media that there is no evidence of non-citizens being placed on its voter rolls .\nLast year , the California secretary of state admitted he had no idea how many non-citizens were on the voter rolls . Earlier this year , a state audit was released that showed non-citizens were not only registered to vote , but had voted in California elections . These two news stories made it clear that California did not use state administrative records to ensure that only citizens were being registered to vote . Rather than follow federal law and make a determination of citizenship before placing an applicant on the voter rolls , the state simply waits for a scandal to break before responding by removing a non-citizen from its voter rolls . This is improper .\nThe California secretary of state has claimed that there is no state administrative record that tracks citizenship of Californians . This is clearly not true , since a state audit was able to determine that non-citizens were not only on the voter rolls but had also actually voted . Contrary to what the secretary of state wants the media to believe , there are multiple state administrative records that contain the citizenship status of voters . Every applicant for a state driver ’ s license is required to provide proof of identity . These proof-of-identity documents include citizenship status . If an individual can not prove that he/she is lawfully a United States citizens , a driver ’ s license is still doled out but that individual is supposedly not simultaneously also registered to vote .\nBy bringing this lawsuit , the plaintiffs desire to hold the secretary of state ’ s feet to the fire . It is time that California be required to follow federal law and ensure that everyone who is on the voter rolls is actually eligible to vote . This lawsuit is necessary because California has a bad habit of thumbing its nose at federal election laws and dragging its feet as long as possible . When Congress passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002 — which required states to establish a statewide voter registration list — California was the last state to comply . It did not do so until 2016 .\nEarlier this year , Judicial Watch won a major victory against California requiring the state to follow federal law in removing from the voter rolls those who have died and those who have moved . California had chosen to simply not send out the required notices , and the voter rolls were thus bloated with ineligible voters .\nCalifornians deserve the assurance that the state is following federal law and ensuring that only citizens are on the voter rolls . By its own admissions , the state is not verifying voter applicants ’ citizenship status . Since California has claimed that it is not doing anything wrong , this lawsuit had to be brought to force California to follow the NVRA .\nMark Meuser is an election law attorney with the Dhillon Law Group , which is based in California . You can follow Mark Meuser on Twitter @ markmeuser . | allsides-corpus-462 |
While all eyes were on the Nevada Caucuses , people in Super Tuesday states started receiving their absentee ballots . In places like California , voters are encouraged to vote absentee . It 's been a way to garner greater political involvement and participation .\nAdam Housley , a former correspondent for Fox News , said he received two ballots : one for non-party preference ( NPP ) and one for the libertarian ticket . What makes the scenario even more troubling ? Housley said he has never registered as a libertarian .\nCongrats California you have sent me two ballots . One as a non party preference , which I ’ ve been for 20 years and one as a Libertarian ... which I have never registered . Neither one has many choices other than new taxes . Being honest and ripping one up . Makes me wonder tho pic.twitter.com/6QDS0zPX2V — Adam Housley ( @ adamhousley ) February 21 , 2020\nIn a state with millions of people , a small flub here and there is likely to happen , but it turns out Housley was n't the only one who received multiple ballots ..\nI also got two . When I called the Elections office they said they were getting lots of calls about that . Mine was because I switched parties , but still ... — NapaValleyChick ( @ NapaValleyChick ) February 21 , 2020\nI moved to Texas in 2012 & changed my license but still have a home in CA . I still get mail in ballots to vote in CA . If I wasn ’ t an honest person I could easily vote in both . — Anne Carrillo ( @ wildcatanne ) February 21 , 2020\nI didn ’ t get two ballots but my party preference was changed from Republican to No Preference . — NorwichFan ( @ SiosNorwich ) February 22 , 2020\nMy son received 2 also followed by a letter which stated `` they '' were in error . Received a ballot for my wife who passed away last October . Sent it back .... — Scott ( @ bakerinCA ) February 22 , 2020\nDemocrats continually wonder why voter fraud exists . There are multiple reasons :\nWhen people get a driver 's license or identification card , they are automatically registered to vote unless they opt-out . That automatic registration begins when people get their licenses at 16-years-old but does n't go into effect until the person turns 18 . How do we know that the state is actually keeping that information safe for a year or two until the individual decides to vote ? How do we know their party preference has changed in that time frame ?\nOver the last 10 years , there has been a massive push to get voters to utilize absentee ballots . This helps ensure people make more informed decisions and vote at their own convenience , but along with that convenience comes risk . There 's no way to verify that the person whose name is on the ballot is the one who actually voted . There 's no way to know that the right person actually received the ballot . And there 's nothing keeping thieves from stealing a ballot out of a person 's mailbox .\nWhen people show up at the polls they 're not always required to show their ID , especially in liberal states like California . The poll worker simply asks you for your name and address and off you go . Again , there 's no way for them to verify you are who you say you are . And that 's why people who have passed away are still casting votes from their graves .\nWhat 's taking place in California really is n't all that surprising . It just reaffirms the idea that voter rolls need to be purged every year or two , people 's information needs to be verified and cross-referenced before ballots are sent out and IDs need to be checked at the polling booth . These are simple fixes but they 're the very ones that Democrats are resistant to . | allsides-corpus-463 |
Democrats have a direct political interest in making voting easier for their demographic supporters ; Republicans are dependent on white people and older voters who already turn out in large numbers . “ Fear of the increasing diversity of America is driving this , ” says Carol Anderson , chair of African American studies at Emory University .\nThey ’ re passing photo ID laws , cutting early voting hours , and purging voter rolls of infrequent voters , citing the need to defend against fraud . Democratic leaders are angry about the changes , charging that the real aim is to make it harder for minorities and younger people – key Democratic constituencies – to vote . In a larger sense , the battle is part of a broader war between the Democratic coalition of transformation , composed of groups comfortable with rapid racial and cultural change , and the Republican coalition of restoration , reliant on voters who aren ’ t .\nFifty-four years after President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law , a renewed and intensifying struggle over ballot access and voting power is shaking the structure of American democracy . It began in 2013 , when the Supreme Court struck down a key Voting Rights Act provision and freed nine states , most in the South , to change their election laws without advance approval from the federal government . Since then , some Republican governors and GOP-controlled state legislatures have begun tightening access to the ballot box .\nPresident Lyndon B. Johnson used 50 pens to sign the Voting Rights Act into law . Television footage of the Aug. 6 , 1965 , ceremony shows the president putting each to paper for a moment , scratching perhaps a half-letter , and then swapping the instrument out for new . When finished , he handed the pens to some of the famous figures gathered around him . Sen. Robert F. Kennedy got one . So did the Rev . Martin Luther King Jr . So did civil rights activist and future member of Congress John Lewis .\nMost pen recipients felt it was one of America ’ s finest hours . The law put federal muscle behind African Americans ’ long struggle for equal voting booth access – and the political power that access bestowed . But Johnson ’ s own feelings that day were complicated . His daughter Luci Baines Johnson later told journalist Ari Berman , in an interview for his voting rights history “ Give Us the Ballot , ” that LBJ felt both victorious and afraid .\nPresident Johnson knew he had just transformed the political structure of the nation , in ways both predictable and unforeseen . He could no longer control what would happen , the progress and the inevitable backlash , and how those might balance .\n“ It would be written in the history books . But now the history had to be made , ” Ms. Johnson said .\nFifty-four years later , a renewed and intensifying struggle over ballot access and voting power is shaking the intricate structure of American democracy .\nIn the short run , the vote – who gets it , who doesn ’ t , what it ’ s worth – is almost certain to loom large in the 2020 elections . Top Democratic presidential contenders have all criticized recent GOP-led tightening of some state voting laws , claiming these changes are partly intended to make it harder for minorities to cast ballots .\n“ You ’ ve got Jim Crow sneaking back in , ” said former Vice President Joe Biden in a speech in South Carolina on May 6 , evoking the racial segregation laws of the past .\nIn the long run , this conflict could redraw the battle lines between America ’ s two big political parties during a period of rapid demographic change . That ’ s why Democrats made it their first order of legislative business after retaking the House in the 2018 midterms , passing H.R . 1 , a sweeping bill that would establish national automatic voter registration , outlaw the “ purging ” of voter rolls , and in general ease and expand ballot access while countering some state-imposed voting barriers .\nMark Humphrey/AP Suzanne Lanier ( l. ) holds up a sign in the Tennessee House gallery opposing a bill that would impose new restrictions on groups that hold voter registration drives , April 15 , 2019 , in Nashville , Tenn .\nVoting access is becoming a crucial front in what CNN political analyst and journalist Ron Brownstein has dubbed a broader war between the Democratic coalition of transformation , composed of groups comfortable with rapid racial and cultural change , and the Republican coalition of restoration , reliant on voters who aren ’ t .\nMore and more , American electoral politics seems correlated with demographics . The modern Democratic Party is increasingly made up of minorities and young people , and thus has a direct interest in making voting as easy and widespread as possible . Republicans , conversely , are dependent on white people and older voters , demographic groups already more likely to cast ballots . The GOP thus has a direct political incentive to tighten rules and restrict electoral access .\n“ Fear of the increasing diversity of America is driving this , ” says Carol Anderson , chair of African American studies at Emory University and author of “ One Person , No Vote : How Voter Suppression Is Destroying Our Democracy . ”\nMany Republicans reject this framework . Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has flatly refused to bring to the floor a Senate version of H.R . 1 – or , as he calls it , the “ Democrat Politician Protection Act . ”\n“ It ’ s an attempt to rewrite the rules of American politics in order to benefit one side over the other , ” Senator McConnell said on the Senate floor . The bill is a nakedly partisan attempt to grow Washington ’ s power over Americans ’ political speech and elections , the Kentucky senator charged . It would impose onerous and confusing regulations on states and localities , “ while making it harder for [ them ] to clean inaccurate data off their voter rolls , harder to remove duplicate registrations , ineligible voters , and other errors . ”\nThe larger conservative position is that America has come a long way on voting , thanks to the Voting Rights Act and other massive changes , and the country and its laws should recognize that . This was the view underpinning the majority opinion in Shelby County v. Holder , a pivotal 2013 Supreme Court decision that freed nine mostly Southern states to change their election laws without obtaining advance approval from the federal government .\nWhen the Voting Rights Act passed in 1965 , voter registration of African Americans in Mississippi was 6.4 % , wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority opinion . By the 2004 election , Mississippi ’ s black registration rate was 76 % , 4 percentage points higher than that of white people .\n“ Our country has changed , ” Chief Justice Roberts wrote in the opinion . “ While any racial discrimination in voting is too much , Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions . ”\nVoting is fundamental to the exercise of democracy . If there were no votes , how would the collective will of eligible citizens be expressed ? Justice Roberts , in his 2005 Senate confirmation hearing , noted that voting was the “ preservative ” of all the other American rights . “ Without access to the ballot box , people are not in a position to protect any other rights that are important to them , ” he said .\nGiven that , it ’ s perhaps surprising that the Founding Fathers did not leave behind a bit more instruction on the issue . The Constitution did not guarantee voting rights for Americans . Instead , it allowed the states to set their own voting rules .\nAt the time of the Constitution ’ s ratification , most states limited voting to white male property owners . By some estimates , these eligible voters constituted only 6 % of the nation ’ s population . Democracy , indeed .\nSuffrage is a “ part of the Constitution that has not aged well , ” wrote George Mason University political scientist Jennifer Victor in a recent Vox series on the document ’ s flaws .\nMark J. Terrill/AP/File A voter fills out a registration form before getting in line at the Los Angeles County registrar 's office on Nov. 6 , 2018 .\nSince 1789 , periodic waves of reform have greatly enlarged the eligible U.S. voting population . In the 1800s , many states struck the “ property owner ” requirement , opening up voting to most white males . In 1870 , the ratification of the 15th Amendment to the Constitution technically gave all African Americans , including former slaves , access to the ballot . In response , Southern states adopted poll taxes and literacy tests , and employed open violence to disenfranchise African Americans and retain white political hegemony .\nSome states opened the voting franchise to women in the decades before and after the turn of the 20th century , but women weren ’ t fully allowed ballot access until the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920 . The most recent reform wave crested with the 1965 Voting Rights Act , which banned discriminatory voter qualification practices , and authorized deployment of federal officials to register voters and oversee elections in areas with a history of blocking minorities from the polls .\nA key enforcement provision of the Voting Rights Act ordered states with a poor minority voting record , most of them Southern , to ask Washington for permission before doing almost anything to change voting procedures , from moving a polling place to redrawing legislative districts . It ’ s this part of the law that the Roberts court deemed no longer necessary and struck down in 2013 .\nIn the context of the long rise of democracy throughout the Western world , the voting record of the United States is mixed . The U.S. was indeed one of the first democratic countries to expand its electorate by knocking down explicit economic barriers to political participation , writes Alexander Keyssar , a Harvard professor of history and social policy , in his book “ The Right to Vote : The Contested History of Democracy in the United States. ” Alexis de Tocqueville and other foreign observers were struck by what they perceived as the nation ’ s powerful democratic spirit in the early decades of the 1800s .\nBut the U.S. was also unusual in that it experienced a contraction of voting rights as Southern segregationists essentially negated the 15th Amendment following Reconstruction .\n“ Despite its pioneering role in promoting democratic values , the United States was one of the last countries in the developed world to attain universal suffrage , ” writes Dr. Keyssar .\nToday , the story of voting rights in America is largely a tale of two kinds of states , moving in two different directions .\nSome states – mainly but not exclusively blue ones – are adopting measures to make it easier to register and vote . Automatic voter registration , for example , is a system where citizens who interact with government agencies are automatically added to the voter rolls , or automatically have their address or other voter information updated , unless they opt out of the process . Fifteen states covering about a third of the U.S. population , from Vermont and New Jersey to Nevada and California ( plus the District of Columbia ) , now have some form of automatic registration , according to data from the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law .\nBruce Newman/Oxford Eagle/AP/File A poll worker checks a voter 's identification against a list before allowing her to vote in the party primary , June 3 , 2014 , at the Oxford Park Commission in Oxford , Mississippi .\nOther states – mainly but not exclusively red ones – are going in the opposite direction and tightening voting rules . These changes range from strict requirements for photo IDs to cutbacks in the time allowed for early voting to the winnowing of presumed nonvoters from the rolls and other general registration restrictions . Since the 2010 midterms , at least 25 states have enacted tougher ballot laws , according to the Brennan Center .\nSome of these changes , in basic form , garner widespread approval among voters . This is particularly true of photo ID . A 2016 Associated Press poll found that 79 % of respondents favored requiring all voters to provide some form of photo identification .\nProponents frame many of the changes as a means to defend against fraud . But the days of deceased voters allegedly casting ballots in Illinois ’ Cook County , and voter turnout in some Louisiana precincts reaching 120 % , are long over . Documented cases of in-person fraud are “ super rare , ” says Dan Hopkins , a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania whose research focuses on elections and public opinion .\nOne 2014 study in an academic journal , Dr. Hopkins points out , concluded that in the U.S. voter impersonation – the fraud against which photo ID is meant to defend – is reported at about the same rate as instances of alleged abduction by extraterrestrials .\nThe problem , Dr. Hopkins notes , is America ’ s long and troubled history of denying racial minorities their right to vote . Today ’ s new restrictions are inevitably seen in that old context .\nTake photo ID . Many Americans see that as an easy hurdle to surmount . Who doesn ’ t have a driver ’ s license or a passport or something like that ?\nLots of people , actually . And they tend to be those on the edges of mainstream economic society . People of color , poorer people , both young and elderly , tend to be most affected by ID requirements .\nThe effects of the restrictions can also depend on the way they are set up . Dr. Anderson of Emory University uses the example of Alabama . In that state , you have to have a government-issued ID to vote – but a public housing ID doesn ’ t count . Seventy-one percent of public housing occupants in the state are African Americans . Also , Alabama has been closing Department of Motor Vehicle offices in black counties .\nYou create an obstacle , then you create an obstacle to the obstacle , says Dr. Anderson . “ We believed we had overcome , ” she says . “ We haven ’ t . ”\nDr. Anderson says that one of her goals when writing her 2018 book “ One Person No Vote ” was to counter the idea that many of the new voting restrictions are just reasonable responses to concerns about the integrity of America ’ s voting systems .\nPoor people move often , so they miss the official postcards asking if they wish to remain on the voting rolls . Young people , students , and minorities disproportionately don ’ t vote regularly . After missing a few ballots , their names start to be crossed out as well .\nRight now America isn ’ t a real democracy , Dr. Anderson says .\n“ We came close to being a democracy with the Voting Rights Act , ” she says . “ But the forces of white supremacy have kept fighting back . ”\nDo voting restrictions actually affect elections ? If so , how much ?\nDr. Anderson and other fierce critics would certainly say yes . Their Exhibit A is the 2016 presidential election in Wisconsin . Wisconsin ’ s voter ID law , passed under GOP Gov . Scott Walker , requires all voters to present a driver ’ s license , state ID , passport , military ID , naturalization papers , or tribal ID to vote . ( Other forms of ID are acceptable under certain circumstances . ) Voters without proper identification can cast a provisional ballot , which will count if they present the document at a state office within 72 hours of the election .\nIn 2016 , the first presidential election affected by the new law , there were 60,000 fewer votes for president than in 2012 , says Dr. Anderson . Sixty-eight percent of the decline was in Milwaukee alone , a heavily Democratic and minority area .\nMorry Gash/AP/File Observers look over test results as a statewide presidential election recount began Dec. 1 , 2016 , in Milwaukee . Donald Trump won Wisconsin by less than a percentage point over Hillary Clinton after polls had predicted a Clinton victory .\nDonald Trump won Wisconsin by roughly 20,000 votes . It was a harbinger of similarly close triumphs in other Rust Belt states that helped provide his margin of victory .\nBut many political scientists have a more nuanced view on the subject .\nEvidence shows that photo ID requirements and other restrictions indeed prevent some voters from casting ballots or going to the polls in the first place , says Dr. Hopkins of the University of Pennsylvania . But studies also show that the magnitude of the effect is not great enough to actually sway many outcomes .\n“ This is an important issue of voter rights and civil rights . But the levels of disenfranchisement we have seen do not indicate any election we can point to that would have been shifted , ” says Dr. Hopkins .\nTake Wisconsin . It ’ s true minority turnout dropped in 2016 relative to 2012 . But was that due to voting restrictions , or the fact that Barack Obama , the nation ’ s first African American president , wasn ’ t on the ballot ? How did party mobilization efforts compare for those years ? Could there have been some other factor ?\nLike many states , Wisconsin also has something of a split personality on voting issues . Under a GOP-led state government , it tightened ID laws – but it also allows same-day voter registration .\nThe way restrictions are drawn up and implemented also matters a lot . What IDs count ? The question of whether a student ID is acceptable makes a big difference in heavily collegiate states such as New Hampshire and Wisconsin .\nIn the short run , new restrictions can sometimes even boost turnout . Studies have shown that they can produce a powerful emotional response among Democrats in general and affected groups in particular , spurring a counter-mobilization that actually leads to higher turnout at the polls . That response might eventually wear off – but long-term effects are difficult to predict . Older voters tend to skew Republican , and as they age they become statistically less likely to have driver ’ s licenses , passports , or other IDs .\nNevertheless , the partisan intent seems clear . It is Republican governors and legislators who are pushing for and implementing new restrictions . In 2012 , Pennsylvania ’ s Republican state House leaders said publicly that the state ’ s new voter ID law would “ allow ” GOP candidate Mitt Romney to take the state . ( A state judge later threw out the law as contrary to Pennsylvania ’ s Constitution . )\nPresident Trump has called for a nationwide photo ID requirement , saying it would ensure only U.S. citizens vote in U.S. elections . ( Multiple nationwide studies have found only a handful of documented cases of noncitizen votes . )\n“ There are sometimes clear political motivations [ for instituting voting restrictions ] , ” says Dr. Hopkins .\nBut voter photo ID , “ purges ” of infrequent voters from the rolls , and other moves are not the only things affecting the voting rates of minorities . At a time when America is rapidly becoming more diverse , it is voters ’ own disengagement that may be most slowing the rise of the “ transformative ” coalition , and maintaining the clout of the “ restorative ” counterpart .\n“ It is this broader story of encouraging people to participate that ’ s the issue , ” says Bernard Fraga , assistant professor of political science at Indiana University and author of “ The Turnout Gap : Race , Ethnicity , and Political Inequality in a Diversifying America . ”\nThe U.S. has long lagged on turnout compared with other developed nations . In part , this is because registration to vote in the U.S. has traditionally been an individual responsibility . Other nations may vote on weekends , or holidays . According to Pew Research data , 24 nations make voting compulsory , including the perennial top turnout nation , Belgium , which averages close to a 90 % turnout .\nIn U.S. presidential elections , about 50 % to 60 % of eligible voting-age citizens typically turn out to vote . Midterms attract a turnout of about 40 % , while local elections draw even less . Municipal primaries may be decided by as little as 15 % of those eligible to vote .\nTurnout of minority groups in America is particularly low . Whether it is the barrier of an ID , or simply apathy – a decision to not decide on political choices – minority turnout lags far behind that of white people , says Dr. Fraga .\nIn 2016 , 65.3 % of eligible white people said they voted , according to Pew data . Forty-nine percent of black people said the same thing , representing a sharp decline from 2012 ’ s record 66.6 % turnout .\nLatino turnout lagged behind at 47.6 % , according to Pew . A greater number of eligible Latinos have not voted than voted in each presidential election since 1996 .\nAsian Americans historically do not break the 50 % turnout barrier , either . In 2016 , their voting percentage was 49.3 .\nVoter ID and other restrictive policies don ’ t explain this minority turnout gap , says Dr. Fraga . Some states that have implemented relatively tight laws actually have higher minority turnout numbers .\nAnd the gap has clear electoral effects . If minority turnout had equaled white turnout , given that minorities are preponderantly Democratic , Hillary Clinton would have won the presidency in 2016 instead of being narrowly defeated . Democrats would have regained a majority in the Senate .\nInterestingly , the turnout gap is much smaller in places where minority groups make up a larger share of the population . This may be due to the fact that African Americans or Latinos feel they have the power to affect outcomes in a way they do not in overwhelmingly white areas . Or it may be because political campaigns cater to them and target them more when they might make more of a difference .\n“ The broad conclusion is , this is a story about engagement , empowerment , and mobilization , ” says Dr. Fraga .\nAll of this – sweeping demographic change , voter ID , voter roll “ purges , ” minority turnout , plus cameo appearances by partisan gerrymandering and the Electoral College – may roll into the electoral storm of the century in 18 months .\nThe 2018 midterms saw a huge spike in voter interest and turnout . As Dr. Hopkins pointed out in his 2018 book “ The Increasingly United States : How and Why American Political Behavior Nationalized , ” the old saying that “ all politics is local ” has now been turned on its head . All politics is now national , focused on the big stories from Washington via social media and nationalized media . Midterm interest was driven by anger toward and defense of President Trump . With the president himself on the ballot next fall , turnout could be off the charts .\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nIt will be a great clash between the transformative coalition of anti-Trump Democrats and the restorative coalition of the pro-Trump base . A recent Fox News poll found that the percentage of voters who say today that they are “ extremely ” interested in the 2020 presidential election is already higher than the percentage who said the same thing on the day before the 2016 vote .\nMichael McDonald , an election specialist at the University of Florida , is predicting record participation levels . “ We are likely in for a storm of the century , ” he recently tweeted , “ with turnout levels not seen for a presidential election in the past 100 years . ” | allsides-corpus-464 |
Get breaking news alerts and special reports . The news and stories that matter , delivered weekday mornings .\nDES MOINES , Iowa — President Donald Trump ’ s campaign and allies have blocked efforts to expand mail-in voting , forcing an awkward confrontation with top GOP election officials who are promoting the opposite in their states .\nThe rare dissonance between Trump and other Republican elected officials also reflects another reality the president will not concede : Many in his party believe expanding mail-in voting could ultimately help him .\nTrump ’ s campaign has intervened directly in Ohio , while allies have fired warning shots in Iowa and Georgia , aimed at blunting Republican secretaries of state in places that could be competitive in November .\n“ There is a dimension to legislatures underfunding or undercutting election officials that could ironically backfire and hurt Republicans , ” said Michael McDonald , a University of Florida professor and director of the nonpartisan United States Election Project .\nAction by these three secretaries of state , who are the top election officials in their states , was designed to make ballot access easier during the coronavirus pandemic . Trump has repeatedly made the unfounded claim that voting by mail could lead to fraud so extensive it could undermine the integrity of the presidential election .\nIn Ohio last month , senior Trump campaign adviser Bob Paduchik weighed in on Secretary of State Frank LaRose ’ s proposal , insisting to GOP legislative leaders that they drop a provision to allow voters to file absentee ballot applications online , according to Republican officials involved in the discussions . The GOP officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal communications regarding the legislation .\nOhio already allows the secretary of state to send absentee ballot requests to every registered voter . The provision was aimed at allowing a faster processing option , while making mail-in application processing available .\nPaduchik , Trump ’ s 2016 Iowa campaign director , insisted there be no substantive changes ahead of the November election in Ohio , which Trump won in 2016 by 8 percentage points under the existing rules , according to the GOP officials .\nTrump campaign aides did not respond to requests for comment .\n“ This bill didn ’ t do everything I wanted it to do . In fact , there ’ s several things I wanted to get done that are not included in this bill , ” LaRose said in a video statement this month , promising to try ” to get some of those other changes made in the future . ”\nLet our news meet your inbox . The news and stories that matters , delivered weekday mornings . This site is protected by recaptcha\nTrump has railed against expanding vote by mail , arguing without evidence that the practice , despite being the primary voting method in Colorado , Hawaii , Oregon , Washington and Utah , is ripe for widespread fraud .\nOn Sunday , he renewed the criticism , tweeting “ Mail-In Voting , on the other hand , will lead to the most corrupt Election is USA history . Bad things happen with Mail-Ins . ”\nThat claim is part of a pattern . He also has incorrectly equated a secretary of state widely distributing absentee ballot requests with the ballots themselves in Michigan .\nLast week , after Iowa voters broke a 26-year-old statewide primary election turnout record , the Iowa Senate ’ s GOP majority pressed to bar Secretary of State Paul Pate from sending absentee ballots to all 2 million registered voters this fall , as he did before the June 3 primary .\nRepublican Gov . Kim Reynolds , a Trump ally , last week signed compromise legislation requiring Pate and his successors to seek approval from a partisan legislative council for similar future actions . The GOP-controlled council unanimously rejected Pate ’ s request to widely send absentee ballot applications this fall .\n“ My goal was to protect Iowa voters and poll workers while finding ways to conduct a clean and fair election , ” Pate said last month . “ I stand by my decisions . ”\nHis Georgia counterpart , Brad Raffensperger , faced a similar fate after he , too , sent absentee ballot applications to nearly 7 million registered voters ahead of the state ’ s June primary . Although Raffensperger objected to proposed limits being put on his authority , legislation to do that died when the legislature adjourned and after he said he would not repeat the move this fall .\nTrump carried Georgia , Iowa and Ohio comfortably in 2016 . To win again , he would likely need to match his sizable winning margins in their rural counties , home to many in his older , white base .\nPresumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has backed mail-in voting , saying it would make it easier for people to vote this November amid the coronavirus pandemic .\nSome longtime GOP activists say expanded vote by mail is essential for older voters who are accustomed to voting in person but hesitant to during the pandemic and who are unfamiliar with the process .\nAnn Trimble Ray , a veteran Iowa GOP activist , voted in June by mail and says Pate made the right call , especially for the many older voters in her rural home in Sac County , which Trump carried with 72 % of the 2016 vote .\n“ Reducing their exposure by voting absentee , we think , was a considerate thing to do , ” she said . “ I was grateful for Secretary of State Pate ’ s mailing and encouragement for absentee voting . ”\nConsolidation of rural polling places , shrunken election staff and long lines may deter rural voters vital to Trump , said University of California Irvine professor Richard Hasen , chair of a committee of U.S. scholars that has recommended changes ahead of the 2020 elections .\n“ The voters Trump is hurting are likely his own when he ’ s making these comments against mail-in balloting , ” said Hasen , “ because it ’ s a safe and generally effective way to cast a ballot , especially in the midst of a pandemic . ”\nThe check on ballot request steps in Iowa and Georgia also could threaten rural votes from being counted , based on McDonald ’ s study .\nThough Ohio counts all mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day , a number of absentee ballots came in late for the March 17 primary , including 4,000 in Greene County in southeast Ohio , a county where Trump won 60 % of the vote .\nUnderstaffed election offices and longer processing time between rural areas and metro postal centers could leave some rural voters unable to mail their ballots on time , McDonald said .\n“ I ’ m pretty convinced that ballot request step is hurting rural voters , ” McDonald said . | allsides-corpus-465 |
In their lame-duck session , Republicans passed legislation that removed key powers from both Evers and Kaul and transferred them to lawmakers . Most notably , Republicans took away Evers ’ ability to appoint members of several state boards and agencies . They also usurped Kaul ’ s authority to decide whether to approve court settlements and whether the state should even defend lawsuits like those challenging voter suppression and gerrymandering . And they slashed early voting availability , although that move had been put on hold until the recent 7th Circuit ruling .\nThe Supreme Court upheld the laws stripping powers from Evers and Kaul , an unsurprising decision given the court ’ s ruling last year that rejected a challenge to the legality of the entire lame-duck session itself . These decisions , along with one in April that blocked Evers from postponing elections that month to avoid exposing voters to coronavirus , cement the court ’ s Republican-aligned majority as one of the most partisan in the nation—one that has willingly facilitated GOP legislators ’ attempt to reject the legitimacy of Democratic victories in 2018 .\nMeanwhile , in the voter ID case , the court revived a limit of two weeks for early voting , which had been allowed for as long as six weeks in some parts of the state . The judges also restored a requirement that voters maintain residency for at least 28 days to be able to vote at a given location , even if they ’ ve moved from elsewhere within the state . Voters with fewer than 28 days of residency would have to vote at their previous address .\nIn addition , the court barred the state from letting most voters receive an absentee ballot by fax or email so that they can print them out and return them by mail , even though military and overseas voters are permitted to do so . Multiple federal courts have also temporarily allowed blind voters in other states to obtain ballots this way due to the pandemic .\nMost ominously , the judges , all of whom were appointed by Republicans , implied that any manipulation of election laws for partisan gain was constitutional even for laws that potentially discriminate against voters based on race . “ If one party can make changes that it believes help its candidates , the other can restore the original rules or revise the new ones , ” they wrote , even though the very purpose of such laws is to make it impossible for the disadvantaged party to regain control .\nThis reasoning is the logical extension of the U.S. Supreme Court ’ s 2019 decision prohibiting all federal challenges to partisan gerrymandering . If adopted by other courts , especially the Supreme Court , it would be open season for lawmakers to all but rig elections outright .\nThe ruling , however , was not a complete defeat for the plaintiffs . The 7th Circuit did uphold a decision letting college students use expired university IDs , as well as a prohibition on requiring schools to share citizenship information with the state . The judges gave the lower courts a chance to rewrite their now-invalidated injunctions to give voters who lack an ID the ability to easily get one , though that may be easier said than done especially because of the pandemic . The plaintiffs have not yet indicated whether they will appeal .\nIn a third recent case , the Wisconsin Supreme Court opted not to expedite an appeal by conservative activists who are trying to compel the state to purge roughly 129,000 voter registrations . The court won ’ t hear the case at least until Sept. 29 , when progressive Judge Jill Karofsky will have replaced conservative Justice Dan Kelly following her victory in April ’ s election .\nThe timing matters because with Kelly still in office , conservatives would likely have had at least a 4-to-3 majority in favor of ordering the purge . However , once Karofsky takes her seat , conservative Justice Brian Hagedorn will most probably decide the fate of this lawsuit . Earlier this year , he sided with the progressive minority in declining to expedite the case , though it ’ s unclear which way Hagedorn leans on the merits of the case . Even if the court permits the purge , such a decision may come too late to affect the November general election .\n● Arkansas : Redistricting reformers have submitted approximately 99,000 signatures to place an amendment on November ’ s ballot to establish an independent redistricting commission . About 89,000 signatures must be found valid , including an amount equivalent to 5 % of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election in at least 15 of Arkansas ’ 75 counties .\nSubmitting only 10,000 more signatures than the minimum needed gives the initiative ’ s backers less margin for error than is typically advised for such an effort , and even supporters estimate that only around 75,000 of their signatures are probably valid . However , Arkansas gives organizers one additional month to gather signatures if their initial submission includes valid signatures equivalent to 75 % of the total needed both statewide and in at least 15 counties .\nSupporters are waging an ongoing federal lawsuit seeking to suspend a requirement that initiative petition signatures be witnessed or notarized in-person . A lower court had temporarily blocked the requirement , allowing voters to sign petitions at home and mail them in , but the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a short-term stay of that ruling last month while it decides whether to issue a lengthier stay while the GOP ’ s appeal proceeds .\nSeparately , electoral reform supporters have submitted roughly 95,000 signatures for a different constitutional amendment that would establish a “ top-four ” primary . Under this system , all candidates regardless of party would compete on a single primary ballot , with the top four finishers advancing to a general election that would be decided by instant-runoff voting .\n● Massachusetts : Supporters of a ballot initiative that would enact a statute implementing instant-runoff voting in congressional and state elections have submitted nearly double the 13,000 additional signatures needed to qualify for November ’ s ballot . As a result , it ’ s likely that voters will have a chance to decide whether to make Massachusetts the second state after Maine to adopt this reform for all state and federal races , aside from the presidency .\n● North Dakota : Supporters of a ballot initiative that would amend North Dakota ’ s constitution to reform redistricting and its electoral system have submitted some 37,000 signatures to qualify for the November ballot , 27,000 of which must be valid . Officials will determine by Aug. 10 whether the measure has qualified .\nAs we ’ ve previously detailed , this measure would replace traditional primaries with a “ top-four ” system where the four candidates with the most support would advance to the general election regardless of party . From there , instant-runoff voting would be used to determine the winner . Additionally , the measure would require that any voting machines create a paper record of every vote—North Dakota currently uses paper ballots by default and voting machines for voters with disabilities—and that the secretary of state conduct routine audits of elections .\nThe other major change would remove the Republican-dominated legislature ’ s control over state legislative redistricting ( North Dakota only has a single congressional district , which covers the entire state ) . The proposal would hand redistricting over to the state Ethics Commission , which voters created with a 2018 ballot initiative . The commission ’ s five members are chosen by unanimous agreement of the governor and the majority and minority leaders of the state Senate ; they would draw maps using several nonpartisan criteria .\n● San Francisco , CA : The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has unanimously voted to put a referendum on the ballot this November that would amend the city ’ s charter to lower the voting age to 16 in local elections .\nVoters narrowly rejected a similar proposal 52-48 in a 2016 referendum , but if they pass the measure this time , San Francisco would become the first major city in the country to lower the voting age , though a few small localities in Maryland already allow 16-year-olds to vote in local elections .\nRelatedly , all California voters will also get a chance to decide on another November referendum that would amend the state constitution to let 17-year-olds vote in primary elections for all levels of government if they will turn 18 by the time of the general election , a policy that a number of states already allow .\n● Michigan : A federal district court has dismissed a Republican-backed lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Michigan ’ s new independent redistricting commission that voters passed at the ballot box in 2018 . This ruling follows a GOP loss in April before a panel of three judges on the GOP-heavy 6th Circuit Court of Appeals , which had unanimously upheld the lower court ’ s refusal to temporarily block the law creating the commission while the case proceeded on the merits .\nRepublicans had been challenging the new commission in two lawsuits that were consolidated into a single set of proceedings . One lawsuit argued that the new commission violated Republicans ’ First Amendment rights to free speech and association and their 14th Amendment right to equal protection because it imposes prohibitions on who may serve as a commissioner .\nRepublicans argued in the other lawsuit that the process for selecting commissioners violates the GOP ’ s First Amendment rights to freedom of association by preventing political parties from picking their own commissioners . The appeals court rejected both arguments by citing Supreme Court precedent enabling prohibitions on certain individuals serving on the commission , a decision the district court cited in its own ruling .\nThe Republican plaintiffs have not yet announced whether they will appeal but said they are considering their options .\n● New Jersey : Democratic lawmakers in New Jersey have introduced a constitutional amendment that would delay the implementation of new legislative districts from 2021 until 2023 and keep the current districts in place if the Census Bureau is unable to deliver the data from the 2020 census needed to draw new districts on time next year . The Trump administration has already told Congress that it doesn ’ t expect to be able to meet its early 2021 deadlines because of the pandemic and requested a new deadline of July 31 . The proposed amendment would come into effect if the census doesn ’ t certify New Jersey ’ s data by Feb. 15 .\nDemocrats hold the three-fifths supermajorities needed to put the amendment on the ballot without any GOP support , although voters would have to approve it in November for it to take effect . If no amendment passes , however , and the state is unable to meet its deadlines mandated under its constitution , it ’ s unclear what exactly would happen except that litigation would be a certainty .\nNew Jersey has a bipartisan redistricting commission appointed by legislative and state party leaders , and in past decades , a court-appointed tiebreaker has chosen between maps proposed by the two parties rather than draw their own lines . After the 2010 census , the tiebreaking member selected the Democratic proposal , leading the GOP to blast this proposed amendment as a power grab , although common statistical measures find no unfair advantage for Democrats under the current map .\n● District of Columbia : The D.C. Council has once again passed a bill to completely eliminate felony disenfranchisement as part of a larger package of police reforms , repealing and replacing the version it passed last month over what the lead sponsor called “ relatively minor tweaks , ” sending the latest legislation to Mayor Muriel Bowser for her expected signature .\nThe bill would immediately restore voting rights for several thousand citizens and would require officials to provide incarcerated citizens with registration forms and absentee ballots starting next year . However , because it is emergency legislation , it must be reauthorized after 90 days , though Council members plan to make it permanent soon .\nOnce Bowser signs the bill , D.C. would become only the third jurisdiction in the country after Maine and Vermont to maintain the right to vote for incarcerated citizens . It would also be the first place to do so with a large community of color : The District is 46 % African American , and more than 90 % of D.C. residents currently disenfranchised are Black .\n● Florida : Voting rights advocates have asked the Supreme Court to overturn a recent stay by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals of a lower court ruling that had struck down the Florida GOP ’ s poll tax on citizens who have served their felony sentences but owe court fines or fees . If it ’ s put back into effect , the district court ’ s ruling would pave the way for approximately 800,000 citizens who couldn ’ t pay off Florida ’ s predatory court costs to regain their voting rights , a group of citizens that is disproportionately Black .\nSeparately , the 11th Circuit scheduled a hearing on the merits of the case for Aug. 18 , the very same day as Florida ’ s statewide primary and nearly a month after the July 20 voter registration deadline for that election , ensuring that affected voters will be unable to vote in that election if the Supreme Court doesn ’ t intervene .\n● Minnesota : Minnesota officials have announced that they will not appeal a federal district court ruling from June that issued a preliminary injunction blocking a state law that would have listed Democrats last on the ballot in every partisan contest statewide in November after national Democrats sued . The court said that ballot order will be determined randomly for 2020 , though the state ’ s agreement with plaintiffs would give lawmakers a chance to change the law legislatively next year before the case proceeds further . As we ’ ve previously explained , being listed higher on the ballot can give candidates a modest boost , particularly in less-salient downballot races .\n● Indiana : Voting rights advocates have filed a federal lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of a law that Republicans passed in 2019 to prohibit voters , parties , and candidates from asking a court to keep polling locations open past 6 PM local time on Election Day if there are problems with voting . Under current law , only bipartisan county election boards can ask a court to extend polling hours , and only after a unanimous vote .\nThe plaintiffs argue that this law violates the First and 14th Amendments and has a disparate impact on Black and Latino voters . Alongside Kentucky , Indiana is the only state that closes its polls at 6 PM on Election Day ( all others close 7 PM or later ) , and this early closure makes it difficult to vote for people who work on Election Day or are caregivers for children or family members .\n● Iowa : Republican Gov . Kim Reynolds has signed a budget bill into law that makes Iowa ’ s voter ID regime more onerous and makes absentee voting more cumbersome for election officials to facilitate despite an expected surge in mail voting due to the pandemic .\nThe law adds a new requirement that voters present ID if they go to their county government offices to vote early in-person . A second provision requires absentee ballot applications to include the voter ’ s “ voter ID PIN , ” a state-issued four-digit number that few voters are likely aware of .\nIn addition , under the state ’ s previous laws , county officials could verify voter identities using other information on their applications or the state ’ s registration database , but this new law disallows that . Instead , officials would have to contact the voter individually to confirm their identity , which could cause significant delays in processing absentee requests and lead to voters not receiving their ballots in time to vote by mail .\n● Montana : A state court has issued a preliminary injunction blocking a GOP-supported law that makes it a crime for most Montanans to turn in another person ’ s absentee mail ballot , ruling in favor of the Native American advocates who brought a suit arguing that the statute violates the state constitution . The court had previously blocked the law on a short-term basis days before the June 2 primary , but this latest ruling suspends the law until the judge can issue a final ruling on the law , which may not happen until after November ’ s elections .\nThe law in question was approved by voters in 2018 after Republican legislators placed it on the ballot to circumvent a veto from Democratic Gov . Steve Bullock . It makes it a felony to turn in someone else ’ s absentee ballot unless the person doing so is the voter ’ s family member , caregiver , household member , or acquaintance , and even those individuals may turn in no more than six others ’ absentee ballots . Only postal workers and election officials are fully exempt .\nMontana is one of a few states that lets voters opt into permanently receiving an absentee mail ballot in all elections , which is intended to make it easier to vote . In addition , the pandemic prompted officials to mail every voter a ballot for the June 2 primary , and mail voting is likely to be very popular in November . However , because many Native Americans living on remote reservations lack reliable postal service and access to transportation , many ask others who do not face such barriers to turn in their ballots for them .\nRepublican state Attorney General Tim Fox and Secretary of State Corey Stapleton have not yet indicated whether they will appeal , though the lead GOP sponsor of the law said he hoped that they would .\n● Electoral College : On Monday , the U.S. Supreme Court rejected two legal challenges to the constitutionality of state laws prohibiting “ faithless electors ” in the Electoral College , ruling that states may enforce their laws that require the replacement of electors attempting to vote for a candidate other than the one whose slate they appeared on . Faithless elector bans are the law in 32 states and the District of Columbia , but only 15 states have provisions that actually enforce those bans by requiring faithless electors to be replaced with faithful ones .\nThe 10th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Colorado ’ s ban on faithless electors last year , but Washington ’ s Supreme Court upheld its state ’ s ban . The losers in both lawsuits had appealed to the Supreme Court , which ultimately upheld Washington ’ s ruling and overturned the case out of Colorado .\nSupporters of overturning faithless elector bans brought their cases in the hopes that victory would undermine public support for the Electoral College and lead to reforms abolishing it . However , justices such as Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh raised concern that doing so would “ lead to chaos ” and a “ massive campaign to try to influence electors ” in a close election , which could open the door to corruption , blackmail , and potentially the disenfranchisement of voters .\nAlthough the cases did not address the ongoing effort to reform the Electoral College by having states with a majority of electoral votes to pledge their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner , it may nevertheless neutralize one of the several potential legal threats to this project , known as National Popular Vote Interstate Compact . That ’ s because the court validated the notion that the Constitution grants the states sweeping authority to determine how they award their electors , although other potential constitutional challenges remain if the compact attains enough member states to enter into effect .\n● Mississippi : This fall , Mississippi voters will have their chance to repeal a provision of the state ’ s Jim Crow-era constitution that deliberately penalizes Black voters and the Democrats they support in elections for statewide office . However , the proposed change could end up replacing one major hurdle for Democratic candidates with another .\nLast week , Republican Gov . Tate Reeves signed a bill placing a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that would change the way the state conducts elections by eliminating Mississippi ’ s version of the Electoral College , a key feature of the state ’ s 1890 constitution that proponents openly announced was enacted “ to secure to the State of Mississippi ‘ white supremacy . ' ”\nThe provision in question requires candidates for statewide offices such as governor or attorney general to win not only a majority of the vote but also a majority of the state House ’ s 122 districts . If no candidate surpasses both thresholds , the members of the House choose the winner , and there ’ s nothing to stop them from picking the person who lost the popular vote .\nAfter Republicans took control of the legislature in 2011 , they redrew their own districts to guarantee they ’ d never lose their grip on power . They did so by making sure a majority of districts would be heavily white and , therefore , heavily Republican . As a result , they not only gerrymandered the state House , they gerrymandered every statewide election , too . The effect was so pronounced that in last year ’ s race for governor , which Democrat Jim Hood lost by 52-47 , Hood would likely have had to win by 15 points just to have a shot at carrying 62 House districts .\nThis proposed amendment would no longer require candidates for statewide office to carry a majority of the state House districts , but it would mandate a separate general election runoff if no candidate earned a majority of the vote . Georgia has had a similar runoff law on the books for years , and those runoffs have consistently seen turnout plummet and hurt Democratic candidates . If Mississippi Republicans wanted to ensure candidates are elected with majority support , they could instead replace the current system with instant-runoff voting or another preferential voting system that would eliminate the need for a separate runoff election .\nEven if this amendment fails to pass , it may not be the last word . Last year , a group of Black voters challenged this mini-Electoral College in federal court on the grounds that it violated the Constitution ’ s guarantee of one person , one vote . While the judge who heard the case agreed , he put the suit on hold to give lawmakers time to correct the problem themselves . If they fail to , the judge said , he ’ d allow litigants to once more pursue their claims .\nPlease bookmark our litigation tracker for a complete summary of the latest developments in every lawsuit regarding changes to elections and voting procedures as a result of the coronavirus .\n● Colorado : The Colorado Supreme Court , which has a 6-1 majority of Democratic appointees , has unanimously overturned Democratic Gov . Jared Polis ’ executive order that had allowed ballot initiative supporters to gather voter signatures by mail or email , siding with the business groups that brought the case and reinstating a requirement that signatures be witnessed in-person . This ruling may make it impossible for some measures to qualify for the ballot ahead of the Aug. 3 deadline to submit signatures .\n● Michigan : The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has refused to stay a district court ruling that required Michigan to either lower the number of signatures needed to put initiatives on November ’ s ballot or give supporters more time to gather them . The state has not yet indicated whether they will appeal the stay while the case proceeds on the merits .\n● New Hampshire : Advocates for blind voters have filed a federal lawsuit arguing that New Hampshire makes it impossible for them to exercise their right to vote a secret ballot using an absentee ballot . They want the court to require that New Hampshire let voters with such disabilities use the same absentee voting system available to military and overseas voters , which allows voters to fill out their ballots using a computer and print them out to mail them in .\n● New York : Civil rights advocates have filed a federal lawsuit objecting to New York ’ s procedures for rejecting absentee ballots . They aim to avoid a repeat of 2018 , when New York had the highest rate of rejected mail ballots in the country , with 14 % of such ballots invalidated . The plaintiffs are challenging how ballots with problems such as a signature either missing or not matching the one on file are rejected without notifying voters . They want the state to require that voters be alerted and given a chance to remedy the problem in a timely manner .\n● North Carolina : Voters who are suing North Carolina in state court to make it easier to vote absentee have amended their lawsuit to include a request for 21 extra days of in-person early voting . The case remains pending before a lower court .\nSeparately , the ACLU has filed a new lawsuit in state court to suspend the requirement that absentee voters have someone witness their ballot in-person . The GOP legislature with the support of Democrats passed a law earlier this year to require only one witness instead of two witnesses or a notary . However , even one required witness is more than most states mandate and has been waived by courts this year in other states with such requirements on their books .\n● Oregon : Redistricting reformers announced on Wednesday that they had failed to obtain enough signatures by the July 2 deadline to put an initiative on the November ballot that would establish an independent redistricting commission . However , their campaign isn ’ t over just yet thanks to a lawsuit that organizers filed in federal court shortly ahead of the deadline . The plaintiffs are asking the court to lower the number of signatures needed , which is currently about 150,000 , and for an extension of the deadline to submit them .\nReformers did not reveal how many signatures they had already submitted to the state , only saying it was in the “ tens of thousands. ” It ’ s unclear whether they will be able to meet the requirements if only one or the other of their two requests are granted and not both , since they lack the ability to obtain signatures electronically and instead have to direct supporters to an online form that must be printed out and mailed in to officials .\n● Pennsylvania : The Trump campaign and several Republican Congress members have filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to prohibit counties from setting up drop boxes or locations aside from the county board office for voters to return their absentee mail ballots . They also want to bar officials from counting mail ballots that aren ’ t placed in a secrecy envelope and allow Pennsylvanians to serve as poll watchers across the state regardless of which county they live in .\nThese provisions would add onerous burdens for mail voting access , and the measure on poll watchers in particular appears intended to encourage voter intimidation in urban communities of color in cities like Philadelphia . At one 2016 campaign rally , Trump listed several cities with large Black populations—including Philadelphia—and urged his supporters to volunteer as poll watchers in them .\n● Puerto Rico : Governor Wanda Vázquez of the pro-statehood New Progressive Party ( known by its Spanish acronym , PNP ) signed a bill into law making changes to Puerto Rico ’ s election code late last month only after lawmakers removed a contentious provision that would have enabled online voting for absentee voters this year and set the island on a path to transition entirely to universal online voting by 2028 . Lawmakers removed the provision after election security experts expressed alarm at the major risk of hacking with such a system .\nVázquez ’ s party passed the final bill over the objections of the pro-commonwealth Popular Democratic Party , or PPD , which is the island ’ s other major party . The bill expanded early voting and eligibility for mail voting , but the PPD denounced it as a power grab . Opposition lawmakers claimed it would allow Puerto Ricans who ’ ve left the island for the mainland to vote absentee in an effort to bolster the PNP ’ s support , which has been hurt by scandals that culminated in Vázquez ’ s predecessor resigning last year .\n● South Carolina : South Carolina ’ s state Election Commission has announced that it will provide prepaid postage on all absentee ballots this year amid an ongoing federal lawsuit by Democrats seeking to ease access to absentee voting . Democrats are still challenging the requirement that voters must provide a valid excuse , which the GOP waived for the primaries but has left untouched for November .\n● Tennessee : Republican officials announced that they plan to enforce parts of a 2019 law restricting absentee voting eligibility despite a recent state court ruling that allows all voters to cast an absentee ballot due to concerns over COVID-19 . The law requires that newly registered voters who registered by mail , a voter registration drive , or public assistance offices must vote in-person the first time . Black voters in particular have been more likely to register through registration drives in recent years , exposing them to a disproportionate impact .\nRepublicans passed this restriction in 2019 in reaction to a 2018 surge in Black voter registrations . The law added criminal penalties to certain components of voter registration drives in an effort intended to make them all but impossible to conduct . While the GOP subsequently repealed some of those provisions regarding registration drives after a court ruling had curtailed them , other provisions of the law remain in effect , such as one that makes it a crime to pay workers based on the number of registrations they gather instead of paying them hourly or allowing them to volunteer .\nHowever , the GOP ’ s decision to enforce this in-person voting requirement for these registrants is not the final word , as the plaintiffs in the case that loosened the absentee voting restrictions are challenging this mandate as well . Republicans are currently appealing that ruling to the state Supreme Court , although the high court refused to stay the lower court ’ s decision while the appeal proceeds . | allsides-corpus-466 |
The federal government is warning a former National Football League player 's company to stop advertising his medicinal cannabis products as treatments for the novel coronavirus .\nThe Federal Trade Commission and the Food and Drug Administration sent a warning letter to that effect on Tuesday to the Las Vegas headquarters of Neuro XPF , which is owned by former NFL offensive tackle Kyle Turley . Turley insists that CBD , a popular non-psychoactive cannabis derivative , can cure the coronavirus .\nIn fact , Neuro XPF had an entire page of its website , headlined “ CRUSH CORONA , ” devoted to those claims . “ Your best defense against the COVID-19 blitz starts with a strong immune system , ” the page claimed , and “ a growing body of scientific evidence shows that CBD can help keep your immune system at the top of its game . ”\n“ We want everyone to take CBD and take advantage of its potential to help prepare your body to fight a coronavirus infection , ” Neuro XPF said . “ So , we ’ re making all of our products more affordable . ”\nThose claims quickly drew the ire of federal regulators that have cracked down of late on advertisements and scams hawking medically dubious coronavirus treatments .\n“ FDA is taking urgent measures to protect consumers from certain products that , without approval or authorization by FDA , claim to mitigate , prevent , treat , diagnose , or cure COVID-19 in people , ” the agencies ’ joint letter advised . “ We request that you take immediate action to cease the sale of such unapproved and unauthorized products for the mitigation , prevention , treatment , diagnosis , or cure of COVID-19 . ”\nA failure to comply , the agencies warned , “ may result in legal action , including , without limitation , seizure and injunction . ”\nIt appears that Turley ’ s company did , in the end , comply . The CRUSH CORONA page , which was active as late as March 29 , has since been taken down . The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment .\nIn his own public communications , Turley , a first-round 1998 NFL draft pick who spent much of his career with the Saints before retiring in 2007 , is adamant that his products are a coronavirus panacea . “ CBD CAN PREVENT AND CURE THE CORONA VIRUS ! ” he tweeted last month . He also insists that the drug cured his wife ’ s skin cancer .\nTurley has spurned colleagues in the recreational and medicinal cannabis industry who have criticized him for his outlandish claims about the products ’ medical benefits . Critics are “ scared to say too much because we don ’ t want the government , we don ’ t want the man , to start coming down on us , ” he told Marijuana Moment on Tuesday .\n“ Well guess what ? ” he added . “ I was a first round draft pick , I made millions of dollars , god saved my life through this plant and I live in America . So get used to it ... And I ’ m going to continue to spread his word . ” | allsides-corpus-467 |
Washington ( CNN ) President Donald Trump made yet another false claim about coronavirus testing on Wednesday , wrongly saying at a White House briefing that the US is conducting more tests than any governor probably even wants . In fact , numerous governors , including Republicans , have said that more testing is necessary .\nTrump also continued to embellish about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi 's February 24 visit to San Francisco 's Chinatown , inaccurately saying that she had held a Chinatown `` rally . '' He continued to insist that his travel restrictions on China were a `` ban , '' though they contained significant exemptions . And he threw in an old false claim about Michelle Obama for good measure .\nTrump bragged about the level of coronavirus testing in the US and played down criticism from medical professionals that there still is n't enough testing to get a handle of the pandemic .\n`` Ultimately , we 're doing more testing , I think , than probably any of the governors even want , '' Trump said , suggesting that his administration was leading the way on coronavirus testing .\nTrump later said that `` not everybody believes as strongly as some people on testing . '' And suggesting that calls for more testing are some sort of partisan plot , he claimed that `` some people want ( us ) to do testing because they think it 's impossible for us to fulfill that goal . ''\nFacts First : Trump is off the mark . There have been bipartisan calls from governors and medical professionals for the Trump administration to ramp up testing and give states the supplies they need to get it done . There is no evidence that calls for more tests are some sort of anti-Trump plot ; nonpartisan public health experts have said it 's critical for the government to significantly increase the level of testing as part of any plan to end social distancing and lift economic restrictions .\nEven as Trump shifts his rhetoric to reopening the country , governors from both parties say they need more testing or that they 're still struggling to obtain the testing materials they need . This includes Republican governors from Ohio , Nebraska , Maryland , Massachusetts , South Dakota and Wyoming\nDuring the same briefing on Wednesday , Surgeon General Jerome Adams , a Trump appointee who has been a strong defender of the President during the pandemic , acknowledged that `` many different groups '' have talked to the administration about testing , `` and we hear that testing is absolutely a concern . ''\nIt 's not clear who Trump is referring to when he says some `` not everybody believes as strongly as some people '' in testing . While skeptics certainly exist , there is a strong consensus among public health and elected officials that testing is pivotal . These views are shared by major business executives , doctors , and even some Trump appointees , including Dr. Scott Gottlieb , his former chief of the Food and Drug Administration .\nDuring Wednesday 's press briefing , Trump repeated a false claim he 's made numerous times about the travel restrictions imposed on China due to the coronavirus .\nHe once again described the restrictions as a `` ban '' and claimed that `` if we did n't close our country to China , we would have been so infected like nobody 's ever seen . ''\nFacts First : Trump 's comments are misleading because he did not `` close our country to China . '' On February 2 , the United States began Trump 's comments are misleading because he did not `` close our country to China . '' On February 2 , the United States began implementing travel restrictions that denied entry to foreign nationals who had visited China within 14 days of arrival in the United States . But the travel restrictions contain exemptions for US citizens who had visited China , which makes Trump 's characterization that there was a `` ban '' misleading .\nAs of February 2 , US citizens who had been in China 's Hubei province in the two weeks prior to their return to the United States are subject to a mandatory quarantine of up to 14 days upon their return to the US . American citizens returning from the rest of mainland China may also face up to 14 days of quarantine after undergoing health screenings at selected ports of entry .\nOnly foreign nationals who have visited China within the past 14 days are temporarily banned from entering the United States .\nDespite publicly disagreeing with Georgia Gov . Brian Kemp 's decision to open up businesses such as barbershops and tattoo parlors , Trump reiterated his past support for the governor . He compared his efforts to get Kemp elected with those of Democrats , erroneously claiming that Michelle Obama joined her husband in campaigning for Kemp 's opponent .\n`` As you know , Brian Kemp , governor of Georgia , I worked very hard for his election , he beat their superstar , he beat the superstar of their party . I think you can say I helped a lot , '' Trump said , `` Michelle Obama , Barack Obama , Oprah Winfrey they all went in , they campaigned for him very , very hard and he lost . ''\nFacts First : Michelle Obama did not campaign for either of Kemp 's opponents . Kemp beat Republican Lt. Gov . Casey Cagle , a man , in the primary and Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams , a woman , in the general election .\nWhile Trump 's comments make it unclear which of Kemp 's opponents he 's referring to specifically , he has claimed on multiple occasions that both the Obamas and Winfrey campaigned for Abrams . While Barack Obama and Winfrey did , Michelle Obama did not .\nTrump again exaggerated about Pelosi 's visit to San Francisco 's Chinatown on February 24 , this time claiming Pelosi was having a `` rally in San Francisco , in Chinatown . '' | allsides-corpus-468 |
She advocates limiting social media consumption and finding opportunities to help others and live in a purpose-driven way . “ When we ’ re using our skills , resources , and capacities to contribute to the betterment of society , ” she says , “ that really is known to elevate and protect our well-being through times of difficulty . ”\n“ Sometimes a crisis can give us a lot of fear but it can also prompt us to think deeper and to think better , ” says Dr. Kristen Lee , a behavioral science expert at Northeastern University in Boston who cautions against “ hype contagion . ”\nConspiracy theories have spread faster than the virus itself . Scientific papers are being hastily released – and debunked . The Trump administration has alleged a foreign disinformation campaign to spread fear . As everyone from data scientists to pastors try to address this parallel challenge , dubbed an “ infodemic ” by the World Health Organization , many see an opportunity for society to come together in this crisis and emerge the stronger for it .\nIt ’ s one thing to quarantine people , it ’ s another to contain the fear and false information that ’ s gone viral in the world ’ s first social media pandemic .\nOne thing quarantines can ’ t stop is the spread of false information and fear on Facebook and other popular platforms . In the world ’ s first social media pandemic , that presents a parallel set of challenges for citizens and leaders alike .\nMany have found social media an effective tool for rapidly conveying official guidelines and recommended practices , as well as for connecting with each other and supporting the most vulnerable in society . But mixed in has been a torrent of misguided advice and inaccurate claims – including from supposedly scientific studies . This false information has amplified concerns in ways that have made it difficult to ascertain clearly the scope of the global health challenge and how best to address it .\nThe director-general of the World Health Organization has called on governments , companies , and news outlets around the globe to tackle an “ infodemic ” of fake news , which he characterized as being as dangerous as the coronavirus itself . The U.S. State Department ’ s foreign propaganda-busting center has compiled a report on some 2 million tweets spreading conspiracy theories about the epidemic , concluding that at least some of the activity was due to coordinated campaigns involving fake accounts , according to The Washington Post . And amid the swirl of dire predictions , a microbiology professor in Spain has deemed this a “ pandemic of fear . ”\nIndeed , fear and false information have gone viral . Everyone from data scientists and doctors to psychologists and pastors are weighing in on how to contain this infodemic and its attendant effects . Many see an opportunity for society and individuals to come out of this crisis the stronger for it .\n“ Sometimes a crisis can give us a lot of fear but it can also prompt us to think deeper and to think better , ” says Kristen Lee , a behavioral science professor at Northeastern University in Boston who cautions against “ hype contagion . ”\nTo avoid the sometimes paralyzing effects of fear , she advocates limiting social media consumption and finding opportunities to help others and live in a purpose-driven way . “ When we ’ re using our skills , resources , and capacities to contribute to the betterment of society , ” Dr. Lee says , “ that really is known to elevate and protect our well-being through times of difficulty . ”\nClaudio Furlan/LaPresse/AP People walk past a billboard reading `` Andra tutto bene , '' which is Italian for `` Everything will be alright , '' in Milan , Italy . Amid a nationwide lockdown to slow the spread of the coronavirus , Italians are finding ways to come together virtually in solidarity . This week , children ’ s drawings of rainbows are appearing all over social media as well as on balconies and windows in major cities .\nCarl Bergstrom , a biologist at the University of Washington , says half-jokingly that he was “ pre-designed ” for this crisis , with a background in studying novel infectious diseases as well as how information spreads through networks from ant colonies to Facebook .\nAs he ’ s monitored false information online about COVID-19 , he ’ s seen everything from anti-China conspiracy theories including the intentional development of coronavirus as a bioweapon to “ snake-oil salesmen ” peddling fake cures . Those cures have included special toothpaste and potions , prompting a spoof from comedian John Oliver who offered “ Premium Werewolf Solution ” for $ 49.99 .\nOne of the challenges of combating false information is the underlying architecture of social media and the algorithms that drive it .\n“ What goes viral doesn ’ t have a lot to do with what ’ s true , it has to do with what ’ s shocking , ” says Professor Bergstrom , who commends social media companies for trying to prevent misinformation from spreading on their platforms . “ On the one hand , kudos to them for doing that . On the other hand , the problem exists in an ecosystem of their making . ”\nIn addition to the often well-intentioned sharing of unverified information that turns out to be false , another threat is organized disinformation campaigns designed to distract , distort , and deceive .\nWhen the crisis ramped up last week , there was a four- to five-day window in which official communication channels were relatively unfettered by such campaigns , says Marc Ambinder , a digital fellow at the University of Southern California studying disinformation and cybersecurity around elections . But , he adds , if the number of cases spikes , “ there ’ s going to be more anxiety , and the purveyors of disinformation in this arms race are going to regain their footing very quickly . ”\nThe Trump administration has alleged that a foreign disinformation campaign is underway to sow fear . This past weekend , the National Security Council tweeted , “ Text message rumors of a national # quarantine are FAKE . There is no national lockdown. ” Governors and mayors have issued similar missives . And the Pentagon has called out China for spreading “ false & absurd conspiracy theories about the origin of COVID-19 blaming U.S. service members . ”\nAn internal European Union document describes a “ significant disinformation campaign by Russian state media and pro-Kremlin outlets regarding COVID-19 ” in numerous languages designed to “ exacerbate confusion , panic and fear ” and thereby undermine public trust in authorities and national health care systems . Messages in Spanish , for example , “ advance apocalyptic stories , blame capitalists for trying to benefit from the virus , and emphasise how well Russia and [ President Vladimir ] Putin are dealing with the outbreak , ” according to a Financial Times report .\nNicholas Christakis , a physician and sociologist at Yale who has become a prominent voice on COVID-19 , complained on Twitter of having gained the unwanted attention of lots of Russian bots . “ Their intent seems to be to waste my time . Their psychological tricks are incredible , ” he wrote .\nToomas Hendrik Ilves , the former president of Estonia , which is a leader in countering disinformation , responded that attempts to disrupt , disinform , and dismay are par for the course . He tweeted back , “ No need to interact . Block . ”\nEver since I started tweeting useful and accurate information about coronavirus , I seem to have attracted the attention of a lot of Russian bots ( with 50 followers and nutty twitter streams ) . Their intent seems to be to waste my time . Their psychological tricks are incredible . — Nicholas A. Christakis ( @ NAChristakis ) March 16 , 2020\nIn this turgid information environment , it has been difficult for leaders to find “ a healthy balance between conveying calm and being frank about troubling facts , ” as former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. advised in a Washington Post op-ed last week . Imparting lessons he learned from helping to steer the nation through the 2008 economic crisis , he called fear “ as big an enemy as the virus itself . ”\nTo be sure , minimizing or ignoring information from official sources carries its own dangers , and there is disagreement about what constitutes an “ appropriate ” level of fear . Some say fear spurs people into necessary action . But it can also lead to poor decision-making and unnecessary worry , and negatively affect one ’ s health .\n“ After working for 45 years in the field of psychiatry , I have seen fear cause a lot of long-term consequences in people ’ s lives , ” says Dr. Mary Moller , associate professor of nursing at Pacific Lutheran University in Washington and the 2018 American Psychiatric Nurses Association ’ s Psychiatric Nurse of the Year . “ Ultimately , over time , it can lead to compromising your immune system . ”\nIn addition to mental health professionals ’ efforts to help people address their fears , faith leaders are also pointing seekers to spiritual sources and encouraging them to minister to their neighbors .\n“ There ’ s not only a physical toll but there ’ s a psychological , emotional , and spiritual toll that we need to be aware of and we need to pray through , ” says Derwin Gray , lead elder-pastor of Transformation Church in Indian Land , South Carolina , citing scriptural promises of reassurance . “ When we are serving other people ’ s needs , that ’ s when we tend to be the most healthy . ”\nComing together to work through this crisis could be a catalyst for human progress , says virologist Anjeanette Roberts , who worked on SARS for three years and serves as a research scholar with Reasons to Believe .\n“ It ’ s the crises that have the ability to bring out the very best in us because it makes us lay aside what we tend to focus on that can divide us , ” says Dr. Roberts , a public advocate of her Christian faith who is deeply concerned about the level of polarization in American society today . “ We have gotten really far away from the idea of ‘ Do unto others as you would have them do unto you . ’ ”\nNow , with a global health challenge that has neighbors leaning out their windows and singing together , younger people going grocery shopping for their older neighbors , little kids leaving drawings in every mailbox in their neighborhood , and many other examples of people helping each other , some see an opportunity not only to survive the crisis but come out stronger for it .\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nPastor Gray says , “ I think it ’ s putting us in a place of saying , ‘ Wow , maybe I do need a hope and a power and a strength and a love that is beyond me . ’ ” | allsides-corpus-469 |
During a briefing at the White House Tuesday afternoon , Press Secretary Kayleigh McEneny corrected Democrat Senator Elizabeth Warren after she presented false Wuhan coronavirus data at a Senate hearing earlier in the day .\n`` I talk to Dr. Birx regularly . In fact , I talked to her just before I came out here because I had some questions about some funny numbers I heard from Elizabeth Warren and she helped me to correct those numbers which I 'd like to correct here because I think it 's unfair to the American people to give inflated case numbers and mortality numbers because it leads to those same Americans making a decision to not get a mammogram , to not have the cancer screenings they need so I 'd like to reveal some information Dr. Birx just shared with me , '' McEnany said .\n`` Elizabeth Warren erroneously said there were 25,000 new cases today , in fact there were less than 20,000 . Senator Warren said there were 2000 deaths , in fact there have been less than a 1000 . I spoke to Dr. Birx about that so I would encourage our Democrat colleagues and all Americans to make sure we 're putting out good information because it does have consequences , '' she continued .\nMeanwhile , the White House continues to help states access testing supplies in order to get through the three-phase reopening guidelines issued by the Wuhan coronavirus task force last month .\n`` President Trump will continue to fight for the health , safety , and economic wellbeing of ALL Americans , especially those impacted in low-income communities and disadvantaged communities . '' — @ PressSec pic.twitter.com/zVwlX1smhJ — The White House ( @ WhiteHouse ) May 12 , 2020 | allsides-corpus-470 |
fighting an “ infodemic ” of rumors and misinformation , and you can help . Read our coronavirus fact checks . Submit any questionable rumors and “ advice ” you encounter . Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers . And , please , follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease . As governments fight the COVID-19 pandemic , ███ isan “ infodemic ” of rumors and misinformation , and you can help.our coronavirus fact checks.any questionable rumors and “ advice ” you encounter.to help us hire more fact-checkers . And , please , follow theorfor guidance on protecting your community from the disease .\nMicrosoft founder Bill Gates is a rich man . He has put some of that wealth toward charitable organizations and initiatives through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation . A primary focus of that foundation , and of Gates ’ philanthropy in general , is the reduction of inequalities in health outcomes , with a focus on the developing world . Via these organizations , he also funds research into technological solutions to public health problems in the poorest communities globally . Since 2015 , he has been raising alarms about the world ’ s potentially catastrophic lack of preparedness for a pandemic .\nIn part because of his advocacy for vaccines , Gates has also been a major recipient of the anti-vaccine movement ’ s vitriol for well over a decade . Years of manufactured animosity built by false claims from these anti-vaccine groups have , as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolded , combined with the dubious claims of doomsday soothsayers and cryptocurrency Youtubers to create a sprawling COVID-19 conspiracy theory centered on Gates .\nThe basic allegation against Gates goes like this : He is using the COVID-19 pandemic as a pretext to push a vaccine with a microchip capable of tracking you along with the rest of the world population .\nFrom a factual standpoint , Gates has never proposed or funded research into the development of a vaccine — for COVID-19 or for anything else — that includes the injection of a device that could actively track your location , monitor anything you are doing , or “ control ” you .\nThe Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation did fund a pilot study conducted by MIT and Rice University researchers into a potential vaccine-delivery device that could impart an invisible mark detectable by a smartphone . This study was theoretical , the technology described was passive , and the device was incapable of any sort of tracking or monitoring . Still , much of the credence lent to the false notion that Gates has designs to track you using vaccines comes from mixing the existence of that pilot study with another public health concept Gates is actively involved in researching called a “ digital identity . ”\nThe basic premise behind a digital ( or decentralized ) identity in the context of Gates ’ work is simple : It would involve some sort of cloud-based storage of medical and/or personal-identification documents accessible only with the consent of the owner but available anywhere in the world . Crucially , such a concept , whose central scientific challenges are in the realm of encryption and blockchains , has nothing to do with anything injected into the body . Despite this , conspiracy theorists falsely use Gates ’ support for digital identity initiatives as evidence of his intentions to build a vaccine-enabled surveillance state .\nAs someone who has funded general research into vaccines and pandemics , Gates has made several public statements on the present crisis . Broadly speaking , these statements reflect Gates ’ commitment to researching and developing both treatments and vaccines for COVID-19 , and to stressing the need for a scalable method to quickly identify people who have either recovered from COVID-19 or received a vaccination against it as a means to restart the global economy . For example , in an interview with Chris Anderson , who runs TED Talks , Gates indicated he believes some sort of “ immunity certificate ” will be instrumental in reopening the global economy :\nEventually what we ’ ll have to have is certificates of who ’ s a recovered person and who ’ s a vaccinated person , because you don ’ t want people moving around the world where you ’ ll have some countries that won ’ t have it under control . Sadly . You don ’ t want to completely block off the ability for those people to go there and come back and move around . So eventually there will be sort of this digital immunity proof that will help facilitate the global reopening up .\nIn a Reddit “ Ask Me Anything ” ( AMA ) discussion from March 2020 , Gates further detailed his views on disease surveillance in the United States :\nThe testing in the US is not organized yet . In the next few weeks I hope the government fixes this by having a website you can go to to find out about home testing and kiosks . Things are a bit confused on this right now . In Seattle , the [ University of Washington ] is providing thousands of tests per day but no one is connected to a national tracking system . Whenever there is a positive test it should be seen to understand where the disease is and whether we need to strengthen the social distancing .\nGates has praised the more extreme disease-surveillance measures taken by South Korea as a model for future pandemic preparedness . South Korea has had considerable success in limiting deaths from COVID-19 thanks in large part to aggressive “ contact tracing , ” described in an April 2020 report by the Brookings Institute :\nSouth Korea was effective in tracing people who may have come into contact with those who tested positive for COVID-19 . Nearly all South Korean citizens have smartphones and use credit cards , so when someone tests positive , the government can trace where they have been , at what time , and what mode of transportation they used . With this data , the government can trace the potentially infected population , using CCTV footage to identify potential contacts when needed . Those in close contact with the infected are asked to get tested , while indirect contacts are ordered to self-quarantine for fourteen days . This is an arduous process , but the South Korean government has maintained the ability to trace and contact potentially infected persons .\nThe theory that Bill Gates wants to use a vaccine to track people based on any of these statements or views is flawed for at least two reasons . First , nothing he has advocated for above necessitates injecting a tracking device into a body . Instead these theoretical technologies would rely on a combination of biometric identification , encryption , and cloud storage of data . Second , as shown by South Korea , the injection of tracking devices via vaccines would likely be a waste of time , given the fact that most of humanity is constantly connected to a GPS enabled smartphone that probably knows more about you than your parents .\nThe sole bit of evidence used to suggest Bill Gates ’ interest in adding anything that resembles a microchip in vaccines stems from his foundation ’ s funding of a study , published in Science Translational Medicine in December 2019 , that “ developed dissolvable microneedles that deliver patterns of near-infrared light-emitting microparticles to the skin ” that can , when exposed to certain frequencies of light , “ identify the immunization status of infants. ” In several developing countries , a lack of reliable immunization records can , the authors argued , affect the quality of care provided .\nThe study — which was not conducted on human subjects — did not describe the injection of a “ microchip ” co-administered with a vaccine . Instead , it described the use of something referred to as a quantum dot . These dots are essentially molecule-sized particles engineered to have unique structures that react to near-infrared light in a way that could theoretically be identified by a device such as a smartphone . It is physically impossible to implant a quantum dot sized device that could actively ping location or any other data to an unknown third party .\nFurther , this sort of research — if it ever came to fruition in the first place — is in its infancy , and would be years away from actual implementation anywhere , let alone in a potential COVID-19 vaccine that scientists estimate could be available potentially within 18 months . Nonetheless , this study is crucial to the conspiracy theory , as that narrative is dependent on conflating quantum dots with Gates ’ work in digital identities . That ’ s why it is important to understand the misrepresentations made of the Gates-funded group ID2020 .\nID2020 , or the Digital Identity Alliance , is a 501c3 non-profit funded by a diverse range of foundations and corporate sponsors — including Microsoft and the Gates-funded vaccine non-profit GAVI — that provides grants for practical research into the real-world application of digital identities :\nThe ID2020 Alliance provides funding and other forms of material support for high-impact and high-quality digital identity projects that are privacy-protecting , user-centric , and designed for scale , impact , and replicability . Proposals are accepted on a rolling basis at various stages of development . Any individual or organization meeting the required application and evaluation criteria is welcome to submit a proposal .\nSeveral of the projects funded by ID2020 have been characterized by anti-vaccine activists as using the poor and vulnerable as scientific guinea pigs involving the implantation of a device that infringes on their privacy . Outside of the fact that none of these projects involve injecting subjects with anything , the philosophical premise implied by such claims is also in direct opposition to what ID2020 seeks to accomplish . Its goal , however lofty , is to develop a system in which the individual has complete control over personal identification or health documentation . The end product would be a system that allows this sort of information to be accessible anywhere in the world but only with your consent . The ID2020 manifesto makes this explicit :\nOver 1 billion people worldwide are unable to prove their identity through any recognized means . As such , they are without the protection of law , and are unable to access basic services , participate as a citizen or voter , or transact in the modern economy . … We believe that individuals must have control over their own digital identities , including how personal data is collected , used , and shared . Everyone should be able to assert their identity across institutional and national borders , and across time . Privacy , portability , and persistence are necessary for digital identity to meaningfully empower and protect individuals .\nOne pilot project funded by ID2020 is MyPass , which is an effort to provide digital identification to the homeless population of Austin , Texas . The project , still in its infancy , seeks to create an online , cloud-based repository of identification and medical documents . Early versions of the pilot study would likely use some combination of a QR code card given to participating individuals , but future work could involve biometrics like fingerprints or IRIS scans . Importantly , the participants in the study volunteered to be in it , can opt out at any time , and did not and will not have anything injected into them . Another project , currently active in Bangladesh and Tanzania , seeks to test the viability of tying infant fingerprints to digital identities .\nThese projects are small pilot studies with limited relevance to the current COVID-19 pandemic , and none of them involves injecting anything into anyone , let alone something that would contain the functionality that would enable any sort of active tracking or surveillance . Still , conspiracy theorists have pushed the above facts into an unfounded but paranoid narrative .\nAs stated above , Bill Gates has been interested in using vaccines to combat health inequalities for over a decade . Though it has no relevance to the claims at issue for COVID-19 , the assertion that Bill Gates ’ interest in vaccines stems from a goal of “ depopulating ” the world is almost universally included as part of that narrative as a means to imbue Gate ’ s actions with nefarious intent . That false conclusion stems from a grotesque misreading of Gates ’ argument that communities with access to vaccination tend to have lower birth rates because reduced childhood mortality means more children will survive into adulthood .\nAs also discussed above : Gates has been interested in , and financially supportive of , the concept of digital identification as another means of reducing health inequality globally . The narrative pushed by conspiracy theorists involves conflating the concept of a digital identification with the injection of a device . For example , appearing in an interview by far-right Christian conspiracy theorist Rick Wiles ’ on his TruNews platform , a guest asserted without evidence that both concepts were directly related :\nWhat Bill Gates said was eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered , who has been tested … and we will have [ a record of who ] received [ a COVID-19 ] through that digital certificate . Now that digital certificate might just sound like something simple . Maybe it ’ s a computer document . That ’ s not exactly what ’ s going on here . … . This project has researchers at MIT and Rice University with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation working to create that digital certificate system . It ’ s going to be a chip that actually is implanted into humans .\nAs previously explained , the MIT/Rice study was not conducted by the ID2020 alliance , and ID2020-funded projects are not experimenting with injecting things into people . Natural News , a supplement store and alternative health conspiracy blog , similarly conflated digital identity with quantum dot technology to portray Gates as an agent of Satan :\nKeep in mind that this all coincides with the ID2020 agenda , which aims to create a global digital identification system for every person on Earth . As we ’ ve reported in the past , ID2020 and vaccines are being used together to harvest the biometric identities of all mankind , and all for the purpose of creating the global system of tracking and control that was foretold in the book of Revelation . They ’ ve already begun to test ID2020 in Bangladesh , inserting digital IDs in the bodies of newborn babies along with their vaccinations . And Bill Gates is now talking about how so-called “ quantum dot tattoos ” are the next wave of biometrics identification , also to be inserted in people ’ s bodies through vaccination .\nIgnoring the fact that ID2020 is not a product capable of being “ tested , ” the Bangladesh project Natural News references here does not involve dead babies , nor does it involve the “ insertion ” of anything into anyone . It ’ s an exercise in imaging infant fingerprints .\nIn sum , the contention that Gates is using COVID-19 as a pretense to inject monitoring devices into humans relies on a misrepresentation of the research he has funded , the methods those projects have employed , and confusion over what a “ digital identity ” seeks to achieve . If and when a vaccine for COVID-19 comes , it will not be capable of tracking your movements or reporting any data to any entity whatsoever . None of the technology discussed by Gates here is even capable of such a task .\nPandemics are global catastrophes with few easy answers . Gates , a private citizen with no ability to mandate policy or govern international health organizations , has spent over a decade funding research into various strategies that could mitigate their effect . His ideas , though supported by many scientists , are not decrees . Instead , his focus has been on understanding the likely viability and efficacy of various counter-pandemic and public health strategies . These initiatives have been blended into a false narrative involving an as-yet-undeveloped COVID-19 vaccine combined with a made-up microchip device unlike anything Gates has ever been involved in . As such , the claim that Gates is planning to microchip you via a COVID-19 vaccination is false . | allsides-corpus-471 |
There 's a long way to go , but the Covington Kids have struck the first blow in returning accountability to news media .\nA year after he and his family 's name was dragged through the mud by a social media mob , egged on by fake news , Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann has secured a settlement of his defamation lawsuit against CNN . I hope it 's a big one . He deserves it . And CNN deserves the hit .\nFar too many journalists in this country are interested not in reporting the news or providing honest commentary , but in creating inflammatory incidents to `` start a national conversation , '' or far worse , to sadistically humiliate private citizens they perceive to be their enemies .\nBoth problematic impulses were on display when `` Black Hebrew Israelites '' and a professional protester pretending to be a Vietnam veteran confronted a group of Catholic high school students from Covington , Kentucky , last January .\nIf there was a news story to report , it was the brazen aggression of the openly anti-Semitic Black Hebrew Israelites , who chose to scream racist and anti-Catholic slurs at the boys , who had just participated in the March for Life . Less than a year later , two associates of that very group would open fire in a kosher grocery in Jersey City , N.J. , killing three people . Any journalist could have had a scoop on a rising , violent threat to Jewish-Americans that the Covington incident foreshadowed .\nBut that was n't the story the media wanted to tell . It was n't the `` conversation '' they wanted to start . The story they wanted to tell was about white Catholic kids `` harassing '' black activists and peace-loving Native Americans . So that 's what they did , heedlessly embracing that biased impulse . They put 16 year-old student Nick Sandmann 's face front and center of their reporting , claiming his `` smirking face '' made him a racist thug .\nSome of the more dishonest participants in this pile-on would claim they were `` just reporting the facts , '' but others let their guard down and more or less admitted they wanted to mess this kid 's life up because he wore a MAGA hat . I wrote about this at length as soon as the real facts came out : Sandmann and the Covington Catholic students did nothing wrong . They were the victims of a set-up by leftist activists and it fit the media 's biases so well they bought the rouse hook , line , and sinker .\nThis is how the modern American media operates far too much of the time , driven by ideology and hatred of people they think are different . And for far too long , they 've done so with virtual impunity . Defamation suits against the news media are expensive and difficult to win . Because of the free press ' role in preserving our democratic traditions , courts are often exceedingly deferential to reporters , even when they get the most important facts wrong .\nThe news that CNN agreed to settle with Sandmann for an undisclosed amount should have serious ramifications in the news industry . If the mainstream media were the professionals they claim to be , they would n't threaten the lives and reputations of ordinary Americans with their libels .\nBut this is the American fake news media we 're talking about . They 've got a long , steep climb ahead before they regain any respectability .\nDonald Trump Jr. is the executive vice president at The Trump Organization and author of the New York Times bestseller `` Triggered : How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us . '' | allsides-corpus-472 |
CLOSE Texas state troopers have begun asking motorists their race and ethnicity after it was discovered that drivers — mostly Hispanics — were often misidentified during traffic stops due to flaws in a system meant to guard against racial profiling . Wochit\nTexas state troopers have begun asking motorists their race and ethnicity after it was discovered that drivers — mostly Hispanics — were often misidentified during traffic stops because of flaws in an automated system meant to guard against racial profiling .\nDepartment of Public Safety Director Steve McCraw told a state House committee that the change took effect Wednesday in an attempt to gather more accurate data .\n`` What we can do better , and what we should have been doing better , is collect the data accurately as it relates to Hispanics . Plain and simple ... I would rather a trooper not have to ask , '' McCraw told lawmakers , according to a transcript of the hearing . `` But if the data does n't work ... there is a problem . ''\nKXAN-TV in Austin conducted a database review using millions of records going back to 2010 that showed troopers across the state inaccurately reported the race of Hispanic drivers .\nThe television station 's investigation of DPS traffic citation records also found the number of drivers stopped by troopers and recorded as Hispanic has gone up annually since 2010 — from nearly 208,000 to 351,000 last year — while the number of drivers recorded as white declined in the same time period from 1.9 million to about 1.2 million last year , the Associated Press reported .\nAmong the most common surnames of drivers listed by troopers as white are Garcia , Martinez , Hernandez , Gonzalez and Rodriguez . While a Hispanic name does n't necessarily mean a person is of Hispanic descent , the review of DPS records showed more than 1.9 million drivers with traditionally Hispanic names were listed as white . Over the same period , approximately 1.6 million were reported as Hispanic .\nIn an effort to guard against racial profiling , state law requires authorities to document the race of drivers who are arrested , issued warnings or citations . But McCraw testified that coding on drivers licenses only allowed for identification as Hispanic since 2010 . Prior to that time , Hispanic motorists were often identified as white .\nMcCraw told lawmakers that he did not know how much it would cost to fix the automated system , leaving no other remedy but to direct troopers to specifically ask for the information .\n`` Officers will advise the individual that the officer is required by law to inquire as to the individual ’ s race or ethnicity , '' a DPS memo outlining the new policy stated . `` The officer will record the race or ethnicity as stated by the motorist . Only in cases where an individual refuses to provide the requested information and the database reflects their race or ethnicity as 'other , ' will the officer use best judgment or ability to determine the race or ethnicity of the motorists . ''\nDespite the current lack of data , McCraw maintained that the agency does not tolerate racial profiling .\n`` Bottom line , it 's against the law , '' he said . `` There is no racial profiling within the DPS . '' | allsides-corpus-473 |
In the fall of 2015 , a maximum-security prison in New York invited Harvard ’ s debate team to compete against a squad of three incarcerated men . The men , all convicted of violent crimes , knew they faced tough odds : Unlike their Harvard opponents , they could not use the internet to study the topic in advance . But the prisoners were declared the winners , and the crowd , including dozens of other incarcerated men in green jumpsuits , burst into applause .\nThe incarcerated debaters at Eastern New York Correctional Facility were students themselves , part of an undergraduate program run by Bard College . The Bard Prison Initiative gives a small group of prisoners access to the same professors and curriculum offered to students on the regular liberal arts campus , allowing them to earn bachelor ’ s degrees . “ BPI is a simple experiment , ” Max Kenner , the program ’ s founder , says in College Behind Bars , a new documentary series directed by Lynn Novick , produced by Sarah Botstein , and executive produced by Ken Burns . “ What happens when we provide the kinds of education that are typically in the US only afforded to the wealthy or lucky or rich , to others ? ”\nWhat happens is more than just beating Harvard ( or Cambridge ) at debate . “ We were blown away by the seriousness and intellectual sophistication and curiosity and the focus and collegiality and the way the students talked with us and to each other and raised really profound challenging questions that we had never been asked , ” says Novick , who herself taught a Bard class about film before beginning the documentary . Graduates of the program are also much less likely to commit other crimes later . Only 4 percent of them have wound up in prison again , compared with about 40 percent of other New York prisoners .\nIf only more people could take advantage of the opportunity . Prison college programs used to be fairly common , but the 1994 crime bill written by Joe Biden and signed by Bill Clinton gutted federal funding for them . By 2001 , when the Bard program began , only three other programs in New York offered higher education behind bars . Today , the documentary series shows that less than 2 percent of incarcerated people in the state ’ s prisons have access to higher education .\nThis week , I caught up with Sebastian Yoon , one of the students portrayed in the film . Incarcerated at the age of 16 , he spent the first part of a 15-year sentence sweeping floors and wishing he could go off to college like his friends on the outside . At one point , he became so desperate he tried to kill himself . But the Bard program changed his outlook , and he threw himself into pursuing a degree in social studies . In one of the final segments of the series , he holds back tears after receiving an A on his senior thesis . “ I want to go home and I want to look back at prison and say , ‘ Prison was terrible , I never want to go back , but I learned something , ' ” he says afterward . “ That is where transformation happens . That is what stops people from coming back to prison . ”\nYoon was recently released . Here , he shares what it was like to go through Bard , the challenges of studying in a cell , and how a college program transformed the maximum-security prison where he lived .\nCan you tell me a little about what your life was like growing up , and how you arrived at Eastern Correctional Facility ?\nI grew up without a mother , who left me when I was five . My father and my two siblings , we were together , and then I went to Korea for about two years when I was five . We came back to Flushing , Queens , and moved to Long Island when I was 10 , and it was there that I found myself being one of few Asians in the entire school . I faced a lot of discrimination and racism . I didn ’ t know how to respond ; all I could do was go home and pretty much cry . There was one time when I just snapped and reacted violently . From then on , I realized people stopped bothering you when you used force . I started hanging out in the streets , where I found a sense of empowerment . One night , me and my friends were hanging out at a karaoke bar , and a fight erupted , which wasn ’ t unusual for us . But this case obviously changed my life : At the age of 16 , I was sentenced to 15 years for manslaughter in the first degree , as an adult . Because at the time , teenagers were still charged as adults in New York state . And then I landed at Eastern , five years after I was incarcerated .\nDo you remember what your first day of class was like and how you felt ?\nWhen I first started class , I was very skeptical . I mean , I was interested and excited to be a part of it , and to have gotten accepted , but I was skeptical . Because generally programs within prisons are dumbed down , and nobody cares , not even the people who are teaching . The greatest surprise to me was how engaged and passionate the professors were . They didn ’ t treat us as prisoners or make the curriculum easy for us in any way .\nMost of my work happened in my cell late at night . Usually people start going to sleep at 11 , but for us college students , sleep time was usually around 3 a.m. , because the quietest time to study was after midnight . You don ’ t want to leave the lights on in the cell because it ’ s an open cell and it would bother people . So we would just turn on the lamps and read for hours on end and write essays . When you look out the window , the cells that you see with the lamps reflecting , they were usually college students .\nThe film mentions how studying would get interrupted regularly for the count—when all the guys would have to go back to their cells to be counted by correctional officers . What were some of the other challenges that made it hard to be a student in prison ?\nJust being a prisoner , that in itself was probably the biggest struggle . No matter how hard you try to be a student , you are first and foremost a prisoner . The only way to fight it was to just get lost in the ideas and the books and discussions .\nWithout access to the internet , how would you do research ?\nMost of our research came through books . But we did have a non-online internet , called JSTOR . So we would type up a subject title , and we would see only the titles of the articles . Based on the titles , we could submit request forms , and there is a faculty member for BPI who , along with a team of Bard college students on [ the main Bard campus ] , would print these papers out and bring them into the prison .\nIn the series , one student talks about how he was put into solitary confinement after writing a story for homework that included characters who swore during the dialogue . Were there other examples of students being punished for doing their work ?\nNot for doing homework , per se . But I ’ ve seen some instances where students got a ticket for having passed the book limit in their cells . In New York , I think the max is 15 books per cell . In a given semester , if you ’ re taking four to five classes , you ’ re going to receive more than 20 books . And you have to also include the personal books you have . Some officers are understanding , but there are some officers who would give you a ticket . Something like that was very frustrating . But what can we do ? We took the risk . Books were more important .\nSome of the guys in the documentary describe the Bard program as a way to escape mentally from the confines of prison , and one says it ’ s a sort of an “ oasis…in the desert. ” Is that how you saw it ?\nWell for me , I have to say that this program gave me life in the literal sense . Because when I first went to prison , I tried to commit suicide upon receiving 15 years . And I was desperate to find a reason to live . I was desperate for hope , because all I could imagine was upon being released that nobody would ever give me an opportunity because I ’ m a convicted criminal , and they would see me as a 16-year-old who committed an act—not define me as a person who committed a bad act , but define me as a bad person . In a place like prison , once you ’ re given even a glimmer of hope , you ’ re just going to latch onto it . And higher education materialized in a form of hope . And I was just gung-ho all the way . Nothing else mattered .\nI used to tell my dad that finishing my senior thesis comes before being released . Like I wanted to finish that paper , that ’ s how important it was to me .\nAbout how Koreans living in Korea and Korean Americans here look back on Japanese colonialism , which happened in the 20th century in Korea , and how they used that history to define their identities .\nHow were you spending most of your time before you decided to apply for BPI ?\nIn the beginning , I swept and mopped the school floors . After that I went to work as a cook in the officers ’ mess hall . So instead of making food for the inmates , I made food for the officers .\nI was 21 at the time I was accepted into BPI . During that time , my friends who were outside would tell me about what they were doing in college , what kind of courses they were taking . I felt a deep sense of shame and despair thinking that while my friends were doing what every 20-year-old should be doing , I ’ m sitting here staring at my wall for hours on end . And I ’ m making no improvements for my life , and my prospects for the future weren ’ t getting any brighter .\nSome correctional officers never got a college degree themselves . Did this ever lead to tension with students who were pursuing their degree while they were incarcerated ?\nSome officers would say something like , “ Just because you ’ re getting an education don ’ t think you ’ re better than me , or don ’ t think you ’ re smarter than me. ” But there were also officers who encouraged us . It would really make my day whenever an officer searching my cell would ask about a paper that was sitting at my desk . “ What are you learning now ? I hope you guys graduate soon . I wish I could be there . If I could I will. ” That was very encouraging for all of us .\nOh , graduation was the highlight of my incarceration . It was a time when all the hard work that we ’ d put in was finally showcased . It was a testament to the fact that despite the difficulties , despite the hopelessness , we ’ d accomplished something . For my father , that became a talking point . As a parent , I guess when you ’ re having conversations with someone , it ’ s difficult to say , “ My son or daughter is in prison. ” Getting my degree , my dad could talk about me with a sense of pride , not in shame . He would say , “ My son is incarcerated , but he ’ s getting a college education. ” He was very proud that day .\nWas there a particular book or class that made a big impression or changed your worldview ?\nMy favorite class was called Cosmopolitanism . We talked about what it would like to have world citizenship , whereby our identities are not limited by nationalities , but where we are global members of the world . It taught me what it meant to have civic duty and to have civic virtues . I thought civic duties was limited to obeying laws , but that changed , and I realized that being a democratic person requires one to actively participate in the political process . I think it carries with me even up to this day . I ’ m constantly reading the news . I want to know what ’ s going on not only in the US , but in the world . And I want to be part of a change . And I ’ m gon na vote , which is something we couldn ’ t do in prison .\nWhat are some of the ways that this Bard program changed Eastern as a facility ?\nIt changes the atmosphere . If you ever visited , you would not see anything similar to what you would see in Hollywood shows or these documentaries that like to show prisoners acting irrationally and violently all the time . You would see incarcerated people walking around with textbooks in the yard , having conversations about philosophy and Plato . It pervades throughout the general population , the people who are not in the program : When they see us having a discussion , often they would come over and ask what we were talking about . The next thing we know , they were part of the conversation and we were able to teach them , but also we were able to listen to them . Which makes them feel like they want to continue this kind of thing and join BPI also .\nWhen did you leave prison , and where are you now ?\nI was released from prison in March . I ’ m currently working as a program specialist with the Democracy Fund at Open Society Foundations , which is the second-biggest philanthropic organization in the world . We provide grants and support to other organizations and individuals who are committed to social justice reform work . I ’ m still in Long Island , but I work in Manhattan .\nI live with my family , and it ’ s great . I ’ m helping to pay the mortgage , I ’ m able to do familial duties , to help my little sister with her homework . She ’ s in high school right now . She ’ s actually 16 , which is the age I went to prison . Just looking at her reminds me how young I was . Because she seems like a baby to me . But yeah , life is really interesting , and I ’ m very optimistic for my future . And just being part of an organization that is about helping others , especially those who are marginalized , I mean , I wake up feeling really good about the coming day .\nThe series College Behind Bars aired on PBS on November 25 and 26 and is now available for free streaming on PBS.org through the end of January . | allsides-corpus-474 |
`` Desperate Housewives '' star Felicity Huffman has been sentenced to 14 days in prison for federal crimes stemming from the massive `` Varsity Blues '' college entrance scam .\nInterested in College Admissions Scandal ? Add College Admissions Scandal as an interest to stay up to date on the latest College Admissions Scandal news , video , and analysis from ███ . Add Interest\nHuffman also will have to pay a $ 30,000 fine , complete 250 hours of community service and serve one year of probation .\nShe is due to self-report to a yet-to-be-determined Bureau of Prisons facility Oct. 25 .\nHuffman , 56 , learned her fate Friday and issued a statement shortly thereafter , accepting the judge 's decision .\n`` I accept the court 's decision today without reservation , '' she said in the statement . `` I have always been prepared to accept whatever punishment Judge Talwani imposed . I broke the law . I have admitted that and I pleaded guilty to this crime . There are no excuses or justifications for my actions . Period .\n`` I would like to apologize again to my daughter , my husband , my family and the educational community for my actions . And I especially want to apologize to the students who work hard every day to get into college , and to their parents who make tremendous sacrifices supporting their children . ''\n`` I have learned a lot over the last six months about my flaws as a person , '' she added . `` My goal now is to serve the sentence that the court has given me . I look forward to doing my community service hours and making a positive impact on my community . I also plan to continue making contributions wherever I can well after those service hours are completed . I can promise you that in the months and years to come that I will try and live a more honest life , serve as a better role model for my daughters and family and continue to contribute my time and energies wherever I am needed . My hope now is that my family , my friends and my community will forgive me for my actions . ''\nBefore announcing her decision , Judge Indira Talwani said she was not punishing Huffman -- and won ’ t punish the other parents either -- for a flawed college admissions process . Instead , the judge focused on why there is such a sense of outrage surrounding the case , saying that it is because the system is already so distorted and that Huffman took the step of obtaining one more advantage to put her child ahead of others .\nHuffman read a statement in front of the court apologizing to the judge , students and the colleges and universities . She then tearfully apologized to her two daughters and husband for betraying them .\nHuffman told the court that her daughter has asked her why she didn ’ t believe in her . Tearfully , she said “ I was frightened . I was stupid and I was wrong . I have inflicted more damage than I could ever imagine . ”\n`` I take full responsibility for my actions . I am prepared to take whatever sentence you give me , ” Huffman told the court .\nEarlier this month , Huffman 's lawyers filed papers asking Talwani to not send the Oscar-nominated actress to prison , writing that `` nothing about her history and characteristics require a prison sentence . ''\nHuffman 's lawyers had asked Talwani to impose a one-year probation term , 250 hours of community service and a $ 20,000 fine . But federal prosecutors asked the judge to sentence Huffman to one month of incarceration , followed by 12 months of supervised release and a fine of $ 20,000 .\n`` She is remorseful -- indeed , deeply ashamed -- about what she did , '' Huffman 's lawyers stated in court documents .\nOn March 13 , a federal indictment was unsealed with charges for 50 people , including Huffman and more than 30 other wealthy parents , in the largest college cheating scam ever prosecuted by the Department of Justice .\nThe indictment alleges the parents paid bribes to William `` Rick '' Singer , a college-entrance tutor guru whom prosecutors identified as the ringleader of the nationwide scam , to get their children into elite colleges , including Stanford , the University of Southern California , Princeton and Georgetown .\nSinger , 59 , who prosecutors said collected $ 25 million in bribes during the years-long scam , pleaded guilty in March to racketeering conspiracy , money laundering conspiracy , conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of justice . He 's yet to be sentenced .\nAlso indicted was actress Lori Loughlin -- best known as Aunt Becky on the sitcom `` Full House '' -- and her husband , fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli , who are fighting charges they paid Singer $ 500,000 to get their two daughters , Olivia Jade and Isabella , into USC as recruits for the university 's crew team , despite the fact they 'd never participated in the sport .\nHuffman pleaded guilty earlier this year to charges of conspiring to commit mail fraud and honest service mail fraud and admitted that she paid Singer $ 15,000 to falsify her daughter Sophia 's SAT score .\n`` I am in full acceptance of my guilt , and with deep regret and shame over what I have done . I accept full responsibility for my actions and will accept the consequences that stem from those actions , '' Huffman tearfully said as she pleaded guilty in court on May 13 .\nHuffman 's lawyers presented Talwani with letters vouching for her character from the actress ' relatives , including her husband , actor William H. Macy , and former colleagues such as Eva Longoria , a fellow cast member on `` Desperate Housewives . ''\nHuffman and Macy later allegedly made arrangements to pursue the scheme a second time , for their younger daughter , before deciding not to do so , according to court documents . Macy was not charged in the scam .\n`` To be sure , Felicity 's relationship with her daughters exploded on March 12th and rebuilding that relationship will be a long process . But I also want you to know Felicity has raised two amazing young women , '' Macy wrote in his letter to Talwani .\nFelicity Huffman ( MORE : among 14 people to plead guilty in college admissions scam )\n`` After her arrest Felicity found a wonderful family therapist and we 've all been going ( in various combinations ) for the last few months , '' Macy wrote . `` There is much to be done , and some of the hurt and anger will take years to work through , but we are making progress . '' | allsides-corpus-475 |
After nearly 40 days of unrest , demonstrators in Portland , Oregon , have successfully evicted law enforcement from a park in the city ’ s downtown , creating their own “ autonomous zone ” like the one that was dismantled last week in Seattle , Washington .\n“ Anti-fascist ” protesters have been waging a nightly war against police and federal law enforcement agents in downtown Portland , centered around a federal courthouse that demonstrators were looking to “ occupy. ” The confrontations gradually became more violent until , in an incident earlier this week , a protester received a gruesome injury from a non-lethal pellet after allegedly throwing a “ canister ” at federal agents .\nTuesday night , the protesters gave up the fight for the courthouse and instead decided to set up an “ occupied ” area in the city ’ s Lownsdale Square , just across the street , according to Fox News .\n“ Demonstrators began erecting tents in downtown Portland ’ s Lownsdale Square , across the street from the federal Pioneer Courthouse , one of the federal properties Homeland Security sought to protect by bringing federal officers into the city two weeks ago , ” the outlet reported . “ A camera at the Portland Standard Building showed protesters beginning to assemble tents late Tuesday night in the same park where ‘ Occupy Portland ’ set up in 2011 . ”\nThe “ Pacific Northwest Youth Liberation Front , ” an “ anti-capitalist ” group that the Seattle Times reported Monday has organized and supplied protesters for their nightly attacks on the courthouse , informally announced the creation of an “ autonomous zone ” Tuesday night and asked for volunteers to staff the area around the clock .\nPeople are needed here ALL night long , especially in the early morning ! Get on over rn ! Bring some tents . pic.twitter.com/cP5cG77m9m — PNW Youth Liberation Front ( @ PNWYLF ) July 15 , 2020\nThe Portland Police also note that a “ couple hundred demonstrators gathered at Revolution Hall in Southeast Portland and marched all throughout downtown Portland before ending their march at Pioneer Square , ” where they blocked traffic , set up tents , and began erecting barricades using “ industrial kitchen appliances , road blockades , and flashing traffic signs . ”\nPortland Mayor Ted Wheeler , like Seattle ’ s Mayor Jenny Durkan , blamed the unrest on President Donald Trump and federal agents charged with protecting federal buildings .\n“ I told the Acting Secretary [ of Homeland Security ] that my biggest immediate concern is the violence federal officers brought to our streets in recent days , and the life-threatening tactics his agents use . We do not need or want their help , ” Wheeler tweeted earlier this week . “ The best thing they can do is stay inside their building , or leave Portland altogether . Our goal is to end these violent demonstrations quickly and safely . And in the meantime , I asked him to clean up the graffiti on local federal facilities . ”\nInitially , Seattle ’ s Mayor Durkan had the same attitude toward the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest , or CHOP , that sprang up in that city ’ s Capitol Hill neighborhood , calling the demonstration a “ block party ” and suggesting protesters would engage in a “ summer of love . ”\nDurkan was forced to use police to dismantle CHOP after three individuals were killed in gun violence inside and near the boundaries of the occupied protest .\n███ is one of America ’ s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news , opinion , and entertainment . Get inside access to ███ by becoming a member . | allsides-corpus-476 |
Former Mayor Of Baltimore Indicted In Alleged Children 's Book Fraud Scheme\nFederal prosecutors have unsealed an indictment accusing former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh of using her series of self-published children 's books to commit fraud , evade federal taxes and illegally boost her own political campaigns .\nPugh , 69 , resigned in May after public outcry over a scandal involving hundreds of thousands of dollars ' worth of Healthy Holly books that she sold to a nonprofit health care company . She was on the board of that company when she was a state senator , raising questions about self-dealing — and even about the existence of the books , which feature a young black girl who touts the benefits of nutrition and exercise . After Pugh was paid , thousands of books apparently were never delivered .\nThe 11-count federal indictment made public Wednesday reveals a fuller picture of what the government says was a scheme in which she collected payments from the books to line her own pocket , donate to her own political campaign and even buy a house . At the same time , authorities say , customers waited around for Healthy Holly books that never arrived .\nPugh now stands accused of federal crimes including multiple counts of wire fraud , conspiracy to defraud the United States and tax evasion .\n`` Fraud and corruption of the sort we are addressing today undermine the public 's faith in public officials , '' Robert Hur , U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland , told reporters Wednesday in Baltimore . `` This is a tragedy and the last thing that our city needs . ''\nProsecutors also announced that two of Pugh 's associates , former city employees Gary Brown Jr. and Roslyn Wedington , have accepted plea deals .\nBrown , 38 , admitted to crimes including wire fraud for cashing checks that he said Pugh wrote to him for the children 's books , then using the money to pay down Pugh 's debt and make political donations to her . Prosecutors say Brown then tried to cover the ruse by filing false documents to the Internal Revenue Service .\nPugh and Brown , according to the indictment , secretly moved tens of thousands of dollars from the book sales to her political campaign under other peoples ' names — what prosecutors call `` straw donations '' — in an alleged attempt to make it appear as if the money was flowing from other sources .\nWedington , 50 , accepted a plea bargain from the government in a separate ploy in which she dodged federal taxes and then attempted to conceal it . Brown admitted that he assisted in this scheme .\n`` Corrupt public employees rip off the taxpayers and undermine everyone 's faith in government , '' Hur said in a statement .\nIf convicted , prosecutors said Pugh could face lengthy prison time . Authorities are also seeking to recover some $ 769,000 in profits from the alleged fraudulent book sales .\nProsecutors said in the indictment that they might try to seize her home in a wealthy section of northwest Baltimore that authorities allege was purchased and renovated with ill-gotten profits .\nPugh is expected to turn herself in to U.S . Marshals ahead of an expected court appearance and arraignment on Thursday before U.S. District Judge Deborah Chasanow . She is expected to enter a plea of not guilty .\nPugh 's lawyer , Steven Silverman , declined to comment , telling NPR that he `` will address this matter in open court tomorrow . ''\nIn late April , the FBI and IRS raided Pugh 's home as part of the federal investigation into the children 's book scandal first exposed by The Baltimore Sun .\nA week later , her resignation was announced at an event in which she was not present . In her absence , Silverman read a statement in which Pugh apologized for `` the harm I have caused to the image of the city of Baltimore and the credibility of the office of the mayor . ''\nPugh has been in self-imposed seclusion in her home following an initial leave of absence she claimed was over a bout of pneumonia . | allsides-corpus-477 |
Former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh is facing federal charges related to what prosecutors say was a plot to enrich herself through sales of her self-published children ’ s book series , according to a grand jury indictment made public Wednesday .\nPugh , 69 , is expected to self-surrender to U.S . Marshals Thursday before her first court appearance before U.S. District Judge Deborah K. Chasanow , according to a news release .\nThe former mayor , who resigned her post in May amid the book sale controversy , is charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud , seven counts of wire fraud , conspiracy to defraud the United States and two counts of tax evasion . The indictment was returned Nov. 14 .\nBALTIMORE MAYOR INSISTS LEADERSHIP IS NOT TO BLAME FOR HOMICIDE RATE\nProsecutors say Pugh , who became Baltimore 's 50th mayor on Dec. 6 , 2016 , used her `` Healthy Holly '' book series in order to fund her lifestyle in addition to her political campaign and political interests . She allegedly bought a house and paid down personal debt with the profits , according to The Baltimore Sun .\nREPUBLICAN SEEKING ELIJAH CUMMINGS ' HOUSE SEAT : MANY BALTIMORE RESIDENTS AGREE WITH TRUMP\nThe book scheme allegedly involved Pugh failing to print thousands of copies or double-selling titles in the series , the Sun reported . Prosecutors also allege Pugh listed her 2016 income as $ 31,000 when it actually exceeded $ 322,000 .\nIn April , Pugh announced she was taking an indefinite leave of absence after she had been `` advised by her physicians that she needs to take time to recover and focus on her health . '' She said she felt like she was n't able to fulfill her obligations as mayor because of her deteriorating health brought on by a recent case of pneumonia .\nUltimately , Pugh resigned amid state and federal investigations about her book series , and apologized `` for the harm that I have caused to the image of the city of Baltimore and to the credibility of the office of the mayor . ''\nPugh was the third Baltimore mayor to face sustained calls to resign . Bernard `` Jack '' Young took her place .\nFormer Baltimore city employees Gary Brown Jr. and Roslyn Wedington pleaded guilty to related charges , it was also revealed Wednesday . | allsides-corpus-478 |
Many years ago , I was a member of a committee that was recommending to whom grant money should be awarded . Since I knew one of the applicants , I asked if this meant that I should recuse myself from voting on his application .\n`` No , '' the chairman said . `` I know him too -- and he is one of the truly great phonies of our time . ''\nThe man was indeed a very talented phony . He could convince almost anybody of almost anything -- provided that they were not already knowledgeable about the subject .\nHe had once spoken to me very authoritatively about Marxian economics , apparently unaware that I was one of the few people who had read all three volumes of Marx 's `` Capital , '' and had published articles on Marxian economics in scholarly journals .\nWhat our glib talker was saying might have seemed impressive to someone who had never read `` Capital , '' as most people have not . But it was complete nonsense to me .\nIncidentally , he did not get the grant he applied for .\nThis episode came back to me recently , as I read an incisive column by Charles Krauthammer , citing some of the many gaffes in public statements by the President of the United States .\nOne presidential gaffe in particular gives the flavor , and suggests the reason , for many others . It involved the Falkland Islands .\nArgentina has recently been demanding that Britain return the Falkland Islands , which have been occupied by Britons for nearly two centuries . In 1982 , Argentina seized these islands by force , only to have British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher take the islands back by force .\nWith Argentina today beset by domestic problems , demanding the return of the Falklands is once again a way for Argentina 's government to distract the Argentine public 's attention from the country 's economic and other woes .\nBecause the Argentines call these islands `` the Malvinas , '' rather than `` the Falklands , '' Barack Obama decided to use the Argentine term . But he referred to them as `` the Maldives . ''\nIt so happens that the Maldives are thousands of miles away from the Malvinas . The former are in the Indian Ocean , while the latter are in the South Atlantic .\nNor is this the only gross misstatement that President Obama has gotten away with , thanks to the mainstream media , which sees no evil , hears no evil and speaks no evil when it comes to Obama .\nThe presidential gaffe that struck me when I heard it was Barack Obama 's reference to a military corps as a military `` corpse . '' He is obviously a man who is used to sounding off about things he has paid little or no attention to in the past . His mispronunciation of a common military term was especially revealing to someone who was once in the Marine Corps , not Marine `` corpse . ''\nLike other truly talented phonies , Barack Obama concentrates his skills on the effect of his words on other people -- most of whom do not have the time to become knowledgeable about the things he is talking about . Whether what he says bears any relationship to the facts is politically irrelevant .\nA talented con man , or a slick politician , does not waste his time trying to convince knowledgeable skeptics . His job is to keep the true believers believing . He is not going to convince the others anyway .\nBack during Barack Obama 's first year in office , he kept repeating , with great apparent earnestness , that there were `` shovel-ready '' projects that would quickly provide many much-needed jobs , if only his spending plans were approved by Congress .\nHe seemed very convincing -- if you did n't know how long it can take for any construction project to get started , after going through a bureaucratic maze of environmental impact studies , zoning commission rulings and other procedures that can delay even the smallest and simplest project for years .\nOnly about a year or so after his big spending programs were approved by Congress , Barack Obama himself laughed at how slowly everything was going on his supposedly `` shovel-ready '' projects .\nOne wonders how he will laugh when all his golden promises about ObamaCare turn out to be false and a medical disaster . Or when his foreign policy fiascoes in the Middle East are climaxed by a nuclear Iran . | allsides-corpus-479 |
“ Do I think he ’ s a civil rights leader ? No , ” said Al Sharpton . Obama and King\nOn this , black civil rights leaders agree : President Barack Obama isn ’ t the second coming of Martin Luther King Jr .\nIt ’ s tempting to compare the two men – “ inevitable , ” the New York Times said this week – but allies and some critics in the black community say Obama is not the leader of a movement . Instead , Obama is playing a different role in a different time .\n“ Do I think he ’ s a civil rights leader ? No , ” said Al Sharpton , who has become close to Obama in part because they are of the same post-movement generation . “ I think he ’ d be the first person to tell you that . ”\nSo when Obama settles into King ’ s footsteps at the base of the Lincoln Memorial on Wednesday , half a century after the 1963 March on Washington , black leaders will be listening not for the inspirational rhetoric of a civil rights icon but for the substance of a president .\n“ Those are two different roles , ” said Jesse Jackson , who has had his differences with Obama . “ What we needed from Dr. King was motivation and vision . What we need from the president is appropriation and legislation . ”\nIn other words , Obama is more Kennedy than King . Obama ’ s background is in organizing but he never promised or sought to be a King-style leader . Indeed , of all the things King envisioned in his famous refrain — “ I have a dream… ” — a black president was not one of them . In that way , Obama is blazing a trail that wasn ’ t publicly contemplated when the original civil rights generation pressured presidents to secure access to public accommodations , voting booths , and housing .\n“ The Civil Rights Movement is what created the opportunity to pave the way for the United States to be able to elect the first African American president , ” said Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett . “ So , he stands on the shoulders of those who paved the way , but he also recognizes that as president of the United States he has an enormous responsibility as well to continue – to use Martin Luther King ’ s words – moving the arc of the moral universe , to bend it toward justice . ”\n( Also on POLITCO : Race against time on MLK memorial )\nMuch as Obama treads on new ground , the election and re-election of a black president have forced contemporary black civil rights leaders to confront a challenge that was hard to foresee half a century ago : Their activism is aimed at a fellow person of color .\nAt times over the past five years , the calculus for civil rights leaders who hope to prod the president to act on a range of issues has proven difficult . Obama has received overwhelming support from black voters in two elections , meaning the leaders of civil rights organizations are risking their own standing if they take him on . There ’ s also the danger that they could hurt the president politically by challenging him publicly . At the same time , Obama ’ s willingness to work around some of those leaders has caused consternation that is typically discussed only in private settings .\nObama has elevated Sharpton and his National Action Network by having one-on-sessions with the MSNBC television host and inviting him to group meetings with leaders of longer-standing civil rights organizations such as the NAACP .\n“ We found a respect for each other ’ s different roles , ” Sharpton said . “ He understands that I ’ m an activist and I understand that he ’ s the president [ while ] some of the guys … want him to be the civil rights leader that brings issues to himself . The president can ’ t lead a march on himself . ”\nThrough his years on the public stage , Obama has navigated the tightrope between embracing King ’ s legacy and appearing to co-opt it , but he has been criticized at times for missing on both sides of that mark .\nObama had spoken during his first campaign of being part of the “ Joshua generation , ” a Biblical reference that casts the vanguard of the civil rights movement as the “ Moses generation ” and Obama and others of his age as the successors obliged to carry on their work .\nFive years ago , as he accepted the Democratic Party ’ s presidential nomination in Denver on the 45th anniversary of King ’ s speech , Obama referred to King not by name but as “ the preacher , ” a rhetorical device that some took as an effort to avoid looking like he hoped to be compared to King . | allsides-corpus-480 |
Soon after video recorded by Feidin Santana showing officer Michael Thomas Slager killing Walter Scott went public , Ed Driggers , the chief of the North Charleston , South Carolina , police force where Slager was once employed , spoke to the press . Like an increasing number of law enforcement officials as of late , Driggers found himself suddenly thrust into the media spotlight , tasked with explaining to an outraged nation why one of his officers used deadly force against an unarmed African-American , a 50-year-old father of four , who posed no threat .\nBut although Driggers ’ public appearance was , on a superficial level , all too reminiscent of what we recently saw in places as disparate as Ferguson , Missouri ; Cleveland , Ohio ; Staten Island , New York ; and Los Angeles , California , the substance was different . Because rather than mount a defense of officer Slager — who repeatedly claimed that he shot Scott only after a routine stop over a busted taillight led to physical altercation , one during which he feared for his life — Driggers buried him instead . “ I have watched the video and I was sickened by what I saw , ” he said . “ And I have not watched it since . ”\nWhat a difference a smartphone can make . As Judd Legum of Think Progress has noted , if not for the remarkably brave Santana , who used his smartphone to record the final moments of Scott ’ s life , the only version of the story the world would know is the version Slager told . Which , in plain language , was a monstrous lie . There 's no evidence that Scott tried to use Slager ’ s taser against him , as the officer claimed ; the only reason it was found near the dead man ’ s body , it appears , is because that ’ s where Slager put it . And contrary to what Slager said in the official incident report , he never feared for his personal safety ; as he pumps Scott ’ s back full of bullets he is calm , cool and collected .\nAccording to the work of one local reporter , Slager ’ s neighbors didn ’ t suspect him of being especially malevolent or inclined toward violence . To them , he seemed normal — even nice . Driggers responded with a similar mix of sadness and bewilderment . “ I want to believe in my heart of hearts that it was a tragic set of events after a traffic stop , ” Driggers said on CNN . “ I always look for the good in folks , ” he continued , “ and so I would hope that nobody would ever do something like that. ” Keith Summey , the town ’ s mayor , was also fatalistic : “ When you ’ re wrong , you ’ re wrong , ” he told the press . “ And if you make a bad decision … you have to live by that decision . ”\nNeither man was interested in damning Slager ; and considering he is now facing charges for murder , that ’ s probably for the best . But both men went further than simply biting their tongues ; they made a point of distancing Slager ’ s behavior from that of the overall North Charleston police force , too . “ The one does not totally throw a blanket across the many , ” Driggers said , according to the Los Angeles Times . The mayor and he noted that the NCPD is composed of more than 340 officers . The video traveling all over the world was hideous , no doubt . But it told us nothing of the overall law enforcement system ; it was merely a single man making a horrible , horrible mistake .\nUnfortunately , that wasn ’ t the case , because Slager is not the only officer seen in the video . After Scott had fallen to the ground , prostrate and bleeding , and after Slager had barked at him to put his hands behind his back ( so he could handcuff him before he lost the ability to move his arms ) , officer Clarence Habersham , who is African-American , arrives at the scene . His body language , like Scott ’ s , indicates this was not the first time he ’ d come upon such a scene . He seems unperturbed as he kneels down to check Scott ’ s pulse . He makes no real attempt to save the back-shot man ’ s life . And that ’ s understandable , really ; Scott was likely already dead .\nWe don ’ t know yet what exactly transpired between Slager , Habersham , or the third , Caucasian one who joins them later . We don ’ t know how much they knew , and we don ’ t know when they knew it . What we do know , though , is plenty . We know that the police department of North Charleston was content to treat Slager ’ s story as fact ; and we know that this was not the first time a member of the force had engaged in acts that we ’ d otherwise describe as thuggery . We know that in the past five years , police officers in South Carolina have used their guns against 209 human beings ; and we know that they were exonerated of wrongdoing every single time .\nLastly , we know that Walter Scott — a father , brother , cousin and veteran ; a man who loved to joke and loved to dance , and who was known as the extrovert of his family — died after being shot multiple times when his back was turned . And we know that if he lived long enough to be conscious as Slager tightened the cuffs around each of his wrists , his spent his final moments on this Earth alone , and enchained . | allsides-corpus-481 |
James Earl Ray grips the steering wheel and turns his plans over in his head . A year ago , he was an inmate doing 20 years for armed robbery in Missouri . He made a daring escape , hiding in a corrections truck and bolting out the back door after it left the prison . He 's been on the run ever since . Montreal . Los Angeles . Mexico . A couple weeks ago he moved to Atlanta , renting a room in a cheap boarding house .\n“ I 'm going to hunt deer in Wisconsin , ” he told the clerk at the Aeromarine Supply Co. in Birmingham , Ala. , giving his name as Harvey Lowmeyer . It is a beautiful gun , a pump-action Remington Gamemaster with a polished , walnut stock , a .30-06 gauge with a seven-power Redfield scope .\nRay does n't look much like an outdoorsman . Pasty and thin , with cold , blue eyes and greased-back hair , the 40-year-old drifter could be mistaken for an undertaker or a vacuum cleaner salesman in his dark suit and tie . He has a wad of $ 20 bills in his pocket and some amphetamines to keep him alert , driving him forward .\nThis could be any old day for Mathews , a struggling local beautician . She is driving through Memphis in her gray and black Buick Electra , a boat-like sedan known as a Deuce and a Quarter for its 225-inch length , more than 18 feet .\nAny old day — except today riding next to her in the front seat is Martin Luther King Jr. Abernathy , Young and Lee are in the back seat , and Cotton is in a Lincoln behind them .\nMathews looks into the rearview mirror and tenses up again .\nDespite her admonitions to Redditt at the airport , the police follow .\n11:20 a.m. — Arrives at the Lorraine Motel , a two-story motor court inn in Downtown 's gloomy warehouse district that opened years earlier at the height of segregation as the Lorraine Hotel and caters to black people . King and Abernathy check into Room 306 along the second-floor balcony . Cotton is next door in Room 307 . Young and Lee are downstairs .\n12:05 p.m. — Leaves for a meeting at Rev . James Lawson 's Centenary United Methodist Church in South Memphis . There , a large gathering of pastors and supporters discuss the anticipated march next week as word trickles in that the city has convinced a judge to issue an injunction .\n2:15 p.m. — The meeting breaks up and Mathews drives King back to the Lorraine .\nThe police have a duty to be watching , to keep law and order , but their mission is murky . Some officers were assigned for security , to protect King . But Redditt and his partner , Willie Richmond , have more specific orders — to keep an eye on King 's movements .\n“ The reason for the surveillance being ordered was because Dr. King was a controversial figure ” and because he 'd “ been meeting with local black militants , ” a police report said .\nThough few know it , Redditt and Richmond are only the tip of a much larger operation .\nWith assistance from the local FBI office the previous fall , the Memphis Police Department set up an intelligence unit , sometimes called a Red Squad , whose job is to monitor “ Reds , ” or Communists , radicals , militants and others deemed dangerous by the government . Working closely with the FBI 's William H. Lawrence , the agent in charge of domestic security in Memphis , MPD is assembling files on hundreds of people , some street thugs and criminals but many others law-abiding citizens whose political views simply veer left of mainstream Memphis .\nIt 's a great injustice to Mathews , an attractive woman who favors glittery earrings , permed hair and stylish coats , and could be mistaken for a pastor 's wife or a tea club socialite , yet at heart is a fiery activist .\nIn a way , she is the Rosa Parks of Memphis .\nBack in 1958 , when she was 25 , Mathews dared to venture onto the grounds of the Memphis Zoo on a Sunday , a day reserved for white residents . Like Parks , who refused to give up her bus seat to a white man in that seminal confrontation in Montgomery , Ala. , which helped spark the civil rights movement in 1955 , Mathews stood her ground . When police escorted her out , she followed up with a federal lawsuit that led to the city taking down the infamous “ Thursday Only ” signs that allowed black residents to visit one day a week at the zoo and nearby Brooks Art Gallery . City parks , golf courses and swimming pools were integrated , too .\nSince the sanitation strike broke , her activism is taking an increasingly militant tone .\nMuch of it is traditional movement fare — she gives free haircuts to garbage men at her Orange Mound shop and , as a singer , leads rallies in rousing versions of “ I Shall Not Be Moved , ” “ We Shall Overcome ” and “ Ai n't Gon na Let Nobody Turn Me Around ” — but police are alarmed by her conduct . She forges a public bond with her pastor , Ezekiel Bell , who is making volatile statements that include a reference to burning down the city , and confides she is a fan of Malcolm X , the assassinated black nationalist . And what she sees in King today she likes . 2\n“ We are going to march even if we ca n't get the injunction overturned , ” King told Lawson and the others that afternoon back at the church .\nAs she drops King and his entourage off at the Lorraine , a detective watches from the curb and another eyes them from a peephole in a firehouse across the street . | allsides-corpus-482 |
Bias Is n't Just A Police Problem , It 's A Preschool Problem\nLate one night , a man searches for something in a parking lot . On his hands and knees , he crawls around a bright circle of light created by a streetlamp overhead .\n`` Oh , no . I dropped them way over there , '' he says , gesturing vaguely to some faraway spot on the other side of the lot .\nNew research from the Yale Child Study Center suggests that many preschool teachers look for disruptive behavior in much the same way : in just one place , waiting for it to appear .\nThe problem with this strategy ( besides it being inefficient ) , is that , because of implicit bias , teachers are spending too much time watching black boys and expecting the worst .\nLead researcher Walter Gilliam knew that to get an accurate measure of implicit bias among preschool teachers , he could n't be fully transparent with his subjects about what , exactly , he was trying to study .\nImplicit biases are just that — subtle , often subconscious stereotypes that guide our expectations and interactions with people .\n`` We all have them , '' Gilliam says . `` Implicit biases are a natural process by which we take information , and we judge people on the basis of generalizations regarding that information . We all do it . ''\nEven the most well-meaning teacher can harbor deep-seated biases , whether she knows it or not . So Gilliam and his team devised a remarkable — and remarkably deceptive — experiment .\nAt a big , annual conference for pre-K teachers , Gilliam and his team recruited 135 educators to watch a few short videos . Here 's what they told them :\nWe are interested in learning about how teachers detect challenging\nbehavior in the classroom . Sometimes this involves seeing behavior before it becomes problematic . The video segments you are about to view are of preschoolers engaging in various activities . Some clips may or may not contain challenging behaviors . Your job is to press the enter key on the external keypad every time you see a behavior that could become a potential challenge .\nEach video included four children : a black boy and girl and a white boy and girl .\nWhile the teachers watched , eye-scan technology measured the trajectory of their gaze . Gilliam wanted to know : When teachers expected bad behavior , who did they watch ?\n`` What we found was exactly what we expected based on the rates at which children are expelled from preschool programs , '' Gilliam says . `` Teachers looked more at the black children than the white children , and they looked specifically more at the African-American boy . ''\nIndeed , according to recent data from the U.S. Department of Education , black children are 3.6 times more likely to be suspended from preschool than white children . Put another way , black children account for roughly 19 percent of all preschoolers , but nearly half of preschoolers who get suspended .\nOne reason that number is so high , Gilliam suggests , is that teachers spend more time focused on their black students , expecting bad behavior . `` If you look for something in one place , that 's the only place you can typically find it . ''\nThe Yale team also asked subjects to identify the child they felt required the most attention . Forty-two percent identified the black boy , 34 percent identified the white boy , while 13 percent and 10 percent identified the white and black girls respectively .\nThe Yale study had two parts . And , as compelling as the eye-scan results were , Gilliam 's most surprising takeaway came later .\nHe gave teachers a one-paragraph vignette to read , describing a child disrupting a class ; there 's hitting , scratching , even toy-throwing . The child in the vignette was randomly assigned what researchers considered a stereotypical name ( DeShawn , Latoya , Jake , Emily ) , and subjects were asked to rate the severity of the behavior on a scale of one to five .\nWhite teachers consistently held black students to a lower standard , rating their behavior as less severe than the same behavior of white students .\nGilliam says this tracks with previous research around how people may shift standards and expectations of others based on stereotypes and implicit bias . In other words , if white teachers believe that black boys are more likely to behave badly , they may be less surprised by that behavior and rate it less severely .\nBlack teachers , on the other hand , did the opposite , holding black students to a higher standard and rating their behavior as consistently more severe than that of white students .\nHere 's another key finding : Some teachers were also given information about the disruptive child 's home life , to see if it made them more empathetic :\n[ CHILD ] lives with his/her mother , his/her 8- and 6-year-old sisters ,\nand his/her 10-month-old baby brother . His/her home life is turbulent , between having a father who has never been a constant figure in his/her life , and a mother who struggles with depression but does n't have the resources available to seek help . During the rare times when his/her parents are together , loud and sometimes violent disputes occur between them . In order to make ends meet , [ CHILD 's ] mother has taken on three different jobs , and is in a constant state of exhaustion . [ CHILD ] and his/her siblings are left in the care of available relatives and neighbors while their mother is at work .\nTeachers who received this background did react more empathetically , lowering their rating of a behavior 's severity — but only if the teacher and student were of the same race .\nAs for white teachers rating black students or black teachers rating white students ?\n`` If the race of the teacher and the child were different and [ the teacher ] received this background information , severity rates skyrocketed , '' Gilliam says . `` And the teachers ended up feeling that the behavioral problems were hopeless and that very little could be done to actually improve the situation . ''\nThis result is consistent with previous research on empathy , Gilliam says . `` When people feel some kind of shared connection to folks , when they hear more about their misfortunes , they feel more empathic to them . But if they feel that they are different from each other ... it may actually cause them to perceive that person in a more negative light . ''\nIt 's impossible to separate these findings from today 's broader , cultural context — of disproportionately high suspension rates for black boys and young men throughout the school years , of America 's school-to-prison pipeline , and , most immediately , of the drumbeat of stories about black men being killed by police .\nIf implicit bias can play a role on our preschool reading rugs and in our classrooms ' cozy corners , it no doubt haunts every corner of our society .\nBiases are natural , as Gilliam says , but they must also be reckoned with .\nThe good news , if there is such a thing from work such as this , is that Gilliam and his team were ethically obligated to follow up with every one of the 135 teachers who participated in the study , to come clean about the deception .\nGilliam even gave them an out , letting them withdraw their data — for many of them , the lasting proof of their bias . | allsides-corpus-483 |
The decision to not prosecute NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo in Eric Garner ’ s death was ultimately made by Attorney General William Barr himself — because of “ insufficient evidence ” in the case , Brooklyn ’ s top prosecutor announced Tuesday .\nUS Attorney Richard Donoghue said that after an extensive five-year investigation , the Department of Justice couldn ’ t prove that Pantaleo “ acted in willful violation of the law ” — while noting that Garner was not in a chokehold when he repeatedly gasped , “ I can ’ t breathe . ”\n“ For anyone to die under circumstances like this is a tremendous loss . For the family to suffer as this family has only compounds that loss , ” Donoghue said at a press conference . “ But these unassailable facts are separate and distinct from whether a federal crime has been committed . And the evidence here does not support charging Police Officer Daniel Pantaleo or any other officer with a federal criminal civil rights violation . ”\nHe later said , “ Significantly , Officer Pantaleo was not engaged in a chokehold on Mr. Garner when he said he could not breathe , and neither Officer Pantaleo nor any other officer applied a chokehold to Mr. Garner after he first said he could not breathe . ”\nThe decision to not bring civil rights charges against Pantaleo comes the day before the statute of limitations in the case was to set to expire — and the fifth anniversary of Garner ’ s death on July 17 , 2014 .\nProsecutors met with Garner ’ s family and their advisers Tuesday morning ahead of announcing the decision , which leaked about 90 minutes beforehand .\nDonoghue said the government was tasked with the uphill battle of proving beyond a reasonable doubt “ that an officer willfully used more force than he reasonably could have believed was necessary under the circumstances . ”\nHe also pointed to a disagreement among medical experts as to the cause of Garner ’ s death . One medical examiner ruled his death a homicide , while another couldn ’ t conclusively say whether the chokehold was the cause .\nTwo other medical experts said the heart attack Garner suffered could ’ ve stemmed from a number of causes .\n“ This is significant because it casts doubt upon whether the chokehold itself caused Mr. Garner ’ s death , ” Donoghue said .\nDonoghue said the investigation relied heavily on video of the encounter between Garner and the officers — who were attempting to arrest him for selling loose cigarettes .\n“ The video shows that the officers ’ initial actions were in accordance with established police tactics and procedures , but that the situation deteriorated as it progressed , ” he said .\nPantaleo used “ two approved NYPD tactics ” involving force to subdue Garner , who was resisting arrest — an “ arm bar ” and a “ rear takedown ” or “ seat belt . ”\nIt was the latter maneuver that caused Garner to lose balance and fall backward with Pantaleo , whose body slammed against a store window .\n“ It appears that , in response to that collision , and to maintain a hold on Mr. Garner , Officer Pantaleo wrapped his left arm around Mr. Garner ’ s neck , resulting in what was , in effect , a chokehold , ” Donoghue said .\nDonoghue said the “ significant difference in size and weight ” between the two men contributed to the difficulty in placing Garner under arrest . Garner was 6 feet 2 and weighed close to 400 pounds , while Pantaleo is “ considerably smaller , ” according to Donoghue .\nPantaleo ’ s lawyer Stu London said “ it is always a tragedy when there is a loss of life ” — but defended his client ’ s actions that day .\n“ Officer Pantaleo utilized NYPD approved techniques to make the arrest in this case , ” London said . “ Officer Pantaleo is gratified that the Justice Department took the time to carefully review the actual evidence in this case rather than the lies and inaccuracies which have followed this case since its inception . ”\nA Staten Island grand jury declined to prosecute Pantaleo in 2014 .\nThe cop underwent an NYPD disciplinary trial recently , though a ruling has not yet been issued .\nIn a statement , NYPD spokesman Phil Walzak said the DOJ ’ s decision doesn ’ t affect the departmental proceeding .\n“ Commissioner [ James ] O ’ Neill is now awaiting the report and recommendation from the Deputy Commissioner of Trials , after which he will make the final determination on the matter , ” Walzak said . “ In order to ensure the integrity of the process , the NYPD will not comment further at this time . ”\nPantaleo , who was stripped of his badge and gun , has been on desk duty since Garner ’ s death .\nIn a statement , Police Benevolent Association president Pat Lynch said the feds ’ decision to not prosecute Pantaleo clears his name .\n“ Scapegoating a good and honorable officer , who was doing his job in the manner he was taught , will not heal the wounds this case has caused for our entire city , ” Lynch said . “ We firmly believe that if the NYPD decides the disciplinary case on the facts , free of improper political influence , that Police Officer Pantaleo , will be fully exonerated of any wrongdoing . ”\nMeanwhile , Fred Davie , the chair of the city Civilian Complaint Review Board , which brought the case against Pantaleo in his departmental trial , called on O ’ Neill to fire the cop .\n“ Our last hope for justice in this case lies with the police commissioner , ” Davie said . “ CCRB prosecutors presented evidence at trial that showed — unequivocally — that Officer Pantaleo engaged in misconduct worthy of termination . The evidence directly contradicts the statements made earlier today by the United States attorney for the Eastern District . ” | allsides-corpus-484 |
New Delhi , July 13 , 2020 – West Bengal authorities must immediately release journalists Suraj Ali Khan and Safikul Islam , as well as Islam ’ s wife , Alima Khatun , and drop all the charges against them and investigations into their work , the ███ said today .\nAt about 3 a.m. on June 29 , police arrested Khan and Islam at Islam ’ s home in Arambagh , in the Hoogly district of West Bengal , for alleged extortion , and also arrested Khatun , their lawyers , Pintu Karar and Samim Ahammed , told CPJ over the phone .\nKhan works as a reporter and Islam as an editor and owner at Arambagh TV , a news channel on YouTube that has about 130,000 followers , their lawyers said . Police also detained Islam and Khatun ’ s two children during the arrests , but later released them , Ahammed said . CPJ could not determine on what grounds police were holding Khatun .\nThe journalists ’ arrests were prompted by a complaint filed just after midnight on June 29 by a local resident , whose name was not disclosed , who alleged that Islam and Khan had photographed him cutting down a tree on government land , a criminal offense , on March 16 , and then extorted money from him in exchange for not publishing the image , Ahammed said .\nThe journalists ’ lawyers told CPJ that they believe the arrests were actually retaliation for Islam and Khan ’ s reporting on alleged corruption in government funds distributed to private clubs amid the COVID-19 pandemic .\n“ The arrests of Arambagh TV editor Safikul Islam and reporter Suraj Ali Khan , as well as of Islam ’ s wife , are clear attempts to intimidate the journalists and force them to stop their critical reporting , ” said Aliya Iftikhar , CPJ ’ s senior Asia researcher , in New York . “ The three should be released immediately and all investigations into them dropped . West Bengal police must cease harassing journalists for their work . ”\nKarar and Ahammed told CPJ that they have moved their case to the state High Court after a lower court refused to grant bail , and said the next hearing is set for tomorrow .\nIf charged and convicted with extortion , the journalists could face up to three years in jail and a fine set by a judge , according to the Indian penal code .\nAccording to documents reviewed by CPJ , the West Bengal police have also opened five other investigations into Islam and Khan in recent months . In two cases opened on April 28 and others opened on May 6 , 13 , and 14 , police have investigated the journalists for alleged cheating , forgery , defamation , public mischief , criminal conspiracy , wrongful restraint , provocation that will break public peace , criminal intimidation , disobeying a public servant , obstructing a public servant in discharge of public functions , causing grievous harm to a deter public servant from his duty , and assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from the discharge of his duty , according to those documents .\nPolice are also investigating Khan and Islam for allegedly violating sections of the Disaster Management Law , which was invoked in March due to the COVID-19 pandemic , and for making false statements and printing or publishing news without conforming to rules under the Press and Registration of Books Law , according to those documents .\nOn June 2 , the Calcutta High Court instructed the police not to take any coercive action against Islam or Khan in relation to the investigations , as the journalists assured the court that they would cooperate with authorities and would be physically present at the police station whenever summoned for questioning , according to Karar .\nIslam and Khan followed the court ’ s instructions and appeared before the Arambagh police for questioning on June 10 , Karar said .\nCPJ emailed Hooghly Rural Superintendent of Police Tathagata Basu , who oversees the police responsible for the journalists ’ arrests , for comment , but did not receive any reply . In a press conference held on July 4 , Basu denied wrongdoing on the part of police and claimed that Islam was being investigated for fraud and that Arambagh TV was run illegally , without government permission .\nAhammed told CPJ that no regulatory permission is required under Indian law to run an internet-based news outlet .\nPreviously , in early May , Arambagh TV posted two videos in which Islam and Khatun separately claimed that mobs of 30 to 40 people had surrounded their homes and threatened them over their coverage .\nIn June , the West Bengal police opened an investigation into the editor of Bengali-daily Anandabazaar Patrika following a complaint from a senior bureaucrat over the newspaper ’ s coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic , as CPJ documented at the time . | allsides-corpus-485 |
According to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo , the administration is “ looking at ” the possibility of banning a range of Chinese apps , including the hugely popular video-sharing app .\nTikTok , which was downloaded 315 million times in the first three months of the year , has long been a source of national security concern for U.S. politicians , and now the Trump administration says it ’ s seriously considering banning the app .\n“ We are taking this very seriously and we are certainly looking at it . With respect to Chinese apps on people 's cell phones , I can assure you the United States will get this one right , ” Pompeo told Fox News on Monday night , in response to a question about banning TikTok and other apps . “ I do n't want to get out in front of the President , but it 's something we 're looking at . ”\nSpeaking about Tiktok in particular , Pompeo said people should only download it “ if you want your private information in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party . ”\nTikTok is owned by Beijing-based startup ByteDance , which responded to Pompeo ’ s comments on Tuesday morning by saying it has never shared any data with the Chinese government .\n“ TikTok is led by an American CEO , with hundreds of employees and key leaders across safety , security , product , and public policy here in the U.S. , '' a TikTok spokesperson told ███ News in response to Pompeo 's comments . “ We have no higher priority than promoting a safe and secure app experience for our users . We have never provided user data to the Chinese government , nor would we do so if asked . ”\nTikTok has tried to distance itself from its parent company in recent months , appointing former Disney executive Kevin Mayer as CEO , in a bid to rebuild trust with regulators .\nTiktok says that all American users ’ data is stored in servers in the U.S. with backups in Singapore , meaning that it is not subject to Chinese law . TikTok is not available in China , but ByteDance operates a separate app , Douyin , specifically for the Chinese market .\nLast year the company ran into trouble when it locked the account of Feroza Aziz , a 17-year-old user from New Jersey , who posted a makeup tutorial that contained stinging criticism of the Chinese government ’ s treatment of Uighur Muslims .\nTikTok said the account was banned on account of a different video that violated its policies , adding that the removal of the viral video about Uighurs was removed due to a “ human moderation error . ”\nTikTok has also been drawn into the wider U.S.-China tech war that has seen companies like Huawei and ZTE sanctioned over concerns that Beijing is using their equipment to spy on users around the world .\nLast year , Sen. Tom Cotton ( R-AR ) and Sen. Chuck Schumer ( D-NY ) sent a joint letter to acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire , requesting the intelligence community conduct a security assessment of TikTok , which , they said , was one of a number of apps that “ support and cooperate with intelligence work controlled by the Chinese Communist Party . ”\nBut the U.S. is not the only country targeting TikTok . Last week India banned the app along with 58 other Chinese apps , as tensions between Delhi and Beijing grew over clashes along the Himalayan border .\nA report last week suggested the ban in India , which is TikTok ’ s largest market , could cost ByteDance as much as $ 6 billion .\nCover : TikTok removed from Google Play store , App Store after India bans 59 Chinese apps on June 29 , 2020 in Kolkata , India . ( Photo by Debajyoti Chakraborty/NurPhoto via AP ) | allsides-corpus-486 |
New Delhi , June 23 , 2020 — Police in India ’ s Uttar Pradesh state must thoroughly and transparently investigate the killing of journalist Shubham Mani Tripathi , and ensure that all responsible are brought to justice , the ███ said today .\nOn June 19 , two assailants shot and killed Tripathi , a reporter with the local Hindi daily Kampu Mail , in Uttar Pradesh ’ s Unnao district , according to news reports and his brother Rishabh Mani Tripathi , who spoke to CPJ over the phone .\nAccording to a complaint Rishabh filed to police on the night of June 19 , which CPJ reviewed , Tripathi was returning home on a motorcycle with a friend when he was attacked . He was rushed to a local hospital but died soon after , the complaint said .\nToday , Unnao police arrested Afshar Ahmed and Abdul Bari , the alleged shooters , and Shahnawaz Azhar , an alleged co-conspirator , according to a police press release , which CPJ reviewed .\n“ Uttar Pradesh authorities must show that they are taking violent attacks on journalists seriously . The arrests of three suspects in Shubham Mani Tripathi ’ s killing is a good start , but police must also find the mastermind and all those involved , and hold them all to account , ” said Steven Butler , CPJ ’ s Asia program coordinator , in Washington , D.C. “ We urge Uttar Pradesh authorities to take steps to protect all journalists working in the state . Ensuring that no one can kill with impunity is the most effective measure of all . ”\nAccording to the press release , Azhar told police that local real estate figure Divya Awasthi arranged the journalist ’ s killing in retaliation for Tripathi ’ s articles and Facebook posts about an allegedly illegal construction project she had undertaken . That project was demolished by authorities in response to his reporting , according to that police statement .\nThe police press release alleged that Awasthi instructed a person identified as Monu Khan to pay Ahmed and Bari a combined 400,000 rupees ( $ 5,200 ) to kill Tripathi .\nThat statement said Khan and Awasthi have absconded , and offered a reward for information leading to their arrests .\nRishabh ’ s complaint named Azhar , Aswathi , and eight others who were allegedly involved in the killing .\nAccording to a journalist in Unnao who knew Tripathi and who spoke to CPJ over the phone , Tripathi had mailed letters to state authorities on June 15 saying that he had been threatened . The journalist , who declined to be identified for security reasons , told CPJ that Tripathi named the same 10 suspects as mentioned by his brother in the police complaint .\nUnnao Superintendent of Police Dhawal Jaiswal referred CPJ to Vinod Kumar Pandey , an additional superintendent of police , for comment . When CPJ called Pandey , he was not available to speak ; when CPJ texted him , he did not respond .\nCPJ could not find contact information for the suspects mentioned in the police complaint , or public statements from them regarding this case . | allsides-corpus-487 |
Facebook on Sunday removed the page for Natural News , a far-right conspiracy outlet that had nearly 3 million followers . The page violated Facebook 's policy against spam , the social media company told The ███ on Monday .\nNatural News ’ founder Mike Adams wrote on fellow-right wing conspiracy site Infowars that his site was “ permanently banned ” from posting . He told the Gateway Pundit , another far-right site , that the apparent ban is evidence of a conspiracy against his website .\nThe ███ reported on Saturday that Natural News and its founder had a history of pushing hoaxes and calling for mass arrests against the left . Before the ban , Natural News had more Facebook followers than Infowars at its peak . Natural News used the page to push its trademark combination of natural remedies and far-right conspiracy theories , including disinformation about vaccines .\nFacebook has previously banned similar pages , including those for Infowars—a move criticized by the right as “ censorship ” by Silicon Valley .\nIn May , Facebook issued a new ban against Jones , plus bans against far-right figures like Paul Joseph Watson , Laura Loomer , and Milo Yiannopoulos , as well as anti-Semitie and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan . ( The bans also applied to Facebook-owned Instagram . )\n“ We 've always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate , regardless of ideology , '' a Facebook spokesperson said of the bans in May . `` The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today . ”\nFacebook has cracked down on conspiracy and extremist content over the past year . In August , it banned Infowars and its founder Alex Jones , although Infowars appears to have used similar-sounding pages like “ Newswars ” to promote its content after the ban .\nFacebook also began taking stronger actions against anti-vaccination hoaxes this year , banning anti-vax ads in March . Those ads previously targeted women in measles-stricken areas , The ███ revealed . | allsides-corpus-488 |
The New York Times building in New York City ( Gary Hershorn/Reuters )\nMaybe this deserves a prize , but not one for honest history .\nNRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE J ournalism and academia are supposed to honor , as their highest value , the fearless pursuit of truth . If you tried to parody the sad decline of prestige awards in those fields into an ideologically blinkered self-congratulatory echo chamber for progressive agitprop , it would be difficult to find a more on-the-nose example than the Pulitzer Prize awarded to Nikole Hannah-Jones of the New York Times for commentary . Hannah-Jones was , according to the Pulitzer committee , honored for “ a sweeping , deeply reported and personal essay for the ground-breaking 1619 Project , which seeks to place the enslavement of Africans at the center of America ’ s story , prompting public conversation about the nation ’ s founding and evolution . ”\n“ Deeply reported ” is one way to describe an essay that required the Times to append a correction and a separate “ Editor ’ s Note ” regarding an incendiary assertion that was presented without factual support , and that resulted in Hannah-Jones ’ s eventually admitting , after seven months of defending the claim , scrambling to find scholarly support for it , and bitterly denouncing her critics in racial terms , that “ in attempting to summarize and streamline , journalists can sometimes lose important context and nuance . I did that here. ” One hesitates to think what the runners-up for the award looked like .\nTechnically , the Pulitzer is for Hannah-Jones ’ s lead essay in the 1619 Project , and not for her role as the self-described architect of the rest of the essay collection . So , we can set aside the errors ranging from American political history to basic economics that plagued other submissions and focus on the lead essay .\nThe most dramatic and controversial assertion in Hannah-Jones ’ s essay was that , in 1776 , “ one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery. ” Her essay cited nothing to support this , nor did it show even the slightest awareness of how radical a claim this is . She continued :\nBy 1776 , Britain had grown deeply conflicted over its role in the barbaric institution that had reshaped the Western Hemisphere . In London , there were growing calls to abolish the slave trade . This would have upended the economy of the colonies , in both the North and the South . . . we may never have revolted against Britain if some of the founders had not . . . believed that independence was required in order to ensure that slavery would continue .\nThis is ahistorical nonsense , which is why it was met almost instantly by a chorus of derision from the leading lights of the historical profession . It gets the chronology on both sides of the Atlantic wrong . While Hannah-Jones openly scoffs that there is “ no such thing ” as objective history , there are absolutely such things as objective facts . Dates are one of those .\nThe first real strike against slavery was the 1772 Somerset judicial decision in Britain , which declared that slavery was alien to the English common law and thus could not exist within Britain without a positive act of Parliament . As Princeton University history professor Sean Wilentz has noted , however , the reaction to the Somerset case , which did not apply to British colonies , was relatively muted even in the southern colonies ; it provoked nothing even vaguely resembling the furious responses to the Tea Act the following year . Most of the southern colonies had positive laws about slavery anyway ; Virginia ’ s , for example , was enacted by the House of Burgesses in 1705 .\nOrganized , popular movements against slavery , and laws restricting or abolishing slavery and the slave trade , were considerably more advanced in the American colonies in the 1770s than in Britain , where Parliament would not ban slavery in Jamaica and other British colonies until 1833 , after many years of failures by William Wilberforce and other anti-slavery leaders . The world ’ s first organized anti-slavery society was formed in Pennsylvania in 1774 , and the first legal ban on slavery anywhere in the world was in Vermont in 1777 . Five of the original 13 states followed suit either during or immediately after the Revolution , passing bans on slavery between 1780 and 1784 . The first federal ban on slavery , in the Northwest Territory , was drafted in 1784 by Thomas Jefferson and passed by the Confederation Congress in 1787 . Its language would later be adopted directly into the 13th Amendment .\nSlavery as such had died a natural death in Britain and most of Western and Central Europe over the ten centuries between the fall of Rome and the age of exploration , but Americans of the Founding generation were the first people in world history to set seriously about the business of killing it on principle . This in an age when , in the words of Seymour Drescher ( one of the leading historians of global slavery and abolition ) , “ personal bondage was the prevailing form of labor in most of the world . . . Freedom , not slavery , was the peculiar institution . ”\nBy contrast , anti-slavery agitation was still getting off the ground in Britain in 1775 and remained a long way from becoming a potent political force . Wilberforce himself would not even enter Parliament until 1780 and became a publicly committed anti-slavery advocate only in 1787 , the year Britain ’ s Committee for the Abolition of the Slave Trade was formed . Hannah-Jones cites the Constitution ’ s 20-year ban on Congress prohibiting the slave trade , but she leaves out three rather important facts : that multiple colonies and states legislated against the trade before and during the Revolution ; that Congress banned the trade at the first possible moment , in 1807 , at the insistence of President Jefferson ; and that Britain , with no such constitutional restriction , only got around to banning the slave trade the same year .\nThis is the tip of the iceberg ; the reality , known to anyone who has studied the period with any degree of intellectual honesty and curiosity , is that the rhetoric and ideals of revolutionary America were a major driving force in compelling people on both sides of the Atlantic to think about human liberty and how it could be reconciled with slavery and other forms of forced labor . The same dynamic happened in France , where anti-slavery went from the talk of a small intellectual elite to a matter of serious legislative debate only with the French Revolution . This is human nature : People want rights and liberties for themselves and their own , and only in the fighting for those things are they brought to face the question of why those same principles should not apply to everyone .\nIn order to paint the American Revolution as a fight to protect slavery from an anti-slavery Britain , you not only need to ignore the whole history of anti-slavery , you also must invert the chronology and geography of the Revolution . In reality , the Revolution began in Massachusetts , and the colonies with few slaves and early slavery bans were its most enthusiastic backers , while those with the most slaves tended to have the highest concentrations of Loyalists . Banastre Tarleton , the notorious leader of the Loyalist militia in North Carolina , was heir to a Liverpool slave-trading fortune and went on to a long career after the war as a vocal defender of the slave trade in Britain . Hannah-Jones ’ s alternative history also requires discarding the whole historical literature of the public and private arguments of the men who made the Revolution . Virtually none of them ever attempted — in speeches , in pamphlets , even in private letters — to convince anyone else to rebel to protect slavery .\nIt is telling in this regard that one of Hannah-Jones ’ s defenders , Adam Serwer of The Atlantic , entitled his essay on the controversy “ The Fight Over the 1619 Project Is Not About the Facts , ” and that Hannah-Jones cited as a “ brilliant analysis ” an essay from left-wing historian David Waldstreicher ( the only historian she named in her own essay ) saying that those taking Hannah-Jones ’ s view of the question of what motivated the American revolutionaries “ do not take for granted that the story is primarily one of uncovering the motives and beliefs of the founders. ” This is quite an admission , given that the entire debate is about Hannah-Jones ’ s claim about the “ primary ” motives and beliefs of the Founders .\nWaldstreicher takes the position of every conspiracy theorist : that the men who led the public debates over the momentous decision to separate from Britain were too embarrassed to mention in public or in private their real reasons , so that the absence of evidence is proof against them . But if you have read anything of the debates at the Constitutional Convention , or the 18th-century arguments over abolition in the northern states , or the rest of American politics between 1775 and 1861 , you know that American slaveowners were not shy about asserting their interests . We know that the states that seceded in 1860-61 did so over slavery because they said so . Slaveowners were horrified by the 1775 effort by Lord Dunsmore to raise a slave rebellion in Virginia , after the war had started , and said so . But virtually nobody argued that this had been the casus belli in the first place ; at most , it aggravated an existing breach that had already come to war . The chief self-interested cause of Virginia slaveowners such as George Washington was the opening of the Ohio Valley to settlement — and when they had secured that territory , they banned slavery from it .\nHannah-Jones ’ s invented history of the American Revolution attracted the most scholarly denunciation , but other parts of her Pulitzer-winning essay were misleading , at best , in their retelling of American history . She described slavery in the 13 colonies as “ unlike anything that had existed in the world before , ” but racial chattel plantation slavery existed in Haiti and the Spanish and Portuguese colonies before 1619 . In fact , she noted that the first slaves in 1619 were stolen from a Portuguese slave ship , but never asked where it was headed . She wrote of the Declaration of Independence , “ the white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst , ” ignoring the fact that two of the three men on the drafting committee ( John Adams and Benjamin Franklin ) were opposed to slavery . On the Constitution , relying on Waldstreicher , she offered half-truths :\nThat the Constitution “ protected the ‘ property ’ of those who enslaved black people ; ” in fact , it protects property rights in general , but was specifically written to avoid giving explicit federal recognition to “ property in man , ” as detailed in Wilentz ’ s book No Property in Man . Instead , it pointedly refers to slaves as “ persons. ” Its only specific protection for ownership of slaves is the fugitive slave clause , with which Hannah-Jones takes separate issue .\nThat it “ allowed Congress to mobilize the militia to put down insurrections by the enslaved ; ” in fact , this power refers generally to any insurrection . It was invoked against the Whiskey Rebellion and against the Confederacy , and was cited by Congress as authority for the Militia Act of 1862 , which authorized the enlistment of “ persons of African descent . ”\nSpeaking of the civil-rights movement , she wrote : “ For the most part , black Americans fought back alone. ” Unlike the movements against slavery and the slave trade , in which free black Americans — while important voices — were too few and too powerless to be a driving force , African Americans took the starring role in the civil-rights movement in its crucial period between the mid 1940s and late 1960s . But never alone . Other Americans marched and , in some cases , died for civil rights . Branch Rickey hired Jackie Robinson . Harry Truman desegregated the Army . An all-white Supreme Court decided Brown v. Board of Education . Dwight Eisenhower sent federal troops to Little Rock . Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act , with bipartisan support from an almost entirely white House and an all-white Senate .\nHannah-Jones spent five paragraphs on Abraham Lincoln , dwelling entirely on an out-of-context quote from the 1858 Lincoln–Douglas debates and a meeting in August 1862 when he proposed to black abolitionist leaders “ to ship black people , once freed , to another country. ” Contrary to the implication in that phrasing , Lincoln was proposing voluntary emigration , but more importantly , both his disclaimer of black equality in 1858 and his push for colonization in the summer of 1862 ( while a draft of the Emancipation Proclamation sat in his drawer ) were part of Lincoln ’ s political strategy to bring wavering whites over to the anti-slavery cause . It is fair enough to criticize Lincoln for a certain political cynicism , or for sharing some of the endemic prejudices of his age , but to paint the Great Emancipator — who was gunned down for supporting the vote for freed slaves — solely as an enemy of black liberty is not honest history at all . Worse , Hannah-Jones claimed that “ Lincoln was blaming [ black people ] for the war , ” which no fair-minded reader of the 16th president ’ s public statements from 1861 to 1865 could believe with a straight face .\nHannah-Jones ’ s essay , and the 1619 Project as a whole , were sharply criticized by a who ’ s who of America ’ s leading historians of the Revolution , the Founding era , and the Civil War , most of them political liberals . The World Socialist Web Site , a Trotskyist publication , did surprisingly good yeoman work in interviewing many of these scholars , among them :\nGordon Wood , professor emeritus at Brown University and perhaps the leading living scholar on the revolutionary era ;\nJames McPherson , professor emeritus of history at Princeton University and author of the preeminent single-volume history of the Civil War era ;\nJames Oakes , Distinguished Professor of History at the City University of New York , and a leading writer on abolitionism , Lincoln , and Frederick Douglass ;\nVictoria Bynum , distinguished emerita professor of history at Texas State University and a writer on the social history of the Civil War era ; and\nClayborne Carson , professor of history at Stanford University and director of its Martin Luther King , Jr. , Research and Education Institute , a job for which he was hand-picked by Coretta Scott King .\nThe interviews make brutal reading . Wood , McPherson , Wilentz , Oakes , and Bynum wrote an open letter to the Times “ as historians to express our strong reservations about important aspects of The 1619 Project. ” None of the scholarly critics argued against the idea of publishing a project on this topic , or disputed that some of its content was valuable . They took issue , instead , with its sloppy treatment of the facts : “ These errors , which concern major events , can not be described as interpretation or ‘ framing. ’ They are matters of verifiable fact , which are the foundation of both honest scholarship and honest journalism . They suggest a displacement of historical understanding by ideology. ” They also noted how very few of the leading experts had been consulted by the Times . Noticeably , Princeton ’ s Kevin Kruse ( who contributed a piece to the 1619 Project on traffic in Atlanta and styles himself as the leader of “ Twitterstorians ” ) went rather silent on the controversy once the gray eminences of his own department weighed in .\nThe knee-jerk reaction by Hannah-Jones to historical criticism was to tweet , “ LOL . Right , because white historians have produced truly objective history. ” This was part of a general pattern of unserious and dismissive antics by Hannah-Jones , who calls herself the “ Beyoncé of journalism. ” At some point , this should probably have given the Times pause in entrusting her with the paper ’ s good name . It is also a symptom of the toxic Twitter environment ; in a talk with Henry Louis Gates in December , she was less confrontational , admitting that Newt Gingrich and others had a valid point in asking why her history ignored white Northerners who fought against slavery in the Civil War .\nNew York Times Magazine editor in chief Jake Silverstein responded to the historians ’ letter with a long , mealy-mouthed response : “ Historical understanding is not fixed ; it is constantly being adjusted by new scholarship and new voices . Within the world of academic history , differing views exist , if not over what precisely happened , then about why it happened , who made it happen , how to interpret the motivations of historical actors and what it all means. ” Silverstein took the scholarly vivisection of Hannah-Jones ’ s work as proof of “ what we hoped our project would do : expand the reader ’ s sense of the American past . ”\nFinally , in March — seven months after publication — Politico published a whistleblowing essay by one of the 1619 Project ’ s fact-checkers , Northwestern professor Leslie Harris , taking issue with a number of things said in Hannah-Jones ’ s essay , and specifically observing that she had been asked to fact-check the most controversial passage and had her objections ignored :\nI vigorously disputed the claim . Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution , the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war . . . Far from being fought to preserve slavery , the Revolutionary War became a primary disrupter of slavery in the North American Colonies . . .\nThis , at last , compelled Hannah-Jones and the Times to make one correction to the essay , changing “ one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence ” to “ one of the primary reasons some of the colonists decided to declare their independence. ” Hannah-Jones conceded , at last , that her original sentence had been devoid of context and nuance . Silverstein appended an “ Editor ’ s Note ” conceding that “ we recognize that our original language could be read to suggest that protecting slavery was a primary motivation for all of the colonists . The passage has been changed to make clear that this was a primary motivation for some of the colonists. ” Of course , in any popular movement , you can find somebody who believes a thing ; ascribing historical causation is supposed to aim rather higher than the search for a fig leaf .\nThe facts are , of course , the central thing — both the hard , provable facts and the broader narratives of causation , motivation , and effect that historians draw from them . It is apparent enough that Hannah-Jones dug in so hard on her particular claim about the American Revolution because she was wedded so deeply to the narrative that the 1776 founding of the nation could not be allowed to be regarded as a milestone in the idea of human liberty . That is why her essay gave her attack on the founding such prominent placement .\nIn public statements , Hannah-Jones has been open that her objective was agitprop : “ When my editor asks me , like , what ’ s your ultimate goal for the project , my ultimate goal is that there ’ ll be a reparations bill passed. ” “ I write to try to get liberal white people to do what they say they believe in . I ’ m making a moral argument . My method is guilt . ”\nAs for her employer , Slate published a transcript of a town-hall meeting held by Times executive editor Dean Baquet in August 2019 , in which he responded to a staffer asking\nto what extent you think that the fact of racism and white supremacy being sort of the foundation of this country should play into our reporting . Just because it feels to me like it should be a starting point , you know ? . . . I just feel like racism is in everything . It should be considered in our science reporting , in our culture reporting , in our national reporting .\nBaquet pointed , in his response , to the 1619 Project : “ I do think that race and understanding of race should be a part of how we cover the American story . . . one reason we all signed off on the 1619 Project and made it so ambitious and expansive was to teach our readers to think a little bit more like that . ”\nAs for the Pulitzer committee , which is run through Columbia University and ( predictably ) includes Gail Collins of the Times , one way to pitch a piece of journalism as Pulitzer-worthy is to have it embraced by the ( unaffiliated ) Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting . At the time of the 1619 Project ’ s publication in August 2019 , the Pulitzer Center issued a press release touting its pride in its educational arm being “ selected as the education partner ” by the Times to create a school curriculum out of the 1619 Project , complete with a glowing quote from the head of the Pulitzer Center :\n“ We are honored to have the opportunity to work with The New York Times on this landmark initiative , ” said Jon Sawyer , executive director of the Pulitzer Center . “ The education network we have built over the past 13 years is premised on the belief that journalism can be the engine for public education and civil discourse . It is hard to imagine a topic more resonant , or more important , than ‘ The 1619 Project. ’ ” . . . Hannah-Jones and other contributors to the ‘ 1619 ’ issue will visit Pulitzer Center partner schools in the coming months . A schedule of public speaking appearances by Hannah-Jones and other ‘ 1619 ’ contributors will appear on the Center ’ s events page when available .\nOn August 13 — the day before publication — the Times held a live rollout event , at which Silverstein “ thanked the Pulitzer Center and . . . mentioned the sheet in the [ Times ] magazine highlighting the Pulitzer Center ’ s education materials. ” In September , the Chicago Public Schools announced : “ Thanks to our partners at the Pulitzer Center , every CPS high school will receive 200–400 copies of the New York Times ’ The 1619 Project this week as a resource to help reframe the institution of slavery , and how we ’ re still influenced by it today. ” In October , “ Pulitzer Center staff ventured to high schools and colleges in Illinois and North Carolina ” to promote this initiative .\nYou know , and I know , and everybody else on this planet knows , that nothing full of as many shoddy errors and untruths , and subject to such withering scholarly rebuttal , as the 1619 Project would be awarded an accolade such as a Pulitzer if its politics were of the right rather than of the left . Nor , for that matter , would the Times devote such effort to defending an assertion as outlandish as Hannah-Jones ’ s view of the American Revolution unless it had strong ideological and institutional reasons to be wedded to the argument . Maybe this deserves a prize , but not one for honest history . | allsides-corpus-489 |
If someone had simply stopped and double-checked some math , they might have saved MSNBC ’ s Brian Williams and New York Times editorial board member Mara Gay some embarrassment and an apology Thursday night .\nInstead , both Williams and Gay marveled on air in reaction to a Twitter user ’ s post about Mike Bloomberg ’ s campaign spending .\nTrouble is , the post had gotten the math all wrong – yet neither Williams nor Gay seemed to notice .\nMSNBC 'S RACHEL MADDOW TELLS WARREN HER 2020 EXIT IS 'CRUSHING , ' A 'DEATH KNELL ' FOR A FUTURE FEMALE POTUS\nThe Super Tuesday evening post , now deleted , said : “ Bloomberg spent $ 500 million on ads . The U.S. population is 327 million . He could have given each American $ 1 million and still have money left over , I feel like a $ 1 million check would be life-changing for people . Yet he wasted it all on ads and STILL LOST . ”\n“ It ’ s an incredible way of putting it . It ’ s true , ” Gay agreed .\nIn reality , however , had Bloomberg divvied his advertising dollars among all Americans , the per-capita cash-out would have been more like $ 1.53 per person – not even enough to take a ride on New York City ’ s subway .\n“ Turns out Mara and I got the same grades at math . I ’ m speaking of the tweet we both misinterpreted . He could give each American $ 1 . Again , I did n't have it in high school . I do n't have it tonight . I stand corrected . Sorry about that . The tweet is wrong , ” Williams told viewers later in the show . “ Garbage in , garbage out . ”\nOne Twitter user who took notice of the bad math was writer Michael Salfino of New Jersey .\n“ What is wrong with these people ? ” Salfino wrote . “ This would be right here if there were 327 people in the US . And this reflects horribly on the NY Times too . Can someone stop and think for two seconds ? ”\n`` The 11th Hour '' eventually pointed out the mistake on social media .\n“ Tonight on the air we quoted a tweet that relied on bad math . We corrected the error after the next commercial break and have removed it from later editions of tonight ’ s program . We apologize for the error , ” the verified Twittter account for Williams ’ show wrote after the gaffe .\nBERNIE SANDERS FIRES BACK AT MEDIA FOR ITS 'WILLFUL DISTORTION ' OF HIS ATTACKS ON 'THE ESTABLISHMENT '\nAs for the author of the original post , her account was set to private -- and in her Twitter bio she wrote : “ I know , I ’ m bad at math . ”\nNational Review editor Charles C. W. Cooke wrote that the math is obviously “ spectacularly off ” but so it ’ s also very telling .\n“ This , right here , is why so many left-leaning Americans think that ‘ the billionaires ’ can pay for everything . It ’ s why Elizabeth Warren was enthusiastically boosted by the media despite her ridiculous pretense that she could pay for a series of gargantuan initiatives without raising taxes on anyone but the extremely rich , ” Cooke wrote . “ It ’ s why Democrat after Democrat promises not to raise ‘ middle class taxes ’ while promising programs that require the raising of middle class taxes . How did this bad tweet make it onto TV to be endorsed ? Why did Mara Gay agree with it ? Why didn ’ t Brian Williams notice ? Because the people involved in this clip thought it was true . This is how they see the world . ”\nOther critics took to Twitter to mock Williams and the Times : | allsides-corpus-490 |
Sen. Elizabeth Warren with Sen. Bernie Sanders at a Capitol Hill press conference introducing Sanders ’ s “ Medicare for All ” plan , September 13 , 2017 . ( Yuri Gripas/Reuters )\nWholesale seizure and control of private property ? With 2020 in her sights , Warren woos the hard Left .\nSenator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has one-upped socialists Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez : She proposes to nationalize every major business in the United States of America . If successful , it would constitute the largest seizure of private property in human history .\nWarren ’ s proposal is dishonestly called the “ Accountable Capitalism Act. ” Accountable to whom ? you might ask . That ’ s a reasonable question . The answer is — as it always is — accountable to politicians , who desire to put the assets and productivity of private businesses under political discipline for their own selfish ends . It is remarkable that people who are most keenly attuned to the self-interest of CEOs and shareholders and the ways in which that self-interest influences their decisions apparently believe that members of the House , senators , presidents , regulators , Cabinet secretaries , and agency chiefs somehow are liberated from self-interest when they take office through some kind of miracle of transcendence .\nUnder Senator Warren ’ s proposal , no business with more than $ 1 billion in revenue would be permitted to legally operate without permission from the federal government . The federal government would then dictate to these businesses the composition of their boards , the details of internal corporate governance , compensation practices , personnel policies , and much more . Naturally , their political activities would be restricted , too . Senator Warren ’ s proposal entails the wholesale expropriation of private enterprise in the United States , and nothing less . It is unconstitutional , unethical , immoral , irresponsible , and — not to put too fine a point on it — utterly bonkers .\nIt is also cynical . Senator Warren is many things : a crass opportunist , intellectually bankrupt , personally vapid , a peddler of witless self-help books , etc . But she is not stupid . She knows that this is a go-nowhere proposition , that she will be spared by the Republican legislative majority from the ignominy that would ensue from the wholehearted pursuit of this daft program . It is in reality only a means of staking out for purely strategic reasons the most radical corner for her 2020 run at the Democratic presidential nomination . The Democratic party in 2018 , like the Republican primary electorate in 2016 , is out for blood and desirous of confrontation . So Senator Warren is running this red flag up the flagpole to see who salutes .\nTo propose such a thing for sincere reasons would be ghastly stupidity . To propose this program for narrowly self-serving political reasons is the sort of thing that would end a political career in a sane and self-respecting state , which Massachusetts plainly is not and has not been for some time .\nWhen the owners of Apple wish to hold on to their own after-tax earnings , they are denounced as greedy . When Elizabeth Warren wants to seize those earnings for her own use , what is that ? It is covetousness , which is what you get when you have greed compounded with envy .\nTo those on the left who look at Senator Warren ’ s proposal and think that giving the government a stronger whip hand over American businesses is just the ticket , I would like to present four questions : Who is the president of these United States ? Who is the majority leader in the Senate ? Who is the speaker of the House ? How would you evaluate the composition of the Supreme Court , either as it stands or after President Donald Trump has the opportunity to nominate another justice or two ? The power you give the federal government will be there during Republican administrations , too . Any future populist demagogue who finds his way into the White House will have access to the same power . No one should be trusted with that kind of power .\nAnd nobody who seeks that kind of power should be trusted with any power at all .\nIt is worth keeping in mind that the fabulous goose was slaughtered not in spite of the golden eggs but because of them . Politicians are covetous . When the owners of Apple wish to hold on to their own after-tax earnings , they are denounced as greedy . ( Apple ’ s shareholders are corporately the largest taxpayer in the world . ) When Elizabeth Warren wants to seize those earnings for her own use , what is that ? It is covetousness , which is what you get when you have greed compounded with envy . Senator Warren , a former Sunday-school teacher , apparently has a keen appreciation for the vices that lurk in the human heart , and she intends to leverage them to her benefit .\nAnother thing about these kinds of proposals : They are , at heart , acts of cowardice . There are politicians who wish to provide benefits to certain constituents and who would like those benefits to be paid for by other parties who are politically disfavored . There is an easy way to do that : Tax x to subsidize y . The problem with doing that is embarrassment . Politicians such as Senator Warren lack the courage to go to the American electorate and say : “ We wish to provide these benefits , and they will cost an extra $ 3 trillion a year , which we will pay for by doubling taxes. ” Why spend the money to subsidize , say , health insurance , when you can just pass rules that make businesses do the subsidizing for you ? It ’ s a way to spend money without putting the expenditures on a budget line . It treats the productive capacity of the United States as a herd of dairy cows to be milked by Senator Warren et al . at their convenience . And , of course , Senator Warren and her colleagues get to decide how the milk gets distributed , too .\nIt is a fairly easy thing for an established American business to move its corporate domicile to some other country , as with all those corporate inversions in the pharmaceutical industry that gave the Obama administration the willies a few years ago . It is also a fairly easy thing for a new business being founded by Americans to incorporate in some other country from the beginning . There is no insurmountable reason for , say , Microsoft or Altria ( formerly Philip Morris ) to be domiciled in the United States . Silicon Valley ’ s competitive edge comes from people , and people are mobile .\nNearly half of the total sales of the S & P 500 businesses come from overseas customers . Many big U.S. manufacturers such as Caterpillar get more than half of their sales from abroad . Exxon , the target of a political jihad being conducted by Senator Warren ’ s party , gets more than half of its revenue from overseas sales . You can serve the growing Asian markets as easily from Singapore as from California or Virginia . Watching American cities scurry around to prostrate themselves before Jeff Bezos ( pbuh ) in the hopes of attracting the new Amazon campus has been amusing . Imagine Apple or Google doing that in a global search for a new home . Fanciful ? Yes .\nRecep Tayyip Erdogan , Hugo Chávez , Huey Long : The rogues ’ gallery of those who sought to fortify their political power by bullying businesses is long , and it is sickening .\nBusinesses historically have chosen to locate in the United States for a number of reasons : It was long the world ’ s largest market , and businesses had faith in American law and the American dollar . It ’ s still a big market , and the dollar is still the world ’ s favorite currency . But if American law or American lawmakers are going to treat profit-seeking enterprises as an Enemy of the People — Zurich is pretty nice . Lots of places are . There are a lot of big American businesses with targets painted on their backs , and those that do not already have a Plan B are doing their shareholders a disservice .\nRecep Tayyip Erdogan , Hugo Chávez , Huey Long : The rogues ’ gallery of those who sought to fortify their political power by bullying businesses is long , and it is sickening . Senator Warren now nominates herself to that list , at least in her aspiration . It is not an honorable aspiration . | allsides-corpus-491 |
It 's 7 a.m. at the Kimball 's Washington , D.C. , home . Peter and Leslie Kimball are running up and down the stairs , changing diapers and trying to feed their kids breakfast .\nThey 're packing for a work conference in Orlando , Fla. , but they 've also planned a surprise for their daughter Lane 's birthday : a visit to Disney World .\nThis summer , more than 200 million people are expected to fly out of U.S. airports . The Kimballs are one of many families flying with their kids .\nIn the car , the Kimballs go over Mom 's rules for the airplane . No . 1 : Do n't kick the seat in front of you . No . 2 : Do n't hop in your seat ( or the seat in front of you ) . No . 3 : Speak quietly . And the last rule : Have fun .\nThey made their flight with time to spare and Leslie says they enjoyed the flight . But for many families , flying is anything but fun .\n`` It is stressful when you have three kids , you 've got carry-ons , you 're trying to comply with all the rules , you 're being yelled at by a TSA agent , that all raises your blood pressure , '' says Christopher Elliott , a father of three young children and a consumer advocate based in Orlando . He writes about the TSA for publications like National Geographic Traveler and The Washington Post .\nElliott says he understands why kids have to go through security checkpoints — but still .\nHow To Get Through Security With Kids Have your boarding pass and ID ready . Children are not required to show ID . Remove all items from your pockets , including your wallet . Take off your belt , bulky jewelry , money , keys and cellphone . Remove shoes and place them directly on the belt . Children under 12 do not have to take off their shoes or light outerwear jackets . Remove animals from their carrying cases and send the case through the X-ray machine . Hold your pet in your arms and proceed through the metal detector . All liquids , gels and aerosols must be in 3.4-ounce ( 100-ml ) or smaller containers , and packed in a 1-quart , clear plastic , zip-top baggie . Each passenger can take one zip-top bag in his or her carry-on . This is the 3-1-1 rule . Medically necessary liquids and gels — including medications , baby formula and food , breast milk and juice — are allowed in reasonable quantities above the 3.4 ounce limit . These liquids are not required to be in zip-top bags . Let a TSA officer know you are carrying these items . They may be screened . Put any items in the stroller pockets or baskets in a carry-on bag and place it on the X-ray belt for inspection . Take infants and children out of baby carriers and strollers and carry them with you through the metal detector . ( Folded strollers , booster seats , slings , children 's toys and baby carriers go through the X-ray machine with your bags ) . Source : TSA : Traveling With Children\n`` When I see my daughter go through the checkpoint , I 'm always thinking , 'What if she 's singled out for a more thorough check , and how am I going to react ? ' `` he says . `` As a parent , that kind of freaks me out . I would not want anyone touching my kids like that . ''\nTSA spokeswoman Lisa Farbstein says last fall , the agency began to reduce — though not eliminate — the number of pat-downs for kids .\nIf they set off an alarm , kids can now go through the metal detectors more than once . If they continue to set off alarms , instead of getting a pat-down , they 'll be swabbed — usually on their hands . The swab then goes into a machine to check for explosive residue .\nPat-downs are among the top five complaints the TSA received last year .\n`` One of the things that is going to be met with much happiness , from the parents anyway , is that passengers who are 12 and under no longer need to take off their shoes , '' Farbstein says .\nShe says there 's a reason agents screen kids and their belongings . Last month , in Providence , R.I. , a parent had sown gun parts into a child 's stuffed animal . Once on the plane , the parent could have reassembled the handgun if TSA officers did not screen the child 's toy .\nAmy Selco is a mother of two boys in Silver Spring , Md . She says the new rule allowing her sons to keep their shoes on has been very popular with her family .\n`` The first time my son had to take off his shoes , he flipped out , '' Selco says . `` I mean , that 's kind of a violation . He was in this new environment anyway . And he screamed and he cried . ''\nMonika Sakala , a mother of two young girls , writes about her experiences for her blog , Wired Momma . She says for her , the most difficult part of traveling with kids is often dealing with the adult passengers .\n`` People see little kids coming on an airplane and they immediately recoil , '' Sakala says . `` Parents do not want their kid crying or acting out at all . It 's their nightmare . ''\nShe says she 's surprised when people do n't offer to help a parent traveling alone with their kids . Families have to think about a lot of things other passengers do n't : packing strollers , car seats , baby formula , diapers , snacks and entertainment for their unpredictable kids .\nWilliam Clark , a relatively recent parent , says becoming a father has changed his perspective .\n`` I 'm always just worried about other passengers . Sometimes they 're in a bad mood , '' Clark says . `` I remember when I did n't have kids , being disturbed by a kid kicking the back of my seat . Now I 'm much more understanding . ''\nAs for other parents flying with their kids this summer , Selco has a word of advice : patience . Lots of it . | allsides-corpus-492 |
Protesters rally against the death in Minneapolis police custody of George Floyd , at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn , New York City , May 31 , 2020 . ( Jeenah Moon/Reuters )\nThe hot protest slogan and hashtag of the moment is “ Defund the Police. ” At times , it ’ s also framed as a call to abolish or disband the police . Ordinary speakers of the English language would naturally assume , listening to people chant “ defund the police ” in the streets , carry “ defund the police ” signs , and literally paint “ defund the police ” on the streets of D.C. , that such people mean “ defund the police . ”\nBut not our media ! There ’ s been an immediate rush to write pieces explaining that , of course , “ defund the police ” does not actually mean “ defund the police. ” From a Washington Post op-ed by Georgetown Law professor Christy Lopez , entitled “ Defund the police ? Here ’ s what that really means ” :\nBe not afraid . “ Defunding the police ” is not as scary ( or even as radical ) as it sounds . . . Defunding and abolition probably mean something different from what you are thinking . For most proponents , “ defunding the police ” does not mean zeroing out budgets for public safety , and police abolition does not mean that police will disappear overnight — or perhaps ever .\nFrom an Associated Press explainer by Michael Balsamo , Zeke Miller , and Michael Sisak entitled “ When protesters cry ‘ defund the police , ’ what does it mean ? ” :\nBut what does ‘ defund the police ’ mean ? It ’ s not necessarily about gutting police department budgets . . . . Supporters say it isn ’ t about eliminating police departments or stripping agencies of all of their money .\nFrom Matt Yglesias at Vox , “ Growing calls to “ defund the police , ” explained ” :\nThe basic idea , though , is less that policing budgets should be literally zeroed out than that there should be a massive restructuring of public spending priorities . . . . Police abolitionists are proposing a scaling-back of the scope of police activities that is far outside the horizon of current political possibility , so they may not articulate the most fine-grained details .\nFrom Emily VanDerWerff at Vox , “ The narrative power of ‘ abolish the police ’ : It isn ’ t just a policy proposal . It ’ s also an idea of what the country could be ” :\nApplying these storytelling rules to the political realm shifts the introduction of the main character and the goal — the first act , in other words . Different sides advance different ideas of what goal should be accomplished ( in this case , police reform ) , and which protagonist should be at the forefront ( in this case , a broad sociopolitical movement often defined by key individuals ) . The audience ( in this case , the American public ) ultimately chooses which story it most wants to hear… So it is with “ abolish the police. ” Here , the “ protagonist ” is a combination of over-policed black communities and the protesters who have rallied to those communities ’ side in the last few weeks , and the goal is to dismantle the de facto police state those communities live in . Setting goals versus proposing solutions is a big divide in how people on the left talk about politics…\nThere ’ s been much more in this vein , but you get the idea . Notably , articles of this nature seek to draw the eye towards legislative and think-tank proposals and away from the voices of the people actually chanting in the streets .\nIn part , of course , all this explaining is a reflection of what a radical and politically explosive idea “ defund the police ” is in an election year , and how it divides the Democrats along ideological and generational lines . Leading Democratic politicians are running headlong away from the slogan while trying to embrace the people chanting it . Joe Biden , who for years proudly touted his role in the 1994 “ put 100,000 more cops on the street ” crime bill , visibly wants no part of the slogan . But unlike the party ’ s leadership , many of whom were born in the early 1940s , influential younger lawmakers such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are pushing the idea . These are the folks who may run the party when the age-77-and-up crowd moves on .\nDefunding police is also wildly impractical . The Minneapolis City Council grabbed headlines by voting to defund and disband the city ’ s police department , but they don ’ t actually have the legal authority to do that ; defunding would require a revision to the city charter , which the voters would have to approve . Until then , the cops report to the city ’ s mayor , not the city council . Camden , New Jersey actually went forward with disbanding its police department — in theory . In practice , what Camden did is just old-fashioned union-busting : disband the department to get rid of the union , then hire the same cops back at lower salaries and benefits .\nWhat makes the media ’ s Voxsplaining of “ Defund the Police ” all so astonishingly brazen is when you compare it with how they routinely treat popular slogans , protests , and broad-brush assertions by politicians on the right . When Tea Party protesters and Republican politicians called for repealing Obamacare , for example , they were roundly mocked in these same quarters for not having a single , comprehensive , CBO-scored plan on which the entire party agreed , notwithstanding the presence of plenty of think-tank proposals and general agreement on a lot of individual pieces . A whole cottage industry exists to lampoon protestors on the right for not fully grasping the nuances of their own slogans . When Tom Cotton wrote an op-ed that the New York Times titled , “ Send in the Troops , ” it was widely treated as a call to sic troops on peaceful protestors even though Cotton explicitly said otherwise in the op-ed . Conservative politicians and pundits are assumed to be responsible for the literal content of “ abolish the IRS , ” or “ close the border , ” or “ build the wall. ” Liberal media commentators spent years mocking Salena Zito ’ s description of Trump supporters who “ take him seriously , but not literally ” — which is precisely what these same voices are now trying to do with “ defund the police . ”\nAs always with these sorts of double standards : They think we can ’ t see what they are doing . | allsides-corpus-493 |
WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans and Democrats reached a tentative agreement on Wednesday on a two-year bill to finance highways , ending a partisan stalemate that had left transit projects under a cloud of uncertainty .\nThe bill , which would provide $ 8.4 billion each year , is similar to a bipartisan measure passed by the Senate earlier this year . House Republicans worked on their own ambitious and unwieldy bill that never even made it to the floor for a vote .\nIn the agreement on Wednesday , House Republicans gave up on two key points : a provision that would have sped up the authorization of the Keystone XL pipeline and another that would have loosened restrictions on coal ash from power plants .\nThe new bill would reduce the average time it takes to complete a highway project by streamlining administrative processes and consolidating a variety of programs , as Republicans desired . “ That was one of the things we insisted on , ” said Representative John Mica of Florida , chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee .\nThe bill is almost certain to rile groups that are concerned with sustaining projects that have received money in the past . For instance , the measure now permits states to opt out of federal mandates that required them to spend highway money on programs like beautification and bike paths .\nNewsletter Sign Up Continue reading the main story Please verify you 're not a robot by clicking the box . Invalid email address . Please re-enter . You must select a newsletter to subscribe to . Sign Up You will receive emails containing news content , updates and promotions from The New York Times . You may opt-out at any time . You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times 's products and services . Thank you for subscribing . An error has occurred . Please try again later . View all New York Times newsletters .\n“ The bill is funded at current levels , and it will protect and create three million jobs , ” said Senator Barbara Boxer , Democrat of California and chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee . “ This job creation is the critical focus of Democrats because we know that the unemployment rate in construction is at an unacceptable level . ” | allsides-corpus-494 |
On Tuesday evening , as 12 Democratic presidential hopefuls debated policy ideas about healthcare , gun control measures , and protecting reproductive rights , President Donald Trump once again vetoed legislation that would end his declaration of a national emergency at the southern border and prevent him from building his wall .\nIt ’ s the sixth veto of Trump ’ s presidency and comes seven months after he first vetoed a similar measure in March , which had been passed by the Senate in a 59-41 vote , with twelve Republicans siding with Democrats . This bill would have halted the president ’ s emergency declaration to funnel $ 3.6 billion in Defense Department funding to build more sections of his wall at the Southern border ; the bill the president vetoed last night was nearly identical . “ In short , the situation on our southern border remains a national emergency , and our Armed Forces are still needed to help confront it , ” Trump wrote in his message to the Senate Tuesday just after 9 p.m. , an hour into the Democratic debate . Congress could override the President ’ s veto with a two-thirds majority of votes in the Senate , but that is unlikely to occur , the New York Times reports .\nBuilding a wall at the southern border has long been a drawn-out battle at the center of Trump ’ s aggressive and contentious crackdown on immigration reform . And Democrats have fought tooth and nail throughout Trump ’ s presidency to block his efforts to succeed in that plan , as well as to put a halt to his detention of refugees and his controversial family separation policy .\nBut during Tuesday ’ s three-hour Democratic presidential debate , there wasn ’ t a single question about immigration . Even some of the candidates later expressed disappointment with how this subject , as well as ones on climate change and LBGTQ , were not part of the discussion .\nThree hours . Not one question about the climate crisis . Not one question about LGBTQ+ rights . Not one question about immigration . These issues are too important to ignore . # DemDebate — Kamala Harris ( @ KamalaHarris ) October 16 , 2019 | allsides-corpus-495 |
Next week , North Dakota voters will decide whether to add an amendment to the state 's constitution that supporters say will guarantee religious freedom . But the ballot measure has prompted debate over precisely what it safeguards ; opponents argue that it 's a solution in search of a problem and worry about its consequences .\nMeasure 3 is worded this way : `` Government may not burden a person 's or religious organization 's religious liberty . '' Its supporters call it the Religious Liberty Restoration amendment ; they say it 's needed because of a 22-year-old U.S. Supreme Court decision they believe has put limits on religious freedom .\n`` What this amendment is attempting to do is to restore that level of protection to what it was pre-1990 , '' says Tom Freier , who heads the North Dakota Family Alliance . The group led the effort to put the measure on the ballot .\nFreier says that making Measure 3 part of the constitution would give it permanence and help prevent attacks on religious freedom .\n`` So , the analogy would be : We live in Fargo , and most recently in Bismarck and in Minot , you 've had floods . And you want to prepare for that . You do n't know exactly when or how things are going to happen , but you want to make preparation , '' he says . `` This measure would really put in place the protection for North Dakota that would make sure that people are protected , and religious organizations are protected , when and if they do need that protection . ''\nBut the measure 's opponents worry about unintended consequences . They say it could allow parents who abuse children to hide behind the curtain of religious liberty . One opponent is Tim Hathaway , executive director of Prevent Child Abuse North Dakota .\n`` We are urging a 'no ' vote on Measure 3 , '' he says , `` because it will seriously undercut protection for children in our state by opening the door for people to claim religious freedom as a justification for maltreatment . ''\nRenee Stromme of the North Dakota Women 's Network agrees , saying if it passes , Measure 3 could also lead to discrimination .\n`` An employer could use religious beliefs to fire a pregnant woman because she is unmarried , '' Stromme says . `` So let 's think that through : We now have a single mother , unemployed , struggling to make ends meet , to care for the welfare of her family — and her employer would have a protected defense for his action . And a judge would have to determine otherwise . ''\nBut Measure 3 supporters like Christopher Dodson , who heads the North Dakota Catholic Conference , say those claims are unfounded .\n`` The measure itself says that it does n't affect those acts which the state has a compelling interest in preventing , '' he says . `` And it 's somewhat irresponsible to even imply that the state does n't have an interest in protecting children , women and vulnerable persons . ''\nNorth Dakota 's Legislative Council , the state Legislature 's research arm , agrees with that assessment . Still , opponents argue the measure is both unnecessary and potentially dangerous — and could raise new ways for people to define their own extreme religious views .\nGladys Cairns , the former administrator of North Dakota Child Protective Services , says she worries that criminals will hide behind a religious cloak .\n`` If I were a defense attorney , I 'd be making sure that my client would be doing that , '' she says .\nRecent polls point to a close vote . Both sides are running a number of radio and television ads between now and the June 12 election . | allsides-corpus-496 |
US Congresswomen have protested for the right to bare arms in parts of Washington DC 's Capitol building .\nThe National Rifle Association may be disappointed to learn that this is not a typo . They are not campaigning to bear weapons , but to stand against the Congressional dress code .\nThe protest comes after a number of women have recently reported being told their outfits violated the rules .\nFemale reporters have said they had been prevented from entering the lobby area , where the press meets to ask questions of US politicians .\nOn Friday , Representative Jackie Speier tweeted to encourage colleagues to dress in clothes that showed their arms , calling the protest `` Sleeveless Friday '' .\nA group of around 25 women gathered on the steps of Congress , wearing sleeveless shirts and dresses .\n`` It 's 2017 and women vote , hold office , and choose their own style . Time to update House Rules to reflect the times ! '' tweeted Congress member Chellie Pingree .\nAlthough the rules are long-standing , they are rarely enforced , and so those affected recently expressed surprise .\nNews network CBS said one reporter tried to fashion makeshift sleeves out of her notebook so she would be able to work .\nThe sleeves rule also applies to men , who are required to wear suit jackets and ties to enter the same areas .\nPolicing of the rules is left to the chamber 's security team , under the guidance of the house speaker .\nAfter a backlash , House Speaker Paul Ryan emphasised that the code had not been devised under his term , and agreed it needs to be modernised .\n`` It came to my attention that there was an issue about dress code , '' he said in a press conference on Thursday morning , with a laugh .\nSpeaker Ryan said , earlier in June , that members should wear `` appropriate business attire '' .\nIn the UK , a similar debate recently erupted when House of Commons Speaker John Bercow said he was happy to relax the rules .\nIn June , he accepted a question from a member of parliament who was not wearing a tie .\nYet what this constitutes in 2017 - especially with the rise of more casual media and tech companies - is not always clear . | allsides-corpus-497 |
Controversy and the government shutdown greeted marchers who gathered in the Washington cold Saturday for the third annual national Women ’ s March .\nThe event , which kicked off near Freedom Plaza blocks from the White House , drew thousands , a number far fewer than the hundreds of thousands who descended on the National Mall for the first Women ’ s March , the day after Donald Trump ’ s inauguration in 2017 .\nA National Park permit issued Thursday anticipated a crowd of 10,000 , The Washington Post reported . Weeks ago organizers anticipated a crowd of several hundred thousand in a permit application .\nWASSERMAN SCHULTZ OPTS OUT OF WOMEN 'S MARCH : ' I CAN NOT STAND ALONGSIDE IT '\nSister marches in other cities included one in New York City . Bronx Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spoke at that march . She was also expected to attend a separate “ Women ’ s Unity Rally ” in downtown Manhattan .\n“ Last year we brought the power to the polls , and this year we need to make sure that we translate that power into policy , ” Ocasio-Cortez said at the New York Women 's March in Columbus Circle . “ That means we will not let anyone take our rights away - in fact we will expand them . ”\nShe told the crowd it also meant working to pass an Equal Rights Amendment .\nThis year ’ s Women ’ s March has been hurt by accusations of anti-Semitism that have trailed the group ’ s organizers . Two of them , Linda Sarsour , a Palestinian activist who has embraced the Boycott , Divestment and Sanctions movement , and co-President Tamika Mallory , have been criticized over their ties to Nation of Islam firebrand Louis Farrakhan .\nMallory refused recently to condemn Farrakhan for incendiary remarks about Jews during a speech in February that she attended .\nAs a result , the Democratic National Committee bowed out as a Women ’ s March sponsor .\nThe original plan for Saturday called for gathering on the National Mall , but with snow and freezing rain in the forecast and the National Park Service no longer plowing the snow because of the shutdown , the march ’ s location and route was altered this week to start at Freedom Plaza and march down Pennsylvania Avenue past the Trump International Hotel .\nNear Freedom Plaza , protesters carried singed that were playful and pointed , including “ Wonder Woman in a pink pussy hat , ” “ Our Rights Are Real , ” and “ Protect Women , ” according to the Post .\nA small group of counter-protesters , surrounded by D.C. police , marched toward Trump International Hotel with signs that said “ America you need to bless God , ” “ Abortion is murder ” and “ Islam is a religion of blood and murder , ” the paper reported .\nShannon Lydon , a recent Boston College grad , told NBC News that she was excited to be attending the Women ’ s March in Washington .\n`` It ’ s such a movement , and it ’ s so empowering to be around so many people who are celebrating women and fighting for change , '' she said . | allsides-corpus-498 |
Some of our most dedicated feminists are trying to make a good thing of rape , heretofore regarded as one of the more horrific crimes . Once upon a time rape was even a capital crime , like murder . Many men went to the gallows or the electric chair for it .\nThe mere accusation of rape , like the accusation of molesting children , was usually horrific enough to guarantee conviction . Would a woman lie ? Some men accused of rape died at the hands of a mob and many at the hands of the state and were often not actually guilty .\nRape was serious , dreadful business then . But now , sometimes , not so much .\nAnger , unfocused resentment and high dudgeon have lately inspired certain young women — abetted by men and women in responsible positions who ought to know better ( and probably do ) — to make uncorroborated claims of abuse that trivializes one of the meanest and most brutal crimes that a human can inflict on another .\nOne young woman , Lena Dunham , has made a television career of a sordid sex life and of being raped , or at least she thinks she was . She wrote a book about it .\nInnocent reputations suffer . Institutions are damaged when , like men , they pay for crimes that did not exist . Bearing false witness is a crime , too , and a serious one , legally no less than morally .\nRolling Stone magazine , the journal of rock music that sometimes aspires to big-boy journalism , is the current cause celebre , out with a sensational story of gang rape on the campus of the University of Virginia . Colleges and universities build their reputations slowly and sometimes inadvertently . The University of Alabama is celebrated as the nation ’ s foremost football factory . Georgetown is famous for having educated Bubba and infamous for the drunken students who have blighted the quiet residential streets surrounding its campus in Washington . And now Tom Jefferson ’ s university has become , fair or not , a place where cautious parents are wary of sending their daughters for a college education . Rolling Stone will now live in infamy as a rag that put a dent in the credibility of modern media everywhere .\nThe story in the magazine was a horrific one , more a tale from an Arabian night than from the cultured precincts of an American university town . A young women , identified by Rolling Stone only as “ Jackie , ” said she went to a party in a fraternity house in Charlottesville and was set upon by a gang of ruffians , raped and scratched and beaten and left to make her escape without help . The details were set down in a story by one Sabrina Rubin Erdely in Rolling Stone .\n“ Jackie ” provided neither corroborating evidence , and the magazine did not ask for a witness to go on the record with details . Her story was told in the usual purple ink , as evidence of the “ rape epidemic ” said to be roiling campuses everywhere . “ Who would lie about rape ? ”\nWhen her story began unravel , as others sought but could not find corroboration or evidence to support her story , Rolling Stone was left to explain the greater sin of the story . Feminists trotted out their usual shock that anyone could question a rape accusation ; “ rape denial , ” said one , “ is like denying the Holocaust. ” Maybe nothing happened , but it could have . Isn ’ t that enough ?\nRolling Stone ’ s only defense was an apology , subject to revision , which in an earlier day would have been an unanswerable indictment of both its editors and its publishers . The apologies , such as they were , suggested that the university ’ s “ troubling history of indifference to many other instances of alleged sexual assaults ” was to blame for its careless disregard for the fundamental canons of journalism . Newspapers and magazines have slipped into the newspaper graveyard for less .\n“ Because of the sensitive nature of Jackie ’ s story , ” wrote Will Dana , the managing editor , “ we decided to honor her request not to contact the man she claimed participated in the attack , for fear of retaliation against her. ” Facts have destroyed many a good story , and the magazine didn ’ t want that to happen to its account of Jackie ’ s lurid tale .\n“ In the face of new information , ” the apology continued , “ there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie ’ s account , and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced. ” It wasn ’ t Rolling Stone ’ s fault , it was Jackie ’ s . “ We were trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault and now regret the decision to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account. ” It wasn ’ t Rolling Stone ’ s fault that it sold fiction as fact , it was society ’ s fault . Lawyers are now on the scout for an identifiable plaintiff against the Stone .\n• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The ███ . | allsides-corpus-499 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.