Army Corps had approved the Dakota Access pipeline before halting the project In 2015, Obama rejected the Keystone proposal, ending a seven-year fight With one swipe of the presidential pen, the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines were back on the agenda, marking the realization of protesters’ worst fears about what a Donald Trump presidency means for the environment and the controversial energy projects. Trump signed executive actions Tuesday to advance the approval of the pipelines – one of which, the Dakota Access, was recently stalled, while the other had been killed by the State Department and White House in 2015. The proposed $3.7 billion Dakota Access Pipeline was slated to stretch 1,172 miles through four states – from North Dakota into South Dakota, winding through Iowa and ending in southern Illinois – moving 470,000 barrels of crude oil a day across the Midwest. It is completed except for a contested portion under North Dakota’s Lake Oahe, half a mile upstream from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s reservation. The $8 billion Keystone XL Pipeline was proposed to stretch nearly 1,200 miles across Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas, carrying more than 800,000 barrels of carbon-heavy petroleum daily from Canada’s oil sands to refineries on the Gulf Coast. With debates looming, and protests quickly mobilizing, how did the nation get to this point? Proponents of both projects tout their economic boon. Supporters say the Dakota Acess pipeline would decrease American reliance on foreign oil. Opponents cite environmental concerns, such as contamination due to breaches and eventual greenhouse gas emissions, and destruction of Native American land and burial sites. Instagram post not found. Post has been removed or is no longer public. We are the only planet with love songs, we are the only planet with dancing, we are the only planet with love, we are the only planet with water.  We can't drink oil, water is life. #noDAPL #protectcleanwater #weStandwithStandingRock #marchon #notgoinganywhere #evenintherain #Iwillnotbesilent #resist A photo posted by Mallory (@malzb611) on Jan 24, 2017 at 5:19pm PST The US Army Corps of Engineers approved the project and granted final permits in July to the dismay of environmentalists and the Standing Rock Sioux. The tribe quickly sued the corps, claiming the pipeline threatens its “environmental and economic well-being, and would damage and destroy sites of great historic, religious, and cultural significance.” Read the complaint The Army Corps of Engineers has declined to comment, citing pending litigation. The developer, Dakota Access, a subsidiary of Energy Transfer Crude Oil, said the pipeline from the oil-rich Bakken Formation, a vast underground deposit where Montana and North Dakota meet Canada, is the most cost-effective and environmentally responsible way to move crude oil, removing the dependency on rails and trucks. An estimated 7.4 billion barrels of undiscovered oil is believed to be in the US portion of the Bakken, according to the US Geological Survey. Related article Dakota Access Pipeline: What's at stake? Dakota Access estimates the pipeline would generate $156 million in sales and income taxes to state and local governments as well as add 8,000 to 12,000 construction jobs. An advocacy group, the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now, backed the developer’s assertions that pipelines are a safe way to move crude oil. “Already, eight pipelines cross the Missouri River carrying hundreds of thousands of barrels of energy products every day,” the group said. The alliance said the pipeline “does not cross into the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s reservation.” The alliance also said 100% of the affected landowners in North Dakota, where part of the tribe lives, voluntarily signed easements allowing construction. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe is also concerned that digging the pipeline under the Missouri River would affect the area’s drinking water. “We have laws that require federal agencies to consider environmental risks and protection of Indian historic and sacred sites,” Dave Archambault II, the elected chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, said in an earlier statement. Related article Dakota Access Pipeline: What happens next? “But the Army Corps has ignored all those laws and fast-tracked this massive project just to meet the pipeline’s aggressive construction schedule.” Based in Fort Yates, North Dakota, Standing Rock is a federally recognized Indian tribe, a successor to the Great Sioux Nation. Other Native American tribes and nations have joined in opposition. Archambault II said he doesn’t support moving more crude oil from North Dakota. He told CNN affiliate KFYR-TV in Bismarck the country should search for alternative and renewable sources of energy. For months, Standing Rock Sioux members and allies protested in North Dakota. They stood in the path of the pipeline during peaceful demonstrations and clashes that turned violent. Police deployed bean bag rounds and pepper spray and unleashed a high-pitched siren to disperse the crowd. One day in October, police arrested at least 141 people. A few weeks later, just before Thanksgiving, as temperatures dipped below freezing, authorities unleashed water cannons on the demonstrators. Related video Veterans stand in solidarity in Standing Rock But in December, protesters celebrated after the Army said it would not – for the time being – allow the pipeline to cross under Lake Oahe. The Army said the plan should be carefully restudied and alternative routes should be deeply considered. In her letter to the Army Corps, Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Army’s assistant secretary for civil works, called for the creation of an official environmental impact statement, a months-long process that would allow the public to weigh in. The Army statement did not rule out future approval of the current route. But tribal leaders worried then that the decision to change direction might not be permanent, especially with the incoming Trump administration and pipeline supporters backing the plan. This month, a judge blocked an effort by Dakota Access to stop the Army Corps from beginning the environmental impact study. Supporters of the project praised Trump’s decision Tuesday. Related video Daring protest during NFL game leads to arrest “This is clearly a step in the right direction,” North Dakota Public Service Commissioner Julie Fedorchak told KFYR. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe vowed to keep fighting. “It wasn’t a surprise. We knew this was gonna happen. We’ve been preparing for it,” Jon Eagle Sr., Standing Rock’s historic preservation officer, told KFYR. “You gotta take a historic perspective, though, of who we are as Lakota Dakota people. We’ve been resisting since the point of contact.” TransCanada first applied for a permit to build the pipeline in 2008. Since then, the massive project has been a hot topic during presidential and congressional elections. It pitted oil companies and Republicans against environmentalists and liberal activists. Keystone XL represented just under a third of TransCanada’s entire Keystone project. Every other piece of the project had been built and laid out. The Canadian and, in particular, Alberta government pushed President Barack Obama to approve the project. TransCanada said in 2011 that the project would create about 140,000 direct and indirect jobs. Related article Keystone XL pipeline debate: What do I need to know? Fact checking Keystone job claims The State Department in January 2015 concluded the project would create about 42,000 jobs directly and indirectly. The total included about 3,900 construction jobs. In all, the pipeline would provide about $2 billion in economic benefits, the State Department review said. But once the construction jobs, which would last no more than two years, wrapped up, Keystone XL would have created about 50 permanent jobs, the number needed to maintain the pipeline. Environmentalists were concerned because extracting crude oil from the oil sands, a combination of oil and sand, pumps about 17% more greenhouse gases into the air than standard crude oil extraction, according to the State Department review. How we got hereWhat happens next?In pictures: Protesters rejoiceWhat’s at stake? How we got hereWhat happens next?In pictures: Protesters rejoiceWhat’s at stake? Environmentalists, local residents and indigenous tribes also said the pipeline’s proposed route would cut across the Ogallala Aquifer, which is one of the world’s largest. Activists were also concerned the pipeline could pollute many of the 2,500 aquifers, key sources of fresh water, within a mile of the proposed route. Native Americans voiced concerns over the societal impact of camps with thousands of construction workers living near their communities. Those face high rates of sexual assaults from nonindigenous men, representatives of the activist Wica Agli group said in 2015. In 2011, the Obama administration said it would delay a decision on the pipeline until at least 2013 to allow for more time to study the issues and to look at possible alternative routes. Exercising his veto power for the first time in five years, Obama rejected legislation giving the go-ahead for construction of the pipeline in February 2015. The White House said it opposed the bill because it would have usurped the Obama’s authority to approve or deny the creation of the pipeline and short-circuit the State Department analysis. In November 2015, Obama nixed the proposed pipeline, virtually ending the fight over the project that had gone on for much of his presidency. Related video Boehner: Obama's with 'anarchists' on Keystone pipeline Secretary of State John Kerry concluded the project was not in the country’s national security interest. Obama’s move came as the White House continued to promote his environmental agenda and efforts to fight climate change. In a statement at the time, Kerry said the climate impact was the key factor. “The critical factor in my determination was this: Moving forward with this project would significantly undermine our ability to continue leading the world in combating climate change,” he said. The pipeline was a key issue in the 2012 presidential campaign, with GOP nominee Mitt Romney saying he would approve the pipeline. Republican candidates in the 2016 race also pledged to let the project go forward. At the time, Trump, then the GOP front-runner, tweeted: “So sad that Obama rejected Keystone Pipeline. Thousands of jobs, good for the environment, no downside!” So sad that Obama rejected Keystone Pipeline. Thousands of jobs, good for the environment, no downside! Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who has said he was “disappointed by the decision,” expressed support for the pipeline Tuesday. “I’ve been on the record for many years supporting it because it leads to economic growth, and good jobs for Albertans,” he said. In a statement, Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said, “The Keystone pipeline was rejected because it was not in the country’s interest, and the environmental review of the Dakota Access Pipeline was ordered because of the threats it poses to the Standing Rock Sioux. Nothing has changed.” CNN’s Melanie Whitley and Holly Yan contributed to this report.


Republican Party establishment figures are beginning to go public with their concerns about Donald Trump’s race-based criticisms of the federal judge overseeing the Trump University lawsuit, even as the presumptive GOP nominee urges supporters to up the ante. U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel’s Mexican heritage has become a fixation for the GOP’s presumptive nominee, who has repeatedly questioned the Indiana-born Curiel’s impartiality – often in stark terms. Now, as worries mount that Trump’s words could weigh down other Republicans in November, more high-profile elected officials and party leaders are speaking out. Here’s what some of the biggest names are saying: Ryan ended his waiting game and endorsed Trump on Thursday. One day later, the speaker was on the radio in his home state of Wisconsin bashing the presumptive nominee: “Look, the comment about the judge, just was out of left field for my mind,” Ryan told WISN in Milwaukee, nearly a week after Trump first criticized Curiel. “It’s reasoning I don’t relate to; I completely disagree with the thinking behind that.” “So (Trump) clearly says and does things I don’t agree with and I’ve had to speak up from time to time when that has occurred and I’ll continue to do that if that’s necessary – I hope it’s not,” Ryan added. Among the most vocal Never-Trumpers, Sasse delivered a stinging condemnation Monday: “Public Service Announcement: Saying someone can’t do a specific job because of his or her race is the literal definition of “racism,” he tweeted. Public Service Announcement:Saying someone can't do a specific job because of his or her race is the literal definition of "racism." Cruz, a vanquished primary rival of Trump’s, on Monday afternoon joined the chorus of concerned Republicans, saying, “Of course it’s inappropriate to attack a federal judge’s race or ethnicity. “You’ll have to ask Donald why he says the thing he does,” he said. “I’m not going to try to explain it.” Rubio’s long drift toward Trump seemed to stall on Monday, when he repeatedly criticized Trump. “When I was running for president, I told everyone that this is what would happen,” Rubio told CNN. “That we would continue to be faced with this very difficult choice, as we are, as many of us have been, between Hillary Clinton and Donald. This is not where I wanted us to be.” Earlier, he addressed the comments in Orlando: “I continue to have strong disagreements with (Trump) on a bunch of issues and I do not agree with and quite frankly I’m very disturbed by the way he keeps referring to this judge – an American – born Indiana who he continues to raise issues about and I hope he’ll stop doing that.” The Kentucky senator endorsed Trump in early May, but is now warning that the billionaire businessman could alienate a generation of voters with his attacks on Curiel: “This is a man who was born in Indiana,” McConnell said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “All of us came here from somewhere else. Almost all Americans are either near-term immigrants like my wife, who came here at age 8 not speaking a word of English, or the rest of us whose ancestors were risk-takers who came here and made this country great. That’s an important part of what makes America work.” Carson, who has emerged as a Trump supporter and emissary for the campaign, released the following statement via business manager Armstrong Williams: “Every human being is an individual first rather than a member of an identity group. The moment we forget that is the moment we enter into a phase of moral descent.” Schwarzenegger in 2006 appointed Curiel to his first judicial post, as a Superior Court judge. On Monday the action star-turned-politician – and Trump’s successor heading “Celebrity Apprentice” – tweeted his dismay about Curiel’s treatment by the presumptive Republican nominee, harkening back to the judge’s days as a federal prosecutor. “Judge Curiel is an American hero who stood up to the Mexican cartels. I was proud to appoint him when I was Gov.” Judge Curiel is an American hero who stood up to the Mexican cartels. I was proud to appoint him when I was Gov. https://t.co/ADLCBXw57Q Trump’s former GOP primary rival has been mostly quiet since leaving the race after the Indiana primary. But on Monday he, too, dropped a pair of critical tweets, first condemning Trump’s comments, then asking for an apology: “Attacking judges based on their race &/or religion is another tactic that divides our country. More importantly, it is flat out wrong,” he said, adding: “@RealDonaldTrump should apologize to Judge Curiel & try to unite this country. #TwoPaths” Attacking judges based on their race &/or religion is another tactic that divides our country. More importantly, it is flat out wrong.(1of2) .@RealDonaldTrump should apologize to Judge Curiel & try to unite this country. #TwoPaths (2of2) Facing a tough general election challenge from New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan, Ayotte has said she will “support” Trump, but has no plans to endorse. On Monday, she released a more easily-parsed response to Trump’s remarks on Curiel: “His comments are offensive and wrong, and he should retract them.” Scott, the only African-American Republican in the Senate, told CNN Trump’s criticisms are “racially toxic.” Corker has been among highest-profile elected officials to speak favorably about Trump. Though he hasn’t offered an outright rebuke, this weekend the Tennessee senator did suggest the current path was a dangerous one. “I think that he’s going to have to change,” Corker said on ABC’s “This Week.” “I’m not talking about him necessarily changing his views, but I think that he’s moving into a different phase, he’s talking to the right people.” Another vocal backer, Gingrich has emerged as one of the favorites to be chosen as Trump’s running mate. But in an interview with The Washington Post published this weekend, he delivered a stern judgment: “I don’t know what Trump’s reasoning was, and I don’t care,” Gingrich said in an email. “His description of the judge in terms of his parentage is completely unacceptable.” Collins, like many of her GOP colleagues, has been mostly mum on Trump, refusing to say if she’ll vote for him or a third party candidate. But the Maine Republican told CNN Monday Trump’s recent comments were “very troubling,” and expressed concern they could “undermine respect for the judicial system.” But she stopped short of calling them “racist.” “They seem to be prompted more out of anger than the rulings that this judge has made. I think they are inappropriate regardless, she said. “After all, there are plenty of people who are white who Donald Trump has attacked. His personal insults, which must stop, seem to run the gamut.” Michael Reagan, son of Republican President Ronald Reagan, said his father – iconic in GOP circles – wouldn’t vote for Trump if he was alive today. “This most likely would be the 1st time if my father was alive that he would not support the nominee of the GOP @Reince @newsmax,” he tweeted. This most likely would be the 1st time if my father was alive that he would not support the nominee of the GOP @Reince @newsmax CNN’s Manu Raju contributed to this report.


Editor’s Note: Dustin McKissen is a writer, communications and marketing strategist, and founder of McKissen + Company, a marketing and communications firm. He was recently named one of LinkedIn’s “Top Voices” for the second year in a row. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own. On Tuesday, Ford announces it will shift jobs intended for a now-canceled Mexican plant back to Michigan Dustin McKissen: With this announcement, Democrats risk losing the story on outsourcing and trade They must learn to repackage facts in a compelling narrative, or the 2020 election could be an uphill battle When Franklin Delano Roosevelt told America, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” he was telling us a story about resiliency and hope in one of America’s worst economic moments. When Ronald Reagan told Mikhail Gorbachev to “Tear down this wall,” he was telling the world a story about what the future – a future without walls – could look like. And when then-candidate Barack Obama gave his “A More Perfect Union” speech in the spring of 2008, he was telling a story about America’s changing demographics. Politics has always been, and will always be, about story – and Democrats are at risk of losing the “story” on trade, even if they’re right about the data. Data is important, but political data is always driven by the story being told, rather than the other way around (as the Clinton campaign learned). With Ford’s announcement that it will shift jobs intended for a now-canceled Mexican plant back to Michigan, it’s obvious Democrats risk losing the story on outsourcing and trade in a big way. Related video Trump rips GM for making cars in Mexico If the reaction to Carrier’s November decision to keep roughly 800 jobs in Indiana is any precedent, Democrats will likely point to the details of Ford’s decision, arguing that saving a relatively small number of jobs does little to address the decadeslong trend of reduced manufacturing employment. But telling a better story, particularly in an era where that story might be told using less than 140 characters, is almost never about the details. And while Democrats have an obligation to debate a Trump administration on the basis of facts, they need to figure out a way to package those facts in a compelling narrative. Otherwise the following hypothetical commercials could become a 2020 presidential campaign reality. Commercial 1 – Elizabeth Warren (or Joe Biden or Corey Booker or someone we’ve yet to hear of) talks about macro-level trade data, how the efforts of the Trump administration amounted to little more than tokenism and how manufacturing job loss has continued despite companies making periodic announcements that they will restore a few hundred jobs. Commercial 2 – A factory worker (for even better effect, an African-American, female or Hispanic factory worker) stares into the camera and says, “I didn’t vote for Trump. But he saved my job anyway.” Related article Trump has a secret weapon on jobs and trade You don’t have to be an advertising expert or a political junkie to know which of those two commercials will be more effective. One is a potential regurgitation of factual data. The other is a story. Democrats should have already learned this. Hillary Clinton had the data, but she lacked a story. Donald Trump may have lacked many things (staff, money, a filter and at times common decency), but he told a story that resonated with the portions of the electorate he needed it to resonate with. Based on the reaction to the Carrier deal, and what I expect the reaction to the Ford decision will be, Democrats didn’t learn the lesson. After Carrier, there was debate about how many jobs were actually saved, and whether the tax breaks the company received were too generous. The Ford deal may generate the same sort of reaction, including discussion about what the company expects from the administration, given that the automaker cited Trump’s “pro-growth” agenda as a reason for keeping the jobs in Michigan. Is it 1,100 jobs in Indiana, as Trump claims, or 800 jobs, as Carrier (accurately) states? Did the Trump administration make a promise, either directly or indirectly, in exchange for Ford’s decision? In the scope of manufacturing job loss, how much of a difference do these one-off company decisions really make? Related article Why Trump can break his promises and still win Here’s the reality: When it comes to the politics of trade, none of those things matter. In four years, no one will remember the specifics. And any remotely competent communications team can turn an American president flexing his muscle to keep jobs in America into a pretty compelling story, regardless of the specifics, because a good story is never remembered for the specifics. In fact, even if many Americans continue to lose their manufacturing jobs, the image of a newly re-employed man with a hard hat standing next to Trump on a stage will resonate, and those same Americans will cast their vote once again for Trump. And if you think people vote largely because of personal circumstance, think again. In Whitley County, Kentucky, where the rate of uninsured declined by 60% thanks to Obamacare, over 80% of residents voted for Trump. The fear of an Obamacare repeal did nothing to influence Whitley County voters because Trump’s overall narrative was larger than the sum of any one of his policy proposals. Of course, Democrats should understand this better than anyone. I remember watching Obama’s DNC speech in 2004 in an awful, tiny apartment my wife and I shared with our daughter. I remember weeping. I remember a story that felt like it was my story, though I share almost nothing in common with Obama’s background. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook Other than something about there not being a blue America or a red America, I don’t really remember specifics of that speech. But I remember a powerful story. Democrats might be right when it comes to trade policy and the real reasons for manufacturing job loss. However, if they don’t get the story right, if their hatred of Trump blinds them to the fundamental political truth that telling a compelling story is more important than having the best set of charts, they may find themselves – as hard as it is to imagine – campaigning against a popular president four years from now. And that would be a story no one expected to read.


Here is a look at the life of United States Senator Ted Kennedy. Personal:Birth date: February 22, 1932 Death date: August 25, 2009 Birth place: Boston, Massachusetts Birth name: Edward Moore Kennedy Father: Joseph Kennedy Mother: Rose (Fitzgerald) Kennedy Marriages: Victoria (Reggie) Kennedy (1992-2009, his death); Virginia Joan (Bennett) Kennedy (1958-1981, divorced) Children: with Joan (Bennett) Kennedy: Patrick Joseph, 1967; Edward Moore Jr., 1961; Kara Anne, 1960 Education: Harvard University, B.A, 1956; Attended International Law School, The Hague, The Netherlands, 1958; University of Virginia Law School, LL.B., 1959 Military service: US Army, 1951-1953 Religion: Catholic Other Facts:The youngest of nine children in the famous Kennedy family. One of only six senators in US history to serve more than 40 years. Longtime champion of health care reform. Notable legislation: Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965, 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act, Kennedy-Hatch Law of 1997, and No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Timeline: 1961-1962 - Serves as the Suffolk County, Massachusetts assistant district attorney. 1962 - Is elected to the US Senate, filling his brother’s, President John F. Kennedy, seat. 1964, 1970, 1976, 1982, 1988, 1994, 2000, 2006 - Re-elected to the Senate. 1964 - Breaks his back in a plane crash. July 18, 1969 - Drives his car off a bridge in Chappaquiddick Island, Massachusetts. His passenger Mary Jo Kopechne drowns. Kennedy fails to notify authorities for several hours and later is found guilty to leaving the scene of an accident. 1969-1970 - Serves as the Democratic whip in the Senate. 1979-1980 - Runs unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination in the 1980 presidential election. 1979-1981 - Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. 1987-1995 - Chairman of the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee. April 2006 - Kennedy’s book, “America Back on Track,” is released. May 2006 - Kennedy’s children’s book “My Senator and Me: A Dog’s Eye View of Washington, D.C.” is released. August 3, 2007 - Casts his 15,000th roll call vote. May 17, 2008 - Is rushed to the hospital after suffering a seizure. On May 20, doctors announce Kennedy has a malignant brain tumor. June 2, 2008 - Undergoes brain surgery. July 9, 2008 - Returns to the Senate to cast the tie-breaking vote on a Medicare bill. He is met with cheers and applause. August 25, 2008 - Delivers a speech at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. January 20, 2009 - Suffers a seizure during a post-inauguration luncheon for President Barack Obama. February 2009 - Returns to work briefly and casts a vote in support of the stimulus package. March 4, 2009 - Prime Minister Gordon Brown announces that Kennedy will receive an honorary knighthood from the Queen of England. April 7, 2009 - Throws out the first pitch at the Boston Red Sox season opener. April 22, 2009 - President Barack Obama signs into law the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, which creates four national service corps. August 12, 2009 - Is awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom. His daughter, Kara, accepts it on his behalf. August 25, 2009 - Dies at the age of 77. September 2009 - Kennedy’s book, “True Compass: A Memoir,” is released.


Editor’s Note: Amy Zegart is Co-Director and Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. The opinions expressed in this commentary are hers. Russian hacks are a warning sign of things to come and the US better be prepared, writes Amy Zegart US government needs to start attributing election-related breaches as fast as possible, she says Next month, America will elect a new president. Most likely there will be no cyber hanging-chad moment, no massive breach that calls into question election results or faith in the democratic process. But it would be a mistake to breathe a collective sigh of relief on November 9th and conclude the danger is past. The danger is just beginning.  The 2016 election is a warning of darker hacks to come. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper recently announced what many cyber experts had long suspected: High-level Russian officials authorized hacks of the Democratic National Committee and other campaign-related sites. Related video Kasparov: Trump fertilizing ground for civil unrest after election This is the first time a foreign power has inserted itself directly into an American presidential election. Russian President Vladimir Putin wasn’t just probing our digital systems. He was probing our political response to see how far he could go to sow distrust in the most important cornerstone of any democracy: free and fair elections. Our response has not helped. FBI Director James Comey has sought to reassure Americans that our decentralized voting system is just too “clunky” for one massive breach to affect the outcome. But sometimes small changes can have big effects. Lyndon Johnson’s 1948 Senate victory hinged on a single sketchy precinct where he was popular with dead voters. The 2000 presidential election was decided by just 537 votes in Florida. In a tight race, cyber bad actors don’t need to disrupt everything. They just need to hit a few counties in Pennsylvania or Florida, two big battleground states that use electronic voting but in some precincts do not use verifiable paper audit trails to confirm results. Related video Putin ally warns of 'war' if US elects Hillary Clinton Pennsylvania and Florida are not alone. Thirteen other states lack paper audit trails in either all or some voting locations. Even when a race isn’t tight, nefarious actors do not actually have to throw an election to succeed: Simply casting doubt on the legitimacy of the process in these states could be enough. Others advocate calling election hacking “acts of war” to deter the Russians. This feels good and sounds tough. But deterrence 101 teaches that if you call something an act of war, you’d better be willing to go to war if it happens. Related article The weaponization of hacked emails Declaring an action unacceptable and then accepting it only weakens US credibility everywhere, on every issue. There’s a reason the Pentagon has been careful to avoid this language: It’s unclear how cyber escalation might work or where it could lead. Many cyber weapons have a “use it and lose it” quality. Once they are in the wild, they can be reverse engineered and possibly used against us. Crossing from the cyber to physical worlds is even more uncertain. What happens if we respond to election “hacks of war” with military strikes? What will the adversary do next? Going up the escalation ladder is a murky and dangerous business with sobering possibilities: Would we really launch nuclear strikes over vote counts in Beaver County, Pennsylvania? Instead of deterrence by punishment, the US should implement a policy of deterrence by denial. The goal is to deny adversaries the outcomes they seek – in this case, by rendering cyber election hacks insignificant to our democratic process. Related article Why Putin fears a Clinton presidency The strategy starts by building better defenses, including legislating minimum cyber security standards for party, PAC, and campaign-related websites for presidential elections. That would include paper audit trails in every state, starting with large battlegrounds, so that our election process can be resilient even if attacked. Building resilience also requires changing minds, not just systems. Public education is essential. Future cyber attacks could alter the integrity of data so the truth will be hard to know. Today, when a breach occurs, we assume the information released must be true. In the future, we need to assume that anything leaked could be false, designed to deceive and manipulate. Because increasingly, it will. Finally, the US government needs to start attributing election-related breaches as quickly as possible unless there is a compelling intelligence reason not to. For months, the Russian government’s election hacking was the worst-kept secret in Washington; everyone knew it, but the White House refused to acknowledge it.  This sends all the wrong signals, emboldening bad actors to do more tomorrow than they did today. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook Fast attribution would help establish international norms that election hacks are outside the bounds of civilized society; move election intrusions from the realm of secret intelligence operations that are rarely discussed to diplomatic agenda items that can be publicly and regularly discussed; and decrease public anxiety by making a vague threat more concrete. It is one thing to say, “Someone is burglarizing your neighborhood but we’re not sure who,” and quite another to say, “The bad guy stealing in your neighborhood is Vladimir Putin. Here’s his picture. Here’s what you can do to protect yourself.” The ultimate aim of election hacking is to change how we think about ourselves and our government. If we do not take concerted action now, the 2016 election will be remembered as the warning nobody heeded.


The marvel of Donald Trump’s presidency is not that so many things happen that stretch the limits of credulity. It’s that the scandals, presidential outbursts, shattered conventions, executive branch muscle-flexing, foreign policy 180s and legal quagmires seem to have no discernible political impact. Related article White House releases photos of Kim Jong Un and Pompeo In any other presidency, a Cabinet secretary being skewered on Capitol Hill over massive ethics questions – such as Environmental Protection Agency Chief Scott Pruitt – or a nominee such as White House physician Ronny Jackson dropping out of consideration as Veterans Affairs secretary would represent major political crises. Photos like those released Thursday of CIA chief turned new Secretary of State Mike Pompeo meeting the world’s most reclusive leader Kim Jong Un would create news shockwaves that would rumble for weeks. And if any other President had called up a morning news show and unspooled a stream of anger down the phone for half an hour, in a way that may have deepened his legal exposure after the FBI raid on his lawyer Michael Cohen, he would drive his White House close to a cliff edge. In the Trump administration, it’s just another day. Given that expectations of Trump’s presidency are cemented 15 months into his term, it’s likely that none of the turbulence of the last few days – extreme even by Trump’s standards – will have an immediate political consequence. Polls show that the President moves in a range between the high mid-30% range and the low to mid-40% territory. The most recent poll of Trump’s approval ratings is by Fox News and shows his number at 44%. In other latest surveys, Quinnipiac puts Trump at 39%, ABC has him at 40% and CNN has the President at 42%. Related article Is Nikki Haley the most popular politician in America? When Trump dips and then picks up the pace in polls, it tends to reflect a drift of softer Republican voters away and back to him – rather than a realignment of wider sentiment in the electorate. The fact that Trump’s floor remains just below 40% – while likely insufficient to stave off heavy midterm election losses or fears among his team about his re-election hopes is still remarkable. It speaks to the solidity of his legendary political base, which he has taken pains to preserve and means that his presidency remains viable despite the torrent of logic defying escapades that he engineers every week. So far, the bottom has not fallen out. He’s not experienced the kind of slide for instance that afflicted George W. Bush a year into his second term after the botched handling of Hurricane Katrina and the bloody occupation of Iraq, which at one point would send him down to Gallup approval rating low of 25%. While Trump seems to be defying political gravity, some prominent critics and observers are beginning to worry about longer term damage – and not to the President’s own political standing. They warn that what is unfolding is potentially damaging to America’s position overseas and the institutions that underpin its democratic system at home. James Comey, the fired FBI chief who has emerged almost as an amateur shrink with his character sketches of the President on his book tour, warned that the abnormality of Trump must not be allowed to become a new normal. Related article Comey's psychoanalysis: Trump's always trying to fill an emotional hole In a CNN town hall event on Thursday Comey was asked by Anderson Cooper about his reaction when he saw Trump tweeting that he should be in jail. He admitted to “a shrug. Like, ‘Oh, there he goes again,’” Comey said. “And then I catch myself, because I hope you’re not shrugging, because that’s numb to something that is not OK, that is not normal,” he continued. “And Republicans, if they just close their eyes and imagine Barack Obama waking up in the morning saying someone should be in jail, they will understand that it’s not normal.” Comey is not the only person to notice the chaos in Washington. French President Emmanuel Macron, who used a state visit to Washington to intensify his charm offensive with the President, remarked on Wednesday night that dizzying US foreign policy U-turns were “insane,” the Guardian reported. There were signs on Thursday that some of Trump’s aides in the White House believe that the new political reality – where none of Trump’s antics appear to hurt him – can hold for ever, after his tirade on “Fox and Friends” which left even the show’s friendly anchors looking puzzled. “Lots of people winced,” CNN’s Jim Acosta quoted one official as saying when asked about Trump’s unleashed performance, which showed why the President’s lawyers and political team try to keep him under wraps. Related article Trump airs grievances in revealing Fox interview At one point, Trump appeared to be signaling that he wanted to conduct a purge of his own Justice Department – but couldn’t do so because of the Russia investigation. “I think you’ll understand this, I have decided that I won’t be involved. I may change my mind at some point because what’s going on is a disgrace,” Trump said. Given that special counsel Robert Mueller is investigating whether Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey, the President’s own admission that he would like to strong arm top US law enforcement agencies may be unwise. Trump may also have deepened his legal exposure regarding Cohen. He admitted on Fox for the first time that his lawyer had acted for him in the case of porn star Stormy Daniels, who was paid $130,000 before the election to keep quiet about an alleged affair with Trump. If there are issues with the payment, the President could now find himself being drawn deeper into the legal mess. Trump also caused a problem for his legal team, which is fighting to convince a federal judge that papers seized from Cohen by the FBI should be covered by attorney client privilege. The President told “Fox and Friends” that the percentage of his legal work entrusted to Cohen was a “a tiny, tiny little fraction.” Hours later, federal prosecutors said that material obtained by the FBI – believed to include records of the Trump Organization – is “unlikely to contain voluminous privileged documents,” using the President’s own words to undermine his legal arguments. Such developments explain why Trump’s legal and political supporters fear the consequences if the President goes anywhere near an interview with Mueller.


Editor’s Note: Since CNN interviewed Alyaman Daar’s parents on Thursday, the family has been granted emergency medical admission to Switzerland. Doctors say Alyaman’s condition may improve temporarily, but that he remains terminally ill. Alyaman Daar is dying of muscular dystrophy at the Eko refugee camp in Greece His family says his 1-year-old sister Bisan has symptoms of the same condition Sunbeams stream through the white canvas wall of the tent, bouncing off the crib and bedding and making it glow in bright colors: red, green, yellow. Inside its mesh walls, barely breathing, 6-year-old Alyaman Daar lies dying. Alyaman and his family fled Syria when the country’s bloody civil war meant they could no longer access healthcare and medication to battle his muscular dystrophy. His parents, Wasel and Johaina, from Deir Ezzor, were sure that if they could just make it to Europe, they could give their son the medical help he so desperately needs. But having finally reached what they once saw as the “promised land” – via Turkey and a perilous and costly voyage across the Mediterranean – they have found no hope, only heartbreak. Marooned in a camp at a gas station close to the Greece-Macedonia border, unable even to register as refugees, they can do little more than watch as Alyaman fades away before their eyes. And to make matters worse, their youngest daughter, 1-year-old Bisan, is now showing signs of the same condition which looks likely to take the life of their son within days. How do you keep 1m refugees healthy? “I wish we had access to proper medical care, but in this tent it’s very difficult,” says Johaina. “The only reason we left our home was to seek treatment for our son.  And now my daughter also has similar symptoms.” Johaina appears sadly resigned to the loss of Alyaman, but she becomes distressed at the thought of her daughter going through the same torment. “It’s from God, so we must accept his fate; but now I am worried about my daughter,” she says, wiping away tears. “It is very difficult to get the kind of medical care we need.” Wearing a purple dress and gold earrings and fussing in her father’s arms, Bisan seems like any other toddler. But the family says she can no longer crawl or grip their fingers. These were the same clues that pointed them to a diagnosis for Alyaman back in Syria five years ago. There is no cure for muscular dystrophy – a genetic disorder that causes muscle weakness and eventually the loss of muscle mass – but medication and therapy can ease a patient’s symptoms and prolong their life. One mom’s life with muscular dystrophy The crib, set up within a tent filled with the clutter of four families’ upended lives, is intended for a much younger child, but Alyaman is tiny and frail, and fits easily among the blankets, a Quran tucked at his side. Hereditary genetic condition Causes progressive weakness and wasting of the musclesNo known cureMedication and therapy can help manage symptomsSome types of MD shorten life expectancy dramatically Hereditary genetic condition Causes progressive weakness and wasting of the musclesNo known cureMedication and therapy can help manage symptomsSome types of MD shorten life expectancy dramatically Dr. Zaher Sahloul leans in and tries to wake him, calling his name and stroking his pale cheek, but there is no response. His long eyelashes do not flutter, his eyes remain closed. “Alyaman’s prognosis is very bad,” Sahloul says. “He’s barely able to eat or swallow; he’s dehydrated; he has malnutrition; his oxygen level is very low; he’s not reacting to stimulation. “In a condition like this, in the U.S. we would usually treat the patients with a nasogastric tube for feeding … oxygen, IV hydration … [maybe] a respirator,” he says. “But in a tent like this, where they don’t have access to any advanced medical care, he’s probably going to die within a few hours.” Greece clears Idomeni refugee camp The one relief for Wasel and Johaina, amid all of their pain, is that their middle child, 3 1/2-year-old daughter Lyan, shows no symptoms of muscular dystrophy. When Alyaman was healthier, he and Lyan were very close. Until very recently he would respond to her laugh, or if she called his name. But even that has stopped now. Now Lyan sits alongside her mother, her big, dark eyes watching intensely as Johaina tries to make her son eat, feeding him tiny amounts of milk formula through a syringe. The only sign he is conscious are his half-open eyelids, but there is no recognition, no light in his eyes, even when his mother coos lovingly at him and tenderly touches his face. His arms are contorted, his body stiff, his face expressionless. Only his mousy brown hair, topped with a Tintin-like cowlick, is recognizable from the screensaver photo on his father’s phone – a picture taken 10 months ago, before they came to Greece. Doctors say the family knows Alyaman has a very short time left. Greek grandmother’s kindness to refugees For Sahloul and his colleague Dr. Hanne Lossius, from the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS), there is sadness that they cannot do more for Alyaman, and anger that Europe is not doing more to help all those like him, trapped in camps and in need of better medical care. “It is very painful that we have, in the 21st century, families like this in Europe [who] don’t have access to the minimum that they could have even in developing countries,” says Sahloul. “It is unacceptable for any human being that a family like this, who have children who are suffering for nothing – for no reason except that there’s a war in their homeland – who expected to be treated with dignity in Europe, that they are not getting any of that.” “It’s inhuman,” adds Lossius. “It really comes down to common decency. A child should not spend his or her last hours of life in a tent like this.” “We’ve met people here saying that they want to go back to Syria – to die with honor, fast – instead of dying slowly here. That’s what Europe is doing right now. This is killing them, and we need to do something.” For Wasel and Johaina, there is one last shred of hope: That people will hear their story and be inspired to act, and that they and their daughters will find a home in Europe. “It is too late for my son,” says Johaina, dabbing at her eyes with a tissue. “But I need your help to save my daughter. I don’t want her to suffer like her brother.” Since CNN interviewed Alyaman Daar’s parents on Thursday, the family has been granted emergency medical admission to Switzerland. Doctors say Alyaman’s condition may improve temporarily, but that he remains terminally ill. Bryony Jones wrote from London with reporting from Atika Shubert and Bharati Naik. CNN’s Elinda Labropoulou and Robert Nowatzki also contributed to this report.


Star Wars fans may be coming soon to an idyllic spot near you as tourist officials try to cash in on locations from the new movie in the series. Scenes from “Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens” were shot in a number of places not used in the previous six films. Here are three that could prove popular: The rural location near Gloucester, England, was inundated with fans when rumors spread in July 2014 that scenes were being filmed there. The moody and mysterious woods appear in the trailer, and were referenced by director J.J. Abrams in a letter thanking the movie’s cast and crew. While locations are often kept secret, local tourism groups dressed up a few surfers as stormtroopers last month to highlight the link. They’re hoping to boost visitor numbers by offering guided tours of the forest from December 16, the day before the film releases in the U.K. Holidaycottages.co.uk, a site offering short-term vacation lets, said it saw an 85% jump in bookings in the area once news of the filming leaked out. “The fact that Star Wars was filmed there is fantastic for tourism in the area,” said managing directory James Morris. Ireland is also hoping for a windfall. Tourism officials are betting that Skellig Michael’s appearance on the big screen will translate into more visits to the rocky outcrop, seven miles off the country’s west coast. The release of the film presents “a truly unique opportunity to highlight the South West and Ireland in 2016,” Tourism Ireland said, predicting a record year for visitors to the country in 2016. Related: 17 ‘Star Wars’ locations that actually exist Spain, Italy and Switzerland boast sites to visit from previous Star Wars films. But Tunisia, home to many locations from the early installments, has missed out on the most recent movie, likely due to recent terror attacks and the Arab Spring uprisings. Still, a recent tourism campaign video showing Star Wars characters dancing around Tunisian film locations has more than two millions views on YouTube. Remote sand dunes in Abu Dhabi replaced Tunisia in “The Force Awakens,” and it’s already given the tiny emirate $60 million worth of free publicity, according to Paul Baker of twofour54, a media group which is hosting the local premier. The movie could give the U.K. and Ireland another boost too. Tourism officials are hoping that American fans will fly over to see the movie there first – it releases in parts of Europe one day before it does in the U.S. Related: ‘Star Wars’ memo from 1976 Related: Movie theaters ban ‘Star Wars’ masks Related: “Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens” brings down ticket booking sites

Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens filming locations


As President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that America is leaving the Paris climate accord, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria had something to say. “[T]his will be the day that the United States resigned as the leader of the free world,” the host of “Fareed Zakaria GPS” asserted. Fareed Zakaria on Trump and climate accord: This could be the day the US resigns as leader of the free world https://t.co/TTwMoMjqEn Zakaria continued, telling “The Lead” anchor Jake Tapper: “The irresponsibility of this act is breathtaking, because the Paris climate accords are actually extraordinarily flexible. They do not dilute American sovereignty. They allow every country to make its own plans. That’s why countries that have jealously guarded their sovereignty – like China, like India, like Russia – have all signed on.” Several world leaders have criticized Trump’s decision to take America out of the agreement.

United States withdrawal from the Paris climate accord


Iran has been complying with the deal, the IAEA says Trump has chafed at sticking with the international pact US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley laid out a case for President Donald Trump to step back from the Iran nuclear deal Tuesday, arguing that Iran’s technical compliance alone isn’t enough for the US to stick with the pact. In a carefully read 20-minute address at the American Enterprise Institute, Haley argued that the nuclear deal can’t be considered in isolation. Instead, Iran’s history, its hostility toward the US and its behavior in the Middle East have to figure into Trump’s calculus when he decides in October whether to certify if Iran is abiding by the deal, she said. And, Haley argued, both UN resolutions and US law should be considered as well. “What I am saying is should he decide to decertify, he has grounds to stand on,” Haley said. “It’s very easy to just talk about compliance and the JCPOA,” she said, referring to the deal’s formal name, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. “But there’s so much more to the story that we need to be looking at,” she added. Related article Haley: Kim Jong Un 'begging for war' The deal, reached in July 2015 and implemented in January 2016, essentially eased nuclear related sanctions in exchange for curbs on Iran’s nuclear program, some of which expire after a few years. Congress passed a separate law requiring the president to certify every 90 days that Iran is in fact complying with the deal, something Trump has done twice now. Asked if the US would end up isolated for leaving a deal that has buy in from China, Russia, Germany, France, the UK and the EU, Haley said that European allies, who worked most closely with the Obama administration to craft the deal, understand the new US concerns. She added that Washington’s job wasn’t to make sure allies were “comfortable.” “This is about US national security, this is not about European security,” she said. Haley’s remarks appeared to draw a quick response from the French ambassador to the US, Gerard Araud, who tweeted a rebuke at the Trump administration’s apparent attempt to move the goalposts on the Iran deal. “The Iran deal is about the nuclear issue, nothing else,” Araud tweeted. “So far, Iran is abiding by the commitments taken in this mutually agreed framework.” Related article Bolton says he's no longer allowed to see Trump Haley rejected suggestions that decertifying the Iran deal could send a message to others involved in negotiations with the US – particularly North Korea – that Washington is an unreliable dealmaker, prone to back out of agreements as easily as it makes them. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is currently trying to pressure Pyongyang back to the negotiating table through an international “peaceful pressure” campaign. “What’s more important is that we let others know we will stay in a deal as long as it protects the security of the United States,” Haley said. She cited Iran’s support for terrorism, proxy wars and malign actors, its weapons-smuggling and human rights violations – subject to other US and international sanctions – as reasons to pull back from the agreement. “Everyone hoped the deal would make the Iranian government good people,” Haley said, “but no one looked at the history of Iran, no one looked at all the past aggressions they have shown.” Related article Iran rejects US call for UN nuclear watchdog to inspect more sites When limits on Iran’s uranium enrichment or centrifuge production expire, Iran may be able to send a nuclear warhead to the US, as North Korea can now, Haley said. “What if we just gave them 10 years, and all the money they wanted to do what they want to prepare for, when that 10th year hits and they start nuclear war?” Haley said. A congressional aide, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss Haley’s speech, said that if the President chose not to certify Iran’s compliance, “they would need to be very clear with Congress about what Iran has done to not deserve certification.” “Thus far, at least to us, there has been no evidence produced. Just all the innuendo in the press and from the President himself,” the aide said. The US law requiring the President to certify compliance also requires the administration to brief Congress on the specific technicalities of how Iran is in violation, the aide said. Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin, the top Democrat on the Senate foreign relations committee, said it would be a mistake for the US to take unilateral action to leave the Iran agreement, especially for political purposes. “It’s a factual determination that the administration has to make as to whether Iran is in compliance with the agreement or not,” Cardin said. “That’s a factual determination – it’s not a political determination.” But Senate foreign relations chairman Bob Corker of Tennessee said that Haley was merely describing mechanisms of the certification law that Congress passed. “That’s the way the legislation is written, that under certain circumstances it comes Back to the House and Senate,” Corker said. “I didn’t think it was anything groundbreaking in what she said.” The former South Carolina governor denied that her speech was meant as a signal of what’s to come. “I’m not going to prejudge in any way what the President is going to decide next month,” Haley said. “While I have discussed it with him, I do not know what decision he will make. It is his decision to make, and his alone.” Still, she crystallized the message that administration officials and those close to the White House have been conveying in recent months. “The entire world thinks the JCPOA is untouchable,” Haley said, “but it’s not.” CNN’s Jeremy Herb contributed to this report


Law promulgated by President Biya in 2014 applies the death penalty to a number of terrorism-related offenses The death sentences handed down Wednesday are "not subject to appeal," a military magistrate told CNN Security expert worries that, rather than deterring terrorists, the law creates more martyrdom appeal A military court in Cameroon this week sentenced 89 Boko Haram insurgents to death for their roles in terror attacks in the country’s Far North Region. The judgment handed down Wednesday marks the most extreme implementation of a controversial anti-terrorism law promulgated by President Paul Biya in December 2014. It prescribes the death penalty for “any activity which can lead to a general revolt of the population or disturb the normal functioning of the country” and for “anyone who supplies arms, war equipment, bacteria and viruses with the intention of killing.” The death penalty also applies for people found guilty of kidnapping with terrorist intent, as well as for “anyone who directly or indirectly finances acts of terrorism” and for “anyone who recruits citizens with the aim of carrying out acts of terrorism.” The law also punishes people and companies found guilty of promoting terrorism, as well as people who give false testimony to administrative and judicial authorities in matters of terrorism, with various fines and prison terms. A military magistrate who would not be named told CNN that “the judgment was not subject to appeal.” The 89 condemned insurgents were among nearly 1,000 who were convicted by the military court. Recently, Chad executed 10 Boko Haram members convicted of acts of terrorism. Security experts already are expressing fears that executions intended to deter terrorists will cause violent retaliation instead. The International Business Times quoted David Otto, CEO of UK-based global security provider TGS Intelligence Consultants, David Otto, as saying that Boko Haram will “surely react” by expanding its violence farther south in Cameroon. “The government has no clue on the potential martyrdom effects this will create,” Otto said. “One must be reminded that no amount of punishment frightens a man who is not afraid of death.” Boko Haram aims to institute Sharia, or Islamic law. It has killed at least 20,000 people since its insurgency began in Nigeria in 2009 and spread to neighboring Cameroon, Chad and Niger. CNN’s Cameron Tankersley contributed to this report.


The first time Alanna Kane wrote to a US president, she was 10 years old. It was Ronald Reagan. She was too young to really understand the dynamics of government. And she didn’t get a response. Kane is in her 40s now. And when Donald Trump assumed office, she wrote again to the President. This time six days a week. For an entire year. If you’re counting – and she was – that’s 313 letters, all of them put on paper in tidy handwriting. The Sharpsville, Pennsylvania, woman is a registered independent and didn’t vote for Trump. She says she began writing because she doesn’t see eye to eye with the President on many issues and wanted him to understand the viewpoints of people like herself. She tried to keep her tone friendly. “I wrote it kind of like a pen pal,” Kane, 47, told CNN. “The kind of friend that will always give you honest advice.” She sent her first letter the day Trump was inaugurated: So here’s the deal. I’m going to write you letters… LOTS of letters. A letter every day for your first year as President. Please don’t worry… I’m not here to cause a problem. I just want to get to know you a little better, and for you to get to know me. Maybe we can find something in each other to relate to… Kane wrote about whatever interested her, including immigration, the Russia investigation and Trump’s Twitter habit. She infused some letters with sarcasm, and took some digs at the President. But she also complimented Trump when she felt he did something right, such as his dignified reaction to Roy Moore’s defeat and his swift reaction to the April 2017 chemical attacks in Syria. Kane, who works the graveyard shift as a 911 dispatcher, said she spent extra time reading the news and researching issues so she would feel better informed in her letters. “I’d try and tie it in with something going on in my own life, something with relevance, or maybe a past experience,” she said. She wrote Trump about her first and only granddaughter, and asked him what activities he enjoys doing with his grandchildren. She took special interest in healthcare. One of her daughters is a cancer survivor. Another has Marfan syndrome – a genetic disorder that affects the body’s connective tissue – making Kane’s granddaughter a risky pregnancy. Her daily routine consisted of making coffee, reading up on the news and then writing Trump a letter in the afternoon. She took a break on Saturdays. It’s the only day both she and her husband have off, so she saved these days for quality time with him. Six months after she sent her first letter, the White House wrote back. “At first they were like little postcards saying ‘Thanks for your support,’” she said with a laugh. “I kind of got a chuckle out of them.” By the end of the year, the White House had sent her nine letters, she said. The initial postcards contained a generic response. “Thank you for your thoughtful suggestions on how to address important issues facing our Nation,” they began. Later, the responses became a little more personalized, citing specific issues that she had mentioned in her letters. All bore Trump’s signature at the bottom, although the replies still read like form letters. Kane didn’t feel like a real person was responding to what she had written. And she says she felt disappointment at putting so much effort into a one-sided relationship. But doing research and writing the letters helped her to better express her views on current events. “If you want to know the truth you got to spend the time looking for it,” she said. “You have to educate yourself if no one else is going to do it for you.” Kane sent her final letter on last month’s anniversary of Trump’s first year in office. I have to admit, I’ve learned so much since you became President… I’ve learned how precarious our freedom is, and how casually we take it for granted… and how important it is to step up individually to protect it…You’ve helped me appreciate what my country is supposed to stand for … and I thank you for that. Now that her year of letter-writing is over, Kane is taking a break and hoping to get her collected Trump letters published in a book. She believes the experience helped make her more understanding and respectful of differing political views. “I learned how important it is to truly take the time to listen to what people from opposing points of view have to say and to figure out where they’re coming from,” she said, “… so I can have a civil conversation with them.” The whole process was exhausting for her, and she wouldn’t do it again. But she’s proud that she stuck with the project. “I went into it pretty depressed and I came out of it a little bit more encouraged,” she said. Kane’s advice for others is simple: Speak out. “Sometimes we feel like our voices are so insignificant,” she said. “Everybody counts. Don’t think that you don’t.”


Congrats to the American League, which won the MLB All-Star Game for the fifth year in a row. Here’s what else you need to Get Up to Speed and Out the Door. (You can also get “5 Things You Need to Know Today” delivered to your inbox daily. Sign up here.) No matter what side you’re on in the whole Trump-Russia thing, you have to admit that Donald Trump Jr.’s emails are something of a game changer. Up until now, President Trump and his supporters downplayed the controversy and insisted that during the campaign no one from Team Trump had connected with Russians. But Trump Jr.’s emails – which he released right before The New York Times published them – undercuts that position. They show that members of Trump’s campaign were glad to meet with someone they’d been told was connected to the Russian government and who promised dirt on Hillary Clinton. Trump Jr. appeared in the friendly confines of Sean Hannity’s show on Fox to defend himself, saying he only took the meeting with a Russian lawyer because he wanted to hear what she had to say, and that, looking back, he “probably would have done things a little differently.” The meeting and emails – which ratchet up possible legal liability for the President’s son and other campaign operatives – have caught the attention of special prosecutor Robert Mueller and will be added to his investigation. The Senate’s going to delay its August recess to carve out more time to work on health care, so GOP senators must be making some good progress in the drive to get rid of Obamacare, right? Nope. No one seems to know exactly what the revised bill will look like, but GOP leaders say a procedural vote is still on for next week. Ready for more confusion? Sen. Lindsey Graham said he’s working on his own health care plan that includes the input of – gasp! – Democrats. America lost some of the best of the best when that military transport plane went down in Mississippi. Sixteen people were killed, including seven Marine special forces members from Camp Lejeune. The plane, carrying troops and equipment, was headed to a base in Arizona when it crashed. Witnesses to the crash said they heard a loud bang before the plane, with white smoke trailing, spiraled to the ground, nose down. Is this the first step in ending the crisis in the Gulf? The US and Qatar signed an agreement to fight terrorism, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said it could help end the nasty diplomatic spat raging between Qatar and other Gulf nations. The other countries in this dispute, including Saudia Arabia, accuse Qatar of supporting terrorism. Tillerson didn’t specify how the agreement could help quell the crisis, but he said he’s hopeful some “progress” can be made. The US-Qatar deal focuses on disrupting terrorist groups’ funding sources. Investigators are calling it a “mind-boggling” mystery: Four men went missing last week north of Philadelphia, and foul play is suspected. The men, ranging in age from 18 to 22, may have all known each other. Police are conducting a big search of a 90-acre property in the area and have arrested the son of the property’s owners. But the charges he’s being held on don’t relate to the case. 2.7 million That’s how many airbags Takata is adding to the biggest automotive recall in history. People are talking about these. Read up. Join in. Matter of timing Remember that buzzed-about photo that could have been Amelia Earhart? Two bloggers say that pic is from a book published two years before she vanished. King Khalifa “Gangnam Style” has been dethroned as YouTube’s top video, replaced by Wiz Khalifa’s “See You Again,” the weepiest rap song ever. Unbreakable bond When a family was in danger of drowning off a Florida beach, 80 strangers formed a human chain to save them. Let the games begin LA and Paris are probably getting the Olympic Games, but we’ll have to wait to find out which years. One city is likely to host in 2024, the other in 2028. Pregnant pause A Spanish airline’s going to stop asking female job applicants to take a pregnancy test. It’s amazing what a little outrage – and a fine – will do. “I’m not going to be a Republican anymore” “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough, telling Stephen Colbert that he’s embarrassed by the GOP’s reaction to Donald Trump’s controversies World class Here’s nine minutes of video of the world’s largest super soaker at work. Enough said. (Click to view)


The UN estimates there are more than 20 million refugees around the world The summit is co-hosted by Canada, Ethiopia, Germany, Jordan, Mexico, Sweden and the UN Secretary General President Barack Obama made an impassioned plea Tuesday for countries to fulfill a moral obligation to alleviate a global refugee crisis “of epic proportions,” despite a political backlash in the US against absorbing those fleeing Middle East violence. The President’s interest in calling attention to the tens of millions of displaced people around the world, and pushing back against the anti-refugee tenor, was underscored by his decision to convene a Leaders’ Summit on Refugees at the United Nations Tuesday. At the summit, he also rejected another aspect of the American political debate swirling around accepting foreigners – GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump’s call to build a wall along the US-Mexico border. “This crisis is a test of our common humanity. Whether we give into suspicion and fear and build walls, or whether we see ourselves in another,” Obama said, though he didn’t mention Trump by name. Obama singled out the situation in Syria, which has displaced 4.8 million people so far, as particularly “unacceptable.” Related video President Obama at the UN: Then and now “We are not as unified as we should be in pushing to make it stop,” he said, describing the global refugee crisis as both a humanitarian and security challenge that tests countries’ ability to take collective action. “I called this summit because this crisis is one of the most urgent tests of our time,” he said. “Just as failure to act in the past – for example, by turning away Jews fleeing Nazi Germany – is a stain on our collective conscience, I believe history will judge us harshly if we do not rise to this moment.” The refugee issue is one that’s captured the world’s attention more in the past two years than at perhaps any time since World War II, seared into the public’s consciousness by photos like that of a 3-year-old Syrian boy who drowned in the Mediterranean and the flood of migrants into Europe. A recent study by from the UN’s refugee agency estimated 65.3 million people were displaced from their homes by conflict or persecution in 2015, up by over five million from the prior year. Many are internally displaced within the borders of their own countries, but about 21.3 million are classified as refugees. Obama’s summit follows a similar UN-led meeting on the issue Monday, which drew attention to the crisis but offered little in the way of binding commitments. RELATED: Donald Trump Jr. likens Syrian refugees to Skittles candy “Make no mistake,” US Secretary of State John Kerry said at the UN meeting, “additional efforts are urgently needed.” Leaders also called for a more orderly and equitable system to manage refugee flows – acknowledging the burden is shouldered disproportionally by certain regions. “You have to know that today the European Union has a clear objective to restore order on its external borders,” European Council President Donald Tusk said in his remarks, signaling a growing sense that patience in Europe with the migrant flow is wearing thin. “There will be no repeat of the year 2015 with more than one and a half million irregular migrants,” he added. The Obama administration is hopeful the Leader’s Summit on Tuesday afternoon can build momentum for more action. Related article Obama outlasts foes at the UN National Security Advisor Susan Rice in June announced that the gathering – co-hosted along with the US by Canada, Ethiopia, Germany, Jordan, Mexico, Sweden and the UN Secretary General – would seek an increase in funding of at least 30%, a doubling of permanent resettlement, and expanded access to education and work rights for refugees. “Reaching these ambitious objectives will be challenging, yet the level of need demands no less,” Rice said in a statement. But aid groups are skeptical the summit will prompt the kind of action they say is desperately needed. “We have to be optimistic that we’ll see some real concrete commitments,” said Amnesty International’s Interim Executive Director Margaret Huang. “But the truth is, even if those numbers are hit, it’s nowhere near what’s actually needed.” The US is a major contributor of humanitarian aid for countries that host large numbers of refugees – particularly Syria’s neighbors – and plans to increase the number of refugees it will take in to America from 85,000 in 2016 to 110,000 next year. The President’s chief spokesman last week conceded that even as the administration calls for greater global action, it is limited in what it can do. “The President’s commitment to ensuring that the United States plays a leading role on this issue is not shared by a lot of people in Congress, including by a lot of people in the Republican majority in Congress,” Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters. “And that has an impact in terms of the resources that are dedicated to this effort.” Vetting efforts to screen refugees, he noted, “are not cheap.” RELATED: Boat survivor: I am a refugee with a voice David Miliband, president of the International Rescue Committee and a former British Foreign Secretary, said he’s hopeful but waiting to see whether any agreements are backed up with action. “The scale of the global refugee problem demands an appropriate scale of response,” Miliband told CNN. “Governments around the world haven’t, in the main, been responding with the right degree of compassion or competence up to now.” But the co-hosts of the Leaders’ Summit said in a statement they were pleased with “new and significant humanitarian contributions” from world leaders. “We sought a $3 billion increase in global humanitarian financing and commitments to maintain funding in future years,” they said. “Through our mutual efforts, over the course of 2016, the 32 donors participating today have contributed this year roughly 4.5 billion additional dollars to UN appeals and international humanitarian organizations than in 2015.” As they await action from world leaders in New York, a group of volunteers in London laid out a “life jacket graveyard” Monday to draw attention to the plight of thousands of migrants who’ve lost their lives attempting hazardous boat crossings in the Mediterranean. The conflict in Syria and resulting migrant crisis in the Middle East and Europe have dominated headlines over the past 18 months, but refugees are a global problem. Perhaps nowhere are they more prevalent than in the so-called “global south” – the developing countries of the southern hemisphere. Last week, South Sudan joined the ranks of Syria, Afghanistan, and Somalia – countries with over 1 million of their citizens living as refugees abroad. And protracted conflict in places like Somalia have led to a generation of lifelong refugees – men and women in their twenties who’ve never known life outside of a camp. “These are not people who can envision what life would be like if they were returned to their home countries,” Huang said.

United Nations Leaders' Summit on Refugees


The Britain that Samuele Marcora fell in love with still exists: He can ride his motorbike along winding mountain roads and past unspoilt sandy beaches, laugh at stand-up comedy nights, enjoy live music at rock gigs, or meet his PhD students for coffee. As long as he doesn’t open his mouth. Marcora doesn’t even have to talk in his mother tongue to spark a reaction: In his adopted hometown of Chatham in Kent, southeast of London, just speaking English with an Italian accent can be enough to provoke a reaction. This is post-Brexit referendum Britain. And it’s a place Marcora, who has lived and worked in the UK for 18 years, barely recognizes. “I was Britain’s biggest fan, pre-referendum,” the physiology professor recalls. “I was always very complimentary about it. Compared to Italy it’s less chaotic, more meritocratic, more cosmopolitan.” “Then all of a sudden, you find out that a large part of the population don’t feel that way. They don’t want you here … I’ve been rejected by the British people.” 100 days ago, Britons went to the polls to vote on whether the country’s future lay inside or outside the European Union. After a bitter campaign that focused largely on immigration, a majority of voters backed Brexit, signalling the UK’s departure from the EU after more than 40 years. That decision has left many of the 3.2 million EU citizens living in the UK in limbo as Britain decides how it will Brexit. Will they be allowed to stay? And do they want to live in a country that voted to leave? READ MORE: Brexit ‘made me feel like a foreigner again’ Tanja Bueltmann says she saw Brexit coming a long way off. Living in the northeast of England, one of the most eurosceptic areas of the UK, and active on Twitter, where she has frequently been attacked for her pro-EU stance, she was well aware of the rising tide of support for a Leave vote. “I’ve no idea why anyone thought it would be otherwise,” the German-born history lecturer, who has spent 10 years in the UK, says. “I don’t understand how the polls got it so wrong.” Kerstin Albers (not her real name) says she, too, saw the writing on the wall – but after 13 years in Britain, was nonetheless taken aback by the final results. Albers and her family, also originally from Germany, were so concerned about the growth of anti-EU sentiment across the country that they began planning for a future outside the UK long before the first ballots were cast. “Over the past two years, the atmosphere in the UK has changed towards EU migrants. I don’t feel welcome here [any more] … [It was] such a tolerant and open society, and we have enjoyed being part of it, but now it feels different.” She decided to take pre-emptive action: “I am sad to leave friends, but at the same time, I don’t want to sit here for two years and wait.” Just weeks after the Brexit vote, she was offered a new teaching job back in Germany. The Albers’ youngest daughter, who was just four when the family moved to the UK,  is still at school, so she and her father will stay in England until she finishes her A-levels – the family now divided between two countries. Albers says the Brexit vote was “very disappointing.” However, she also considers her family lucky: “We are not refugees, so we can go back. I’m more sorry for you, because I have 27 other countries I can go to.” READ MORE: Anti-establishment tsunami sweeps Europe For others, the decision whether to leave or stay is more complicated. Sara Calamassi grew up in Brussels, and first came to the UK as a student in the early 2000s. She moved here permanently 11 years ago, and later married the boyfriend she’d met at university. She says the “most horrible thing” about Brexit has been “to wake up the day after and see my husband so disappointed in his country.” Calamassi and others interviewed by CNN say they are deeply concerned at the impact of Brexit on their ties with friends and loved ones in less EU-friendly areas. “London is my home, but I studied in Scotland, my husband is from North Wales, and most of my friends are from other areas of the country,” she says. “I always identified a lot with Britain … I love other parts of the UK, but I don’t feel comfortable going there now. I don’t really want to go out into the country of the 52%,” she says. “I want to stay here with the 48%.” READ MORE: Can wounds ever heal in divided UK? In the aftermath of the Brexit vote, reports of hate crime against migrants in the UK spiked; police recorded five times the usual number of racist attacks in the week after the referendum. In Harlow, Essex, an area with high levels of Eastern European expats – and a high Leave vote – Polish man Arkadiusz “Arek” Jozwik was attacked and left for dead in August; police are treating his killing as a possible hate crime. Related video This town voted to leave the EU, what do they think now? “Britain won the Olympics of xenophobia,” on June 23, says physiology professor Marcora. He says he’s seen this hatred of foreigners at first hand. “I wouldn’t go talking Italian in one of the pubs in Chatham town center or in Gillingham (another nearby town). I wouldn’t feel safe.” Even in “slightly posher” Rochester, he says, someone yelled at him to “Go home!” when they heard him speak. And he says his wife, who is Chinese and “recognizably an immigrant” has been subjected to even worse treatment. Having undergone a mastectomy as a result of breast cancer, she went to a local chemist to collect a prescription, only to be told “your drugs are very expensive!” He said she was made to feel as though she did not deserve the National Health Service (NHS) medication as a person who wasn’t born in Britain. “[The tablets] cost £88 a month, and we pay our taxes,” says a clearly angry Marcora. “All through the campaign there were stories about health tourism, about ‘immigrants’ coming in to get treatment, but it is unbelievable that someone would say that, that they felt allowed to say it.” READ MORE: The British town that wants to leave Europe A small survey carried out by the pro-Remain group Academics for Europe found that 71% of those questioned were thinking about leaving the UK in the wake of Brexit. Boin Cheong grew up in Berlin, but has made London her home. Now she’s not so sure about that decision. “I really don’t see my long term future in this country,” she says. “I’ve started looking at other places.” “I want to leave because I feel unwelcome, but also because it feels like there’s no bright future here anymore.” She fears the UK will be left facing the double-whammy of a recession and a brain drain of its brightest talent if Brexit goes ahead. READ MORE: Could these ads have changed the vote? Bueltmann agrees that a mass exodus of European expats from the UK would have a huge negative effect on the country – on universities like hers, and particularly on the NHS, where it would have “massive repercussions.” “We need every EU migrant in the UK not to work for one day to demonstrate the impact it would have in universities, hospitals, everywhere,” she says. For now, at least, Calamassi will stay put – but she says she no longer feels at home in the UK. “I’m working towards British citizenship at the moment, which is kind of weird, to be doing that for a country that doesn’t want me.” Photos by Sarah Tilotta, illustrations by Kouzou Sakai. Harshadha Balasubramanian and CNN’s Rachel Clarke contributed to this report.


When Pete Eckert started going blind, he decided to channel his feelings of loss into art. In his 20s at the time, Eckert would spend whole days preparing graphite drawings and woodcuts before asking his wife to describe the results to him. But the process was, in his own words, “driving my wife crazy.” So in search of a more instantaneous medium, he turned his hand to photography. 'Island of the Colorblind': Where the jungle is pink, the sea is gray and the light is far too bright “When I started out, digital cameras hadn’t wiped out mom-and-pop photography shops yet,” Eckert said on the phone from his home in Sacramento, California. “I would go in and buy two rolls of film and ask ten questions. I went every day. And by asking questions and getting feedback, I learned.” More than two decades after entirely losing his sight to retinitis pigmentosa, a degenerative eye disease, Eckert has established a successful career as a self-taught photographer. His striking, ghostly images have been sought after by the likes of Playboy magazine, which commissioned a series of eerie nudes, and Volkswagen, which recently hired Eckert to photograph its new car for an advertising campaign. “I view my work, and the blind photography movement, as an extension of the impressionist movement from a hundred years ago,” he said. “A lot of the impressionists had vision problems, they showed a different way to interpret things. The blind photography movement is the next logical step.” During his first forays into photography, Eckert would go on excursions at night with his German Shepherd, Uzu, for protection. He began by photographing statues, though he soon sought more interesting subject matter. “To take photos of sculptures isn’t really fair because the art is already there,” he said. “What I was looking for was a way of graphically showing what blindness is like.” This new focus resulted in a distinct photographic aesthetic – images composed of ghostly figures and artfully blurred lines. Playing with light and long exposures, Eckert builds the pictures in his mind, using sound and touch to visualize his subjects. “I actually build the images with layers and layers of information – I’m memorizing the layers as I put them together,” said Eckert, who claims to be able to store up to 100 images in his short-term memory. Burnout: The photographer who found beauty in hot rods “Like a bat, I can use my voice to echolocate my model. In (my pitch-black studio), I layer light, measuring what I’ve done until I’m satisfied with the image in my mind’s eye. People ask me how I know how to stop. But since I’m building the image, I have a very clear image of what’s happened. At that point, why would I need sighted people at all?” Many of Eckert’s pictures are shot in his home studio, though some of his most arresting images merge phantom-like figures with outdoor backdrops. He has even taken to photojournalism though his collection “Bus Series,” in which he documents the difficulties facing blind and disabled people on public transport. “You come to understand the ‘sound signature’ of an object,” he said. “Take a stop sign, for instance. A stop sign shimmering in the wind vibrates and (projects) this image that oscillates. At first you can’t hear the pole holding up the sign … but it has a sound shadow that’s many feet long. Photographer captures beauty around the world “I actively listen to things, and then go up to touch them so I can relate the sound shadow to what that object actually is,” he said. “I’m slowly building a language of sound to associate with the objects. “It’s like a baby learning to see. When they’re first born, babies can’t see well at all. As they learn to see, they have to associate words to objects and they become more real.” Eckert’s images aren’t simply metaphors for blindness. Many of them have been shot to literally represent what his mind sees, offering sighted people a compelling look into his world. Eckert claims to be able to see “light” emanating from his own bones, something he compares to the “phantom limb” sensation experienced by some amputees. He believes that this phenomenon is a result of his ongoing efforts to perceive the world around him. Filippo Minelli's 'smoke bombs' spotlight political and social issues “There is a section of the brain that’s not being used when you’re blind,” he said. “(But) your brain, is ready to (redirect) that capacity. So, for the past 20 years, I’ve been actively rewiring my visual cortex through sound, touch and memory inputs. “I believe that if someone did an MRI on me, my visual cortex would be just as active – and it would be cross-wired with my other senses.” See more of Pete Eckert’s photos at www.peteeckert.com


Humanoid dive-bot "OceanOne" successfully completes its maiden voyage The mermaid-like robot can go deeper and stay under longer than regular divers Drifting down into the gloomy depths, the diver barely paused before entering a wreck that lay undisturbed for three and a half centuries. The underwater traveler maneuvered slowly but determinedly, honed in on an ancient artifact, gently picked it up and deposited it in a sample bag. The recovery of a small vase from the wreck of La Lune, once Louis XIV’s flagship, marked a significant step in man’s discovery of the oceans. The diver in question, a plucky orange-and-white humanoid robot called OceanOne, had successfully completed its maiden voyage. It navigated  the wreck that lay out of reach of conventional divers since sinking in waters 32 km (20 miles) off the French city of Toulon in November 1664, taking with it a thousand souls. Aboard a surface support vessel, Oussama Khatib, a Stanford computer science professor, exchanged gleeful high-fives with his students, the Stanford News reports. He’d been controlling OceanOne from the safety of the boat, allowing it to feel its way through the hazards inherent in any shipwreck, using its twin cameras – mounted in its head, just like a pair of human eyes – and its delicate haptic-feedback hands mounted on fully articulated arms and wrists. At the other end of the five-meter-long robot, a complex array of thrusters, and its computer brain, are housed. Sensors enable it to maintain a steady position, no matter the current. It got briefly stuck in the wreck, but its pilot 90 meters above it used its arms to heave it forward, freeing it to carry on with its mission. It’s a breakthrough, Khatib says, and marks the beginning of an age where this underwater proxy can undertake the gritty, dangerous, tiring or just plain repetitive tasks that can test the limits of a human diver’s endurance. It will mean that searches at depth, or underwater work on, say, oil rigs, is not limited by the time divers can stay down or how deep humans can go – around 40 meters (130 m) for recreational divers. “OceanOne will be your avatar,” Khatib tells the paper. “The intent here is to have a human diving virtually, to put the human out of harm’s way. Having a machine that has human characteristics that can project the human diver’s embodiment at depth is going to be amazing.” It’s a remarkable piece of gear. Its hands are covered with sensors that relay the sensation of touch to the remote pilot, and its brain is able to figure out how sturdy or fragile anything it encounters is. It was developed originally to study coral reefs in the Red Sea, meaning a light touch was essential. “You can feel exactly what the robot is doing,” Khatib says. “It’s almost like you are there; with the sense of touch you create a new dimension of perception.” After a successful trip below the waves of France’s southeast coast, the diver will return to California where Khatib and his team will continue to develop it – with the aim of developing a whole team of oceangoing bots that can work silently in concert, going where no human could swim.


United Nations human rights experts are investigating reports of alleged chlorine bomb attacks on civilians in two Syrian towns, officials said Tuesday. “Most alarmingly, the commission has received multiple reports, now under investigation, that bombs allegedly containing weaponized chlorine have been used in the town of Saraqeb in Idlib and in Douma in Eastern Ghouta,” near Damascus, Paulo Pinheiro, chair of the UN’s commission of inquiry on Syria, said in a statement issued in Geneva. The panel also expressed “deep concern” over the escalation of violence in rebel-held Idlib province and in Eastern Ghouta, Pinheiro said. Related article Syria opposition slams Idlib 'onslaught' amid new chlorine gas attack claims The White Helmets, a volunteer rescue group, said three of its members and six others were injured by a chlorine gas attack in Idlib’s Saraqeb on Sunday night. The group posted several videos on social media showing men coughing and being put onto stretchers. Two media activists who spoke to CNN from the nearby town of Kafranbil said they were told that the chlorine attack in Saraqeb had been launched from Syrian helicopters. CNN could not independently verify these claims or videos. The Syrian government has repeatedly denied using chemical weapons. Rebel-held areas in Eastern Ghouta, meanwhile, continue to be a target of airstrikes, a Syrian monitoring group said. Syrian regime airstrikes there killed at least 78 people and injured more than 190 others on Tuesday, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. Tuesday’s deaths included 19 children and 20 women, SOHR said. The monitoring group did not mention allegations of chlorine use in Tuesday’s attacks. Syrian state-run media said the Syrian army was responding to a shelling attack in Damascus by “armed groups” – an attack that they say killed five people – including two children – and injured 13 others. Regime forces targeted “areas from which the shells were launched in Eastern Ghouta, inflicting heavy losses upon the armed groups’ ranks and destroying a number of their mortar launchers,” the state-run SANA news agency said. Various Islamic rebel groups control the Eastern Ghouta area near Damascus, but it has been surrounded by Syrian regime forces for more than four years. Russian-backed Syrian government forces escalated their military offensive against rebel-held areas, including Idlib province and Ghouta, in recent weeks. More than 350 people – including 86 children and 68 women – have been killed in bombardments in Eastern Ghouta alone since December 29, SOHR says. But the scale and ferocity of attacks in Idlib and Eastern Ghouta have “increased dramatically” over the last 48 hours, “resulting in multiple reports of civilian casualties & airstrikes that have reportedly hit at least three hospitals,” Pinheiro, the chair of the UN’s commission of inquiry on Syria, said Tuesday. “The commission remains committed to fulfilling its mandate to investigate and document all human rights violation(s) occurring in the context of the Syrian armed conflict, regardless of who commits them,” Pinheiro said. The UN statement comes the day after the US State Department said it was “gravely alarmed” by allegations that Syrian forces conducted chemical attacks. “We implore the international community to speak with one voice, taking every opportunity to publicly pressure the Assad regime, and its supporters, to cease its use of chemical weapons,” spokeswoman Heather Nauert said in a statement Monday night. Earlier Monday, the US accused Russia of blocking a UN Security Council statement condemning Sunday’s alleged chemical attack in Idlib. Russian UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia fired back, accusing the United States and the United Kingdom of “slandering” Russia and “spreading a mountain of lies.” Related article Russian military reveals identity of pilot shot down in Syria On Monday, the opposition Syrian National Coalition condemned what it described as a “barbaric onslaught” by Russian and Syrian forces in Idlib province in recent days and demanded UN action. Observers say Russia has ramped up its air campaign in Idlib after one of its fighter jets was shot down by rebels in the province on Saturday. The pilot ejected from his aircraft but died following an exchange of gunfire on the ground. The Idlib area is home to more than 1.1 million of Syria’s 6.5 million internally displaced people, many of whom escaped other formerly opposition-held areas after they were overrun by government forces, according to UN figures. Hundreds of thousands are trying to escape the intensified assault and are seeking refuge at makeshift camps near Turkey’s border. CNN’s Hamdi Alkhshali contributed to this report.