Datasets:
Tasks:
Text Classification
Modalities:
Text
Formats:
parquet
Languages:
English
Size:
10K - 100K
License:
Dataset Viewer
topic
stringclasses 108
values | source
stringclasses 157
values | bias
class label 3
classes | url
stringlengths 34
422
| title
stringlengths 5
231
| date
stringlengths 0
10
| authors
stringlengths 0
184
| content
stringlengths 309
53.3k
| content_original
stringlengths 1.71k
76.6k
| source_url
stringclasses 54
values | bias_text
class label 3
classes | ID
stringlengths 16
16
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
politics
|
Politico
| 00
|
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2019/11/13/trump-impeachment-hearing-change-mind-congress-070145
|
Can the Impeachment Hearings Actually Change Anyone’s Mind?
|
2019-11-13
|
This happens for different reasons , but a key element is the vicious cycle between holding strong attitudes on an issue and something called “ selective perception. ” Essentially , the stronger your views are on an issue like Trump ’ s impeachment , the more likely you are to attend more carefully to information that supports your views and to ignore or disregard information that contradicts them . Consuming more belief-consistent information will , in turn , increase your original support or disapproval for impeachment , which just fortifies your attitudes . So , no , not much change will be seen in the minds of the 33 percent .
Except , maybe . One of the more interesting findings from research on attitude change is that our more important , self-defining attitudes do not seem to change incrementally , a little at a time , but they can change dramatically , from one extreme to another . Typically , when others try to change our views on important issues that we hold firmly , their attempts to persuade us with facts and figures end up bolstering our original attitudes or pushing us out to even further extremes . But strong attitudes can experience what psychologists call “ threshold-effect changes. ” Over time , when we are exposed to information contradicting our attitudes , that information—even if we ignore , discount or deny it—can seep into our thinking and accumulate to a point where , across some threshold , people radically change their views to the opposite side of the spectrum . In other words , nothing much changes until everything changes .
These jumps from one extreme attitude to another on self-defining issues are not uncommon , and have been seen with former skinheads turned tolerance trainers , peace activists turned violent militants , and religious zealots turned atheists . This type of drastic transformation is , of course , hard to predict , and it can be triggered by seemingly insignificant events ( the tipping point for one skinhead was when his black co-worker tossed him half of his submarine sandwich when he had no lunch ) . But it typically occurs after repeated exposure to information contradicting their attitudes .
So , yes , it is possible that if some of the testimonies in the hearings are experienced by true believers ( at either extreme ) as counter to their beliefs but also persuasive , this information can plant seeds of a different point of view , that might , someday , lead to a big change . Still , this is unlikely to happen very soon .
Minds , however , can change among the vast majority of people who don ’ t hold extreme views . A recent study by the nonpartisan group More in Common found that about 67 percent of moderate Americans on both sides of the political divide—a group the authors of the study call “ the exhausted majority ” —are fed up with our current dysfunction , despise the contemptuous state of polarization we are in , and are eager to find ways to talk , compromise and work together again . These folks , particularly the 26 percent of moderates who are politically disengaged and thus are much less identified with either tribe , can be swayed . Of course , this assumes that they are not so burned out by the vitriol of our politics that they are unwilling to devote some attention to information coming out of the hearings .
Research suggests a few basic strategies for changing minds that are , well , changeable . First , immediately establishing the credibility of the witnesses—to both progressives and conservatives —is paramount . For example , the introductions of the witnesses should emphasize their merits for both the left and the right to see . Second , logic and evidence can matter when they are clearly laid out , compelling and derived from trusted sources . Third , moving testimony by witnesses about the profound moral dilemmas they faced in coming forward , and any specific threats they experienced to their and their family ’ s physical safety , can help to humanize otherwise dry , technical testimony and move the listener . And finally , because most viewers tend to lean either red or blue ( even though they are “ exhausted ” ) and so will view the proceedings to some degree through their team ’ s lens , it is critical for the lawmakers to choose to emphasize just a few takeaway points , and then to stress the urgency and importance of the viewers ’ attention to them . This can serve to move viewers from their more automatic , heuristic modes of cognitive processing to more intentional , systematic modes , where they will be more likely to take in new information and learn .
But here is a caution for our leaders in Congress on both sides . Clearly , by many accounts , America is more polarized , anxious and exhausted by our political climate today than ever before . No , this is not all Congress ’ doing , but many in Washington are playing their part . The resulting rise in the toxicity of our culture is such that today 86 percent of Americans are seriously concerned that our divisions will soon lead to violence .
So , as our Republican and Democratic members of Congress prepare for the public hearings—ready themselves to make their case and score points and change minds—they should understand what is at stake . A narrow focus on short wins today can bring devastating outcomes tomorrow . Of course , members of Congress have a job to do to reveal the truth and share the facts with the American public . But our social fabric is stretched to the limit , and the future of our society , in the form of our basic capacities for compassion , connection and shared humanity across our divide , is on the line . The impeachment hearings ’ primary audience—the 67 percent ( not base voters ) —is persuadable through credibility , logic and evidence . This is a chance for lawmakers to plant seeds for changing minds in the future . So , please , for our nation ’ s sake , rise to your best selves .
As someone who knew something about divisions once wrote , “ We are not enemies , but friends . We must not be enemies . Though passion may have strained , it must not break our bonds of affection . The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched , as surely they will be , by the better angels of our nature. ” Come Wednesday , lawmakers will need to find a way to make their public case effectively , while not inflaming our already heightened sense of contempt and enmity for the other side . In the long run , this is all that will matter .
|
This happens for different reasons, but a key element is the vicious cycle between holding strong attitudes on an issue and something called “selective perception.” Essentially, the stronger your views are on an issue like Trump’s impeachment, the more likely you are to attend more carefully to information that supports your views and to ignore or disregard information that contradicts them. Consuming more belief-consistent information will, in turn, increase your original support or disapproval for impeachment, which just fortifies your attitudes. So, no, not much change will be seen in the minds of the 33 percent.
Except, maybe. One of the more interesting findings from research on attitude change is that our more important, self-defining attitudes do not seem to change incrementally, a little at a time, but they can change dramatically, from one extreme to another. Typically, when others try to change our views on important issues that we hold firmly, their attempts to persuade us with facts and figures end up bolstering our original attitudes or pushing us out to even further extremes. But strong attitudes can experience what psychologists call “threshold-effect changes.” Over time, when we are exposed to information contradicting our attitudes, that information—even if we ignore, discount or deny it—can seep into our thinking and accumulate to a point where, across some threshold, people radically change their views to the opposite side of the spectrum. In other words, nothing much changes until everything changes.
These jumps from one extreme attitude to another on self-defining issues are not uncommon, and have been seen with former skinheads turned tolerance trainers, peace activists turned violent militants, and religious zealots turned atheists. This type of drastic transformation is, of course, hard to predict, and it can be triggered by seemingly insignificant events (the tipping point for one skinhead was when his black co-worker tossed him half of his submarine sandwich when he had no lunch). But it typically occurs after repeated exposure to information contradicting their attitudes.
So, yes, it is possible that if some of the testimonies in the hearings are experienced by true believers (at either extreme) as counter to their beliefs but also persuasive, this information can plant seeds of a different point of view, that might, someday, lead to a big change. Still, this is unlikely to happen very soon.
Minds, however, can change among the vast majority of people who don’t hold extreme views. A recent study by the nonpartisan group More in Common found that about 67 percent of moderate Americans on both sides of the political divide—a group the authors of the study call “the exhausted majority”—are fed up with our current dysfunction, despise the contemptuous state of polarization we are in, and are eager to find ways to talk, compromise and work together again. These folks, particularly the 26 percent of moderates who are politically disengaged and thus are much less identified with either tribe, can be swayed. Of course, this assumes that they are not so burned out by the vitriol of our politics that they are unwilling to devote some attention to information coming out of the hearings.
Research suggests a few basic strategies for changing minds that are, well, changeable. First, immediately establishing the credibility of the witnesses—to both progressives and conservatives —is paramount. For example, the introductions of the witnesses should emphasize their merits for both the left and the right to see. Second, logic and evidence can matter when they are clearly laid out, compelling and derived from trusted sources. Third, moving testimony by witnesses about the profound moral dilemmas they faced in coming forward, and any specific threats they experienced to their and their family’s physical safety, can help to humanize otherwise dry, technical testimony and move the listener. And finally, because most viewers tend to lean either red or blue (even though they are “exhausted”) and so will view the proceedings to some degree through their team’s lens, it is critical for the lawmakers to choose to emphasize just a few takeaway points, and then to stress the urgency and importance of the viewers’ attention to them. This can serve to move viewers from their more automatic, heuristic modes of cognitive processing to more intentional, systematic modes, where they will be more likely to take in new information and learn.
But here is a caution for our leaders in Congress on both sides. Clearly, by many accounts, America is more polarized, anxious and exhausted by our political climate today than ever before. No, this is not all Congress’ doing, but many in Washington are playing their part. The resulting rise in the toxicity of our culture is such that today 86 percent of Americans are seriously concerned that our divisions will soon lead to violence.
So, as our Republican and Democratic members of Congress prepare for the public hearings—ready themselves to make their case and score points and change minds—they should understand what is at stake. A narrow focus on short wins today can bring devastating outcomes tomorrow. Of course, members of Congress have a job to do to reveal the truth and share the facts with the American public. But our social fabric is stretched to the limit, and the future of our society, in the form of our basic capacities for compassion, connection and shared humanity across our divide, is on the line. The impeachment hearings’ primary audience—the 67 percent ( not base voters)—is persuadable through credibility, logic and evidence. This is a chance for lawmakers to plant seeds for changing minds in the future. So, please, for our nation’s sake, rise to your best selves.
As someone who knew something about divisions once wrote, “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.” Come Wednesday, lawmakers will need to find a way to make their public case effectively, while not inflaming our already heightened sense of contempt and enmity for the other side. In the long run, this is all that will matter.
|
www.politico.com
| 0left
|
bpp2Cqpvyi2ER5Lr
|
|
terrorism
|
Washington Times
| 22
|
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/16/top-general-foley-rescue-highest-risk-mission-ever/
|
Top general: Failed Foley rescue was ‘highest-risk mission’ ever
|
2014-09-16
|
Stephen Dinan
|
The Pentagon ’ s top general said Tuesday that the failed special forces mission to rescue James Foley and other hostages being kept by Islamic State militants was the toughest he ’ s ever seen .
Gen. Martin E. Dempsey , chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , didn ’ t go into details , but said the effort expended should answer some of the criticisms raised that the U.S. government didn ’ t do enough to try to get hostages released .
“ That was the most complex , highest-risk mission we ’ ve ever taken , ” the Army general said .
Foley , a reporter captured in 2012 , was beheaded by an Islamic State terrorist in a brutal execution the militants filmed and released on the Internet on Aug. 19 .
Foley ’ s parents have complained that the U.S. government didn ’ t communicate with them about steps that were being taken to try to free him , and said they were told they could be prosecuted if they tried to pay a ransom .
While Gen. Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel wouldn ’ t go into details of the rescue mission , they said it showed they were trying to do something .
“ We have some limitations in our ability to collect intelligence inside Syria , but when we had the opportunity to do so , we tried to get ‘ em , ” Gen. Dempsey said .
Mr. Hagel said that while there are boundaries to what the U.S. can do , including a strict policy that the country does not pay ransoms , officials could do a better job of “ dealing with families and the human part of this . ”
During the mission , which reportedly took place earlier in the summer , special operations forces slipped into Syria but were unable to locate Foley or other hostages , who had apparently been moved in the time since the last intelligence the U.S. had .
Some military officials have reportedly second-guessed President Obama ’ s decision-making , with one report saying that his hesitation to give the go-ahead reduced the chances for success .
The White House , though , said Mr. Obama gave the go-ahead as soon as they believed the mission could be carried out successfully .
Islamic State militants have also killed American journalist Steven Sotloff and British aid worker David Haines . But another American reporter , Peter Theo Curtis , was released late last month , apparently by the Nusra Front , an al Qaeda-linked group .
|
The Pentagon’s top general said Tuesday that the failed special forces mission to rescue James Foley and other hostages being kept by Islamic State militants was the toughest he’s ever seen.
Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, didn’t go into details, but said the effort expended should answer some of the criticisms raised that the U.S. government didn’t do enough to try to get hostages released.
“That was the most complex, highest-risk mission we’ve ever taken,” the Army general said.
Foley, a reporter captured in 2012, was beheaded by an Islamic State terrorist in a brutal execution the militants filmed and released on the Internet on Aug. 19.
Foley’s parents have complained that the U.S. government didn’t communicate with them about steps that were being taken to try to free him, and said they were told they could be prosecuted if they tried to pay a ransom.
While Gen. Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel wouldn’t go into details of the rescue mission, they said it showed they were trying to do something.
“We have some limitations in our ability to collect intelligence inside Syria, but when we had the opportunity to do so, we tried to get ‘em,” Gen. Dempsey said.
Mr. Hagel said that while there are boundaries to what the U.S. can do, including a strict policy that the country does not pay ransoms, officials could do a better job of “dealing with families and the human part of this.”
During the mission, which reportedly took place earlier in the summer, special operations forces slipped into Syria but were unable to locate Foley or other hostages, who had apparently been moved in the time since the last intelligence the U.S. had.
Some military officials have reportedly second-guessed President Obama’s decision-making, with one report saying that his hesitation to give the go-ahead reduced the chances for success.
The White House, though, said Mr. Obama gave the go-ahead as soon as they believed the mission could be carried out successfully.
Islamic State militants have also killed American journalist Steven Sotloff and British aid worker David Haines. But another American reporter, Peter Theo Curtis, was released late last month, apparently by the Nusra Front, an al Qaeda-linked group.
Sign up for Daily Newsletters
Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
|
www.washingtontimes.com
| 1right
|
pZlutCuZNm832qqK
|
politics
|
CNN (Web News)
| 00
|
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/08/politics/christie-bridge/index.html
|
E-mails among Christie appointees suggest political vendetta
|
2014-01-08
|
Catherine E. Shoichet
|
Story highlights Gergen : `` It feeds into this narrative that he 's a bully ''
King : `` If that perception starts to stick in , that 's not a presidential temperament ''
Top aides to Gov . Chris Christie communicate about lane closures to George Washington Bridge
Christie says he knew nothing about what transpired ; mayor says e-mails raise credibility questions
This is n't the first time critics have called New Jersey Gov . Chris Christie a bully . But now the man many consider a Republican presidential frontrunner is on the defensive , scrambling to distance himself from an erupting political scandal that threatens to tarnish his image well before the 2016 elections .
E-mails that surfaced Wednesday suggest top Christie appointees orchestrated traffic jams on the George Washington Bridge as part of a political vendetta to punish a local mayor who would n't support him at the polls . Lane closures around approaches to the country 's busiest bridge snarled traffic for days in September in Fort Lee , New Jersey -- a problem the governor and his administration had originally blamed on a mishandled traffic study .
In response to the e-mail firestorm , Christie said Wednesday that he was misled by staff . He called the conduct outrageous and said he knew nothing about it .
`` This behavior is not representative of me or my administration in any way , '' he said , `` and people will be held responsible for their actions . ''
Even if he had nothing to do with the traffic snarls , the allegations could have serious consequences for Christie , analysts said .
JUST WATCHED Did Christie know about traffic scandal ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Did Christie know about traffic scandal ? 06:12
JUST WATCHED Bridge closing more than a 'civil case ' Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Bridge closing more than a 'civil case ' 02:25
JUST WATCHED Ft. Lee mayor : Shame on you Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ft. Lee mayor : Shame on you 02:36
`` There 's something about this that 's so petty and so vindictive and it feeds into this narrative that he 's a bully . ... He 's going to have to find some way to defuse this to prove he does n't run a shop like that , '' said CNN Senior Political Analyst David Gergen , a former adviser to several U.S. presidents .
It 's a defining moment for Christie , CNN Chief National Correspondent John King said . And how he deals with the situation in the next two days -- from whether he fires anyone to what he says -- will be key .
`` If he handles it decisively and then he sits down and calmly answers questions and does n't berate the reporters who ask them , then he has a chance to be a leader who dealt with a crisis and he moves on , '' King said . `` But if that perception starts to stick in , that 's not a presidential temperament . And that 's bad for him nationally in his perspective . It 's bad for him as he starts his new term in New Jersey . And it 's bad for him with the audience he needs to care about most politically long-term at the moment , and that 's the Republican base that he wants to make him their nominee . ''
`` Not necessarily , '' Oxford University historian Timothy Stanley wrote in an opinion piece for CNN.com . `` He 's a resourceful politician and it 's still many months before campaigning starts in earnest . But now his opponents have a stick to beat him with . Best of all , it 's an anti-government stick . If Republicans stand for anything right now , it 's opposing the ability of government to mess with the individual 's life -- and here we have a classic example of politicians taking revenge on each other at the expense of the average citizen . ''
Political commentators from both sides of the aisle immediately recognized the potential for credibility questions , particularly around Christie 's explanations in recent months about the traffic jams in Fort Lee and previous comments rejecting suggestions of political mischief .
`` He 's already cemented a narrative as something of a bully , '' said S.E . Cupp , a Republican political strategist and CNN `` Crossfire '' host . `` If this was happening in his administration , I do n't think it would shocking . ''
But , she said , if it `` turns out he 's lying about what he knew or whether he ordered it -- that 's going to be the worst , the most damaging . Because his authenticity is his calling card . ''
It 's important to ask how much Christie knew , Gergen said , but the reality might be more complicated .
`` Sometimes the boss does not order something , '' Gergen said , describing the Nixon White House during the Watergate scandal . `` I do n't know whether Nixon ordered Watergate , but I can guarantee you that people who carried out Watergate thought that 's what he would have wanted . There 's an environment in which you find yourself sometimes on staff when things do n't have to be said . You sort of know . ''
The correspondence , subpoenaed by Democrats investigating the matter and spiced with tough Jersey political talk and expletives , is the most damaging evidence so far supporting their assertions the move was orchestrated because Fort Lee 's mayor , a Democrat , did n't endorse Christie 's re-election .
Mayor Mark Sokolich said the traffic mess created serious hardships for commuters and other residents , and impacted public safety in his community .
The exchanges began three weeks before access lanes to the bridge were closed , causing heavy traffic backups between September 9 and 13 , two months before Election Day .
`` Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee , '' Bridget Anne Kelly , Christie 's deputy chief of staff for legislative and intergovernmental affairs , said in an e-mail to David Wildstein , then the highest-level appointee representing the state at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey , which operates the bridge connecting the two states .
In another message about school buses with students onboard caught in the traffic jams , Wildstein writes , `` they are the children of Buono voters , '' apparently referring to Barbara Buono , Christie 's Democratic opponent in last November 's gubernatorial election .
Those cited in the series of e-mails and text messages did not respond to requests for comment or to verify the communications .
Wildstein , who has left his job , is expected to appear at a legislative hearing on Thursday .
Democratic New Jersey Assembly Deputy Speaker John Wisniewski said the e-mails call into question the integrity of the governor 's office .
Christie , he said , `` has a lot of explaining to do . ''
`` I do not believe the governor called the Port Authority and said , 'Close some lanes . ' But I did say I hold him responsible for the atmosphere . Now finding that that atmosphere existed in his own office is what I find really troubling , '' Wisniewski said .
JUST WATCHED E-mails tie Christie aides to gridlock Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH E-mails tie Christie aides to gridlock 05:59
JUST WATCHED Democrat : It 's a sad day for New Jersey Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Democrat : It 's a sad day for New Jersey 01:39
JUST WATCHED What did Christie know about closed lanes ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH What did Christie know about closed lanes ? 03:02
Christie 's name did not appear in the e-mails , he added .
Sokolich told CNN 's `` The Situation Room '' the e-mails suggested that political motives behind the lane closures have led him to believe that Christie is more clued-in than he 's admitted .
`` I 'm rooting that the highest elected official in the state of New Jersey is n't involved . But I 'm beginning to question my judgment , '' Sokolich said .
The mayor raised the issue of public safety being compromised . A letter by his emergency services coordinator , Paul Favia , on September 10 obtained by CNN cited `` new traffic patterns '' around the bridge 's toll plaza that were backing up traffic in Fort Lee .
`` This new traffic pattern is causing unnecessary delays for emergency services to arrive on scene for medical emergencies , '' Favia said , citing one case in which paramedics rushing to aid an unconscious elderly woman suffering a heart attack were held up and had to meet the ambulance transporting the victim at the hospital instead of at the scene . She later died .
Details surrounding the woman 's death have n't been released . But the situation could deepen Christie 's political woes , Gergen said .
`` If a woman died here , '' Gergen said , `` he 's in deep , deep trouble . ''
Christie is now campaigning for fellow GOP governors as chairman of the Republican Governors Association and is seen as prime political target for national Democrats .
They rarely attacked him during his re-election campaign but are now becoming more aggressive with the bridge controversy unfolding .
`` These revelations are troubling for any public official , but they also indicate what we 've come to expect from Governor Christie - when people oppose him , he exacts retribution . When people question him , he belittles and snidely jokes . And when anyone dares to look into his administration , he bullies and attacks , '' said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz , the Democratic National Committee chair , in a statement .
A source close to Christie said `` there will probably be some sacrificial firing and that 'll be it . ''
|
Story highlights Gergen: "It feeds into this narrative that he's a bully"
King: "If that perception starts to stick in, that's not a presidential temperament"
Top aides to Gov. Chris Christie communicate about lane closures to George Washington Bridge
Christie says he knew nothing about what transpired; mayor says e-mails raise credibility questions
This isn't the first time critics have called New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie a bully. But now the man many consider a Republican presidential frontrunner is on the defensive, scrambling to distance himself from an erupting political scandal that threatens to tarnish his image well before the 2016 elections.
E-mails that surfaced Wednesday suggest top Christie appointees orchestrated traffic jams on the George Washington Bridge as part of a political vendetta to punish a local mayor who wouldn't support him at the polls. Lane closures around approaches to the country's busiest bridge snarled traffic for days in September in Fort Lee, New Jersey -- a problem the governor and his administration had originally blamed on a mishandled traffic study.
In response to the e-mail firestorm, Christie said Wednesday that he was misled by staff. He called the conduct outrageous and said he knew nothing about it.
"This behavior is not representative of me or my administration in any way," he said, "and people will be held responsible for their actions."
Even if he had nothing to do with the traffic snarls, the allegations could have serious consequences for Christie, analysts said.
JUST WATCHED Did Christie know about traffic scandal? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Did Christie know about traffic scandal? 06:12
JUST WATCHED Bridge closing more than a 'civil case' Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Bridge closing more than a 'civil case' 02:25
JUST WATCHED Ft. Lee mayor: Shame on you Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ft. Lee mayor: Shame on you 02:36
"There's something about this that's so petty and so vindictive and it feeds into this narrative that he's a bully. ... He's going to have to find some way to defuse this to prove he doesn't run a shop like that," said CNN Senior Political Analyst David Gergen, a former adviser to several U.S. presidents.
It's a defining moment for Christie, CNN Chief National Correspondent John King said. And how he deals with the situation in the next two days -- from whether he fires anyone to what he says -- will be key.
"If he handles it decisively and then he sits down and calmly answers questions and doesn't berate the reporters who ask them, then he has a chance to be a leader who dealt with a crisis and he moves on," King said. "But if that perception starts to stick in, that's not a presidential temperament. And that's bad for him nationally in his perspective. It's bad for him as he starts his new term in New Jersey. And it's bad for him with the audience he needs to care about most politically long-term at the moment, and that's the Republican base that he wants to make him their nominee."
Does this mean Christie's presidential ambitions are dashed?
"Not necessarily," Oxford University historian Timothy Stanley wrote in an opinion piece for CNN.com . "He's a resourceful politician and it's still many months before campaigning starts in earnest. But now his opponents have a stick to beat him with. Best of all, it's an anti-government stick. If Republicans stand for anything right now, it's opposing the ability of government to mess with the individual's life -- and here we have a classic example of politicians taking revenge on each other at the expense of the average citizen."
Political commentators from both sides of the aisle immediately recognized the potential for credibility questions, particularly around Christie's explanations in recent months about the traffic jams in Fort Lee and previous comments rejecting suggestions of political mischief.
"He's already cemented a narrative as something of a bully," said S.E. Cupp, a Republican political strategist and CNN "Crossfire" host. "If this was happening in his administration, I don't think it would shocking."
But, she said, if it "turns out he's lying about what he knew or whether he ordered it -- that's going to be the worst, the most damaging. Because his authenticity is his calling card."
It's important to ask how much Christie knew, Gergen said, but the reality might be more complicated.
"Sometimes the boss does not order something," Gergen said, describing the Nixon White House during the Watergate scandal. "I don't know whether Nixon ordered Watergate, but I can guarantee you that people who carried out Watergate thought that's what he would have wanted. There's an environment in which you find yourself sometimes on staff when things don't have to be said. You sort of know."
'Time for some traffic problems'
The correspondence, subpoenaed by Democrats investigating the matter and spiced with tough Jersey political talk and expletives, is the most damaging evidence so far supporting their assertions the move was orchestrated because Fort Lee's mayor, a Democrat, didn't endorse Christie's re-election.
Mayor Mark Sokolich said the traffic mess created serious hardships for commuters and other residents, and impacted public safety in his community.
The exchanges began three weeks before access lanes to the bridge were closed, causing heavy traffic backups between September 9 and 13, two months before Election Day.
"Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee," Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie's deputy chief of staff for legislative and intergovernmental affairs, said in an e-mail to David Wildstein, then the highest-level appointee representing the state at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates the bridge connecting the two states.
"Got it," Wildstein replied.
In another message about school buses with students onboard caught in the traffic jams, Wildstein writes, "they are the children of Buono voters," apparently referring to Barbara Buono, Christie's Democratic opponent in last November's gubernatorial election.
Those cited in the series of e-mails and text messages did not respond to requests for comment or to verify the communications.
Wildstein, who has left his job, is expected to appear at a legislative hearing on Thursday.
Democratic New Jersey Assembly Deputy Speaker John Wisniewski said the e-mails call into question the integrity of the governor's office.
Christie, he said, "has a lot of explaining to do."
"I do not believe the governor called the Port Authority and said, 'Close some lanes.' But I did say I hold him responsible for the atmosphere. Now finding that that atmosphere existed in his own office is what I find really troubling," Wisniewski said.
JUST WATCHED E-mails tie Christie aides to gridlock Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH E-mails tie Christie aides to gridlock 05:59
JUST WATCHED Democrat: It's a sad day for New Jersey Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Democrat: It's a sad day for New Jersey 01:39
JUST WATCHED What did Christie know about closed lanes? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH What did Christie know about closed lanes? 03:02
Christie's name did not appear in the e-mails, he added.
Emergency services disrupted
Sokolich told CNN's "The Situation Room" the e-mails suggested that political motives behind the lane closures have led him to believe that Christie is more clued-in than he's admitted.
"I'm rooting that the highest elected official in the state of New Jersey isn't involved. But I'm beginning to question my judgment," Sokolich said.
The mayor raised the issue of public safety being compromised. A letter by his emergency services coordinator, Paul Favia, on September 10 obtained by CNN cited "new traffic patterns" around the bridge's toll plaza that were backing up traffic in Fort Lee.
"This new traffic pattern is causing unnecessary delays for emergency services to arrive on scene for medical emergencies," Favia said, citing one case in which paramedics rushing to aid an unconscious elderly woman suffering a heart attack were held up and had to meet the ambulance transporting the victim at the hospital instead of at the scene. She later died.
Details surrounding the woman's death haven't been released. But the situation could deepen Christie's political woes, Gergen said.
"If a woman died here," Gergen said, "he's in deep, deep trouble."
Democrats swarm
Christie is now campaigning for fellow GOP governors as chairman of the Republican Governors Association and is seen as prime political target for national Democrats.
They rarely attacked him during his re-election campaign but are now becoming more aggressive with the bridge controversy unfolding.
"These revelations are troubling for any public official, but they also indicate what we've come to expect from Governor Christie - when people oppose him, he exacts retribution. When people question him, he belittles and snidely jokes. And when anyone dares to look into his administration, he bullies and attacks," said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Democratic National Committee chair, in a statement.
A source close to Christie said "there will probably be some sacrificial firing and that'll be it."
|
www.cnn.com
| 0left
|
Ludq48gCzDiKtnmX
|
nsa
|
CNN (Web News)
| 00
|
http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/24/world/europe/russia-snowden/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
|
Edward Snowden won't be pressured to end asylum, Russia says
|
2014-01-24
|
Elise Labott, Mariano Castillo
|
Story highlights A Russian lawmaker says Russia will not push Snowden out
Snowden wants to return home , but he wants protection from prosecution
Edward Snowden may stay in Russia longer than first thought .
Snowden has said the time is n't right for him to return to the United States , where he could face criminal charges for leaking classified information . Russia gave him asylum for a year .
Now Russia says it will continue to extend asylum protections to Snowden and wo n't send him back home .
That word came Friday from Alexy Pushkov , a legislator who is head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Duma , Russia 's lower house . He spoke about Snowden at the World Economic Forum in Davos , Switzerland .
Russia 's position basically buys Snowden more time as he mulls his next move .
JUST WATCHED Edward Snowden responds to CNN Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Edward Snowden responds to CNN 01:45
JUST WATCHED A DOJ deal for Edward Snowden ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH A DOJ deal for Edward Snowden ? 04:56
JUST WATCHED Atty Gen. Holder discusses Snowden case Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Atty Gen. Holder discusses Snowden case 01:36
Snowden has said he wants to return home but also wants whistle-blower protection . The U.S. government , meanwhile , says it will not offer clemency .
In an online chat Thursday , Snowden said that returning to the U.S. `` is the best resolution for all parties , '' but `` it 's unfortunately not possible in the face of current whistle-blower protection laws . ''
He pointed out that the U.S. government 's Whistleblower Protection Act does n't cover someone like him , a former government contractor .
`` There are so many holes in the laws , the protections they afford are so weak , and the processes for reporting they provide are so ineffective that they appear to be intended to discourage reporting of even the clearest wrongdoing , '' he wrote . `` ... My case clearly demonstrates the need for comprehensive whistle-blower protection act reform . ''
Snowden offered his remarks from Russia , where he 's been since June , having been granted a one-year asylum . Pushkov 's remarks appear to open the door to an extension of that asylum .
The U.S. government has n't stayed silent on his case , either .
On Thursday , around the time that Snowden was answering questions online , Attorney General Eric Holder said that `` if Mr. Snowden wanted to come back to the United States and enter a plea , we would engage with his lawyers . ''
The government would take the same tack with anyone willing to plead guilty , Holder said at an event at the University of Virginia 's Miller Center .
But in Snowden 's case , the attorney general insisted , `` Clemency is n't something that we ( are ) willing to consider . ''
|
Story highlights A Russian lawmaker says Russia will not push Snowden out
Snowden wants to return home, but he wants protection from prosecution
The U.S. government says clemency is not an option
Edward Snowden may stay in Russia longer than first thought.
Snowden has said the time isn't right for him to return to the United States, where he could face criminal charges for leaking classified information. Russia gave him asylum for a year.
Now Russia says it will continue to extend asylum protections to Snowden and won't send him back home.
That word came Friday from Alexy Pushkov, a legislator who is head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Duma, Russia's lower house. He spoke about Snowden at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Russia's position basically buys Snowden more time as he mulls his next move.
JUST WATCHED Edward Snowden responds to CNN Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Edward Snowden responds to CNN 01:45
JUST WATCHED A DOJ deal for Edward Snowden? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH A DOJ deal for Edward Snowden? 04:56
JUST WATCHED Atty Gen. Holder discusses Snowden case Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Atty Gen. Holder discusses Snowden case 01:36
Snowden has said he wants to return home but also wants whistle-blower protection. The U.S. government, meanwhile, says it will not offer clemency.
In an online chat Thursday, Snowden said that returning to the U.S. "is the best resolution for all parties," but "it's unfortunately not possible in the face of current whistle-blower protection laws."
He pointed out that the U.S. government's Whistleblower Protection Act doesn't cover someone like him, a former government contractor.
"There are so many holes in the laws, the protections they afford are so weak, and the processes for reporting they provide are so ineffective that they appear to be intended to discourage reporting of even the clearest wrongdoing," he wrote. "... My case clearly demonstrates the need for comprehensive whistle-blower protection act reform."
Snowden offered his remarks from Russia, where he's been since June, having been granted a one-year asylum. Pushkov's remarks appear to open the door to an extension of that asylum.
The U.S. government hasn't stayed silent on his case, either.
On Thursday, around the time that Snowden was answering questions online, Attorney General Eric Holder said that "if Mr. Snowden wanted to come back to the United States and enter a plea, we would engage with his lawyers."
The government would take the same tack with anyone willing to plead guilty, Holder said at an event at the University of Virginia's Miller Center.
But in Snowden's case, the attorney general insisted, "Clemency isn't something that we (are) willing to consider."
|
www.cnn.com
| 0left
|
VCAqVCCkTWioWWLE
|
capital_punishment_and_death_penalty
|
Fox Online News
| 22
|
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/09/18/iran-happy-dancers-sentenced-to-1-lashes-jail/
|
Iran's 'Happy' dancers sentenced to 91 lashes, jail
|
2014-09-18
|
Lisa Daftari
|
Iran 's latest crackdown on freedom includes lashes and prison for seven young adults who posted a video of themselves dancing to the American pop hit `` Happy '' and a death sentence for a blogger accused of insulting Prophet Muhammad .
The seven men and women were arrested in May , but then released after self-professed `` moderate '' President Hassan Rouhani tweeted that the regime should lighten up . But the group was forced nonetheless to apologize on television and endure a trial in which they were convicted and each sentenced to 91 lashes . One was given a full year in prison while the others got six months , although their attorney told Iranwire.com the sentences were suspended .
“ A suspended sentence becomes null and void after a certain period of time , ” attorney Farshid Rofugaran said . For the Happy Group , that period will be three years . “ When it ’ s a suspended sentence , the verdict is not carried out , but if during this period a similar offense is committed , then the accused is subject to legal punishment and the suspended sentence will then be carried out as well . ”
The video was part of a global campaign launched by pop star Pharrell Williams and was viewed by more than 100,000 people on YouTube . The six who appeared on the video and a man who shot the footage apologized and said they had been tricked into doing it . After the confession , they were released on bail .
“ We can accept the verdict or appeal , ” said Rofugaran , adding that his clients are not banned from leaving the country .
Meanwhile , the ultimate penalty was handed down to Soheil Arabi , a blogger found guilty of insulting the Prophet Muhammad in his postings on Facebook . The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran reported that Arabi will be able to appeal the decision .
Revolutionary Guard agents arrested Arabi , 30 , and his wife last November . Arabi 's wife was released a few hours later , but Arabi was kept in solitary confinement for two months inside the notorious Evin Prison before being found guilty of “ sabb al-nabi ” ( insulting the Prophet ) , on Aug. 30 .
“ Soheil had eight Facebook pages under different names , and he was charged with insulting the Imams and the Prophet because of the contents of those pages . He has accepted his charges , but throughout the trial , he stated that he wrote the material without thinking and in poor psychological condition , ” a source told the Campaign .
|
Iran's latest crackdown on freedom includes lashes and prison for seven young adults who posted a video of themselves dancing to the American pop hit "Happy" and a death sentence for a blogger accused of insulting Prophet Muhammad.
The seven men and women were arrested in May, but then released after self-professed "moderate" President Hassan Rouhani tweeted that the regime should lighten up. But the group was forced nonetheless to apologize on television and endure a trial in which they were convicted and each sentenced to 91 lashes. One was given a full year in prison while the others got six months, although their attorney told Iranwire.com the sentences were suspended.
“A suspended sentence becomes null and void after a certain period of time,” attorney Farshid Rofugaran said. For the Happy Group, that period will be three years. “When it’s a suspended sentence, the verdict is not carried out, but if during this period a similar offense is committed, then the accused is subject to legal punishment and the suspended sentence will then be carried out as well.”
The video was part of a global campaign launched by pop star Pharrell Williams and was viewed by more than 100,000 people on YouTube. The six who appeared on the video and a man who shot the footage apologized and said they had been tricked into doing it. After the confession, they were released on bail.
“We can accept the verdict or appeal,” said Rofugaran, adding that his clients are not banned from leaving the country.
Meanwhile, the ultimate penalty was handed down to Soheil Arabi, a blogger found guilty of insulting the Prophet Muhammad in his postings on Facebook. The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran reported that Arabi will be able to appeal the decision.
Revolutionary Guard agents arrested Arabi, 30, and his wife last November. Arabi's wife was released a few hours later, but Arabi was kept in solitary confinement for two months inside the notorious Evin Prison before being found guilty of “sabb al-nabi” (insulting the Prophet), on Aug. 30.
“Soheil had eight Facebook pages under different names, and he was charged with insulting the Imams and the Prophet because of the contents of those pages. He has accepted his charges, but throughout the trial, he stated that he wrote the material without thinking and in poor psychological condition,” a source told the Campaign.
|
www.foxnews.com
| 1right
|
7QcjilFOQGEhuaEP
|
elections
|
Townhall
| 22
|
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/09/06/dnc_wednesday_fluke_warren_clinton
|
DNC Wednesday: Clinton's Endless Obama Endorsement
|
2012-09-06
|
Guy Benson, Katie Pavlich, "Cortney OBrien", Timothy Meads
|
CHARLOTTE , NC - Round two of the 2012 DNC is finally complete , following an interminable stemwinder from former President Bill Clinton . A few thoughts on the evening : Prior to the 10pm ET hour , the convention lineup was wholly unremarkable . Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer both spoke for the second time this week . Why ? These speeches lasted nearly six-and-a-half hours in total . Were retreads necessary ? In any case , we heard from more abortion proponents , several union bosses , and a long list of unremarkable politicians . It was tedious in the extreme , especially the mindless Bain demagoguery . On to my `` prime '' prime-time grades :
Sandra Fluke : D. The thirtysomething recent law grad gave a surly and self-pitying speech about birth control and abortion . This is a young woman whose claim to fame is demanding that the Catholic school she chose to attend be coerced by the federal government to cast aside their beliefs and pay for her `` free '' birth control . She cast herself as a courageous victim , repeatedly knocking Mitt Romney for refusing to stand up for her after Rush Limbaugh called her a name . Absolutely pitiful . Her demagoguery about women `` dying '' under the Romney/Ryan plan was unseemly , crass , and befitting her pathetic 15 minutes of fame . Sandra Fluke may be a hero to some liberals , but I ca n't imagine she has even an ounce of appeal to most average people . Democratic commentator Kirsten Powers was decidedly unimpressed with Fluke 's whole schtick .
Jim Sinegal : N/A . The former CEO of Costco 's job was to convince people that Democrats are good for business . His speech was dull and so unmemorable that I have no meaningful analysis to offer .
Elizabeth Warren : C. The Harvard Law professor led the class warfare fight tonight , as is her wont . We do everything `` together , '' the system 's `` rigged , '' etc . She called ( surprise ! ) for much higher levels of government `` investment '' in practically all imaginable sectors . As the author of the original `` you did n't build that '' riff , her message was characteristic and reprehensible . Her delivery was slightly improved and she remembered to smile -- so marks for that , I guess . Interestingly , Warren did n't mention her `` heritage . '' Weird , right ?
Bill Clinton : B+ . It was good . It should have been shorter . If it had , it would have been significantly better . The former president spoke for 48 minutes ; he was reportedly allotted 20-25 minutes . Clinton made the best case available to Obama backers , basically : Things were really bad , he inherited an impossible problem , he 's done as well as anyone possibly could have , things are starting to get better , he 's a good guy , and he needs more time . This argument rests on the hope that voters will believe that they 're better off under Obama and that his policies have not been counter-productive . Tough sledding , but Clinton 's a word wizard . He spun a compelling yarn . He took a risk , though , by ignoring his own pollsters ' advice by crossing into Obama economy happy talk a little too often . Clinton also engaged in a lot of Republican blaming , slightly leavened by a few kind words about his Republican predecessor and successor . He repeated the `` GOP obstructionism '' trope without any acknowledgement of Democrats ' massive majorities for two full years , nor any recognition that the American people elected Republicans in a landslide in 2010 explicitly to slam the brakes on the Obama agenda . After moving through the ( effective ) heart of his remarks , Clinton decided to play fact-checker-in-chief . This is where he wandered . He addressed a litany of Republican arguments and policies , erecting and destroying straw men along the way . His `` arithmetic , '' as he called it , was tendentious and incomplete . Indeed , he repeated many of the claims FactCheck.org dealt with this morning . He talked , and talked , and talked -- on the economy , on healthcare , on Medicare , on the debt , and on welfare reform ( speaking of which , read this and this ) . His mind is still sharp and his political instincts are still keen , but Clinton strayed from the script too often and overstayed his welcome . Not in this hall , of course . The partisan crowd lapped up every last word . But at home . If his address had been shaved down to 30 or even 35 minutes , it would have been dynamite . It was still quite good . The guy loves to talk , and he 's pretty fun to listen to . In the end , Bill Clinton made the most effective sales pitch for `` four more years '' we 've heard at this convention . Did people stick it out through he whole marathon , or were they watching football ? The image of the night was Obama striding on stage to hug Clinton as the pair basked in the crowd 's adulation . Obama wants voters to almost imagine Clinton as his running mate , thus appropriating the 42nd president 's record and enduring good will . Obama 's counting on Clinton 's decade-old legacy to save him from his own .
Odds and Ends : The media is eager to move past today 's floor debacle , so they 'll pump a `` back on track , thanks to a masterful Clinton performance ! '' narrative . Clinton salvaged a lackluster 10pm hour ( and session , really ) then dragged it well into the next . Clinton 's star power and strong endorsement certainly helped Obama ; the rest of the night , not so much .
|
CHARLOTTE, NC - Round two of the 2012 DNC is finally complete, following an interminable stemwinder from former President Bill Clinton. A few thoughts on the evening: Prior to the 10pm ET hour, the convention lineup was wholly unremarkable. Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer both spoke for the second time this week. Why? These speeches lasted nearly six-and-a-half hours in total. Were retreads necessary? In any case, we heard from more abortion proponents, several union bosses, and a long list of unremarkable politicians. It was tedious in the extreme, especially the mindless Bain demagoguery. On to my "prime" prime-time grades:
Sandra Fluke: D. The thirtysomething recent law grad gave a surly and self-pitying speech about birth control and abortion. This is a young woman whose claim to fame is demanding that the Catholic school she chose to attend be coerced by the federal government to cast aside their beliefs and pay for her "free" birth control. She cast herself as a courageous victim, repeatedly knocking Mitt Romney for refusing to stand up for her after Rush Limbaugh called her a name. Absolutely pitiful. Her demagoguery about women "dying" under the Romney/Ryan plan was unseemly, crass, and befitting her pathetic 15 minutes of fame. Sandra Fluke may be a hero to some liberals, but I can't imagine she has even an ounce of appeal to most average people. Democratic commentator Kirsten Powers was decidedly unimpressed with Fluke's whole schtick.
Jim Sinegal: N/A. The former CEO of Costco's job was to convince people that Democrats are good for business. His speech was dull and so unmemorable that I have no meaningful analysis to offer.
Elizabeth Warren: C. The Harvard Law professor led the class warfare fight tonight, as is her wont. We do everything "together," the system's "rigged," etc. She called (surprise!) for much higher levels of government "investment" in practically all imaginable sectors. As the author of the original "you didn't build that" riff, her message was characteristic and reprehensible. Her delivery was slightly improved and she remembered to smile -- so marks for that, I guess. Interestingly, Warren didn't mention her "heritage." Weird, right?
Bill Clinton: B+. It was good. It should have been shorter. If it had, it would have been significantly better. The former president spoke for 48 minutes; he was reportedly allotted 20-25 minutes. Clinton made the best case available to Obama backers, basically: Things were really bad, he inherited an impossible problem, he's done as well as anyone possibly could have, things are starting to get better, he's a good guy, and he needs more time. This argument rests on the hope that voters will believe that they're better off under Obama and that his policies have not been counter-productive. Tough sledding, but Clinton's a word wizard. He spun a compelling yarn. He took a risk, though, by ignoring his own pollsters' advice by crossing into Obama economy happy talk a little too often. Clinton also engaged in a lot of Republican blaming, slightly leavened by a few kind words about his Republican predecessor and successor. He repeated the "GOP obstructionism" trope without any acknowledgement of Democrats' massive majorities for two full years, nor any recognition that the American people elected Republicans in a landslide in 2010 explicitly to slam the brakes on the Obama agenda. After moving through the (effective) heart of his remarks, Clinton decided to play fact-checker-in-chief. This is where he wandered. He addressed a litany of Republican arguments and policies, erecting and destroying straw men along the way. His "arithmetic," as he called it, was tendentious and incomplete. Indeed, he repeated many of the claims FactCheck.org dealt with this morning. He talked, and talked, and talked -- on the economy, on healthcare, on Medicare, on the debt, and on welfare reform (speaking of which, read this and this). His mind is still sharp and his political instincts are still keen, but Clinton strayed from the script too often and overstayed his welcome. Not in this hall, of course. The partisan crowd lapped up every last word. But at home. If his address had been shaved down to 30 or even 35 minutes, it would have been dynamite. It was still quite good. The guy loves to talk, and he's pretty fun to listen to. In the end, Bill Clinton made the most effective sales pitch for "four more years" we've heard at this convention. Did people stick it out through he whole marathon, or were they watching football? The image of the night was Obama striding on stage to hug Clinton as the pair basked in the crowd's adulation. Obama wants voters to almost imagine Clinton as his running mate, thus appropriating the 42nd president's record and enduring good will. Obama's counting on Clinton's decade-old legacy to save him from his own.
Odds and Ends: The media is eager to move past today's floor debacle, so they'll pump a "back on track, thanks to a masterful Clinton performance!" narrative. Clinton salvaged a lackluster 10pm hour (and session, really) then dragged it well into the next. Clinton's star power and strong endorsement certainly helped Obama; the rest of the night, not so much.
|
www.townhall.com
| 1right
|
PAN7i5rlb0Z6tF1U
|
us_house
|
Politico
| 00
|
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/21/nancy-pelosi-fallout-georgia-special-election-239804
|
Pelosi faces growing doubts among Dems after Georgia loss
|
2017-06-21
|
John Bresnahan, Heather Caygle, Kyle Cheney, Scott Bland
|
House Minority Leader Nacy Pelosi remains the most successful non-presidential political fundraiser in U.S. history , raising more than $ 560 million for House Democrats since she became leader in 2003 . | Getty Congress Pelosi faces growing doubts among Dems after Georgia loss There 's a lot of grumbling by rank-and-file members , but no leadership change is imminent .
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats put a brave face on Wednesday morning after a disappointing loss in the Georgia special election , yet there is no disguising the unhappiness in the party ranks .
There is no challenge to Pelosi ’ s leadership , and none is going to happen at this point , said numerous Democrats . But it ’ s clear frustration is growing with the longtime Democratic leader following the extensive losses Democrats have suffered over the past half-decade .
And the fact that Republicans spent millions of dollars on TV ads tying Democratic hopeful Jon Ossoff to Pelosi — and the brand of progressive policies she represents — shows that she will once again be an issue for Democratic challengers in the very districts that the party needs to win to make her speaker again .
Some Democrats want to replace Pelosi atop their caucus , as they have since last November ’ s poor showing at the polls ; they say there is no way to get back in the majority with her as their leader . And others who backed her in last year ’ s leadership challenge have now flipped their stance .
“ I think you ’ d have to be an idiot to think we could win the House with Pelosi at the top , ” said Rep. Filemon Vela ( D-Texas ) , who supported Pelosi in her last leadership race . “ Nancy Pelosi is not the only reason that Ossoff lost . But she certainly is one of the reasons . ”
Rep. Kathleen Rice ( D-N.Y. ) , who backed a challenge to Pelosi last year , said the results of the Ossoff race further underscore that Pelosi should let someone else take the reins .
“ There comes a time when every leader has to say , ‘ For the good of the order and for the betterment of the party , it ’ s time for me to step aside. ’ And I wish that that would happen right now , ” Rice said in an interview . “ This is not a personal thing . I want to get back in the majority . ”
Rep. Tim Ryan ( D-Ohio ) , who challenged Pelosi for minority leader in November , wouldn ’ t comment directly whether she should step down , saying only , “ My position hasn ’ t changed . ”
“ I think it ’ s very concerning that that tactic still has some punch , ” Ryan said . “ Again , it ’ s part of the broader national brand that average people don ’ t feel connected to the Democratic Party . Walk up the street and ask 10 people what the Democrats stand for , you ’ ll get 10 different answers . That ’ s no way to build a national party . ”
Sign up here for ███ Huddle A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox . Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from ███ . You can unsubscribe at any time . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply .
Pelosi told her members in a closed-door meeting on Wednesday morning that Ossoff was “ a candidate who was young and enthusiastic , and attracted national support , ” according to Democratic sources . Pelosi also pointed out that Ossoff lost by only a small margin in the 6th Congressional District race — 3.8 percent — far smaller than the previous Democratic candidate for the seat lost by in November .
Pelosi , though , admitted : “ A loss is a loss . It is a setback . Unfortunately , a loss for us . But not good news ” for Republicans . Pelosi also cautioned her members not to overreact to the results of this specific race .
Pelosi didn ’ t talk to members about the GOP ads focusing on her . No members brought up the issue of her leadership or said she should step aside .
Pelosi pointed out that Democrats won the special-election fights during the 2009-10 cycle , only to lose 63 seats in November 2010 , while in 2005-06 — when Democrats won the House — they lost several special elections .
And Pelosi talked about how the recent shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise ( R-La . ) may have aided GOP candidate Karen Handel . Republican outside groups tried to tie that shooting to the frenzy of anti-Trump rhetoric among Democratic supporters , as the shooter posted strongly negative comments about President Donald Trump on his Facebook page .
“ Republican voters don ’ t get to select the leaders of the Democratic Party , ” said Drew Hammill , a spokesman for Pelosi . “ Since [ Newt ] Gingrich , the politics of personal destruction has been a GOP hallmark . They will do this to any and every Democratic leader because the only thing sustaining their majority is desperation . ”
Some Democrats said they left the meeting surprised and disheartened that the GOP ’ s Pelosi attack ads weren ’ t addressed in some way .
“ It was probably one of the more disturbing caucus meetings that I ’ ve ever been in . And everyone pretty much sat in silence , and I ’ d like to think that they were as shocked as I was that they were hearing the spin that was being put on this loss , ” Rice said .
With President Barack Obama out of office , Pelosi is once again the Democrat that Republicans most love to hate . She has been on the national scene for 14 years , and Republicans have long made the phrase “ San Francisco values ” a pejorative for any Democratic challenger .
And Democrats — despite the fervor among their base — are being forced to acknowledge that an anti-Trump message is not going to be enough by itself to win in 2018 . Trump may have historically bad poll numbers for this point in his presidency , but Democrats are likely to need more than that to get back in the majority .
Pelosi still has a lot going for her . She remains the most successful nonpresidential political fundraiser in U.S. history , raising more than $ 560 million for House Democrats since she became leader in 2003 , even though critics say all the money doesn ’ t matter if they keep losing . There ’ s also no question Pelosi remains popular with many House Democrats , despite her detractors .
“ I think she ’ s one of the best speakers ever , and I am glad to support her , ” said Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota , a leading progressive who lost a race for Democratic National Committee chairman earlier this year .
“ This is nothing new , ” Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley of New York said of the GOP ’ s Pelosi bashing . “ I think we ’ ll have an opportunity to look at all the ads on all sides that were ran , all the issues , all the warts that existed in evaluating the results of this election . But the day after is a little too soon . ”
Some Democrats who are running statewide — either for governor or Senate — say the party must not try to nationalize every race . Instead , they say , it must focus on local issues in order to reach voters . And official Washington ’ s obsession with the Trump-Russia probe , while vitally important , is not something average voters are focusing on daily .
“ I think what people are looking for is that they want to believe someone knows where they are coming from . They want to believe that you ’ re a decent person , ” said Rep. Tim Walz ( D-Minn. ) , who is running for governor . “ I think the race in my district , I think that President Trump would still win it , although it would be closer . That ’ s totally on him , and really doesn ’ t have to do with us . ”
|
House Minority Leader Nacy Pelosi remains the most successful non-presidential political fundraiser in U.S. history, raising more than $560 million for House Democrats since she became leader in 2003. | Getty Congress Pelosi faces growing doubts among Dems after Georgia loss There's a lot of grumbling by rank-and-file members, but no leadership change is imminent.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats put a brave face on Wednesday morning after a disappointing loss in the Georgia special election, yet there is no disguising the unhappiness in the party ranks.
There is no challenge to Pelosi’s leadership, and none is going to happen at this point, said numerous Democrats. But it’s clear frustration is growing with the longtime Democratic leader following the extensive losses Democrats have suffered over the past half-decade.
Story Continued Below
And the fact that Republicans spent millions of dollars on TV ads tying Democratic hopeful Jon Ossoff to Pelosi — and the brand of progressive policies she represents — shows that she will once again be an issue for Democratic challengers in the very districts that the party needs to win to make her speaker again.
Some Democrats want to replace Pelosi atop their caucus, as they have since last November’s poor showing at the polls; they say there is no way to get back in the majority with her as their leader. And others who backed her in last year’s leadership challenge have now flipped their stance.
“I think you’d have to be an idiot to think we could win the House with Pelosi at the top,” said Rep. Filemon Vela (D-Texas), who supported Pelosi in her last leadership race. “Nancy Pelosi is not the only reason that Ossoff lost. But she certainly is one of the reasons.”
Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.), who backed a challenge to Pelosi last year, said the results of the Ossoff race further underscore that Pelosi should let someone else take the reins.
“There comes a time when every leader has to say, ‘For the good of the order and for the betterment of the party, it’s time for me to step aside.’ And I wish that that would happen right now,” Rice said in an interview. “This is not a personal thing. I want to get back in the majority.”
Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who challenged Pelosi for minority leader in November, wouldn’t comment directly whether she should step down, saying only, “My position hasn’t changed.”
“I think it’s very concerning that that tactic still has some punch,” Ryan said. “Again, it’s part of the broader national brand that average people don’t feel connected to the Democratic Party. Walk up the street and ask 10 people what the Democrats stand for, you’ll get 10 different answers. That’s no way to build a national party.”
Sign up here for POLITICO Huddle A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Pelosi told her members in a closed-door meeting on Wednesday morning that Ossoff was “a candidate who was young and enthusiastic, and attracted national support,” according to Democratic sources. Pelosi also pointed out that Ossoff lost by only a small margin in the 6th Congressional District race — 3.8 percent — far smaller than the previous Democratic candidate for the seat lost by in November.
Pelosi, though, admitted: “A loss is a loss. It is a setback. Unfortunately, a loss for us. But not good news” for Republicans. Pelosi also cautioned her members not to overreact to the results of this specific race.
Pelosi didn’t talk to members about the GOP ads focusing on her. No members brought up the issue of her leadership or said she should step aside.
Pelosi pointed out that Democrats won the special-election fights during the 2009-10 cycle, only to lose 63 seats in November 2010, while in 2005-06 — when Democrats won the House — they lost several special elections.
And Pelosi talked about how the recent shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) may have aided GOP candidate Karen Handel. Republican outside groups tried to tie that shooting to the frenzy of anti-Trump rhetoric among Democratic supporters, as the shooter posted strongly negative comments about President Donald Trump on his Facebook page.
“Republican voters don’t get to select the leaders of the Democratic Party,” said Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Pelosi. “Since [Newt] Gingrich, the politics of personal destruction has been a GOP hallmark. They will do this to any and every Democratic leader because the only thing sustaining their majority is desperation.”
Some Democrats said they left the meeting surprised and disheartened that the GOP’s Pelosi attack ads weren’t addressed in some way.
“It was probably one of the more disturbing caucus meetings that I’ve ever been in. And everyone pretty much sat in silence, and I’d like to think that they were as shocked as I was that they were hearing the spin that was being put on this loss,” Rice said.
With President Barack Obama out of office, Pelosi is once again the Democrat that Republicans most love to hate. She has been on the national scene for 14 years, and Republicans have long made the phrase “San Francisco values” a pejorative for any Democratic challenger.
And Democrats — despite the fervor among their base — are being forced to acknowledge that an anti-Trump message is not going to be enough by itself to win in 2018. Trump may have historically bad poll numbers for this point in his presidency, but Democrats are likely to need more than that to get back in the majority.
Pelosi still has a lot going for her. She remains the most successful nonpresidential political fundraiser in U.S. history, raising more than $560 million for House Democrats since she became leader in 2003, even though critics say all the money doesn’t matter if they keep losing. There’s also no question Pelosi remains popular with many House Democrats, despite her detractors.
“I think she’s one of the best speakers ever, and I am glad to support her,” said Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota, a leading progressive who lost a race for Democratic National Committee chairman earlier this year.
“This is nothing new,” Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley of New York said of the GOP’s Pelosi bashing. “I think we’ll have an opportunity to look at all the ads on all sides that were ran, all the issues, all the warts that existed in evaluating the results of this election. But the day after is a little too soon.”
Some Democrats who are running statewide — either for governor or Senate — say the party must not try to nationalize every race. Instead, they say, it must focus on local issues in order to reach voters. And official Washington’s obsession with the Trump-Russia probe, while vitally important, is not something average voters are focusing on daily.
“I think what people are looking for is that they want to believe someone knows where they are coming from. They want to believe that you’re a decent person,” said Rep. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), who is running for governor. “I think the race in my district, I think that President Trump would still win it, although it would be closer. That’s totally on him, and really doesn’t have to do with us.”
|
www.politico.com
| 0left
|
jvvnzO8QAZHZC7sh
|
federal_budget
|
NPR Online News
| 11
|
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/03/12/174087587/ryan-says-his-budget-would-balance-in-10-years
|
Ryan Says His Budget Would Balance In 10 Years
|
2013-03-12
|
Mark Memmott
|
( Note at 11:20 a.m . ET : Scroll down to see the GOP plan , which has now been released ; new comments from Rep. Ryan ; and White House reaction . )
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin , the 2012 Republican vice presidential nominee , unveiled his latest budget plan Tuesday morning — and as NPR 's Tamara Keith told our Newscast Desk , he says it would bring the federal budget in balance by 2023 .
Ryan 's previous proposal , he said , would balance the budget in 20 years . How has he cut 10 years off that time ? The `` fiscal cliff '' deal reached as 2012 turned into 2013 `` raises $ 600 billion in tax revenue over the next decade , '' Tamara reported , `` and Ryan is including that in his new budget . ''
`` Otherwise , '' she added , `` Ryan has telegraphed that his new plan will include many of the same cuts as past GOP budgets , most notably it would convert Medicare into a premium support program . ''
On the op/ed pages of The Wall Street Journal today , Ryan makes his case for the new plan .
`` How do we do it ? '' he writes . `` We stop spending money the government does n't have . ... Our budget matches spending with income . Under our proposal , the government spends no more than it collects in revenue — or 19.1 % of gross domestic product each year . As a result , we 'll spend $ 4.6 trillion less over the next decade . ... `` Our opponents will shout austerity , but let 's put this in perspective . On the current path , we 'll spend $ 46 trillion over the next 10 years . Under our proposal , we 'll spend $ 41 trillion . On the current path , spending will increase by 5 % each year . Under our proposal , it will increase by 3.4 % . Because the U.S. economy will grow faster than spending , the budget will balance by 2023 , and debt held by the public will drop to just over half the size of the economy . ''
President Obama and his fellow Democrats , of course , have other ideas about how to get the federal government books in order . Politico this morning looks at the president 's new efforts to reach out to some Republicans in order to cut a deal . It concludes though , that `` the expectations for both a sustainable civil alliance and a grand bargain remain low for one very simple reason : The parties are further apart on taxes and entitlements than they were in 2011 when Obama and House Speaker John Boehner ( R-Ohio ) first entered into talks and came close to striking the ever-elusive grand bargain . ''
Update at 11:20 a.m . ET . White House Says Ryan 's Math `` Just Does n't Add Up . ''
In a statement just sent to reporters , the White House says , in part :
`` While the House Republican budget aims to reduce the deficit , the math just does n't add up . Deficit reduction that asks nothing from the wealthiest Americans has serious consequences for the middle class . By choosing to give the wealthiest Americans a new tax cut , this budget as written will either fail to achieve any meaningful deficit reduction , raise taxes on middle class families by more than $ 2,000 – or both . ... `` The president has put forward a balanced approach to deficit reduction with no sacred cows . It includes more Medicare savings over the next decade than the House Republican budget , but it does so by cracking down on waste and fraud , not by asking middle class seniors to bear the burden . It closes tax loopholes for the wealthiest and biggest corporations so we can still afford to create jobs by investing in education , manufacturing , infrastructure , and small businesses . The President 's plan puts our nation on a fiscally sustainable path and grows our economy from the middle class out . `` While the president disagrees with the House Republican approach , we all agree we need to leave a better future for our children . The President will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats in Congress to grow the economy and cut the deficit in a balanced way . This is the approach the American people overwhelmingly support , and that is what the president will continue to fight for each day . ''
Update at 10:55 a.m . ET . Ryan Says He Wo n't Surrender His Principles :
Ryan is holding a news conference this hour . A reporter noted that he 's pitched a similar budget plan before — one that focuses on cuts in projected spending and eschews tax increases — and in the time since then was on the losing presidential ticket .
Should losing an election mean `` we surrender our principles ? '' Ryan asks . That Republicans should `` stop believing in what we believe in ? ''
`` We think we owe the country a balanced budget , '' he says , and `` solutions '' to the nation 's problems .
Ryan 's `` Path to Prosperity ; a Responsible , Balanced Budget , '' plan is now out . As Tamara notes , `` it calls for the repeal of the president 's healthcare law , and approval of the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline . It would cut growth in programs for the poor by turning them over to the states . And for future seniors , it would convert Medicare into a premium support program . ''
|
Ryan Says His Budget Would Balance In 10 Years
Enlarge this image toggle caption Michael Sears /MCT /Landov Michael Sears /MCT /Landov
(Note at 11:20 a.m. ET: Scroll down to see the GOP plan, which has now been released; new comments from Rep. Ryan; and White House reaction.)
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the 2012 Republican vice presidential nominee, unveiled his latest budget plan Tuesday morning — and as NPR's Tamara Keith told our Newscast Desk, he says it would bring the federal budget in balance by 2023.
Ryan's previous proposal, he said, would balance the budget in 20 years. How has he cut 10 years off that time? The "fiscal cliff" deal reached as 2012 turned into 2013 "raises $600 billion in tax revenue over the next decade," Tamara reported, "and Ryan is including that in his new budget."
"Otherwise," she added, "Ryan has telegraphed that his new plan will include many of the same cuts as past GOP budgets, most notably it would convert Medicare into a premium support program."
On the op/ed pages of The Wall Street Journal today, Ryan makes his case for the new plan.
"How do we do it?" he writes. "We stop spending money the government doesn't have. ... Our budget matches spending with income. Under our proposal, the government spends no more than it collects in revenue — or 19.1% of gross domestic product each year. As a result, we'll spend $4.6 trillion less over the next decade. ... "Our opponents will shout austerity, but let's put this in perspective. On the current path, we'll spend $46 trillion over the next 10 years. Under our proposal, we'll spend $41 trillion. On the current path, spending will increase by 5% each year. Under our proposal, it will increase by 3.4%. Because the U.S. economy will grow faster than spending, the budget will balance by 2023, and debt held by the public will drop to just over half the size of the economy."
President Obama and his fellow Democrats, of course, have other ideas about how to get the federal government books in order. Politico this morning looks at the president's new efforts to reach out to some Republicans in order to cut a deal. It concludes though, that "the expectations for both a sustainable civil alliance and a grand bargain remain low for one very simple reason: The parties are further apart on taxes and entitlements than they were in 2011 when Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) first entered into talks and came close to striking the ever-elusive grand bargain."
Update at 11:20 a.m. ET. White House Says Ryan's Math "Just Doesn't Add Up."
In a statement just sent to reporters, the White House says, in part:
"While the House Republican budget aims to reduce the deficit, the math just doesn't add up. Deficit reduction that asks nothing from the wealthiest Americans has serious consequences for the middle class. By choosing to give the wealthiest Americans a new tax cut, this budget as written will either fail to achieve any meaningful deficit reduction, raise taxes on middle class families by more than $2,000 – or both. ... "The president has put forward a balanced approach to deficit reduction with no sacred cows. It includes more Medicare savings over the next decade than the House Republican budget, but it does so by cracking down on waste and fraud, not by asking middle class seniors to bear the burden. It closes tax loopholes for the wealthiest and biggest corporations so we can still afford to create jobs by investing in education, manufacturing, infrastructure, and small businesses. The President's plan puts our nation on a fiscally sustainable path and grows our economy from the middle class out. "While the president disagrees with the House Republican approach, we all agree we need to leave a better future for our children. The President will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats in Congress to grow the economy and cut the deficit in a balanced way. This is the approach the American people overwhelmingly support, and that is what the president will continue to fight for each day."
Update at 10:55 a.m. ET. Ryan Says He Won't Surrender His Principles:
Ryan is holding a news conference this hour. A reporter noted that he's pitched a similar budget plan before — one that focuses on cuts in projected spending and eschews tax increases — and in the time since then was on the losing presidential ticket.
Should losing an election mean "we surrender our principles?" Ryan asks. That Republicans should "stop believing in what we believe in?"
"We think we owe the country a balanced budget," he says, and "solutions" to the nation's problems.
Update at 10 a.m. ET. The Plan Is Out:
Ryan's "Path to Prosperity; a Responsible, Balanced Budget," plan is now out. As Tamara notes, "it calls for the repeal of the president's healthcare law, and approval of the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline. It would cut growth in programs for the poor by turning them over to the states. And for future seniors, it would convert Medicare into a premium support program."
|
www.npr.org
| 2center
|
azpNrensPe4f9cyQ
|
world
|
CNN (Web News)
| 00
|
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/04/politics/white-house-africa-summit/index.html?hpt=po_c1
|
5 reasons Obama's Africa leaders' summit matters
|
2014-08-04
|
Kevin Liptak
|
Story highlights Majority of African leaders convene in Washington for first-ever African leaders summit
Ebola outbreak on the continent sure to distract from talks on trade
U.S. hopes to be a player on the African continent and blunt China 's influence
By any measure it 's historic : The vast majority of Africa 's leaders flying to Washington at the invite of the President , whose father was born on the continent , to mark what the White House hopes is a new era of cooperation .
While plans for the first African Leaders Summit this week in the nation 's capital are ambitious , the reality is the United States still has strides to make on the kind of political and economic relationships in Africa that can benefit both sides .
Other nations , namely China , have turned their focus to the continent as a trade partner . Terrorist networks have expanded their reach in some countries , most notably in Nigeria , where hundreds of schoolgirls remain at large after being kidnapped earlier this year . And while U.S.-backed efforts have helped slow the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa , countries there rate among the lowest in life expectancy and infant mortality .
`` The importance of this for America needs to be understood , '' President Barack Obama said on Friday about the summit .
JUST WATCHED West African Ebola epidemic Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH West African Ebola epidemic 04:32
JUST WATCHED Doctors struggle to treat Ebola patients Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Doctors struggle to treat Ebola patients 04:37
JUST WATCHED Obama : U.S. prepared for Ebola Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Obama : U.S. prepared for Ebola 02:11
He added later that Africa `` happens to be one of the continents where America is most popular and people feel a real affinity for our way of life . ''
Here are five reasons that the U.S.-Africa Leader 's Summit , which kicked off on Monday , is important :
1 . Health scare : The health problems in Africa were underscored this week when an Ebola outbreak prompted leaders of two nations to cancel their trips to Washington .
Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf , a Nobel Peace Prize winner , and Ernest Bai Koroma , the leader of Sierra Leone , both said they would remain in their countries .
Ebola has killed more than 700 people in three nations : Guinea , Liberia and Sierra .
Summit leaders , and even Obama , have stressed there is no risk to Washingtonians from those arriving from Africa this week .
Obama said anyone who might have been exposed to the virus would be screened both in their home countries and upon arrival in the United States .
But worry over the worsening outbreak only highlighted challenges Africa faces in combating disease and poverty , despite the billions in U.S. aid over the years .
`` This is an uphill challenge for them , '' said Gayle Smith , Obama 's senior director for development and Democracy , noting both Liberia and Sierra Leone had recently emerged from periods of civil war .
Obama hopes to move past the traditional elements of humanitarian aid to Africa , focusing instead on potential trade .
But promoting commercial ties with countries engulfed in Ebola outbreaks could prove to be difficult . The State Department warned against non-essential travel to Sierra Leone and Libera last week , and some schools and businesses have closed .
`` The timing is very unfortunate , and no one would have wished for this , '' said Howard French , an associate professor of international affairs at Columbia University . `` Having high-level discussions between the U.S. and Africa on business and investment are infrequent . So to the extent that this distracts from that I think will be regretted all around . ''
2 . Security challenges : Another potential barrier to U.S. investment in Africa : Growing extremism on the continent , which has overwhelmed certain governments .
The most flagrant example came earlier this summer , when the group Boko Haram kidnapped more than 200 school girls in Nigeria . The incident prompted international outrage and so far , a U.S.-backed team has not located them .
Nigeria-based Boko Haram opposes western-style education , and there are fears the group 's influence could be crossing borders .
Last month , armed gunman suspected to be Boko Haram militants abducted the wife of Cameroon 's deputy prime minister .
Intra-country sniping has followed . Nigeria has expressed frustration with Cameroon for not doing enough to fight Boko Haram on its side of the border , a charge Cameroon has denied .
The unrest has inflicted damage on African economies , including Nigeria 's , the largest on the continent . Other African nations combating violent extremism , like Mali , Kenya and Somalia , are also tough sells for U.S. investment .
Many of those nations want more U.S. assistance to counter militants , sentiments likely to be expressed at this week 's summit .
`` We are concerned about efforts by terrorist groups to gain a foothold in Africa , '' said Ben Rhodes , Obama 's deputy national security adviser .
He pointed to U.S. counterterror efforts that aim to partner with nations in stemming unrest .
`` We 're looking at how do we get at the broader issue of countering violent extremism in Africa so that these groups , like Boko Haram , like al-Shabaab , like al-Qaeda , are not able to prey on young people with disinformation and intimidation , '' he said .
3 . Countering China : The United States has some catching up to do in Africa when it comes to trade and investment .
China 's imports of African oil and natural minerals have skyrocketed over the past two decades . Alongside have come massive Chinese investments in African infrastructure and construction projects , manned by waves of Chinese workers who ended up remaining in Africa . More than a million Chinese citizens now live there .
`` Africa is in a very particular moment , economically speaking , '' said French during an interview with CNNI from Nairobi . `` The continent has been growing very fast . Demographically , there 's a bulge in terms of it 's youth population . And Africa needs partnerships . ''
Obama wants to make sure the United States is one of those partners , and a more attractive one than China .
`` My advice to African leaders is to make sure that if , in fact , China is putting in roads and bridges , number one , that they 're hiring African workers ; number two , that the roads do n't just lead from the mine to the port to Shanghai , but that there 's an ability for the African governments to shape how this infrastructure is going to benefit them in the long term , '' Obama told The Economist last week .
4 . Cementing legacy : Obama 's two predecessors both secured legacy achievements in Africa -- Bill Clinton through his African Growth and Opportunity Act , and George W. Bush through his program combating HIV/AIDS .
Obama similarly hopes for a way to leave his mark on the continent after he leaves office , though his status as the first president of African descent has already made history .
That fact led some Africans to regard Obama with outsized expectations when he took office in 2009 , leading to some disappointment that he has n't focused more on shoring up U.S.-Africa ties .
During his time in office , Obama has focused on terrorism , uprisings in the Arab world , Russian provocations , and the much-awaited pivot to Asia .
Obama made his first presidential trip to sub-Saharan Africa in 2009 when he visited Ghana . He did n't return again until 2013 with tour of Senegal , Tanzania and South Africa .
He 's embarked upon an initiative that aims to bring electricity to more Africans , and a program supporting young leaders working toward Democratic governments .
Both are elements to a legacy designed to shore up conditions for individuals on the continent .
And the summit itself , while not expected to produce any large-scale trade agreements , is meant to signal a shift from purely humanitarian assistance to a two-way partnership .
`` We believe it can be a game-changer in the U.S.-Africa relationship , '' Rhodes said of the summit .
5 . Not invited : While the bulk of Africa 's leaders will be in Washington , the continent 's most reviled leaders wo n't be attending . They include Zimbabwe 's Robert Mugabe and Sudan 's Omar al-Bashir .
They were n't invited because of their alleged human rights abuses .
Other controversial leaders -- like Kenya 's Uhuru Kenyatta , accused of crimes at the International Criminal Court -- will attend .
Like any major diplomatic gathering , the Africa Leaders Summit has been an exercise in protocol and careful planning .
Instead of meeting with leaders separately , Obama has been scheduled for larger group discussions , to the disappointment of some who wanted to talk to him one-on-one .
`` We just would n't be able to do bilats with everybody , and so the simplest thing is for the President to devote his time to engaging broadly with all the leaders . That way we 're not singling out individuals at the expense of the other leaders , '' Rhodes said .
He noted Obama would speak with each leader individually during a dinner at the White House on Tuesday .
That event has taken on state dinner-type proportions , with a large tent constructed on the South Lawn . Organizers have the added stress of accommodating leaders of 50 nations , all with varied religious and cultural sensitivities that must be respected .
For example , servers must know who drinks alcohol and who abstains for religious reasons .
It 's a reflection of just how diverse Africa is , and how high the stakes are for Obama as he forges new relationships there .
|
Story highlights Majority of African leaders convene in Washington for first-ever African leaders summit
Ebola outbreak on the continent sure to distract from talks on trade
U.S. hopes to be a player on the African continent and blunt China's influence
By any measure it's historic: The vast majority of Africa's leaders flying to Washington at the invite of the President, whose father was born on the continent, to mark what the White House hopes is a new era of cooperation.
While plans for the first African Leaders Summit this week in the nation's capital are ambitious, the reality is the United States still has strides to make on the kind of political and economic relationships in Africa that can benefit both sides.
Other nations, namely China, have turned their focus to the continent as a trade partner. Terrorist networks have expanded their reach in some countries, most notably in Nigeria, where hundreds of schoolgirls remain at large after being kidnapped earlier this year. And while U.S.-backed efforts have helped slow the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa, countries there rate among the lowest in life expectancy and infant mortality.
"The importance of this for America needs to be understood," President Barack Obama said on Friday about the summit.
JUST WATCHED West African Ebola epidemic Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH West African Ebola epidemic 04:32
JUST WATCHED Doctors struggle to treat Ebola patients Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Doctors struggle to treat Ebola patients 04:37
JUST WATCHED Obama: U.S. prepared for Ebola Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Obama: U.S. prepared for Ebola 02:11
He added later that Africa "happens to be one of the continents where America is most popular and people feel a real affinity for our way of life."
Here are five reasons that the U.S.-Africa Leader's Summit, which kicked off on Monday, is important:
1. Health scare: The health problems in Africa were underscored this week when an Ebola outbreak prompted leaders of two nations to cancel their trips to Washington.
Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Ernest Bai Koroma, the leader of Sierra Leone, both said they would remain in their countries.
Ebola has killed more than 700 people in three nations: Guinea, Liberia and Sierra.
Summit leaders, and even Obama, have stressed there is no risk to Washingtonians from those arriving from Africa this week.
Obama said anyone who might have been exposed to the virus would be screened both in their home countries and upon arrival in the United States.
But worry over the worsening outbreak only highlighted challenges Africa faces in combating disease and poverty, despite the billions in U.S. aid over the years.
"This is an uphill challenge for them," said Gayle Smith, Obama's senior director for development and Democracy, noting both Liberia and Sierra Leone had recently emerged from periods of civil war.
Obama hopes to move past the traditional elements of humanitarian aid to Africa, focusing instead on potential trade.
But promoting commercial ties with countries engulfed in Ebola outbreaks could prove to be difficult. The State Department warned against non-essential travel to Sierra Leone and Libera last week, and some schools and businesses have closed.
"The timing is very unfortunate, and no one would have wished for this," said Howard French, an associate professor of international affairs at Columbia University. "Having high-level discussions between the U.S. and Africa on business and investment are infrequent. So to the extent that this distracts from that I think will be regretted all around."
2. Security challenges: Another potential barrier to U.S. investment in Africa: Growing extremism on the continent, which has overwhelmed certain governments.
The most flagrant example came earlier this summer, when the group Boko Haram kidnapped more than 200 school girls in Nigeria. The incident prompted international outrage and so far, a U.S.-backed team has not located them.
Nigeria-based Boko Haram opposes western-style education, and there are fears the group's influence could be crossing borders.
Last month, armed gunman suspected to be Boko Haram militants abducted the wife of Cameroon's deputy prime minister.
Intra-country sniping has followed. Nigeria has expressed frustration with Cameroon for not doing enough to fight Boko Haram on its side of the border, a charge Cameroon has denied.
The unrest has inflicted damage on African economies, including Nigeria's, the largest on the continent. Other African nations combating violent extremism, like Mali, Kenya and Somalia, are also tough sells for U.S. investment.
Many of those nations want more U.S. assistance to counter militants, sentiments likely to be expressed at this week's summit.
"We are concerned about efforts by terrorist groups to gain a foothold in Africa," said Ben Rhodes, Obama's deputy national security adviser.
He pointed to U.S. counterterror efforts that aim to partner with nations in stemming unrest.
"We're looking at how do we get at the broader issue of countering violent extremism in Africa so that these groups, like Boko Haram, like al-Shabaab, like al-Qaeda, are not able to prey on young people with disinformation and intimidation," he said.
3. Countering China: The United States has some catching up to do in Africa when it comes to trade and investment.
China's imports of African oil and natural minerals have skyrocketed over the past two decades. Alongside have come massive Chinese investments in African infrastructure and construction projects, manned by waves of Chinese workers who ended up remaining in Africa. More than a million Chinese citizens now live there.
"Africa is in a very particular moment, economically speaking," said French during an interview with CNNI from Nairobi. "The continent has been growing very fast. Demographically, there's a bulge in terms of it's youth population. And Africa needs partnerships."
Obama wants to make sure the United States is one of those partners, and a more attractive one than China.
"My advice to African leaders is to make sure that if, in fact, China is putting in roads and bridges, number one, that they're hiring African workers; number two, that the roads don't just lead from the mine to the port to Shanghai, but that there's an ability for the African governments to shape how this infrastructure is going to benefit them in the long term," Obama told The Economist last week.
4. Cementing legacy: Obama's two predecessors both secured legacy achievements in Africa -- Bill Clinton through his African Growth and Opportunity Act, and George W. Bush through his program combating HIV/AIDS.
Obama similarly hopes for a way to leave his mark on the continent after he leaves office, though his status as the first president of African descent has already made history.
That fact led some Africans to regard Obama with outsized expectations when he took office in 2009, leading to some disappointment that he hasn't focused more on shoring up U.S.-Africa ties.
During his time in office, Obama has focused on terrorism, uprisings in the Arab world, Russian provocations, and the much-awaited pivot to Asia.
Obama made his first presidential trip to sub-Saharan Africa in 2009 when he visited Ghana. He didn't return again until 2013 with tour of Senegal, Tanzania and South Africa.
He's embarked upon an initiative that aims to bring electricity to more Africans, and a program supporting young leaders working toward Democratic governments.
Both are elements to a legacy designed to shore up conditions for individuals on the continent.
And the summit itself, while not expected to produce any large-scale trade agreements, is meant to signal a shift from purely humanitarian assistance to a two-way partnership.
"We believe it can be a game-changer in the U.S.-Africa relationship," Rhodes said of the summit.
5. Not invited: While the bulk of Africa's leaders will be in Washington, the continent's most reviled leaders won't be attending. They include Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe and Sudan's Omar al-Bashir.
They weren't invited because of their alleged human rights abuses.
Other controversial leaders -- like Kenya's Uhuru Kenyatta, accused of crimes at the International Criminal Court -- will attend.
Like any major diplomatic gathering, the Africa Leaders Summit has been an exercise in protocol and careful planning.
Instead of meeting with leaders separately, Obama has been scheduled for larger group discussions, to the disappointment of some who wanted to talk to him one-on-one.
"We just wouldn't be able to do bilats with everybody, and so the simplest thing is for the President to devote his time to engaging broadly with all the leaders. That way we're not singling out individuals at the expense of the other leaders," Rhodes said.
He noted Obama would speak with each leader individually during a dinner at the White House on Tuesday.
That event has taken on state dinner-type proportions, with a large tent constructed on the South Lawn. Organizers have the added stress of accommodating leaders of 50 nations, all with varied religious and cultural sensitivities that must be respected.
For example, servers must know who drinks alcohol and who abstains for religious reasons.
It's a reflection of just how diverse Africa is, and how high the stakes are for Obama as he forges new relationships there.
|
www.cnn.com
| 0left
|
nRVhRQrlqN4s7S5E
|
elections
|
Washington Times
| 22
|
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/18/reince-priebus-rnc-chief-threatens-john-kasich-oth/
|
RNC chief threatens John Kasich, other Republicans who won’t support Donald Trump
|
2016-09-18
|
David Sherfinski, Ben Wolfgang
|
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus on Sunday threatened Ohio Gov . John Kasich and other Republicans who refuse to support presidential nominee Donald Trump , saying the party may take steps to ensure it ’ s not “ that easy for them ” to seek the White House again .
Speaking on CBS ’ “ Face the Nation , ” Mr. Priebus said every Republican who ran in 2016 needs to get behind Mr. Trump .
Those who haven ’ t — including Mr. Kasich , former Florida Gov . Jeb Bush , and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz — could see diminished support from the party moving forward .
“ People who agreed to support the nominee , that took part in our process , they used tools from the RNC . They agreed to support the nominee . They took part in our process . We ’ re a private party , we ’ re not a public entity . Those people need to get on board , ” Mr. Priebus said .
“ And if they ’ re thinking they ’ re going to run again someday , I think we ’ re going to evaluate our process , the nomination process , and I don ’ t think it ’ s going to be that easy for them , ” he said .
Mr. Kasich said it ’ s “ very unlikely ” he ’ ll vote for Mr. Trump … “ too much water under the bridge , ” the Ohio governor said in an interview with CNN that aired Friday .
SEE ALSO : 48 % of Democratic voters say Bernie Sanders should replace Hillary if she drops out of race
Mr. Bush has expressed similar sentiments , and Mr. Cruz famously withheld an endorsement of Mr. Trump during the Republican National Convention and instead told Republicans to “ vote their conscience ” in November .
Mr. Priebus denied that he was threatening Mr. Kasich , Mr. Cruz or anyone else , yet he clearly suggested the party would put roadblocks in front of the electoral hopes of anyone who hasn ’ t offered a full-throated endorsement of Mr. Trump .
“ People in our party are talking about what we ’ re going to do about this … It ’ s not a threat . It ’ s just a question , ” the RNC chairman said . “ What should a private party do about that if those same people come around in four or eight years ? ”
Mr. Kasich , a former 2016 GOP presidential candidate himself , said it ’ s still important to get out the vote for Republicans like Sen . Rob Portman , who is running for re-election in Ohio .
“ We want to get people out to vote . We want to re-elect Senator Portman , and we want to re-elect people down ticket , ” Mr. Kasich said . “ I ’ m not voting for Hillary [ Clinton ] . ”
“ I ’ ll let everybody know … but I think my actions have spoken very loudly . Louder than even my words , ” he said .
Mr. Kasich was in Cleveland during the Republican National Convention in July , but he did not attend the convention itself .
Asked about Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson , Mr. Kasich said : “ I haven ’ t even gone there yet . It ’ s a long way [ until ] Election Day . ”
|
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus on Sunday threatened Ohio Gov. John Kasich and other Republicans who refuse to support presidential nominee Donald Trump, saying the party may take steps to ensure it’s not “that easy for them” to seek the White House again.
Speaking on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Mr. Priebus said every Republican who ran in 2016 needs to get behind Mr. Trump.
Those who haven’t — including Mr. Kasich, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz — could see diminished support from the party moving forward.
“People who agreed to support the nominee, that took part in our process, they used tools from the RNC. They agreed to support the nominee. They took part in our process. We’re a private party, we’re not a public entity. Those people need to get on board,” Mr. Priebus said.
“And if they’re thinking they’re going to run again someday, I think we’re going to evaluate our process, the nomination process, and I don’t think it’s going to be that easy for them,” he said.
Mr. Kasich said it’s “very unlikely” he’ll vote for Mr. Trump … “too much water under the bridge,” the Ohio governor said in an interview with CNN that aired Friday.
SEE ALSO: 48% of Democratic voters say Bernie Sanders should replace Hillary if she drops out of race
Mr. Bush has expressed similar sentiments, and Mr. Cruz famously withheld an endorsement of Mr. Trump during the Republican National Convention and instead told Republicans to “vote their conscience” in November.
Mr. Priebus denied that he was threatening Mr. Kasich, Mr. Cruz or anyone else, yet he clearly suggested the party would put roadblocks in front of the electoral hopes of anyone who hasn’t offered a full-throated endorsement of Mr. Trump.
“People in our party are talking about what we’re going to do about this … It’s not a threat. It’s just a question,” the RNC chairman said. “What should a private party do about that if those same people come around in four or eight years?”
Mr. Kasich, a former 2016 GOP presidential candidate himself, said it’s still important to get out the vote for Republicans like Sen. Rob Portman, who is running for re-election in Ohio.
“We want to get people out to vote. We want to re-elect Senator Portman, and we want to re-elect people down ticket,” Mr. Kasich said. “I’m not voting for Hillary [Clinton].”
“I’ll let everybody know … but I think my actions have spoken very loudly. Louder than even my words,” he said.
Mr. Kasich was in Cleveland during the Republican National Convention in July, but he did not attend the convention itself.
Asked about Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, Mr. Kasich said: “I haven’t even gone there yet. It’s a long way [until] Election Day.”
Sign up for Daily Newsletters
Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
|
www.washingtontimes.com
| 1right
|
SUFgzIyyoyxOE2zn
|
elections
|
Guest Writer
| 11
|
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/24/wesley-pruden-with-joe-biden-campaign-2016-fun-abo/
|
OPINION: With Joe Biden, campaign 2016 fun about to begin
|
2015-08-24
|
Wesley Pruden
|
This may be the most entertaining road show yet . Round and round the presidential campaign goes , and where it stops nobody knows . Even Mitt Romney is said to be thinking about jumping in again , no doubt figuring that some of Jeb ’ s “ investors , ” who are familiar indeed , may be looking for another place to place their bets .
Hillary Clinton ’ s campaign still gets respectful attention , but nobody ’ s any longer practicing what to call her if , as in a prospect ever more unlikely , she ’ s actually elected . Madame President ? That sounds like something from a bordello , or worse , from France . Mrs. President ? The feminists wouldn ’ t like that , because it pays homage to a husband . “ Miss President ” sounds like everybody ’ s seventh-period Latin teacher , perhaps fetching in her own way , but not much fun .
Joe Biden , everybody ’ s good old , slightly daffy uncle , lovable but prone to gaffes , boners and extravagant slips not only of the tongue but sometimes of the brain , like his suggestion , meant to warm the hearts of gun owners , that if you hear a varmint or a prowler in the middle of the night , the thing to do is to take your shotgun to the front porch and blast away at the night . ( Hoping nobody is still up across the street is optional . )
The Republican establishment has the opposite problem . They ’ re having to quit laughing at Donald Trump and start taking him seriously . He keeps increasing his polling lead over the field , and where that stops nobody knows , either . He ’ s an “ outlier , ” the currently fashionable $ 2 word for “ outsider , ” but he ’ s not as outsiderly as he used to be .
The liberal media , the Greek chorus assigned to enlightening the halt , the unhip and the dumb , spent the weekend chortling over the fact that the Donald attracted “ only ” 20,000 fans to a football stadium that seats 30,000 in Mobile . The cops wisely declined to offer an estimate of the size of the crowd , but it was bigger than anyone else has drawn so far . Who but the Donald , who compared it to a crowd at a Billy Graham revival meeting , would risk holding a political rally in a football stadium in Alabama , exposing empty seats and inviting unwanted comparisons .
President Obama himself threw a big flat rock in the Democratic pond on Monday with a resounding splash . He sent his press agent out to suggest to reporters that he might endorse someone in the Democratic primaries , and it didn ’ t sound like he was talking about Hillary . The president , said press secretary Josh Earnest , thinks taking Joe Biden on his ticket seven years ago was the smartest political decision he ever made . He reminded everyone that he had spoken “ warmly ” about Hillary , too . Then it was back to praising good old Joe .
“ I ’ ll just say that the vice president is somebody who has already run for president twice . He ’ s been on a national ticket through two election cycles … So I think you could make the case that there is no one who has a better understanding of exactly what is required to mount a successful national presidential campaign … I wouldn ’ t rule out the possibility of an endorsement in the Democratic primary . ”
A press agent always speaks for the man who pays him , so we can safely assume that Mr . Earnest didn ’ t make a semi-endorsement , sort of , on his own .
Mr. Obama ’ s endorsement would be valuable in a Democratic primary , a signal that he has found someone who will protect his “ legacy , ” such as it will be . In the general election , his endorsement might be a sloppy kiss of death , where voters of all kinds could rush to make the judgment that is likely to be the verdict of history — Mr. Obama was a freak of history , elected by a well-meaning but naive electorate eager to show good faith and hope for the best .
Taking a flier is rarely a substitute for making a sound judgment . Nominating a candidate with little political experience can be tempting . The Republicans tried it in 1940 , nominating Wendell Willkie , a Wall Street lawyer who had never been elected to anything , thinking everyone shared their contempt for Franklin D. Roosevelt .
That ’ s what terrifies the Republican establishment about Donald Trump . If the establishment understood politics a little better than it does , establishment Republicans would recognize how they brought the Donald to political prominence themselves . The establishment doesn ’ t understand how cable-TV , the Internet and a succession of mushmouth candidates have changed everything .
The Republican grass roots hankers for rough justice , applied without mercy . These are the grass roots that are a minority of a minority , but they ’ re loud , they ’ re angry , and they ’ re out for blood .
• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times .
|
ANALYSIS/OPINION:
ANALYSIS/OPINION:
This may be the most entertaining road show yet. Round and round the presidential campaign goes, and where it stops nobody knows. Even Mitt Romney is said to be thinking about jumping in again, no doubt figuring that some of Jeb’s “investors,” who are familiar indeed, may be looking for another place to place their bets.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign still gets respectful attention, but nobody’s any longer practicing what to call her if, as in a prospect ever more unlikely, she’s actually elected. Madame President? That sounds like something from a bordello, or worse, from France. Mrs. President? The feminists wouldn’t like that, because it pays homage to a husband. “Miss President” sounds like everybody’s seventh-period Latin teacher, perhaps fetching in her own way, but not much fun.
Joe Biden, everybody’s good old, slightly daffy uncle, lovable but prone to gaffes, boners and extravagant slips not only of the tongue but sometimes of the brain, like his suggestion, meant to warm the hearts of gun owners, that if you hear a varmint or a prowler in the middle of the night, the thing to do is to take your shotgun to the front porch and blast away at the night. (Hoping nobody is still up across the street is optional.)
The Republican establishment has the opposite problem. They’re having to quit laughing at Donald Trump and start taking him seriously. He keeps increasing his polling lead over the field, and where that stops nobody knows, either. He’s an “outlier,” the currently fashionable $2 word for “outsider,” but he’s not as outsiderly as he used to be.
The liberal media, the Greek chorus assigned to enlightening the halt, the unhip and the dumb, spent the weekend chortling over the fact that the Donald attracted “only” 20,000 fans to a football stadium that seats 30,000 in Mobile. The cops wisely declined to offer an estimate of the size of the crowd, but it was bigger than anyone else has drawn so far. Who but the Donald, who compared it to a crowd at a Billy Graham revival meeting, would risk holding a political rally in a football stadium in Alabama, exposing empty seats and inviting unwanted comparisons.
President Obama himself threw a big flat rock in the Democratic pond on Monday with a resounding splash. He sent his press agent out to suggest to reporters that he might endorse someone in the Democratic primaries, and it didn’t sound like he was talking about Hillary. The president, said press secretary Josh Earnest, thinks taking Joe Biden on his ticket seven years ago was the smartest political decision he ever made. He reminded everyone that he had spoken “warmly” about Hillary, too. Then it was back to praising good old Joe.
“I’ll just say that the vice president is somebody who has already run for president twice. He’s been on a national ticket through two election cycles … So I think you could make the case that there is no one who has a better understanding of exactly what is required to mount a successful national presidential campaign … I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of an endorsement in the Democratic primary.”
A press agent always speaks for the man who pays him, so we can safely assume that Mr. Earnest didn’t make a semi-endorsement, sort of, on his own.
Mr. Obama’s endorsement would be valuable in a Democratic primary, a signal that he has found someone who will protect his “legacy,” such as it will be. In the general election, his endorsement might be a sloppy kiss of death, where voters of all kinds could rush to make the judgment that is likely to be the verdict of history — Mr. Obama was a freak of history, elected by a well-meaning but naive electorate eager to show good faith and hope for the best.
Taking a flier is rarely a substitute for making a sound judgment. Nominating a candidate with little political experience can be tempting. The Republicans tried it in 1940, nominating Wendell Willkie, a Wall Street lawyer who had never been elected to anything, thinking everyone shared their contempt for Franklin D. Roosevelt.
That’s what terrifies the Republican establishment about Donald Trump. If the establishment understood politics a little better than it does, establishment Republicans would recognize how they brought the Donald to political prominence themselves. The establishment doesn’t understand how cable-TV, the Internet and a succession of mushmouth candidates have changed everything.
The Republican grass roots hankers for rough justice, applied without mercy. These are the grass roots that are a minority of a minority, but they’re loud, they’re angry, and they’re out for blood.
• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
Sign up for Daily Opinion Newsletter
Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
|
www.washingtontimes.com
| 2center
|
fPrMX9N0tQ7PwU1h
|
immigration
|
HotAir
| 22
|
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/16/illegal-immigration-is-it-a-crime-or-not/
|
Illegal immigration. Is it a crime or not?
|
2013-02-16
|
Jazz Shaw, Ed Morrissey, John Sexton
|
The President has been back out on the road again , spinning heartwarming tales and pushing for his second term agenda , as you ’ d expect any recently reelected leader to do . I ’ ll confess that I had a hard time paying attention to a lot of it , what with asteroids crashing to Earth on poop filled cruise ships and all , but there was one theme which caught my attention . He ’ s going all in on the hot new fad of comprehensive immigration reform .
President Barack Obama told a group of Senate Democrats Wednesday that Congress must move forward with comprehensive immigration reform , or else he will propose his own legislation on the hot-button topic… In a description of Wednesday ’ s meeting , the White House said Obama “ reiterated the key principles he believes must be a part of any bipartisan , commonsense effort , including continuing to strengthen border security , creating an earned path to citizenship , holding employers accountable and streamlining legal immigration . ”
Everyone seems to be talking about it these days , and not just Democrats . Republicans from Marco Rubio to John McCain have their own proposals , many of which involve some form of what the President is talking about . You can call it a “ path to citizenship ” or amnesty or Expedited Entry… whatever you like . But for some reason there are still quite a few of us who hear proposals such as these and get an uneasy feeling . For some of us , it may even be hard to quantify exactly what ’ s wrong . But if you harbor any such qualms , of course , you will be immediately labeled… say it with me…
Whatever . But as I considered the question this week , I realized that there might be a better way to describe exactly why this sounds troubling . And to understand it , you really need to talk about the story of Ray Bowman and William Kirkpatrick . Those names might not be familiar unless you lived in the Pacific Northwest in the 90s , but they were something of a legend . In a career spanning more than 16 years they robbed 28 banks around the country for a total of more than $ 7 million . I ’ m not going all anti-hero worship on you here , but you ’ ve got to admit… in terms of raw focus and mission attention , these guys were good . They stole a LOT of money without getting caught .
But the law finally caught up with them , and in 1999 they went to trial and were sent to lengthy stretches in the Crowbar Motel . Now here ’ s the thing about their story… during the trial , not one person – not in the media , the public , the courts or the government – not one single person stood up to say anything remotely like the following :
You know , yeah… okay .. they stole the money . But they ’ ve had it for a really long time now . And their families are depending on it for retirement and the kids ’ college . Some of it is invested in various places and we ’ d have to draw it out . Maybe , after all this time , we should just let them keep it .
Why did nobody say that ? The answer is because they broke the law and they got caught . This applies for virtually any other law you could name… except for illegal immigration . As things stand now , crossing the border without the proper authorization and paperwork is a crime . Beyond that , continuing to stay here without said credentials is also a crime . If you do this , you are committing a crime each and every day that you are here . But for some reason , we seem to be reaching the point where we ’ re fine with treating this as more of a game of Red Rover Red Rover . Yes , it ’ s a crime to come over the border uninvited , but if you make it to home base , maybe we ’ ll just forget about it .
Now , before the inevitable , hollow argument comes flying back at me here , I ’ m not talking about anything resembling the statute of limitations . ( Why we have a statute of limitations is a debate for another day . ) Bowman and Kirkpatrick kept committing crimes all through their run . And people who are here illegally continue to break the law every single day by the simple fact of being in the country . If you want to have a discussion about a statute on illegal immigration where people can leave for seven years and have it dropped from their record… fine . We can have that debate . But it doesn ’ t apply to this situation .
Allow me to also answer the second , inevitable question which crops up every time we have this discussion . No , I have no idea what to do about the five million or twelve million or twenty million illegal immigrants currently breaking the law every single day in this country . I have not even the beginning of a hint as to what should be done about it . I also don ’ t know what to do about the 90 % of robberies that go unsolved each year . But I ’ m pretty sure that the answer isn ’ t to decriminalize theft .
I ’ ve had some conflicting feelings about this immigration question myself , I confess . But America either is or it is not a nation of laws . If we are to change our system so that entering our nation without permission is no longer a crime – or at least not that serious of one – then lawmakers need to make that clear . But don ’ t tell us you ’ re doing it just because you can ’ t figure out how to stop people from breaking the law . And if keeping control of our borders and retaining management of who does or does not enter is still an important priority and a criminal matter , that should be made clear also . What we ’ re getting out of Washington now is static , clarifying nothing and selling a feel-good product which doesn ’ t seem to address any of these questions .
|
The President has been back out on the road again, spinning heartwarming tales and pushing for his second term agenda, as you’d expect any recently reelected leader to do. I’ll confess that I had a hard time paying attention to a lot of it, what with asteroids crashing to Earth on poop filled cruise ships and all, but there was one theme which caught my attention. He’s going all in on the hot new fad of comprehensive immigration reform.
President Barack Obama told a group of Senate Democrats Wednesday that Congress must move forward with comprehensive immigration reform, or else he will propose his own legislation on the hot-button topic… In a description of Wednesday’s meeting, the White House said Obama “reiterated the key principles he believes must be a part of any bipartisan, commonsense effort, including continuing to strengthen border security, creating an earned path to citizenship, holding employers accountable and streamlining legal immigration.”
Everyone seems to be talking about it these days, and not just Democrats. Republicans from Marco Rubio to John McCain have their own proposals, many of which involve some form of what the President is talking about. You can call it a “path to citizenship” or amnesty or Expedited Entry… whatever you like. But for some reason there are still quite a few of us who hear proposals such as these and get an uneasy feeling. For some of us, it may even be hard to quantify exactly what’s wrong. But if you harbor any such qualms, of course, you will be immediately labeled… say it with me…
A racist.
Whatever. But as I considered the question this week, I realized that there might be a better way to describe exactly why this sounds troubling. And to understand it, you really need to talk about the story of Ray Bowman and William Kirkpatrick. Those names might not be familiar unless you lived in the Pacific Northwest in the 90s, but they were something of a legend. In a career spanning more than 16 years they robbed 28 banks around the country for a total of more than $7 million. I’m not going all anti-hero worship on you here, but you’ve got to admit… in terms of raw focus and mission attention, these guys were good. They stole a LOT of money without getting caught.
But the law finally caught up with them, and in 1999 they went to trial and were sent to lengthy stretches in the Crowbar Motel. Now here’s the thing about their story… during the trial, not one person – not in the media, the public, the courts or the government – not one single person stood up to say anything remotely like the following:
You know, yeah… okay.. they stole the money. But they’ve had it for a really long time now. And their families are depending on it for retirement and the kids’ college. Some of it is invested in various places and we’d have to draw it out. Maybe, after all this time, we should just let them keep it.
Why did nobody say that? The answer is because they broke the law and they got caught. This applies for virtually any other law you could name… except for illegal immigration. As things stand now, crossing the border without the proper authorization and paperwork is a crime. Beyond that, continuing to stay here without said credentials is also a crime. If you do this, you are committing a crime each and every day that you are here. But for some reason, we seem to be reaching the point where we’re fine with treating this as more of a game of Red Rover Red Rover. Yes, it’s a crime to come over the border uninvited, but if you make it to home base, maybe we’ll just forget about it.
Now, before the inevitable, hollow argument comes flying back at me here, I’m not talking about anything resembling the statute of limitations. (Why we have a statute of limitations is a debate for another day.) Bowman and Kirkpatrick kept committing crimes all through their run. And people who are here illegally continue to break the law every single day by the simple fact of being in the country. If you want to have a discussion about a statute on illegal immigration where people can leave for seven years and have it dropped from their record… fine. We can have that debate. But it doesn’t apply to this situation.
Allow me to also answer the second, inevitable question which crops up every time we have this discussion. No, I have no idea what to do about the five million or twelve million or twenty million illegal immigrants currently breaking the law every single day in this country. I have not even the beginning of a hint as to what should be done about it. I also don’t know what to do about the 90% of robberies that go unsolved each year. But I’m pretty sure that the answer isn’t to decriminalize theft.
I’ve had some conflicting feelings about this immigration question myself, I confess. But America either is or it is not a nation of laws. If we are to change our system so that entering our nation without permission is no longer a crime – or at least not that serious of one – then lawmakers need to make that clear. But don’t tell us you’re doing it just because you can’t figure out how to stop people from breaking the law. And if keeping control of our borders and retaining management of who does or does not enter is still an important priority and a criminal matter, that should be made clear also. What we’re getting out of Washington now is static, clarifying nothing and selling a feel-good product which doesn’t seem to address any of these questions.
Discuss.
|
www.hotair.com
| 1right
|
xUYb6nZnCIJCrdGy
|
impeachment
|
Yahoo! News
| 00
|
https://news.yahoo.com/marie-yovanovitch-092100947--abc-news-topstories.html
|
Who is Marie Yovanovitch?
|
2019-11-15
|
Stephanie Ebbs, Conor Finnegan
|
But to most of the rest of the world , she 's Marie Yovanovitch , the career diplomat caught up in the blizzard of headlines about Ukraine and President Donald Trump 's possible impeachment .
Until a few months ago , she was the tough-minded U.S. ambassador to Ukraine , living in the embassy in Kyiv with her mother Nadia and her dog Scout , she said in a 2017 interview .
Now , she 's telling her story about being smeared and threatened to millions of Americans watching the House impeachment hearings on television .
Yovanovitch has served under the past six administrations -- both Republican and Democrat -- and won high praise , including the Senior Foreign Service Performance Award six times and the State Department 's Superior Honor Award five times . She was nominated to be U.S. ambassador to Kyrgyzstan and Armenia by George W. Bush and to Ukraine by Barack Obama .
But earlier this year , Yovanovitch was attacked in conservative media and by Ukraine 's former public prosecutor , who accused her of giving him a `` do not prosecute '' list and blocking him from traveling to the U.S. to investigate Democrats after she publicly criticized the country 's lack of progress in tackling corruption .
( MORE : Former Ukraine ambassador felt threatened , told to 'watch my back ' : Deposition )
The State Department and U.S. embassy went on record to deny the allegations , and the prosecutor later recanted them . But Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani have repeated them , and they may have influenced Trump 's decision to recall Yovanovitch early from her post in May .
She learned only in late September , when the White House released a memo of Trump 's now infamous July 25 with Ukraine 's president , that the president called her `` bad news , '' saying she was `` going to go through some things . ''
Since then , Yovanovitch , who just turned 61 , indeed , has been going through `` some things . ''
Still an active Foreign Service officer , she 's been teaching at Georgetown University while the scandal unfolded across Washington -- her name , her photo , and the accusations , coming up repeatedly in news accounts and on television .
She was heralded as a hero when she complied with a House subpoena in defiance of the White House -- the first current administration official to do so -- marching to Capitol Hill on Oct. 11 to speak to House impeachment investigators behind closed doors .
She learned about being a survivor from her parents , whom she credits as teaching her the values of `` freedom and democracy the U.S . represents . ''
They emigrated to North America in the 1940s -- fleeing Nazi and communist regimes in Europe . Young Masha grew up in Kent , Connecticut , according to The Middletown Press , where her parents taught foreign languages at a private boarding school .
`` My parents survived poverty , war , and displacement , '' she said at her confirmation hearing in 2016 . `` They finally arrived in the United States with me in tow in search of freedom , accountability , and opportunity , the very values that Ukrainians demanded in the revolution of dignity . ''
( MORE : Former ambassador to Ukraine says Trump had her removed based on 'false claims ' )
She told a Connecticut newspaper in 2005 that she first thought about working abroad when she was in school but did n't pursue it until years later , after studying in Moscow and working in advertising in New York . She joined the Foreign Service in 1986 .
|
Who is Marie Yovanovitch? originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
Her friends and colleagues all know her as "Masha."
But to most of the rest of the world, she's Marie Yovanovitch, the career diplomat caught up in the blizzard of headlines about Ukraine and President Donald Trump's possible impeachment.
Until a few months ago, she was the tough-minded U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, living in the embassy in Kyiv with her mother Nadia and her dog Scout, she said in a 2017 interview.
Then, her whole world changed.
PHOTO: U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Louise Yovanovitch is seen during a ceremony to mark World AIDS Day in Kiev, Ukraine, Dec. 1, 2017. (Gleb Garanich/Reuters, FILE) More
Now, she's telling her story about being smeared and threatened to millions of Americans watching the House impeachment hearings on television.
Yovanovitch has served under the past six administrations -- both Republican and Democrat -- and won high praise, including the Senior Foreign Service Performance Award six times and the State Department's Superior Honor Award five times. She was nominated to be U.S. ambassador to Kyrgyzstan and Armenia by George W. Bush and to Ukraine by Barack Obama.
But earlier this year, Yovanovitch was attacked in conservative media and by Ukraine's former public prosecutor, who accused her of giving him a "do not prosecute" list and blocking him from traveling to the U.S. to investigate Democrats after she publicly criticized the country's lack of progress in tackling corruption.
(MORE: Former Ukraine ambassador felt threatened, told to 'watch my back': Deposition)
The State Department and U.S. embassy went on record to deny the allegations, and the prosecutor later recanted them. But Trump and his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani have repeated them, and they may have influenced Trump's decision to recall Yovanovitch early from her post in May.
She learned only in late September, when the White House released a memo of Trump's now infamous July 25 with Ukraine's president, that the president called her "bad news," saying she was "going to go through some things."
Since then, Yovanovitch, who just turned 61, indeed, has been going through "some things."
Still an active Foreign Service officer, she's been teaching at Georgetown University while the scandal unfolded across Washington -- her name, her photo, and the accusations, coming up repeatedly in news accounts and on television.
PHOTO: U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, center, sits during her meeting with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in Kyiv, Ukraine, March 6, 2019. (Mikhail Palinchak/AP, FILE) More
She was heralded as a hero when she complied with a House subpoena in defiance of the White House -- the first current administration official to do so -- marching to Capitol Hill on Oct. 11 to speak to House impeachment investigators behind closed doors.
She learned about being a survivor from her parents, whom she credits as teaching her the values of "freedom and democracy the U.S. represents."
They emigrated to North America in the 1940s -- fleeing Nazi and communist regimes in Europe. Young Masha grew up in Kent, Connecticut, according to The Middletown Press, where her parents taught foreign languages at a private boarding school.
"My parents survived poverty, war, and displacement," she said at her confirmation hearing in 2016. "They finally arrived in the United States with me in tow in search of freedom, accountability, and opportunity, the very values that Ukrainians demanded in the revolution of dignity."
(MORE: Former ambassador to Ukraine says Trump had her removed based on 'false claims')
She told a Connecticut newspaper in 2005 that she first thought about working abroad when she was in school but didn't pursue it until years later, after studying in Moscow and working in advertising in New York. She joined the Foreign Service in 1986.
|
www.news.yahoo.com
| 0left
|
g4DOMamtoHgrf17l
|
education
|
Townhall
| 22
|
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2015/01/09/six-things-obama-didnt-tell-you-about-his-free-college-plan-n1940903
|
Six Things Obama Didn't Tell You About His "Free" College Tuition Plan
|
2015-01-09
|
Conn Carroll, "Cortney OBrien", Julio Rosas, Guy Benson, Timothy Meads
|
Previewing yet another item on his 2015 State of the Union Friday , President Obama announced a new plan to make community college tuition `` free . ''
`` Today I 'm announcing an ambitious new plan to bring down the cost of community college tuition in America , '' Obama said . `` I wan na bring it down to zero . I wan na make it free . ''
Obama may have spoken for over half-an-hour in Knoxville , Tennessee , where he was joined by both Sens . Bob Corker ( R-TN ) and Lamar Alexander ( R-TN ) , but he left out a few details about his new program :
Obama may have sold his plan as `` free '' college tuition , but it is n't free to students and it definitely is n't free to taxpayers . First , Obama 's plan will only cover `` three-qarters of the average cost of community college . '' States are expected to pick up the tab for the remaining 25 percent . But even then , the program will only cover the `` average cost '' of tuition . Many students who go to schools with higher tuitions will still be on the hook for money .
Second , nothing is ever free for taxpayers . On Air Force One today , Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz confirmed that the program will cost at least $ 60 billion over ten years .
`` There are no free rides in America , '' Obama insisted today . And he 's right . Nothing is ever really free . `` Colleges would to do their part by offering high quality academics and helping students actually graduate , '' Obama continued . `` States would have to do their part to . This is n't a blank check . It is not a free lunch . ''
All this accountability may sound great in a political speech , but in real life what it all translates to is tons of paperwork and red tape for states and schools . If you loved the federalization of elementary education through No Child Left Behind , and all the millions of hours of paperwork that came with it , then you 'll love Obama 's plan to federalize community colleges .
3 ) Too Many High School Students Are n't Prepared For Community College
Too many high schools are already failing to prepare their graduates for college and making community college as universal as high school , which is what Obama said the goal of his new plan was , would only make the situation worse .
A 2004 study found that not only did 68 percent of community college students take at least one remedial course , but of those that did take remedial courses , they had to take 2.9 of them . All Obama 's plan would really do is create nationally funded 6-year high schools .
If community colleges had a strong track record of taking unprepared or financially strained students through graduation and onto four-year institutions , then maybe Obama 's plan might begin to make some sense . But the simple fact is that they do n't .
Less than 20 percent of first-time , full-time community college students complete their two-year degrees in three years . And of the only 20 percent of community college students who do transfer to four-year institutions , only 72 percent of them will finish or still be in school after another four years .
No government spending program exists in a vacuum . If the government subsidizes the price of a service , then the price of that service will go up . Which is exactly what has happened to the price of four-year college tuition since the federal government has been ramping up their grant and loan-guarantee spending .
Not only will government subsidized tuition at public community colleges drive up the price of tuition at those colleges , but it will also crowd out private sector solutions . The Manhattan Institute 's Judah Bellin explains :
|
Previewing yet another item on his 2015 State of the Union Friday, President Obama announced a new plan to make community college tuition "free."
"Today I'm announcing an ambitious new plan to bring down the cost of community college tuition in America," Obama said. "I wanna bring it down to zero. I wanna make it free."
Obama may have spoken for over half-an-hour in Knoxville, Tennessee, where he was joined by both Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN), but he left out a few details about his new program:
1) It Isn't Free
Obama may have sold his plan as "free" college tuition, but it isn't free to students and it definitely isn't free to taxpayers. First, Obama's plan will only cover "three-qarters of the average cost of community college." States are expected to pick up the tab for the remaining 25 percent. But even then, the program will only cover the "average cost" of tuition. Many students who go to schools with higher tuitions will still be on the hook for money.
Second, nothing is ever free for taxpayers. On Air Force One today, Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz confirmed that the program will cost at least $60 billion over ten years.
2) It Will Drown Community Colleges In Red Tape
"There are no free rides in America," Obama insisted today. And he's right. Nothing is ever really free. "Colleges would to do their part by offering high quality academics and helping students actually graduate," Obama continued. "States would have to do their part to. This isn't a blank check. It is not a free lunch."
All this accountability may sound great in a political speech, but in real life what it all translates to is tons of paperwork and red tape for states and schools. If you loved the federalization of elementary education through No Child Left Behind, and all the millions of hours of paperwork that came with it, then you'll love Obama's plan to federalize community colleges.
3) Too Many High School Students Aren't Prepared For Community College
Too many high schools are already failing to prepare their graduates for college and making community college as universal as high school, which is what Obama said the goal of his new plan was, would only make the situation worse.
A 2004 study found that not only did 68 percent of community college students take at least one remedial course, but of those that did take remedial courses, they had to take 2.9 of them. All Obama's plan would really do is create nationally funded 6-year high schools.
4) Community College's Have A Poor Track Record
If community colleges had a strong track record of taking unprepared or financially strained students through graduation and onto four-year institutions, then maybe Obama's plan might begin to make some sense. But the simple fact is that they don't.
Less than 20 percent of first-time, full-time community college students complete their two-year degrees in three years. And of the only 20 percent of community college students who do transfer to four-year institutions, only 72 percent of them will finish or still be in school after another four years.
5) "Free" Tuition Will Drive Up Costs
No government spending program exists in a vacuum. If the government subsidizes the price of a service, then the price of that service will go up. Which is exactly what has happened to the price of four-year college tuition since the federal government has been ramping up their grant and loan-guarantee spending.
6) Government Spending Crowds Out Private Sector Solutions
Not only will government subsidized tuition at public community colleges drive up the price of tuition at those colleges, but it will also crowd out private sector solutions. The Manhattan Institute's Judah Bellin explains:
|
www.townhall.com
| 1right
|
eJU1UR8yDnZ8ACK8
|
us_house
|
Politico
| 00
|
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77556.html
|
Fast and Furious contempt vote up in the air
|
2012-06-18
|
John Bresnahan, Jake Sherman
|
Eric Holder and Darrell Issa had appeared close to a deal late last week . | AP Photos Holder contempt vote up in the air
GOP Rep. Darrell Issa warned Attorney General Eric Holder late Monday that if the Justice Department failed to turn over documents he is seeking , the California Republican will go ahead with a contempt vote against Holder as planned later this week .
Issa , chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee , has been battling with DOJ since last year over documents related to the failed Fast and Furious program . The two sides had seemed close to making a deal late last week , but Issa cautioned Holder that he will only delay the contempt vote — set for his panel on Wednesday — if DOJ makes the Fast and Furious material available by Tuesday .
Issa and Holder are scheduled to meet Tuesday afternoon in the Oversight and Government Reform Committee ’ s offices in the Rayburn House Office Building .
“ As the department has not yet produced these documents — and unless it does so tomorrow morning — I will not be able to offer you the committee ’ s assessment of them at tomorrow ’ s meeting , ” Issa said in his letter to Holder , the latest in a flurry of public missives between the two sides .
Issa wants information related to a Feb. 4 , 2011 , letter from DOJ downplaying top officials knowledge of what occurred during the Fast and Furious operation . That letter was later withdrawn by DOJ as inaccurate , and Hill Republicans have been trying to determine how the incident occurred .
Issa also dismissed what Holder has called the “ extraordinary accommodation ” made by DOJ in deciding to turn over “ internal deliberative documents ” to congressional investigators . DOJ had previously said such documents were not subject to congressional subpoenas .
“ There is nothing extraordinary about an offer from a federal agency to fully or partially respond to a subpoena , ” Issa told Holder . “ I do , however , hope the department will decide to produce the documents that would justify a postponement [ of Wednesday ’ s vote ] and will use tomorrow ’ s discussion to better understand what steps it can take if it sincerely seeks an outcome other than continuation of contempt proceedings . ”
DOJ officials met with Issa ’ s investigators last week to turn over some materials , and discussions between the two sides were ongoing throughout the weekend , GOP insiders said .
Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings , the top Democrat on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee , will be part of the session with Holder .
Issa — backed by Speaker John Boehner ( R-Ohio ) and other House GOP leaders — has subpoenaed thousands of pages of DOJ documents related to the Fast and Furious “ gun walking ” program .
That operation , run jointly by DOJ and the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives , allowed thousands of guns purchased in the United States to reach Mexican drug cartels as federal agents attempted to track them .
But the effort failed and two U.S. law-enforcement officers were killed using Fast and Furious weapons , leading to outrage on Capitol Hill .
Issa ’ s panel issued a subpoena last October for the Fast and Furious materials , particularly information related to the Feb. 2011 letter . Holder and other DOJ officials have refused for months to turn over those documents , arguing that previous administrations withheld similar “ internal deliberative ” information .
Yet with what Holder called a “ constitutional crisis ” looming over Fast and Furious , Issa and Holder appeared close to a deal to postpone the contempt vote late last week . Holder offered to turn over some — but not all — of the documents Issa has been seeking . In return , Holder sought a face-to-face meeting with Issa to resolve their dispute . Holder called the move an “ extraordinary accommodation ” to the demands of congressional investigators .
The battle with DOJ over Fast and Furious has become a test of strength for Issa and the House GOP leadership . Boehner and other top party leaders initially did not want to get into a showdown with Holder and the White House , fearing it would distract Republicans from the economic-based message that they have been pushing all year . Congress faces deadlines this month on highway and student loan funding , issues with far broader impact than the Fast and Furious debate , despite the seriousness of the DOJ-House fight .
|
Eric Holder and Darrell Issa had appeared close to a deal late last week. | AP Photos Holder contempt vote up in the air
GOP Rep. Darrell Issa warned Attorney General Eric Holder late Monday that if the Justice Department failed to turn over documents he is seeking, the California Republican will go ahead with a contempt vote against Holder as planned later this week.
Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has been battling with DOJ since last year over documents related to the failed Fast and Furious program. The two sides had seemed close to making a deal late last week, but Issa cautioned Holder that he will only delay the contempt vote — set for his panel on Wednesday — if DOJ makes the Fast and Furious material available by Tuesday.
Story Continued Below
( Also on POLITICO: Cummings: Holder acted honorably)
Issa and Holder are scheduled to meet Tuesday afternoon in the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s offices in the Rayburn House Office Building.
“As the department has not yet produced these documents — and unless it does so tomorrow morning — I will not be able to offer you the committee’s assessment of them at tomorrow’s meeting,” Issa said in his letter to Holder, the latest in a flurry of public missives between the two sides.
Issa wants information related to a Feb. 4, 2011, letter from DOJ downplaying top officials knowledge of what occurred during the Fast and Furious operation. That letter was later withdrawn by DOJ as inaccurate, and Hill Republicans have been trying to determine how the incident occurred.
Issa also dismissed what Holder has called the “extraordinary accommodation” made by DOJ in deciding to turn over “internal deliberative documents” to congressional investigators. DOJ had previously said such documents were not subject to congressional subpoenas.
“There is nothing extraordinary about an offer from a federal agency to fully or partially respond to a subpoena,” Issa told Holder. “I do, however, hope the department will decide to produce the documents that would justify a postponement [of Wednesday’s vote] and will use tomorrow’s discussion to better understand what steps it can take if it sincerely seeks an outcome other than continuation of contempt proceedings.”
DOJ officials met with Issa’s investigators last week to turn over some materials, and discussions between the two sides were ongoing throughout the weekend, GOP insiders said.
Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, will be part of the session with Holder.
Issa — backed by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other House GOP leaders — has subpoenaed thousands of pages of DOJ documents related to the Fast and Furious “gun walking” program.
That operation, run jointly by DOJ and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, allowed thousands of guns purchased in the United States to reach Mexican drug cartels as federal agents attempted to track them.
But the effort failed and two U.S. law-enforcement officers were killed using Fast and Furious weapons, leading to outrage on Capitol Hill.
Issa’s panel issued a subpoena last October for the Fast and Furious materials, particularly information related to the Feb. 2011 letter. Holder and other DOJ officials have refused for months to turn over those documents, arguing that previous administrations withheld similar “internal deliberative” information.
( PHOTOS: Eric Holder's career)
Yet with what Holder called a “constitutional crisis” looming over Fast and Furious, Issa and Holder appeared close to a deal to postpone the contempt vote late last week. Holder offered to turn over some — but not all — of the documents Issa has been seeking. In return, Holder sought a face-to-face meeting with Issa to resolve their dispute. Holder called the move an “extraordinary accommodation” to the demands of congressional investigators.
The battle with DOJ over Fast and Furious has become a test of strength for Issa and the House GOP leadership. Boehner and other top party leaders initially did not want to get into a showdown with Holder and the White House, fearing it would distract Republicans from the economic-based message that they have been pushing all year. Congress faces deadlines this month on highway and student loan funding, issues with far broader impact than the Fast and Furious debate, despite the seriousness of the DOJ-House fight.
|
www.politico.com
| 0left
|
sg1SCwPWtclz8Yty
|
elections
|
USA TODAY
| 11
|
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/20/cindy-hyde-smith-apologizes-hanging-comment-mississippi-senator/2075212002/
|
Cindy Hyde-Smith apologizes for 'hanging' comment, says her words were used as a 'weapon'
|
2018-11-20
|
Justin Mitchell, Clarion Ledger
|
CLOSE At a Monday news conference about an endorsement by the National Right to Life Committee , Gov . Phil Bryant and Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith were asked about Hyde-Smith 's comments about attending a hanging , captured in a video posted online Sunday . Luke Ramseth
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith apologized for a comment she made about sitting on the front row of a public hanging earlier this month in a debate against Mike Espy on Tuesday night .
Hyde-Smith and Espy are vying for the U.S. Senate seat that Hyde-Smith currently holds .
Hyde-Smith made the comment at a Nov. 2 event alongside cattle rancher Colin Hutchinson , a supporter of the senator .
`` If he invited me to a public hanging , I 'd be on the front row , '' Hyde-Smith said in an embrace with Hutchinson . The supporters around them laughed .
The exchange was captured in a video and went viral when it was tweeted by Lamar White Jr .
`` If he invited me to a public hanging , I 'd be on the front row '' - Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith says in Tupelo , MS after Colin Hutchinson , cattle rancher , praises her .
Hyde-Smith is in a runoff on Nov 27th against Mike Espy . pic.twitter.com/0a9jOEjokr — Lamar White , Jr. ( @ LamarWhiteJr ) November 11 , 2018
`` For anyone that was offended by my comments , I certainly apologize , '' Hyde-Smith said during the debate when asked if she was willing to apologize . `` There was no ill will , no intent whatsoever in my statements . ''
Hyde-Smith said she is very close to Hutchinson , whose parents died of cancer when he was in high school .
Hyde-Smith said she also used another phrase that day — she said she told the browed she would fight a circle saw for Hutchinson .
`` Obviously , I would not stick my arm in a circle saw , '' Hyde-Smith said .
After apologizing , Hyde-Smith went on to say her words were later used by the Espy campaign for `` political gain . ''
`` This comment was twisted and it was turned into a weapon to be used against me , '' she said .
In a rebuttal , Espy said , `` No one twisted your comments , because the comments came out of your mouth . ''
Espy said the video went viral `` around the world '' in just three minutes .
`` I don ’ t know what ’ s in your heart , but we know what came out of your mouth , '' he said .
|
CLOSE At a Monday news conference about an endorsement by the National Right to Life Committee, Gov. Phil Bryant and Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith were asked about Hyde-Smith's comments about attending a hanging, captured in a video posted online Sunday. Luke Ramseth
Cindy Hyde-Smith apologized for comments she made about attending a "public hanging" in Tupelo on Nov. 2, 2018, during a live debate against Mike Espy. (Photo: WLBT)
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith apologized for a comment she made about sitting on the front row of a public hanging earlier this month in a debate against Mike Espy on Tuesday night.
Hyde-Smith and Espy are vying for the U.S. Senate seat that Hyde-Smith currently holds.
Hyde-Smith made the comment at a Nov. 2 event alongside cattle rancher Colin Hutchinson, a supporter of the senator.
"If he invited me to a public hanging, I'd be on the front row," Hyde-Smith said in an embrace with Hutchinson. The supporters around them laughed.
The exchange was captured in a video and went viral when it was tweeted by Lamar White Jr.
"If he invited me to a public hanging, I'd be on the front row"- Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith says in Tupelo, MS after Colin Hutchinson, cattle rancher, praises her.
Hyde-Smith is in a runoff on Nov 27th against Mike Espy. pic.twitter.com/0a9jOEjokr — Lamar White, Jr. (@LamarWhiteJr) November 11, 2018
"For anyone that was offended by my comments, I certainly apologize," Hyde-Smith said during the debate when asked if she was willing to apologize. "There was no ill will, no intent whatsoever in my statements."
Hyde-Smith said she is very close to Hutchinson, whose parents died of cancer when he was in high school.
Hyde-Smith said she also used another phrase that day — she said she told the browed she would fight a circle saw for Hutchinson.
More: Who is Mississippi Senate candidate Cindy Hyde-Smith?
Related: Who is Mississippi Senate candidate Mike Espy?
"Obviously, I would not stick my arm in a circle saw," Hyde-Smith said.
After apologizing, Hyde-Smith went on to say her words were later used by the Espy campaign for "political gain."
"This comment was twisted and it was turned into a weapon to be used against me," she said.
In a rebuttal, Espy said, "No one twisted your comments, because the comments came out of your mouth."
Espy said the video went viral "around the world" in just three minutes.
"I don’t know what’s in your heart, but we know what came out of your mouth," he said.
Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/20/cindy-hyde-smith-apologizes-hanging-comment-mississippi-senator/2075212002/
|
www.usatoday.com
| 2center
|
fC1mVJQ97PY1kTt9
|
supreme_court
|
Fox Online News
| 22
|
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/02/appeals-court-deals-blow-to-obamacare-contraceptive-mandate/
|
Appeals court deals blow to ObamaCare contraceptive mandate
|
2013-11-02
|
A divided appeals court panel sided Friday with Ohio business owners who challenged the birth control mandate under the new federal health care law .
The business owners are two brothers , Francis and Philip M. Gilardi , who own Freshway Foods and Freshway Logistics of Sidney , Ohio. , and challenged the mandate on religious grounds . They say the mandate to provide contraceptive coverage would force them to violate their Roman Catholic beliefs and moral values by providing contraceptives such as the morning-after pill for their employees . The law already exempts houses of worship from the requirement .
The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is one of several on the birth control issue , which likely will be resolved by the Supreme Court . There are at least three other rulings by federal appeals courts on the mandate : One sided with Oklahoma businesses ; and two sided with the Obama administration in challenges brought by Pennsylvania and Michigan companies .
Writing for the majority , Judge Janice Rogers Brown wrote that the mandate `` trammels the right of free exercise -- a right that lies at the core of our constitutional liberties -- as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act . ''
Brown , an appointee of President George W. Bush , said that the mandate presented the Gilardis with a `` Hobson 's choice : They can either abide by the sacred tenets of their faith , pay a penalty of over $ 14 million , and cripple the companies they have spent a lifetime building , or they become complicit in a grave moral wrong . ''
Friday 's ruling reversed a lower court ruling that had denied the Gilardis ' request for a preliminary injunction to block the Department of Health and Human Services from enforcing the mandate against them as business owners . The appeals court ruled that the lower court erred when it concluded the Gilardis were unlikely to succeed on the merits , and sent the case back to the lower court to consider other factors for an injunction .
But Brown upheld the lower court 's dismissal of an injunction for the brothers ' companies , writing , `` we have no basis for concluding a secular organization can exercise religion . ''
In an opinion dissenting from the court 's main holding in the case , Judge Harry T. Edwards wrote that legislative restrictions may trump religious exercise . He asked what , if the Gilardis ' companies were exempted from covering contraception , would stop another company from seeking an exemption from a requirement to cover vaccines ?
`` The mandate does not require the Gilardis to encourage Freshway 's employees to use contraceptives any more directly than they do by authorizing Freshway to pay wages , '' wrote Edwards , who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter . He added that the Gilardis remain free to publicly express their disapproval of contraceptives .
Coming from the other direction , Judge A. Raymond Randolph joined Brown 's main conclusion about the Gilardis but dissented from her conclusions about Freshway companies ' exercise of religion .
`` Why limit the free-exercise right to religious organizations when many business corporations adhere to religious dogma ? '' asked Randolph , an appointee of President George H.W . Bush . `` If non-religious organizations do not have free-exercise rights , why do non-religious natural persons ( atheists , for example ) possess them ? ''
The Gilardis ' lawyer , Francis Manion , senior counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice , an anti-abortion legal group that focuses on constitutional law , said he was pleased that the court accepted the `` bulk '' of his arguments , but will appeal the part of the ruling on the free exercise religious rights of corporations .
`` It 's a big victory , but not total , '' he said in a telephone interview .
In a statement , the Rev . Barry W. Lynn , executive director of Americans United , a church-state watchdog group , said the Friday 's ruling turns `` the concept of religious freedom on its head .
`` Religious liberty means the right to make decisions for yourself , not other people , '' Lynn said . `` Freedom of religion should never be a blank check to meddle in the personal medical decisions of others . ''
The Department of Health and Human Services said it was unable to comment on pending litigation .
|
A divided appeals court panel sided Friday with Ohio business owners who challenged the birth control mandate under the new federal health care law.
The business owners are two brothers, Francis and Philip M. Gilardi, who own Freshway Foods and Freshway Logistics of Sidney, Ohio., and challenged the mandate on religious grounds. They say the mandate to provide contraceptive coverage would force them to violate their Roman Catholic beliefs and moral values by providing contraceptives such as the morning-after pill for their employees. The law already exempts houses of worship from the requirement.
The ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is one of several on the birth control issue, which likely will be resolved by the Supreme Court. There are at least three other rulings by federal appeals courts on the mandate: One sided with Oklahoma businesses; and two sided with the Obama administration in challenges brought by Pennsylvania and Michigan companies.
Writing for the majority, Judge Janice Rogers Brown wrote that the mandate "trammels the right of free exercise--a right that lies at the core of our constitutional liberties--as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act."
Brown, an appointee of President George W. Bush, said that the mandate presented the Gilardis with a "Hobson's choice: They can either abide by the sacred tenets of their faith, pay a penalty of over $14 million, and cripple the companies they have spent a lifetime building, or they become complicit in a grave moral wrong."
Friday's ruling reversed a lower court ruling that had denied the Gilardis' request for a preliminary injunction to block the Department of Health and Human Services from enforcing the mandate against them as business owners. The appeals court ruled that the lower court erred when it concluded the Gilardis were unlikely to succeed on the merits, and sent the case back to the lower court to consider other factors for an injunction.
But Brown upheld the lower court's dismissal of an injunction for the brothers' companies, writing, "we have no basis for concluding a secular organization can exercise religion."
In an opinion dissenting from the court's main holding in the case, Judge Harry T. Edwards wrote that legislative restrictions may trump religious exercise. He asked what, if the Gilardis' companies were exempted from covering contraception, would stop another company from seeking an exemption from a requirement to cover vaccines?
"The mandate does not require the Gilardis to encourage Freshway's employees to use contraceptives any more directly than they do by authorizing Freshway to pay wages," wrote Edwards, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter. He added that the Gilardis remain free to publicly express their disapproval of contraceptives.
Coming from the other direction, Judge A. Raymond Randolph joined Brown's main conclusion about the Gilardis but dissented from her conclusions about Freshway companies' exercise of religion.
"Why limit the free-exercise right to religious organizations when many business corporations adhere to religious dogma?" asked Randolph, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush. "If non-religious organizations do not have free-exercise rights, why do non-religious natural persons (atheists, for example) possess them?"
The Gilardis' lawyer, Francis Manion, senior counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, an anti-abortion legal group that focuses on constitutional law, said he was pleased that the court accepted the "bulk" of his arguments, but will appeal the part of the ruling on the free exercise religious rights of corporations.
"It's a big victory, but not total," he said in a telephone interview.
In a statement, the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, a church-state watchdog group, said the Friday's ruling turns "the concept of religious freedom on its head.
"Religious liberty means the right to make decisions for yourself, not other people," Lynn said. "Freedom of religion should never be a blank check to meddle in the personal medical decisions of others."
The Department of Health and Human Services said it was unable to comment on pending litigation.
|
www.foxnews.com
| 1right
|
v14iGLgd97jgUAHe
|
|
middle_east
|
Fox News
| 22
|
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/06/egypt-on-edge-after-deadly-clashes-and-islamist-pushback/?test=latestnews
|
Egypt's president holds crisis talks with security officials, names opposition leader interim prime minister
|
2013-07-06
|
Egypt 's new president has backed away from an announcement that pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei would be the interim prime minister .
A spokesman for interim President Adly Mansour , Ahmed el-Musilamani , told reporters on Saturday that consultations were continuing , denying that the appointment of the Nobel Peace laureate was ever certain .
However , reporters gathered at the presidential palace were ushered in to a room where they were told by official to wait for the president who would arrive shortly to announce ElBaradei 's appointment .
A senior opposition official , Munir Fakhry Abdelnur , tells The Associated Press that the reversal was because the ultraconservative Salafi el-Nour party objected to ElBardei 's appointment and mediation was underway .
Earlier Mansour held crisis talks with security officials on efforts to reclaim control of the streets .
More On This ... Key events in Egypt ’ s uprising and unrest
After a night of clashes that claimed at least 36 lives and injured more than 200 , both sides appeared to be preparing for the possibility of more violence as Egypt 's political unraveling increasingly left little room for middle ground or dialogue . Only a fraction of Cairo 's normally heavy traffic was on the streets amid worries that violence could flare up again .
Security forces stepped up their presence near the largest concentration of Morsi supporters on the streets : A sit-in outside a mosque in Cairo 's eastern Nasr City district , a traditionally Muslim Brotherhood stronghold .
In Nasr City lines of fighters brandished homemade weapons and body armor at road blocks affixed with Morsi 's picture .
Next door in the relatively upscale Heliopolis district , people chanted against Morsi and honked car horns in appreciation of roadblocks manned by Egypt 's military -- whose snub of Morsi 's authority earlier this week tipped the scales against Egypt 's first elected leader .
In a further sign of the concern the unrest could spin out of control , Mansour , held talks with the army chief and Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah el-Sissi as well as Interior Minister Mohammed Ibrahim .
It was the first time Mansour has worked out of the president 's main offices since he was sworn-in Thursday as the country 's interim leader .
Mansour also met with leaders of Tamrod , or Rebel , the youth movement that organized the mass anti-Morsi demonstrations , according to the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity .
Gunmen shot dead a Christian priest Saturday while he shopped for food in an outdoor market in the northern Sinai Peninsula Saturday .
It was not immediately clear if the shooting was linked to the political crisis , but there has been a backlash against Christians since just before and after Morsi 's ouster . Attacks have occurred on members of the minority by Islamists in at least three provinces south of Egypt . Morsi 's Brotherhood and hard-line allies claim the Christians played a big part in inciting against the ousted leader .
Officials have briefly detained top figures from Morsi 's Muslim Brotherhood and have kept him from the public eye , under detention in an undisclosed location .
Morsi 's supporters have vowed to take to the streets until he is reinstated . His opponents , meanwhile , have called for more mass rallies to defend what they call the `` gains of June 30 , '' a reference to the start of massive protests to call for the ouster of the president .
There were no reports of major clashes after dawn Saturday , following a night of street battles that added to an overall death toll of at least 75 in the past week .
The Interior Ministry reported that at least eight policemen have been killed since June 30 .
The Health Ministry official ’ s deputy , Khairat el-Shater , considered the most powerful figure in the organization , was arrested in a Cairo apartment along with his brother on allegations of inciting violence , Interior Ministry spokesman Hani Abdel-Latif told The Associated Press .
Egyptian troops reportedly opened fire on Morsi supporters Friday outside Republican Guard headquarters near Cairo , where Morsi was believed held . There were initially conflicting reports on casualties , but an army spokesman denied troops shot at Morsi supporters , saying only blanks and teargas were used .
Crowds of Islamists gathered to cross a bridge over the Nile River after nightfall and clashed with Morsi opponents near Tahrir Square and outside the state TV building . TV images showed groups of youths running and fireworks going off near the bridge . One witness reported stone throwing and gunfire .
In a dramatic appearance -- his first since Morsi 's ouster -- the supreme leader of the Muslim Brotherhood defiantly vowed the president would return . `` God make Morsi victorious and bring him back to the palace , '' Mohammed Badie proclaimed from a stage before a crowd of cheering supporters at a Cairo mosque . `` We are his soldiers we defend him with our lives . ''
Badie , who was taken into custody shortly after Morsi was ousted , addressed the military , saying it was a matter of honor for it to abide by its pledge of loyalty to the president , in what appeared to be an attempt to pull it away from its leadership that removed Morsi . `` Your leader is Morsi ... Return to the people of Egypt , '' he said . `` Your bullets are not to be fired on your sons and your own people . ''
State prosecutors said that Morsi would face an investigation next week into claims that he `` insulted the presidency . ''
Morsi was ousted in what was described by the presidential palace as a `` complete military coup . '' The White House has not labeled Morsi ouster a coup . Doing so would have U.S. aid implications .
Morsi said on his presidential Facebook page that the military 's action `` presents a military coup and it is unacceptable . ''
The U.S. State Department condemned the violence and called on all Egyptian leaders to denounce the use of force and prevent further bloodshed among their supporters .
|
Egypt's new president has backed away from an announcement that pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei would be the interim prime minister.
A spokesman for interim President Adly Mansour, Ahmed el-Musilamani, told reporters on Saturday that consultations were continuing, denying that the appointment of the Nobel Peace laureate was ever certain.
However, reporters gathered at the presidential palace were ushered in to a room where they were told by official to wait for the president who would arrive shortly to announce ElBaradei's appointment.
A senior opposition official, Munir Fakhry Abdelnur, tells The Associated Press that the reversal was because the ultraconservative Salafi el-Nour party objected to ElBardei's appointment and mediation was underway.
Earlier Mansour held crisis talks with security officials on efforts to reclaim control of the streets.
More On This... Key events in Egypt’s uprising and unrest
After a night of clashes that claimed at least 36 lives and injured more than 200, both sides appeared to be preparing for the possibility of more violence as Egypt's political unraveling increasingly left little room for middle ground or dialogue. Only a fraction of Cairo's normally heavy traffic was on the streets amid worries that violence could flare up again.
Security forces stepped up their presence near the largest concentration of Morsi supporters on the streets: A sit-in outside a mosque in Cairo's eastern Nasr City district, a traditionally Muslim Brotherhood stronghold.
In Nasr City lines of fighters brandished homemade weapons and body armor at road blocks affixed with Morsi's picture.
Next door in the relatively upscale Heliopolis district, people chanted against Morsi and honked car horns in appreciation of roadblocks manned by Egypt's military -- whose snub of Morsi's authority earlier this week tipped the scales against Egypt's first elected leader.
In a further sign of the concern the unrest could spin out of control, Mansour, held talks with the army chief and Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah el-Sissi as well as Interior Minister Mohammed Ibrahim.
It was the first time Mansour has worked out of the president's main offices since he was sworn-in Thursday as the country's interim leader.
Mansour also met with leaders of Tamrod, or Rebel, the youth movement that organized the mass anti-Morsi demonstrations, according to the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Gunmen shot dead a Christian priest Saturday while he shopped for food in an outdoor market in the northern Sinai Peninsula Saturday.
It was not immediately clear if the shooting was linked to the political crisis, but there has been a backlash against Christians since just before and after Morsi's ouster. Attacks have occurred on members of the minority by Islamists in at least three provinces south of Egypt. Morsi's Brotherhood and hard-line allies claim the Christians played a big part in inciting against the ousted leader.
Officials have briefly detained top figures from Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood and have kept him from the public eye, under detention in an undisclosed location.
Morsi's supporters have vowed to take to the streets until he is reinstated. His opponents, meanwhile, have called for more mass rallies to defend what they call the "gains of June 30," a reference to the start of massive protests to call for the ouster of the president.
There were no reports of major clashes after dawn Saturday, following a night of street battles that added to an overall death toll of at least 75 in the past week.
The Interior Ministry reported that at least eight policemen have been killed since June 30.
The Health Ministry official’s deputy, Khairat el-Shater, considered the most powerful figure in the organization, was arrested in a Cairo apartment along with his brother on allegations of inciting violence, Interior Ministry spokesman Hani Abdel-Latif told The Associated Press.
Egyptian troops reportedly opened fire on Morsi supporters Friday outside Republican Guard headquarters near Cairo, where Morsi was believed held. There were initially conflicting reports on casualties, but an army spokesman denied troops shot at Morsi supporters, saying only blanks and teargas were used.
Crowds of Islamists gathered to cross a bridge over the Nile River after nightfall and clashed with Morsi opponents near Tahrir Square and outside the state TV building. TV images showed groups of youths running and fireworks going off near the bridge. One witness reported stone throwing and gunfire.
In a dramatic appearance -- his first since Morsi's ouster -- the supreme leader of the Muslim Brotherhood defiantly vowed the president would return. "God make Morsi victorious and bring him back to the palace," Mohammed Badie proclaimed from a stage before a crowd of cheering supporters at a Cairo mosque. "We are his soldiers we defend him with our lives."
Badie, who was taken into custody shortly after Morsi was ousted, addressed the military, saying it was a matter of honor for it to abide by its pledge of loyalty to the president, in what appeared to be an attempt to pull it away from its leadership that removed Morsi. "Your leader is Morsi ... Return to the people of Egypt," he said. "Your bullets are not to be fired on your sons and your own people."
State prosecutors said that Morsi would face an investigation next week into claims that he "insulted the presidency."
Morsi was ousted in what was described by the presidential palace as a "complete military coup." The White House has not labeled Morsi ouster a coup. Doing so would have U.S. aid implications.
Morsi said on his presidential Facebook page that the military's action "presents a military coup and it is unacceptable."
The U.S. State Department condemned the violence and called on all Egyptian leaders to denounce the use of force and prevent further bloodshed among their supporters.
Click for more from the BBC.
Fox News' Greg Palkot, The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
|
www.foxnews.com
| 1right
|
ELItuvrRuGYyCN9w
|
End of preview. Expand
in Data Studio
News Articles with Political Bias Annotations (Media Source Split)
Source
Derived from Baly et al.'s work: We Can Detect Your Bias: Predicting the Political Ideology of News Articles (Baly et al., EMNLP 2020)
Information
This dataset contains 34,737 news articles manually annotated for political ideology, either "left", "center", or "right". This version contains media source test/training/validation splits, where the articles in each split are from different media sources than the articles in the others. These are identical to the media splits used by Baly (according to their git repository).
- Downloads last month
- 160