A federal judge in Oregon has halted the Trump administration’s efforts to deploy federalized National Guard members from California and other states to Portland, Oregon. In a rare late Sunday night virtual hearing on October 5, 2025, US District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, granted a temporary restraining order requested by the state of California to prevent the deployment of up to 300 California National Guard members to Portland. This ruling followed Immergut’s decision the previous day to block President Donald Trump’s attempt to deploy Oregon National Guard troops in the city.
California Governor Gavin Newsom announced plans to sue the Trump administration after it deployed federalized National Guard troops—called into service by the president—to Oregon. In a statement, Newsom condemned the move, saying, “This is a breathtaking abuse of the law and power. The Trump Administration is unapologetically attacking the rule of law itself and putting into action their dangerous words—ignoring court orders and treating judges, even those appointed by the President himself, as political opponents.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta praised Immergut’s ruling, suggesting the administration’s attempt to deploy California troops was a direct response to the judge’s earlier order blocking the federalization of Oregon’s National Guard. “The Trump Administration’s flagrant disregard for the courts was on full display when it sought to circumvent Judge Immergut’s order by redeploying troops from Los Angeles to Portland,” Bonta said. “This disrespect for the rule of law cannot stand—and I’m glad the court agreed.”
Oregon Governor Tina Kotek, a Democrat, confirmed that some California National Guard troops arrived in Oregon on the night of October 4, with more expected on OCtober 6. She strongly opposed the deployment, stating, “The facts haven’t changed. There is no need for military intervention in Oregon. There is no insurrection in Portland. No threat to national security. Oregon is our home, not a military target. Oregonians exercising their freedom of speech against unlawful actions by the Trump Administration should do so peacefully.”
In an op-ed published Sunday in The Oregonian, Portland Police Chief Bob Day addressed the situation, noting that “national portrayals” of Portland overstated the city’s issues. “There is no ignoring that we are facing an extraordinary time in our city’s history, with the deployment of both federal law enforcement and the Oregon National Guard,” Day wrote. He emphasized that Portland police employ a “layered approach” to managing public order, avoiding tactics like tactical gear lineups that could escalate crowd behavior.
On the same day, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced in a memo that up to 400 Texas National Guard members would be federalized for deployment to Chicago and Portland for up to 60 days, with the possibility of an extension. The memo, included in a court filing by the Oregon attorney general’s office, cited President Trump’s determination on October 4, 2025, that “violent incidents, as well as the credible threat of continued violence,” were impeding federal law enforcement in Illinois, Oregon, and other locations.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, supported the deployment, stating on X, “I fully authorized the President to call up 400 members of the Texas National Guard to ensure safety for federal officials. You can either fully enforce protection for federal employees or get out of the way and let Texas Guard do it. No Guard can match the training, skill, and expertise of the Texas National Guard.”
I fully authorized the President to call up 400 members of the Texas National Guard to ensure safety for federal officials.
You can either fully enforce protection for federal employees or get out of the way and let Texas Guard do it.
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, a Democrat, condemned the move, calling it “Trump’s Invasion.” He noted that no federal officials had coordinated with him regarding the deployment and criticized the involvement of another state’s military. “It started with federal agents, it will soon include deploying federalized members of the Illinois National Guard against our wishes, and it will now involve sending in another state’s military troops,” Pritzker said. Both Pritzker and Kotek urged Abbott to withdraw his support for the deployment.
The White House defended the deployment, with spokesperson Abigail Jackson stating, “President Trump exercised his lawful authority to protect federal assets and personnel in Portland following violent riots and attacks on law enforcement.” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell added that California National Guard members were reassigned from Los Angeles to Portland “to support U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal personnel performing official duties, including the enforcement of federal law, and to protect federal property.”
In response to Immergut’s ruling blocking the activation of 200 Oregon National Guard troops until at least October 18, the Trump administration filed a motion with the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the judge “impermissibly second-guessed” Trump’s military judgments. The motion cited a nearly 200-year-old Supreme Court precedent, asserting that such decisions are the president’s prerogative, not that of a governor or federal court.
Judge Immergut’s rulings underscored a “longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs.” Oregon’s Governor Kotek reiterated, “There is no insurrection in Portland. No threat to national security. No fires, no bombs, no fatalities due to civil unrest. The only threat we face is to our democracy—and it is being led by President Donald Trump.”
The controversy extends beyond Portland. Last month, a federal judge in Los Angeles ruled that the deployment of National Guard troops and Marines was illegal, and officials in Washington, D.C., also sued to block similar deployments. Trump has threatened to deploy troops and federal law enforcement to other cities, including Baltimore and New Orleans, escalating tensions with Democratic governors and mayors.
Pritzker, in a CNN interview on Sunday, criticized the federal presence in Chicago, stating, “They are the ones that are making it a war zone. They need to get out of Chicago if they’re not going to focus on the worst of the worst, which is what the president said they were going to do.” He and other Democratic leaders have also condemned Trump’s suggestion to senior military officials that “dangerous cities” be used as “training grounds” for the National Guard.
The deployment of federalized National Guard troops has sparked widespread debate about the balance between federal authority and state autonomy, as well as the appropriate use of military forces in domestic civil matters. As legal battles continue, the situation remains a flashpoint in the ongoing clash between the Trump administration and Democratic state leaders.
The Trump administration on October 2 terminated $7.6 billion in grants funding 223 clean energy projects across 16 states, all of which supported former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election. The decision, announced by the Energy Department, follows a review deeming the projects misaligned with national energy needs or economically unviable. The cuts, affecting initiatives like battery plants, hydrogen technology, electric grid upgrades, and carbon-capture efforts, have sparked accusations of political retaliation amid an ongoing government shutdown.
The Energy Department’s review targeted funding from the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, and other bureaus. While specific project details were not disclosed, the cancellations include up to $1.2 billion for California’s hydrogen hub, the Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems (ARCHES), and $1 billion for a Pacific Northwest hydrogen project. Notably, hydrogen projects in Texas, West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania were spared. The 16 affected states are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. Each of these states voted for Harris in 2024, and their US Senators opposed a Republican short-term funding bill to avert the government shutdown.
White House Budget Director Russell Vought announced the cuts on social media, framing them as eliminating funding for the “Left’s climate agenda.” President Donald Trump, in an interview with One America News, suggested the cuts target Democratic priorities, stating, “I’m allowed to cut things that never should have been approved in the first place.” The administration has also rescinded $13 billion in clean energy funding from the 2022 climate law, citing unspent allocations.
Democrats and environmental groups have condemned the move. California Governor Gavin Newsom highlighted that ARCHES had secured $10 billion in private investment and supported over 200,000 jobs, calling the cut a threat to economic growth. Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) labeled the decision “vindictive” and “shortsighted,” arguing it undermines US energy leadership. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA.) accused the administration of using American livelihoods as “pawns in some sort of sick political game.” Environmental organizations echoed these concerns. Jackie Wong of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) called the cuts a blow to innovative technology and clean energy jobs. Conrad Schneider of the Clean Air Task Force warned that the cancellations weaken U.S. competitiveness in global energy markets.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright defended the cancellations, emphasizing they were business decisions to protect taxpayer dollars and prioritize affordable, reliable energy. He denied political motivations, stating, “These decisions are made on whether it’s a good use of the taxpayer money or not.” Wright noted that projects in both Republican and Democratic states, including hydrogen initiatives in West Virginia, Texas, and Louisiana, are under review, with further cancellations expected. Award recipients have 30 days to appeal.
The cuts align with the Trump administration’s broader rollback of climate programs, including vehicle emission and greenhouse gas regulations. The Energy Department’s review began after President Donald Trump’s 2024 election victory, with over a quarter of the rescinded grants awarded between Election Day and Inauguration Day under the Biden administration. The cancellations are part of a $7 billion hydrogen fuel program initiated by President Joe Biden to combat climate change.
As the government shutdown continues, the debate over these cuts underscores tensions between fiscal priorities and clean energy innovation, with significant implications for jobs, energy costs, and US leadership in emerging technologies.
On October 1, the US federal government shut down, marking the first such closure since 2019. The shutdown, triggered by a contentious spending dispute between President Donald Trump and congressional Democrats, has disrupted federal services and furloughed many federal workers. The current shutdown echoes a 35-day closure in 2018/2019, when President Donald Trump and congressional Democrats clashed over funding for a southern border wall. The central issue behind this most recent government shutdown is the Democrats’ insistence that President Trump agree to extend expiring health care subsidies and reverse Medicaid cuts included in his signature tax cut and domestic policy law passed earlier in 2025. These health care provisions, particularly the Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies set to expire by year’s end, are critical to millions of Americans’ access to affordable insurance.
While most Democrats have united behind Schumer’s strategy, a few broke ranks to support the Republican funding plan, including Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), John Fetterman (D-PA) (arguably the Democratic Senator most aligned with the MAGA movement on a majority of public policy issues), and Angus King (I-ME). On the Republican side, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) was the sole dissenter against his party’s proposal. These defections highlight the complexity of the negotiations, as some lawmakers face pressure from constituents or upcoming re-elections.
Democrats argue that their focus on health care resonates with voters, particularly after backlash from liberal activists in March when some Senate Democrats supported a stopgap funding bill. This time, Democrats are leveraging the health care issue to challenge Trump and Republicans, daring them to reject popular programs like ACA subsidies. Republicans, however, have accused Democrats of holding government funding “hostage” to secure health care concessions. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has expressed willingness to negotiate on extending ACA tax credits separately, but insists that such discussions should occur while the government remains operational.
The shutdown has also amplified partisan rhetoric. On September 29, President Donald Trump met with congressional leaders but later posted an AI-generated video mocking Democratic leaders, including Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer. The video, which featured offensive caricatures and fabricated quotes, falsely attributed statements to Chuck Schumer claiming Democrats aimed to provide free health care to undocumented immigrants to secure their votes, a debunked conspiracy theory. In response, Jeffries posted a photo of Trump with Jeffrey Epstein, captioning it “This is real” and condemning bigotry. Such exchanges underscore the toxic atmosphere surrounding the shutdown, with both sides using social media to inflame tensions. Republicans have continued to push misleading narratives, including claims that Democrats are prioritizing health care for unauthorized immigrants over government funding, further polarizing the debate.
The immediate consequences of the shutdown include the suspension of non-essential federal services and the furlough of thousands of federal workers. Essential services, such as Social Security payments and national defense operations, will continue, but many agencies will face disruptions, affecting everything from national parks to regulatory oversight.
As the standoff continues, the political fallout will likely shape the narrative heading into the 2026 midterm elections. Both parties are betting on their ability to sway public opinion, with Democrats banking on health care’s broad appeal and Republicans framing Democrats as obstructionists. For now, the American public awaits a resolution while grappling with the real-world impacts of a government in gridlock.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Donald Trump Attacks UN and Lectures Nations in Address to General Assembly
On September 23, President Donald Trump delivered a nearly hour-long address to the UN General Assembly, blending sharp criticism of the global body with self-congratulation for his administration’s achievements.
On September 23, President Donald Trump delivered a nearly hour-long address to the UN General Assembly, blending sharp criticism of the global body with self-congratulation for his administration’s achievements. In a speech that oscillated between grievance and optimism, President Trump touted his “America First” agenda, warned European nations of economic and cultural ruin, and positioned himself as a global peacemaker while questioning the UN’s effectiveness.
2. The UK, Canada, Australia, and Portugal Recognize Palestinian Statehood
On September 21, 2025, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Portugal formally recognized Palestine as a sovereign state, marking a significant shift in their long-standing diplomatic positions.
3. Supreme Court to Review Presidential Authority Over Independent Agencies
On September 22, 2025, the US Supreme Court announced it would consider a significant expansion of President Donald Trump’s power over independent federal agencies, potentially overturning a nearly century-old precedent that limits when presidents can remove agency board members.
4. President Donald Trump Moves to Designate Antifa as a Major Terrorist Organization
On September 22, President Donald Trump signed an executive order designating the decentralized anti-fascist movement known as Antifa a domestic terrorist organization.
On September 23, President Donald Trump delivered a nearly hour-long address to the UN General Assembly, blending sharp criticism of the global body with self-congratulation for his administration’s achievements. In a speech that oscillated between grievance and optimism, President Trump touted his “America First” agenda, warned European nations of economic and cultural ruin, and positioned himself as a global peacemaker while questioning the UN’s effectiveness.
President Donald Trump opened his speech by calling the UN a “feckless institution” filled with “empty words” that fail to resolve global conflicts. He questioned the organization’s purpose, stating, “The U.N. has such tremendous potential. I’ve always said it. It has such tremendous, tremendous potential. But it’s not even coming close to living up to that potential.” His remarks underscored a return to an unapologetically nationalist stance, a departure from the more internationalist approach of his predecessor, President Joe Biden. Despite his criticisms, Trump later met with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, assuring him that the US remains “100%” supportive of the organization. “I may disagree with it sometimes, but I am so behind it because the potential for peace at this institution is great,” Trump said, striking a conciliatory tone after his earlier rebuke.
President Donald Trump used the global stage to issue stark warnings to European nations, arguing that their migration policies and commitment to green energy initiatives were leading to economic and cultural devastation. He described these policies as a “double-tailed monster” that “destroys everything in its wake.” “I’m telling you that if you don’t get away from the ‘green energy’ scam, your country is going to fail,” Trump declared. “If you don’t stop people that you’ve never seen before that you have nothing in common with, your country is going to fail.” He contrasted these policies with his administration’s approach, which has prioritized expanded oil and gas drilling and aggressive crackdowns on illegal immigration in the United States. Trump expressed sympathy for Europe, saying, “I love the people of Europe, and I hate to see it being devastated by energy and immigration.” His remarks were a clear call for other nations to adopt similar policies to those of his administration.
In a significant development, President Donald Trump addressed Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine, revealing a shift in his stance. After meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump announced his belief that Ukraine, with support from the European Union and NATO, could reclaim all territory lost to Russia. “I think Ukraine, with the support of the European Union, is in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form,” Trump wrote in a post following his speech. “With time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option.” This marks a departure from his 2024 campaign rhetoric, where he often suggested the US had limited interest in the conflict’s outcome and promised a swift resolution. Trump also took a swipe at Russia, calling it a “paper tiger” and noting that the war, now in its third year, “should have taken a Real Military Power less than a week to win.” He threatened Moscow with “a very strong round of powerful tariffs” if Russian President Vladimir Putin does not negotiate an end to the conflict.
President Donald Trump also addressed the growing international push for Palestinian statehood, a movement spotlighted during the UN General Assembly’s discussions on a two-state solution. France recently joined other nations in recognizing Palestinian statehood, a move Trump and Israel strongly oppose. “The rewards would be too great for Hamas terrorists,” Trump argued, referencing the October 7 attacks. “This would be a reward for these horrible atrocities.” He also participated in a group meeting with leaders from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan to discuss ending the Gaza war, calling it his “most important meeting” and expressing a desire to resolve a conflict that “should have probably never started.”
Early in his speech, President Donald Trump deviated from his prepared remarks to poke fun at logistical issues at UN headquarters, including a malfunctioning escalator and a faulty teleprompter. “These are the two things I got from the United Nations: a bad escalator and a bad teleprompter,” he quipped, drawing laughter from delegates. UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric later explained that the escalator issue may have been caused by a videographer from the US delegation triggering a safety mechanism, while a UN official noted that the Trump Administration was responsible for operating the teleprompter.
President Donald Trump reiterated his ambition to win a Nobel Peace Prize, claiming his administration has “ended seven wars” since his return to office. “Everyone says that I should get the Nobel Prize — but for me, the real prize will be the sons and daughters who live to grow up because millions of people are no longer being killed in endless wars,” he said. He cited efforts to mediate conflicts between Israel and Iran, India and Pakistan, and Egypt and Sudan, though experts note that his impact on these resolutions is not as straightforward as he claims. Trump expressed frustration that the UN had not taken a more active role, stating, “It’s too bad that I had to do these things instead of the United Nations doing them.”
President Donald Trump’s address was a vivid reminder of his polarizing leadership style, blending boasts of domestic and foreign policy successes with dire warnings to other nations. His unapologetic “America First” posture, coupled with sharp critiques of global institutions and policies, underscored his intent to reshape the international order. As he navigates his second term, Trump’s vision for global leadership continues to spark both admiration and alarm among world leaders.
The case centers on a challenge to Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935), a landmark Supreme Court ruling that established protections for commissioners of independent agencies. In that decision, the Court unanimously held that President Franklin D. Roosevelt could not fire an FTC commissioner without cause, such as misconduct or neglect of duty. This ruling paved the way for the creation of powerful independent agencies tasked with regulating critical areas like consumer protection, labor relations, and federal employment disputes. These agencies were designed to operate with a degree of autonomy, insulated from direct presidential control to ensure decisions were based on expertise rather than political pressures.
However, the Humphrey’s Executor decision has long been a point of contention for conservative legal scholars who argue that independent agencies should be more accountable to the president, as the head of the executive branch. The Justice Department, representing President Donald Trump, contends that the president should have the authority to remove agency board members at will to effectively carry out his agenda. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued, “The President and the government suffer irreparable harm when courts transfer even some of that executive power to officers beyond the President’s control.” Sauer further noted that courts lack the authority to reinstate fired officials, only to award back pay.
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court permitted President Donald Trump to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic FTC commissioner, while the broader case challenging Humphrey’s Executor proceeds. This ruling follows a series of similar decisions allowing the president to remove board members from three other independent agencies, including Gwynne Wilcox of the NLRB and Cathy Harris of the MSPB. The Court’s conservative majority did not provide detailed reasoning for allowing Slaughter’s firing, as is typical for decisions on the emergency docket. Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented, arguing that Congress explicitly prohibited such presidential removals. “Yet the majority, stay order by stay order, has handed full control of all those agencies to the President,” Kagan wrote. The dissenters expressed concern that eroding the independence of these agencies could lead to regulatory decisions driven by politics rather than expertise.
The upcoming case, set for arguments in December 2025, will determine whether the Court overturns or narrows Humphrey’s Executor. A decision to grant the president broader authority to fire agency board members could fundamentally alter the structure of independent agencies. These bodies, including the FTC, NLRB, and MSPB, play critical roles in enforcing consumer protections, investigating unfair labor practices, overseeing union elections, and resolving federal employment disputes. Opponents of expanding presidential power, including Slaughter’s legal team, argue that allowing the president to remove congressionally confirmed board members at will risks politicizing regulatory decisions. They assert that such a change would undermine the expertise-driven mission of these agencies. “If the President is to be given new powers Congress has expressly and repeatedly refused to give him, that decision should come from the people’s elected representatives,” Slaughter’s attorneys stated. The Justice Department, however, argues that the president’s ability to execute his agenda is hindered when agency officials operate beyond his control. This tension between presidential authority and agency independence lies at the heart of the case.
The Supreme Court’s willingness to hear this case before it has fully worked through lower courts signals its urgency and potential impact. Additionally, Wilcox and Harris, the fired NLRB and MSPB board members, have asked the Court to consider their cases alongside Slaughter’s, highlighting the broader implications for multiple agencies. The Court has also suggested that the president’s removal power may face limits at certain agencies, such as the Federal Reserve. This issue is likely to be tested in a separate case involving fired Fed Governor Lisa Cook, which could further clarify the boundaries of presidential authority.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments in December, the outcome of this case could redefine the relationship between the executive branch and independent federal agencies. A ruling in favor of expanded presidential power could usher in an era of greater executive control over regulatory bodies, potentially affecting how laws are enforced in areas like consumer protection, labor rights, and federal employment. Conversely, upholding Humphrey’s Executor would preserve the autonomy of these agencies, ensuring their decisions remain grounded in expertise rather than political influence. For now, the Court’s recent decisions signal a conservative majority inclined to reconsider long-standing precedents, setting the stage for a pivotal legal battle with significant consequences for the structure of the federal government.
In a post on X, President Donald Trump stated, “I am pleased to inform our many U.S.A. Patriots that I am designating ANTIFA, A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER, AS A MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.” He further emphasized that he would push for thorough investigations into those funding Antifa, ensuring compliance with the highest legal standards.
🚨 "I am pleased to inform our many U.S.A. Patriots that I am designating ANTIFA, A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER, AS A MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION…" – President Donald J. Trump pic.twitter.com/irLHCkrX1n
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt described the order as one of the administration’s first major steps in fulfilling President Donald Trump’s campaign promises to confront left-leaning political entities. Speaking at a briefing earlier that day, Leavitt railed against Democrats and Trump’s political opponents, stating, “Many Democrats in elective office have now been totally captured by a radical fringe of the far left who want to dehumanize every person they disagree with.” She pointed to Democratic lawmakers who voted against a resolution honoring conservative activist Charlie Kirk, whose recent assassination has intensified the administration’s rhetoric. “We must continue to call this wickedness out,” Leavitt added. “It’s the only way that our nation can heal.”
The announcement follows President Donald Trump’s vow last week to label Antifa a terrorist group, coming in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s killing. In a post on his Truth Social platform, President Trump wrote: “I am pleased to inform our many U.S.A. Patriots that I am designating ANTIFA, A SICK, DANGEROUS, RADICAL LEFT DISASTER, AS A MAJOR TERRORIST ORGANIZATION. I will also be strongly recommending that those funding ANTIFA be thoroughly investigated in accordance with the highest legal standards and practices!”
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt emphasized that the focus would extend beyond Antifa to its financial backers, noting, “We will be most importantly looking at who is funding Antifa and who is funding these other violent left-wing groups.” She cited evidence from the Kirk investigation, including bullets engraved with anti-fascist messages like “Hey Fascist! Catch!” She also referenced a series of alleged Antifa-linked incidents, including assailants shooting and assaulting law enforcement in Texas and Oregon in July, bringing a pipe bomb to a pro-Trump event in 2022, and threatening to shoot police and Trump supporters outside the Florida State Capitol in 2021. “We have seen a rise in violence perpetuated by Antifa, radical people across this country who subscribe to this group,” Leavitt said.
The term “Antifa,” short for anti-fascist, originates from the German word “antifaschistisch,” referencing 1930s resistance groups that opposed Nazi ideology. It traces its roots to European movements that fought Italian dictator Benito Mussolini during World War II and white supremacist skinhead groups during the Cold War. In the US, Antifa has existed for decades but gained prominence after Donald Trump’s 2016 election and the 2017 Charlottesville rally, where far-right violence galvanized anti-fascist activists.
Unlike structured far-right groups like the Proud Boys or Oath Keepers, which have clear leaders, hierarchies, and membership, Antifa is a loose, leaderless network of individuals and small cells leaning toward the far left, often including anarchists, communists, and hardline socialists. Its members broadly share anti-government, anti-capitalist, pro-LGBTQ+, and pro-immigration views. Activists often organize organically online and offline, without a national command structure, membership lists, or defined funding sources. This decentralization makes it challenging for authorities to target “leaders” or financial networks, as local groups operate independently.
Critics, including President Donald Trump and Republicans, frequently use “Antifa” as a catch-all label for a wide array of liberal and left-wing groups they oppose, blurring lines between ideology and action. The administration’s push raises concerns that it could stretch executive authority to suppress large-scale left-wing dissent. President Trump has already suggested charging members of the activist group Code Pink, who protested him during a recent Washington, D.C., restaurant visit, with crimes, signaling a pattern of aggressive targeting. Trump first promised to designate Antifa a terrorist organization during his first term in 2020, but never followed through. The current effort aligns with his declaration that “radical left political violence has hurt too many innocent people and taken too many lives.” Authorities have described Kirk’s accused killer, Tyler Robinson, as holding a “leftist ideology,” though no direct link to Antifa has been established, and the motive remains unclear.
What distinguishes Antifa from mainstream left-wing activism, according to critics, is some activists’ readiness to employ violence—often framed as self-defense against far-right threats. Participants frequently appear in public wearing dark clothing and face coverings, and online videos capture them wielding clubs, shields, sticks, and pepper spray at rallies. Notable incidents include a 2017 clash in Berkeley, California, where around 100 masked Antifa-linked activists attacked right-wing protesters, leading to multiple arrests. During the 2020 unrest following George Floyd’s killing, self-identified Antifa activist Michael Reinoehl fatally shot a member of the far-right Patriot Prayer group in Portland before being killed by police.
The executive order invokes powers typically reserved for foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), which allow the US to ban members, deport individuals, seize assets, and prosecute material supporters. However, domestic groups like Antifa do not fit the FTO criteria, which require the entity to be foreign-based. The order specifies implementation within existing laws, directing agencies to pursue “any and all illegal operations” without broadly criminalizing anti-fascist ideology, a move that would violate the First Amendment. Legal experts anticipate swift constitutional challenges, given Antifa’s lack of a centralized structure. Prosecuting individuals for “material support” to domestic groups lacks the clear legal framework available for foreign ones, potentially limiting the order’s reach.
As the administration moves forward, the designation’s practical impact remains uncertain. It fulfills a long-standing Trump pledge but underscores deepening partisan divides, especially in the shadow of Charlie Kirk’s death, where his widow, Erika Kirk, urged fighting hate with love, clashing with President Donald Trump’s assertion at the funeral that he “hates” his political opponents. Karoline Leavitt defended the president, saying, “The president is authentically himself.” Whether this authenticity translates to effective policy or fuels further unrest is a question that will define the coming months.
On January 6, 2025, a joint session of Congress certified President-elect Donald Trump’s victory in the 2024 election, fulfilling a vital democratic tradition that was violently disrupted four years ago. This time, there was no sign of unrest, though security at the Capitol was heightened. Unlike President-elect Trump in 2020, Vice President Kamala Harris did not dispute her loss in the November election, and Democrats refrained from raising any objections during the certification of Electoral College votes.
Vice President Harris presided over the certification process with dignity, even as it confirmed her loss. The session proceeded smoothly, with lawmakers from both parties reading out each state’s electoral votes in alphabetical order and declaring them “regular in form and authentic.” The only noticeable partisan divide came in the applause: Republicans celebrated the states won by Trump, while Democrats cheered for those carried by Harris. The session ended with a standing ovation from Republicans as Trump’s majority was announced.
Earlier in the day, Vice President Harris described her role as “a sacred obligation,” emphasizing her commitment to the Constitution and democracy. She told reporters in the Rotunda that the key takeaway was that “Democracy must be upheld by the people.” Aides described the peaceful transfer of power as one of the most significant acts of her vice presidency. As Harris led senators to the House chamber, she exchanged polite words with House Speaker Mike Johnson, who had played a prominent role in contesting the 2020 election results.
The calm and orderly certification process starkly contrasted to the violent events of January 6, 2021. This year, the Capitol was under heavy lockdown, with tall metal fencing and enhanced security measures designated by the Department of Homeland Security as a “national special security event.” The increased precautions reflected the lessons learned from the 2021 riot, which was tied to the deaths of seven people, including three police officers, after Trump’s false claims of a stolen election incited his supporters to storm the Capitol.
In the days leading up to the certification, President Joe Biden stressed the importance of a smooth transition of power while urging Americans to remember the events of January 6, 2021. Writing in The Washington Post, Biden accused Trump and his supporters of attempting “to rewrite — even erase — the history of that day.” Despite Trump’s campaign promises to pardon individuals convicted for their actions during the 2021 riot, Democrats refrained from challenging the election results, prioritizing constitutional norms over partisan conflict.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer underscored the importance of upholding democratic principles and warned Trump against pardoning those responsible for the January 6 violence. “It would be a dangerous endorsement of political violence,” Schumer said. “It is wrong, it is reckless, and would be an insult to the memory of those who died in connection to that day.” With the peaceful certification complete, the nation moves forward under Trump’s leadership, but the shadow of January 6 remains a potent reminder of the fragility of democracy.
Russia is dissatisfied with the reported peace deal proposals on Ukraine from U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s team, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on December 29, according to state-owned TASS. Earlier reports from the Wall Street Journal indicated that Trump’s team is considering a plan to delay Ukraine’s NATO membership by at least 20 years in exchange for continued Western arms supplies and the deployment of European peacekeepers to monitor a ceasefire. Lavrov said the proposal, as outlined in leaks and Trump’s December 12 Time interview, suggests “freezing hostilities along the current line of contact and transferring the responsibility of confronting Russia to Europe.” “We are certainly not satisfied with the proposals sounding on behalf of representatives of the president-elect’s team,” Lavrov said, specifically rejecting the idea of introducing European peacekeepers in Ukraine.
Reports suggest that President-elect Donald Trump discussed these ideas during a December 7, 2024 meeting in Paris with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and French President Emmanuel Macron. Trump reportedly emphasized Europe’s need to take the lead in deterring Russian aggression. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov noted that Moscow has received no official signals from Washington regarding these proposals, adding that policy remains under the Biden administration until Trump’s inauguration on January 20. Lavrov expressed Russia’s “willingness to engage” with the new U.S. administration, provided Washington takes the “first move” to restore dialogue severed after the start of Russia’s invasion.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said on December 26 that Russia aims to “end the conflict” in 2025 while reiterating hopes for a front-line success. Following Putin’s comments, Sergey Lavrov ridiculed the possibility of a ceasefire, adding that “a ceasefire is a road to nowhere. Putin expressed openness to dialogue with Trump but maintained Russia’s firm demands, including no territorial concessions and a rejection of Ukraine’s NATO membership.
Russia’s rejection of Trump’s peace proposals is significant because it means that the incoming administration will have to revamp its strategy when it comes to negotiating peace between Kyiv and Moscow. As both sides have now rejected parts of the president-elect’s proposal, in order to facilitate negotiations, Trump will have to come up with an entirely new strategy.
President-elect Donald Trump has previously said on numerous occasions that he would end the war in Ukraine “within 24 hours” and his advisers have reportedly been coming up with a peace plan that would involve freezing all conflict at the front lines and creating a demilitarized zone. Keith Kellogg, the president-elect’s nominee to serve as special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, has said that the nearly three-year war between the two countries will be “resolved in the next few months.” During his recent interview with Time magazine Trump said that he will not abandon Kyiv and that he believes the war would not have broken out if he was president. Russia had previously said that it was “ready to study Trump’s proposals on Ukraine” but specified that “studying” did not mean “agreeing.”
President-elect Donald J. Trump endorsed House Speaker Mike Johnson for another term in his post on December 30, moving to shore up the fortunes of a leader whose fate he threw into question this month when he sank a bipartisan spending deal Speaker Johnson had struck to avert a government shutdown. The announcement from Trump on his website, Truth Social, ended days of private discussions by the president-elect and his allies about whether to try to save Johnson or find another candidate, as some conservatives have been agitating for. It followed a concerted, monthslong effort by Johnson to ingratiate himself with the president-elect in hopes of winning his backing and averting another messy fight for the speakership at the start of the 119th Congress on Friday.
It is still not clear whether President-elect Donald Trump’s stamp of approval would guarantee Congressman Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, a smooth road to re-election, given the antipathy he has drawn from some right-wing lawmakers who have recently shown their willingness to buck Trump. Given the very narrow margin of the incoming House majority, the loss of just a few votes could stymie Johnson. One Republican lawmaker, Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, has already pledged to oppose him, and others have said their support is not a certainty.
The House is set to choose a speaker as the new Congress convenes, just three days before President-elect Donald Trump’s Electoral College victory is scheduled to be certified by a joint session of Congress. House Speaker Mike Johnson must cobble together a majority in the 435-member chamber to keep his job, a feat that his predecessor Kevin McCarthy struggled to accomplish even though he, too, had Trump’s endorsement at the time. Failure to have a speaker in place by January 6 could delay the certification process and focus attention on the deep divisions within the narrow House Republican majority. It also could slow what Trump and Republican leaders had hoped would be a rapid start to legislative business in the new Congress to begin enacting the president-elect’s ambitious agenda.
“The American people need IMMEDIATE relief from all of the destructive policies of the last Administration. Speaker Mike Johnson is a good, hard working, religious man,” President-elect Donald Trump wrote in a discursive post that praised himself and his campaign, attacked Democrats, and mocked the Reverend Al Sharpton, with whom he has a long and contentious history. Trump said Johnson would “do the right thing, and we will continue to WIN. Mike has my Complete & Total Endorsement. MAGA!!! A person close to Trump, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the fact that House Republicans had defied the president-elect on the debt limit demand helped Trump realize that some members of the House posed challenges, but that Johnson was not one of them.
Before making his endorsement on December 30, President-elect Donald Trump had privately told people that House Speaker Mike Johnson had asked for his support, but that he was not sure he was going to back him. Trump and his advisers also told associates, though, that they did not see who else could get the 218 votes required to become speaker. No Republican has emerged to challenge him so far, though several have publicly vented their dissatisfaction with his performance and complained that Johnson did not keep them informed about his spending proposal.
After President-elect Donald Trump’s announcement, Congressman Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican who would be a potential alternative candidate, said on social media that he agreed with Trump’s endorsement as a way to move quickly on the Republican agenda. “Time to do what we said we would do.” Jordan wrote on social media.
On the other hand, Congresswoman Victoria Spartz, Republican of Indiana, said on Fox News before President-elect Trump’s endorsement that she was uncommitted on supporting Mike Johnson for the speakership. She reiterated that view later in a social media post. “I understand why President Trump is endorsing Speaker Johnson as he did Speaker Ryan, which is definitely important,” Spartz wrote. “However, we still need to get assurances that @SpeakerJohnson won’t sell us out to the swamp.”
After winning the House majority in 2022, Republicans got off to a rough start in 2023, taking 15 ballots and four days to elect Kevin McCarthy as speaker, only to see him deposed 10 months later. That led to Mike Johnson’s surprise election after others on McCarthy’s leadership team were rejected on the House floor. A similar scenario in the new Congress would be an embarrassing spectacle for Republicans who will control the White House and both chambers of Congress.
In private, President-elect Donald Trump has fumed about the fact that Mike Johnson failed during the end-of-session negotiations this month to deliver on his late demand that a year-end spending package also contain a suspension of the debt ceiling, which would have spared him from having to address with the federal borrowing limit when he takes office. Trump had made that demand after he and his ally, Elon Musk torpedoed the original catchall spending deal Johnson had cut with Democrats. Musk also endorsed Johnson keeping his job on Monday.
President-elect Donald Trump has complained about a broad fiscal deal negotiated by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and President Biden in May 2023, which increased the debt ceiling for two years while freezing and capping some government spending. He has also complained that Mike Johnson has failed to find a way to spare him a debt ceiling dilemma early in his next term, given that many Republicans refuse to support raising the limit no matter who is in the White House.
The Republican resistance to suspending the debt limit showed that despite President-elect Donald Trump’s demands, dozens of the most conservative House Republicans were willing to oppose him and risk the backlash when it comes to a central issue for them. Thomas Massie was among those who balked at the debt limit request, and he renewed his opposition to Mike Johnson after the president-elect’s endorsement. “I respect and support President Trump, but his endorsement of Mike Johnson is going to work out about as well as his endorsement of Speaker Paul Ryan,” Massie wrote on social media, referring to the former speaker who ended up at odds with Trump. “We’ve seen Johnson partner with the democrats to send money to Ukraine, authorize spying on Americans, and blow the budget.” Johnson did rely on Democratic votes multiple times to push through spending bills to avoid government shutdowns and keep aid flowing to Ukraine. The latter position won him Democratic backing when Massie sought unsuccessfully to topple Johnson in May. But Democrats, who were outraged that Johnson abandoned the spending deal he had struck with them this month, have made it clear they would not rescue him a second time.
Mike Johnson said he was “honored and humbled” by the incoming president’s backing. “Together, we will quickly deliver on your America First agenda and usher in the new golden age of America,” Johnson wrote on social media as he reposted Trump’s endorsement. “The American people demand and deserve that we waste no time. Let’s get to work!”
Republican state lawmakers and conservative leaders around the United States see Donald Trump’s re-election as a mandate that will help them enact right-wing policies in Republican-run states across the US. The policies include steep tax cuts, environmental legislation, religion in schools, and legislation concerning transgender medical care and education, among other hot-button social issues. Next year, Republicans will have trifecta control, meaning both legislative bodies and the governorship in a state, in 23 states, while Democrats will only control the three entities in 15 states. The other states have divided government.
While federal and state control could allow Republicans to advance their top priorities, leaders of progressive groups point to other election outcomes, such as some red states supporting abortion rights, as evidence that even if people voted for Trump, that does not necessarily mean they support what opponents describe as extreme proposals. And they remain optimistic that they will prevail against such measures in court. “We are in a moment right now where the incoming administration” won “by distancing themselves from these very policies that it now seems that they are seeking to accelerate”, said Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, a liberal legal group that includes more than 800 lawyers and has filed legal challenges to Republican regulations and administrative actions. Perryman added: “We are laser-focused on protecting the American people and on ensuring that people in this country have the tools to make their voices heard.”
Top priorities among Republican state lawmakers appear to concern curriculum and school choice, meaning allowing parents to use public money to send their children to private schools, which can be religious or more socially conservative than public schools. According to Education Week, twenty-eight states have at least one school choice program, such as education savings accounts, which provide public per-pupil funds to families with children who do not attend public schools. President-elect Donal Trump’s platform stated that he wanted “to protect the God-given right of every parent to be the steward of their children’s education” and when nominating Linda McMahon to serve as education secretary, he stated that she would “fight tirelessly to expand ‘Choice’ to every state in America”.
Since Trump’s election, Republicans in states such as Ohio have also introduced legislation labeled as a “Parent’s Bill of Rights” that would mandate that public school officials notify parents of a student’s mental, emotional or physical health, including “any request by a student to identify as a gender that does not align with the student’s biological sex”. Critics of such legislation have described it as “an endangerment to all LGBTQ+ youth”. Earlier this month, there were 129 pending anti-LGBTQ+ state bills, including proposals to prohibit doctors from prescribing to minors puberty-blocking drugs or gender reassignment surgery, according to the ACLU. Tiffany Justice, co-founder of Moms for Liberty, a rightwing advocacy group, said that the Department of Education under Trump would help states “stop gender ideology being taught in our nation’s schools”.
President-elect Donald Trump has also promised to eliminate the Biden administration’s efforts to address the climate crisis. The Montana state senator Tom McGillvray said he hoped Trump would mitigate or rescind recent federal environmental regulations. “We don’t need Washington to tell us how to manage our environment,” said McGillvray. Still, the courts could provide a way for people to combat Trump administration policies. The Montana Supreme Court upheld a ruling last month that stated that 16 young plaintiffs had a “constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment” and invalidated a law that barred regulators from considering the effects of greenhouse gas emissions when permitting fossil fuel projects.
Democracy Forward plans to use the courts to “challenge policies that are harmful and in instances where the incoming administration may be inclined to ignore the law”, said Skye Perryman. And even though Trump captured the popular vote and electoral college, voters in three states, including Montana, supported the Republican-passed ballot measures to protect abortion rights. According to polls, a majority of people also oppose Project 2025, a policy playbook from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. During the election, Trump distanced himself from the plan, which calls for withholding federal funding from states that share data on abortion that occurred within their borders and for dismantling the Department of Education, among a long list of other ideas. But Trump has since appointed people connected to Project 2025, including Tom Homan to serve as “border czar” and Brendan Carr to serve as chair of the Federal Communications Commission. “Some of the same architects behind the extreme federal policies also work at the state level,” said Perryman. “We are obviously monitoring the bills that are being filed in various sessions and ensuring that people at the state and local level can make their voices heard, including through using the courts.”
President Joe Biden on January 5 delivered a ferocious condemnation of former President Donald Trump, his likely 2024 opponent, warning in searing language that the former President had directed an insurrection and would aim to undo the nation’s bedrock democracy if he returned to power. On the eve of the third anniversary of the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by former President Trump’s supporters, President Biden framed the coming election as a choice between a candidate devoted to upholding America’s centuries-old ideals and a chaos agent willing to discard them for his benefit. “There’s no confusion about who Trump is or what he intends to do,” Biden warned in a speech at a community college not far from Valley Forge in Pennsylvania, where George Washington commanded troops during the Revolutionary War. Exhorting supporters to prepare to vote this fall, he said: “We all know who Donald Trump is. The question is: Who are we?”
In an intensely personal address that at one point nearly led President Joe Biden to curse former President Donald Trump by name, the President compared his rival to foreign autocrats who rule by fiat and lies. He said former President Trump had failed the basic test of American leaders, to trust the people to choose their elected officials and abide by their decisions. “We must be clear,” Biden said. “Democracy is on the ballot. Your freedom is on the ballot.”
President Joe Biden’s harshness on his rival illustrated what his campaign believes to be the stakes of the 2024 election and his perilous political standing. Confronted with low approval ratings, bad head-to-head polling against former President Donald Trump, worries about his age, and lingering unease with the economy, President Biden is turning increasingly to the figure who has proved to be Democrats’ single best motivator. Former President Donald Trump, speaking at a campaign rally in Iowa soon after President Joe Biden’s appearance, quickly lashed back, calling the president’s comments “pathetic fearmongering” and accusing him of “abusing George Washington’s legacy.”
President Joe Biden’s remarks carried echoes of the 2020 campaign when he presented himself as the caretaker of “the soul of America” against a Trump presidency that he and Democratic supporters argued was on the verge of causing permanent damage to the country. The 31-minute speech was President Biden’s first public campaign event since he announced in April 2023 that he would seek re-election and was, in tone and content, arguably his most forceful public denunciation of former President Donald Trump since the two men became political rivals in 2019.
President Joe Biden’s appearance, meant as a kickoff to help define the 2024 campaign, was an early effort to revive the politically sprawling anti-Trump coalition that propelled Democrats to key victories in recent elections. Mr. Biden’s task now is to persuade those voters to view the 2024 contest as the same kind of national emergency that they sensed in 2018, 2020, and 2022. He began with an extensive recounting of former President Donald Trump’s actions before, during, and after the January 6 attack. The country, President Biden said, cannot afford to allow Trump and his supporters to present a whitewashed version of that day and spread falsehoods about the violent outcome of their effort to undo the 2020 election results. Upholding the nation’s democracy, Biden said, is “the central cause of my presidency.”
President Joe Biden made no mention of the 91 felony charges the former president faces in four jurisdictions, sticking to a vow to steer clear of his rival’s legal problems and focusing squarely on Trump’s actions rather than any potential criminal consequences for them. “Trump exhausted every legal avenue available to overturn the 2020 election. The legal path took him back to the truth, that I won the election and he was a loser,” Biden said. “He had one act left, one desperate act available to him, the violence of January 6.”
For a president who has faced intense scrutiny over his vigor in public appearances, the speech was a deftly delivered, focused argument about this year’s stakes. It was President Joe Biden’s latest attempt to build his political identity around the ideas of restoring national unity and upholding fairness, democracy, and collective patriotism. He has come back to those themes many times, during his brief push for voting rights legislation in early 2022, then as the midterm elections approached, and most recently in September, during a speech in Arizona honoring former Senator John McCain.
In the speech, President Joe Biden sought to frame former President Donald Trump as the leader of a cult of personality, and his Republican allies as sycophants. The president mentioned the recent $148 million judgment against Rudolph W. Giuliani for his lies about Georgia election workers, as well as the $787.5 million that Fox News was ordered to pay to settle a defamation case about its role in spreading election lies. Biden lamented that Fox News hosts and Republican officials who condemned Trump’s January 6 behavior in the moment had since changed their tune and repeated his falsehoods. “Politics, fear, and money all intervened, and now these MAGA voices who know the truth about Jan. 6 have abandoned democracy,” Biden said.
What remains unclear is how much President Joe Biden’s democracy pitch will resonate with voters who remain nervous about an improving economy, and wary of re-electing an 81-year-old who is already the oldest president in US history. Even some who have expressed deep fears about Trump’s authoritarian impulses are skeptical that the subject will be a winning message in 2024. “As a Biden campaign theme, I think the threat to democracy pitch is a bust,” 2012 Republican Presidential nominee, prominent Trump critic, and Utah Senator Mitt Romney, wrote in a text message to a New York Times reporter. “January 6 will be four years old by the election. People have processed it, one way or another. Biden needs fresh material, a new attack, rather than kicking a dead political horse.”
President Joe Biden threaded his speech with warnings that former President Donald Trump and Republicans would threaten not only democracy but also major Democratic priorities, abortion rights, voting rights, and economic and environmental justice. Ian Bassin, the executive director of Protect Democracy, a nonprofit dedicated to combating authoritarianism, said he had stressed to Biden’s aides that the president needed to connect democracy to voters’ personal experiences on other issues, in the same way Trump repeats to his supporters that prosecutions of him are persecutions of them. “Democracy is not just a way of structuring elections for order in our government,” Mr. Bassin said. “It’s a set of values about the kind of communities we want to live in and the way that we want to live as neighbors.”
President Joe Biden warned in his speech that former President Donald Trump was not being shy about what he would do in a second term. “Trump’s assault on democracy isn’t just part of his past. It’s what he’s promising for the future,” President Biden said. “He’s not hiding the ball.” Biden then recounted, in exacting detail, how a Trump campaign rally last year began with a choir of rioters who stormed the Capitol on January 6 singing the national anthem while a video of the damage played on a big screen. Trump had watched with approval. The scene, Biden suggested, would be the nation’s fate if Trump and his allies returned to power. “This is like something out of a fairy tale,” Biden said. “A bad fairy tale.”
Former President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court on January 3 to allow him to stay on the presidential primary ballot in Colorado, saying a state ruling banning him was unconstitutional, unfair, and based on a January 6 insurrection that his appeal said did not happen. The court filing, dominated by technical and procedural challenges to the Colorado Supreme Court ruling last month, does not ask the high court to weigh in on whether the former president indeed participated in an insurrection. The state’s highest court concluded that Trump indeed engaged in the January 6 insurrection effort and thus was banned from running under an obscure, Civil War-era clause in the Constitution’s 14th Amendment banning such a person from holding office.
Former President Donald Trump’s appeal, which experts expect the high court to consider, instead argues that the Colorado court had no business getting involved in the matter at all and that keeping Trump off the ballot would deprive voters of their right in a democracy to choose their leaders. The decision is “a ruling that, if allowed to stand, will mark the first time in the history of the US that the judiciary has prevented voters from casting ballots for the leading major-party presidential candidate,” said the court papers filed late Wednesday afternoon, two days before a deadline to appeal or get booted off the Colorado Republican Party primary ballot.
The Colorado court ruled in favor of six Republican and independent voters who said the “insurrection clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution makes Trump ineligible to hold office and thus, not qualified to be on the ballot. That clause, originally directed at Confederates, says no one can hold office who has previously taken an oath to support the Constitution but then engaged in an insurrection or provided help to enemies of the US.
Former President Donald Trump’s team, in their legal brief, argued that Congress gets to decide a candidate’s eligibility to serve as president. And while the appeal was specific to the Colorado case, it tacitly invited the high court to offer a ruling that applied nationwide. “It would be beyond absurdity” for the ballot question to be determined by 51 separate state and District of Columbia jurisdictions rather than federal courts, the brief said. “The election of the President of the United States is a national matter, with national implications, that arises solely under the federal Constitution and does not implicate the inherent or retained authority of the states.”
The brief said former President Donald Trump was never an “officer” of the US and that the oath he took as president was different than those taken by other public servants, meaning he was not subject to the ban on insurrectionists. Further, the court papers said, the clause merely says such an individual cannot serve – not that he or she can’t run for office. The term “insurrection” is unclear, the brief said, and anyway, his lawyers said, Trump did not engage in “insurrection.” “Trump never told his supporters to enter the Capitol, either in his speech at the Ellipse or in any of his statements or communications before or during the events at the Capitol,” the appeal said. “To the contrary, his only explicit instructions called for protesting “peacefully and patriotically” to “support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement,” to “[s]tay peaceful” and to “remain peaceful.”
Jena Griswold, Colorado’s Democratic secretary of state, urged the high court to settle the matter. “Donald Trump just filed an appeal to the US Supreme Court to consider whether he is eligible to appear on Colorado’s Presidential Primary ballot. I urge the Court to consider this case as quickly as possible,” Griswold wrote on social media.
The appeal is virtually certain to be heard by a Supreme Court whose reputation as an unbiased arbiter has suffered immensely in recent years. Questions about ethical transgressions, along with the stunning 2022 reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision guaranteeing abortion rights, have turned the court, in the eyes of many Americans, into another partisan entity. The Trump case puts the court in an extremely uncomfortable position: No matter how it may rule, and no matter the legal arguments used to justify it, the decision is likely to cause a backlash from some political segments in deeply divided America. The high court was the target of criticism after its 2000 ruling that effectively made George W. Bush president. And while the justices may not want to enter that political fray again, competing decisions on the insurrection clause likely means the Supreme Court will have no choice but to get involved.
Former PresidentDonald Trump, aiming to become only the second commander-in-chief ever elected to two nonconsecutive terms, announced on November 15 night that he will seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2024. “In order to make America great and glorious again, I am tonight announcing my candidacy for president of the United States,” Trump told a crowd gathered at Mar-a-Lago, his waterfront estate in Florida, where his campaign will be headquartered. Surrounded by allies, advisers, and conservative influencers, Trump delivered a relatively subdued speech, rife with spurious and exaggerated claims about his four years in office.
Despite a historically divisive presidency and his own role in inciting an attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump aimed to evoke nostalgia for his time in office, frequently contrasting his first-term accomplishments with the Biden administration’s policies and the current economic climate. Many of those perceived accomplishments, from strict immigration actions to corporate tax cuts and religious freedom initiatives, remain deeply polarizing to this day. As Trump spoke to a roomful of Republicans who expect him to face primary challengers in the coming months, he also claimed the party cannot afford to nominate “a politician or conventional candidate” if it wants to win back the White House. “This will not be my campaign, this will be our campaign all together,” Trump said.
Donald Trump’s long-awaited campaign comes as he tries to reclaim the spotlight following the Republican parties underwhelming midterm elections performance – including the losses of several Trump-endorsed election deniers – and the subsequent blame game that has unfolded since Election Day. Republicans failed to gain a Senate majority, came up short in their efforts to fill several statewide seats, and have yet to secure a House majority, with only 215 races called in their favor so far out of the 218 needed, developments that have forced Trump and other party leaders into a defensive posture as they face reproval from within their ranks.
To the delight of aides and allies who have long advised him to mount a forward-looking campaign, Donald Trump spent only a fraction of his remarks repeating his lies about the 2020 election. Though he advocated for the use of paper ballots and likened America’s election system to that of “third world countries,” Trump also tried at times to broaden his grievances, lamenting the “massive corruption” and “entrenched interests” that in his view have consumed Washington. Many of Trump’s top advisers have expressed concern that his fixation on promoting conspiracies about the last presidential election would make it harder for him to win a national election in 2024. Throughout the hour-long speech, Trump made clear that he wants his campaign to be seen by Republicans as a sacrificial undertaking. “Anyone who truly seeks to take on this rigged and corrupt system will be faced with a storm of fire that only a few could understand,” he said at one point, describing the legal and emotional toll his presidency and post-presidential period has taken on his family members.
On the heels of last week’s midterm elections, Donald Trump has been blamed for elevating flawed candidates who spent too much time parroting his claims about election fraud, alienating key voters and ultimately leading to their defeats. He attempted to counter that criticism, noting that Republicans appear poised to retake the House majority and touting at least one Trump-endorsed candidate, Kevin Kiley of California. At one point, Trump appeared to blame his party’s midterm performance on voters not yet realizing “the total effect of the suffering” after two years of Democratic control in Washington. “I have no doubt that by 2024, it will sadly be much worse and they will see clearly what has happened and is happening to our country – and the voting will be much different,” he claimed.
Donald Trump is betting that his first-out-of-the-gate strategy will fend off potential primary rivals and give him an early advantage with deep-pocketed donors, aides say. He is widely expected to be challenged by both conservative and moderate Republicans, though the calculus of some presidential hopefuls could change now that he is running. Others, like his former Vice President, Mike Pence, may proceed anyway.
Donald Trump’s third presidential bid also coincides with a period of heightened legal peril as Justice Department officials investigating him and his associates revisit the prospect of indictments in their Trump-related probes. The former President is currently being investigated for his activities before and during the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol and his retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate after he left office. While Trump is counting on an easy path to the GOP nomination with his sustained support among the party’s base, his announcement is likely to dash the hopes of party leaders who have longed for fresh talent. In particular, top Republicans have been paying close attention to the next moves of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who won his reelection contest with a 19-point margin of victory and considerable support from minority and independent voters. Some Republican leaders may try to scuttle Trump’s campaign by elevating or encouraging alternative candidates, including DeSantis, who has been quietly laying the groundwork for a possible White House bid of his own.
Of course, any effort to inhibit Trump’s path to the nomination is likely to prove difficult. Despite his myriad legal entanglements and the stain of January 6, the twice-impeached 45th president remains immensely popular among most Republican voters and boasts a deep connection with his core backers that could prove difficult for other GOP hopefuls to replicate or weaken. Even leading conservatives who disliked Trump’s pugnacious politics and heterodox policies stuck with him as president because he helped solidify the rightward shift of the US Supreme Court with his nominations – one of the most far-reaching aspects of his legacy, which resulted in the conservative court majority’s deeply polarizing June decision to end federal abortion rights. In fact, while Trump ended his first term with the lowest approval rating of any president, Republicans viewed him favorably, according to a May NBC News poll. That alone could give Trump a significant edge over primary opponents whom voters are still familiarizing themselves with.
Among those potential competitors is Mike Pence, who would likely benefit from high name recognition due to his role as vice president. Pence, who has been preparing for a possible White House run in 2024, is sure to face an uphill battle courting Trump’s most loyal supporters, many of whom soured on the former vice president after he declined to overstep his congressional authority and block certification of now-President Joe Biden’s 2020 victory. Trump could also find himself pitted against DeSantis, who has risen to hero status among cultural conservatives and who is widely considered a more polished version of Trump. Even some of the former president’s advisers have voiced similar observations to CNN, noting that DeSantis also made inroads with major Republican donors during his quest for reelection and built a mountain of goodwill with GOP leaders by campaigning for federal and statewide Republican candidates in the middle of his own race.
Beyond his potential rivals, Donald Trump has another roadblock in his path as the House select committee continues to investigate his role in January 6, 2021, and Justice Department officials weigh whether to issue criminal charges. The committee, which subpoenaed him for testimony and documents in October and which Trump is now battling in court, held public hearings throughout the summer and early fall featuring depositions from those in Trump’s inner circle at the White House, including members of his family, that detailed his public and private efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results through a sustained pressure campaign on numerous local, state and federal officials, and on his own vice president.
From the moment Donald Trump left Washington, defeated and disgraced, in January 2021, he began plotting a return to power, devoting the bulk of his time to building a political operation intended for this moment. With assistance from numerous former aides and advisers, he continued the aggressive fundraising tactics that had become a marker of his 2020 campaign, amassing a colossal war chest ahead of the 2022 midterm elections, and worked diligently to elect steadfast allies in both Congress and state legislatures across the country. Through it all, Trump continued to falsely insist that the 2020 election was stolen from him, indulging in far-flung conspiracy theories about voter fraud and pressuring Republican leaders across the party’s election apparatus to endorse changes that would curtail voting rights. rump’s aides were pleased earlier this fall when his public appearances and rally speeches gradually became more focused on rising crime, immigration and economic woes, key themes throughout the midterm cycle and issues they hope will enable him to draw a compelling contrast with Biden as he begins this next chapter.
Despite his campaigning, there is no guarantee that Donald Trump will glide easily to a nonconsecutive second term. Not only does history offer just one example of such a feat (defeated in 1888 after his first term, President Grover Cleveland was elected again in 1892), no previously impeached president has ever run again for office. Trump was first impeached in 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of justice, and then again in 2021 for inciting the riot at the US Capitol. Though he was acquitted by the Senate both times, 10 House Republicans broke with their party the second time around to join Democrats in a vote to impeach him. Seven Republican senators voted to convict him at his Senate trial. Trump has also been the subject of a bevy of lawsuits and investigations, including a New York state investigation and a separate Manhattan district attorney criminal probe into his company’s finances, a Georgia county probe into his efforts to overturn Biden’s election win in the state, and separate Justice Department probes into his campaign’s scheme to put forth fake electors in battleground states and his decision to bring classified materials with him to Mar-a-Lago upon leaving office.
The House of Representatives Select Committee investigating the Capitol attack issued subpoenas on November 23 to the leaders of the far-right Proud Boys and Oath Keepers militia, directly focusing for the first time on the instigators of the violence at the January 6 Insurrection. The subpoenas demanding documents and testimony targeted both the leaders of the paramilitary groups on the day of the Capitol attack that sought to stop the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s election win, as well as the organizations behind the groups. House investigators in total issued five subpoenas to Proud Boys International LLC and its chairman, Henry “Enrqiue” Tarrio, the Oath Keepers group and its president, Stewart Rhodes, as well as Robert Patrick Lewis, the chairman of the 1st Amendment Praetorian militia.
The chair of the Select Committee, Bennie Thompson (D-MS) said in a statement that subpoenas reflected the panel’s interest in uncovering possible connections between the paramilitary groups, efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 election and the Capitol attack. “We believe the individuals and organizations we subpoenaed today have relevant information about how violence erupted at the Capitol and the preparation leading up to this violent attack,” Thompson said. Dozens of paramilitary group members have been indicted by the justice department as they pursue criminal charges against rioters involved in the insurrection, but the Select Committee had not yet publicly sought their cooperation in its investigation. The new subpoenas are aimed to uncover whether there was any coordination between the paramilitary groups and the White House, according to a source close to the investigation, and whether Donald Trump had advanced knowledge of plans about the Capitol attack.
The Select Committee said they subpoenaed the Proud Boys group since its members called for violence leading up to the January 6 Insurrection and that at least 34 individuals affiliated with the group had been indicted by the justice department for their roles in storming the Capitol. Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson suggested in the subpoena letters to Proud Boys International LLC and Tarrio that the group appeared to have advanced knowledge of the violent nature of the Capitol attack, having fundraised for “protective gear and communications” in planning for January 6. The select committee said they similarly subpoenaed the Oath Keepers for their part in leading the deadly assault on Congress, which a federal grand jury indictment in Washington DC described as a conspiracy involving at least 18 members. The members of the Oath Keepers led by Stewart Rhodes, the select committee said, planned their assault on the Capitol in advance, and traveled to Washington DC with paramilitary gear, firearms, tactical vests with plates, helmets, and radio equipment.
According to the indictment, the main unnamed conspirator, believed to be Stewart Rhodes, was in direct contact with his Oath Keepers members before, during, and shortly after the Capitol attack, the select committee added in the subpoena letters. The Justice Department has said Rhodes directed members of the Oath Keepers as they stormed the Capitol on 6 January but has not been charged with a crime and has denied any wrongdoing. He surrendered his phone to law enforcement and has sat for an interview with the FBI. House investigators also subpoenaed the leader of the 1st Amendment Praetorian, as Lewis was in constant contact with Trump operatives based at the Willard Hotel in Washington DC, which served as a “command center” for President Donald Trump to stop President-elect Joe Biden’s certification. The select committee said to Lewis that he was subpoenaed in part because he claimed the day after the Capitol attack that he “war-gamed” with constitutional scholars about how to stop Biden from being certified president on January 6. Thompson noted in the subpoena letter that members of the 1st Amendment Praetorian wore body cameras, suggesting the select committee’s interest in obtaining those recordings.
A federal appeals court on November 11 granted a short-term delay in the January 6 select committee’s access to former President Donald Trump’s White House records. A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, including President Joe Biden’s first and only appointee to that court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, will instead hear arguments in the matter on November 30. The delay is a minor setback for the House January 6 Committee, which had prevailed in US District Court against Trump’s legal effort to block access to his records altogether. The National Archives, which house Trump’s records, had been preparing to deliver the first batch of requested files to the committee.
The first batch of documents that was slated for release on November 12 is relatively small, as former President Donald Trump contested just 70 pages. But subsequent tranches identified by the Archives include hundreds of pages that were slated for release on November 26. Those will now likely be delayed, as well. The records include call logs, visitor records and documents culled from the files of top Trump aides like chief of staff Mark Meadows. The committee has repeatedly emphasized the urgency of accessing Trump’s records as it explores the former president’s effort to overturn the 2020 election results, including the January 6 assault on the Capitol that disrupted the electoral vote count and sent lawmakers fleeing in fear.
Despite claims of urgency, the January 6 House Select Committee did not object to former President Donald Trump’s request for a temporary injunction while the appeals court considers the broader issues. The Justice Department also took no position on the temporary stay. The composition of the appeals court panel is likely to hearten House investigators. The order issued on November 11 indicates that, in addition to Jackson, the panel includes Judges Patricia Millett and Robert Wilkins, who were appointed by former President Barack Obama to the court. The court’s order emphasized that the move to freeze the status quo, for the time being, should not be seen as reflecting what the court will end up deciding about Trump’s attempt to block disclosure of files from his former White House. “The purpose of this administrative injunction is to protect the court’s jurisdiction to address appellant’s claims of executive privilege and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits,” the order said.
Despite the slowdown, the case is still moving at breakneck speed through typically slow-moving federal courts. Former President Donald Trump filed suit in mid-October to block the January 6 committee’s access to his records. A District Court judge, Tanya Chutkan, rejected Trump’s efforts, dismissing the notion that a former president could overrule the sitting president on matters of executive privilege. Trump quickly appealed the decision and asked the appeals court to delay the effect of Chutkan’s ruling until fuller arguments could be heard. The appeals court’s decision to set a two-week briefing schedule keeps the case moving on a fast track. Trump is due to file his written brief in the case on November 16, with a reply by the National Archives and the House on November 22. Trump will have an additional reply on November 26 before oral arguments the following week. If Trump loses in the three-judge panel, he has the option to appeal to the full appeals court or the Supreme Court.
The top US general secretly called his Chinese counterpart twice over concerns then-President Donald Trump could spark a war with Chinaas his potential election loss loomed and in its aftermath, the Washington Post reported on September 14. US General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called General Li Zuocheng of the People’s Liberation Army on October 30, 2020, four days before the election, and again on January 8, two days after Trump supporters led a deadly riot at the US Capitol, the newspaper reported. In the calls, Milley sought to assure Li the US was stable and not going to attack and, if there were to be an attack, he would alert his counterpart ahead of time, the report said. The report was based on “Peril,” a new book by journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, which they said relied on interviews with 200 sources and is due to be released next week. Former President Donald Trump, in a statement, cast doubt in the story, calling it “fabricated.” He said if the story was true Milley should be tried for treason. “For the record, I never even thought of attacking China,” Trump said.
Republican Senator Marco Rubio called on President Joe Biden to immediately fire General Mark Milley in response to the revelations. “I do not need to tell of you the dangers posed by senior military officers leaking classified information on U.S. military operations, but I will underscore that such subversion undermines the President’s ability to negotiate and leverage one of this nation’s instruments of national power in his interactions with foreign nations,” Rubio said in a letter to President Biden. Asked about the Washington Post report, White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre declined to comment and referred questions to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Department.
President Donald Trump named Mark Milley to the top military post in 2018 but began criticizing him, as well as other appointees and former staffers, after losing the presidential election to Joe Biden in November 2020. The Washington Post reported that Milley was motivated to contact China the second time in part due to a January 8 call with US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had asked the general what safeguards were in place to prevent an “unstable president” from launching a nuclear strike. “He’s crazy. You know he’s crazy,” Pelosi told Milley, the newspaper reported, citing a transcript of the call. According to the cited call transcript, the general replied, “I agree with you on everything.”
Former President Donald Trump said on March 16 he would decide whether to make another run for the Presidency after congressional elections in November 2022. Trump has said he is committed to helping fellow Republicans try to win back control of the House of Representatives and the Senate in the 2022 elections, which will be an early referendum on Democratic President Joe Biden’s leadership.“I think we have a very, very good chance of taking back the House,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News. “You have a good chance to take back the Senate and frankly, we’ll make our decision after that.” Trump told Fox News host Maria Bartiromo that his supporters appeared ready to back him again if he ran. “Based on every poll, they want me to run again, but we’re going to take a look and we’ll see,” Trump said.
In addition to his discussions about the 2024 Election, former President Donald Trump also recommended that everyone take the Coronavirus vaccine, reaffirming his remarks at last month’s Conservative Political Action Conference. Polls show large numbers of Republicans and Trump supporters resistant to getting the vaccination. “It’s a great vaccine. It’s a safe vaccine. And it’s something that works,” said Trump, who quietly got vaccinated himself in January. “I would recommend it and I would recommend it to a lot of people that don’t want to get it, and a lot of those people voted for me, frankly.” The White House has said it would welcome Trump’s support in encouraging his supporters to be vaccinated, although President Joe Biden expressed doubt about how much it would help.
Former President Donald Trump has largely stayed out of the political spotlight since leaving office in January, other than his speech at the conservative conference in Florida. In his absence, a battle has erupted in the Republican Party between establishment figures such as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who are eager to move on, and conservative Trump allies who believe the party’s future depends on the energy of the pro-Trump base. In his final weeks in office, Trump promoted false claims that he lost his re-election bid due to rampant electoral fraud, stood accused of inciting a mob of supporters to rampage through the US Capitol, and became the first president ever to be impeached twice. Trump has said he will campaign in the 2022 elections for candidates who back him and his policies, and against those Republicans he views as disloyal. He also is making plans to set up a super PAC political organization to support candidates he endorses.
In a February 28 speech to close out the Conservative Political Action Conference, former President Donald Trumpteased his political future and repeated the lie that he won the 2020 election.“I stand before you today to declare that the incredible journey we began together four years ago is far from over,” the former president said in his first speech since leaving the White House. “We are gathered this afternoon to talk about the future — the future of our movement, the future of our party, and the future of our beloved country.” The former president began his roughly 90-minute address by asking the crowd: “Do you miss me?” before reviving false claims that he had beaten President Joe Biden in November, lies that inspired the deadlypro-Trump riot at the Capitol on January 6. “Actually, as you know they just lost the White House,” Trump said of Democrats. “Who knows, I may even decide to beat them for a third time,” he added, stopping precise of declaring his 2024 plans.
Former President Donald Trump later launched into multiple tirades about mail-in voting, voter ID laws and the Supreme Court ruling rejecting his election challenges. “This election was rigged,” Trump said, prompting the crowd to chant, “You won! you won!” “They didn’t have the guts or the courage to make the right decision,” he added of the high court. Prior to Trump’s address, he won CPAC’s presidential straw poll with the support of 55 percent of the more than 1,000 conference attendees asked about who they support for the GOP’s 2024 bid. That he won with just over half of the vote, though, is notable given the event was jokingly referred to as “TPAC” and supporters were spotted bowing in front of a gold-hued statue in his likeness. While 95 percent said they wanted the Republican Party to advance Trump’s agenda, just 68 percent said they wanted to see Trump himself run again.
Former President Donald Trump said that he is “not starting a new party,” but put fellow Republicans who have crossed him on notice, name-dropping each of the 17 Republicans who voted to impeach or convict him for his role in the January attack. “Get rid of them all,” he said of those members, including Congresswoman Liz Cheney Wyoming and Senator Mitt Romney of Utah. Trump later took aim at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky, who criticized Trump over his actions around the riot. “The Republican Party is united,” he said. “The only division is between a handful of Washington, D.C., establishment political hacks and everybody else all over the country.”
President Joe Biden was also in the former president’s rhetorical crosshairs, with Donald Trump criticizing his successor on immigration, China, and school reopenings. The White House director of rapid response, Michael Gwin, said in a statement: “The only thing that seems to be able to unite the Republican Party is their opposition to giving Americans $1,400 checks, to getting schools the money they need to reopen safely, to keeping cops, firefighters, and teachers on the job, and to speeding up vaccinations.” “While the GOP casts about for a path forward,” Gwin said, “President Biden is going to remain laser-focused on crushing the virus, re-opening schools, and getting Americans back to work.”
Former President Donald Trump suffered a major setback on February 22 in his long quest to conceal details of his finances as the US Supreme Court paved the way for a New York City prosecutor to obtain the former president’s tax returns and other records as part of an accelerating criminal investigation. The justices without comment rebuffed Trump’s request to put on hold an October 7 lower court ruling directing Trump’s longtime accounting firm, Mazars USA, to comply with a subpoena to turn over the materials to a grand jury convened by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, a Democrat. “The work continues,” Vance said in a statement issued after the court’s action. Trump issued a statement describing Vance’s investigation as part of “the greatest political witch hunt in the history of our country,” accusing New York Democrats of expending their energy on taking down a political opponent instead of tackling violent crimes. “That’s fascism, not justice – and that is exactly what they are trying to do with respect to me, except that the people of our Country won’t stand for it,” Trump added.
The Supreme Court’s action does not require former President Donald Trump to do anything. The records involved in the dispute were requested from a third-party, Mazars, not Trump himself. Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance previously told Trump’s lawyers his office would be free to immediately enforce the subpoena if the justices rejected Trump’s request. A Mazars spokesman said the company “remains committed to fulfilling all of our professional and legal obligations.” Unlike all other recent U.S. presidents, Trump refused to make his tax returns public. The data could provide details on his wealth and the activities of his family real-estate company, the Trump Organization. The Supreme Court’s action, which followed Vance’s hiring this month of a prominent lawyer with deep experience in white-collar and organized-crime cases, could boost the district attorney’s investigation into the Trump Organization following a flurry of recent subpoenas.
The Supreme Court, whose 6-3 conservative majority includes three Trump appointees, had already ruled once in the subpoena dispute, last July rejecting former President Donald Trump’s broad argument that he was immune from criminal probes as a sitting president. Trump, who left office on January 20 after losing the Presidential election to Democrat Joe Biden, continues to face an array of legal issues concerning personal and business conduct. Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance subpoenaed Mazars in 2019 seeking Trump’s corporate and personal tax returns from 2011 to 2018. Trump’s lawyers sued to block the subpoena, arguing that a sitting president has absolute immunity from state criminal investigations. The Supreme Court in July rejected those arguments but said Trump could raise other subpoena objections. Trump’s lawyers then told lower courts the subpoena was overly broad and amounted to political harassment.
Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance’s investigation initially focused on hush money paid by former President Donald Trump’s former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen before the 2016 election to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal. The two women said they had sexual encounters with Trump, which he denied. In recent court filings, Vance suggested the probe is now broader and could focus on potential bank, tax and insurance fraud, as well as falsification of business records. “The Supreme Court has now proclaimed that no one is above the law. Trump will, for the first time, have to take responsibility for his own dirty deeds,” Cohen said in a statement.
“The Republican Party as I knew it no longer exists. I’d call it the cult of Trump,” said Jimmy Gurulé, who was Undersecretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence in the Bush administration. Kristopher Purcell, who worked in the Bush White House’s communications office for six years, said roughly 60 to 70 former Bush officials have decided to leave the party or are cutting ties with it, from conversations he has been having. “The number is growing every day,” Purcell said.
More than half of the Republicans in Congress, eight senators and 139 House representatives, voted to block certification of the election just hours after the Capitol siege. Most Republican Senators have also indicated they would not support the impeachment of former President Donald Trump, making it almost certain that the former president will not be convicted in his Senate trial. Trump was impeached on January 13 by the Democratic-led House of Representatives on charges of “incitement of insurrection,” the only president to be impeached twice. The unwillingness by party leaders to disavow Trump was the final straw for some former Republican officials. “If it continues to be the party of Trump, many of us are not going back,” Rosario Marin, a former Treasurer of the US under Bush, told Reuters. “Unless the Senate convicts him, and rids themselves of the Trump cancer, many of us will not be going back to vote for Republican leaders.”
Pro-Donald Trump rioters overwhelmed the Capitol Police and stormed Congress on January 6, interrupting the certification of Joe Biden’s Electoral College win and throwing the US Capitol into a spiral of chaos and violence. Shortly after 2:30 p.m., lawmakers, staff, and reporters were forced to shelter in place, and several House office buildings were evacuated due to potential bomb threats. Vice President Mike Pence was pulled from the Senate chamber. But the situation quickly spun out of control. Protesters breached the Capitol, entering the Senate chamber and streaming through Statuary Hall. They broke windows, and one man sat in the very seat Pence had been sitting in just a few minutes before, while another was in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office. Lawmakers, reporters, and staffers sheltered throughout the building as pro-Trump rioters banged on doors and shouted. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) were quickly whisked away to undisclosed locations as the violent protesters broke through the Capitol, busting through secure doors, shattering windows and even scaling scaffolding outside of Senate leadership offices. One person was injured when they fell more than 30 feet from the scaffolding. By mid-afternoon, the National Guard was called up to help suppress the unrest, nearly two hours after the first reports of a breach.
What unfolded at the Capitol was the culmination of months of President Donald Trump’s tweets and statements pushing his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election based on baseless claims of fraud. Lawmakers, helpless amid the chaos, tweeted urgently at the president to call off his supporters and described, in real-time, the violence and destruction they were witnesses to. Some immediately called President Trump’s conduct impeachable, while others, Republicans and Democrats alike, described it as a “coup” attempt and an insurrection. Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE), a Trump critic, described the violence as “the inevitable and ugly outcome of the President’s addiction to constantly stoking division.” Utah Senator and 2012 Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who also frequently calls out Trump, directly blamed the President, saying, “What happened here today was an insurrection, incited by the United States President.” “There’s no question the president formed the mob, the president incited the mob, the president addressed the mob. He lit the flame,” said Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-WY).
Shortly after both chambers were evacuated, President Donald Trump tweeted: “I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful.” But he did not tell the demonstrators to leave the Capitol. He followed that with a recorded message, saying, “You have to go home now. We have to have peace, we have to have law and order,” President Trump said while still falsely insisting the election was “stolen from us.” President-elect Joe Biden also called on the rioters to stop, saying “This is not dissent. It’s disorder. It’s chaos. It borders on sedition. And it must end now.” The security was in starkcontrastto Trump’s impeachment trial or even Black Lives Matter protests last year, when police presence was more pronounced and restrictive. Before rioters were cleared from the complex, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Schumer called forthem to exit the Capitol. “We are calling on President Trump to demand that all protestors leave the U.S. Capitol and Capitol Grounds immediately,” Schumer and Pelosi said.
At 5:30 p.m., three hours after rioters breached the Capitol, the sergeant at arms informed members that the building was finally again secure. Minutes before a 6 p.m. curfew began, an announcement was made warning that anyone who did not leave would be arrested. Shortly before 6 p.m., Senators reconvened behind closed doors to process President-elect Joe Biden’s win and House leaders also vowed to continue their work. Inside the House chamber, the atmosphere was frantic. Capitol Police were warning people they may need to go behind their seats. The House floor quickly turned into chaos. Some top lawmakers, including Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Whip Jim Clyburn, were pulled from the chamber. Minutes later, police rushed members from the floor to be evacuated. Police and floor staff handed out protective hoods as police warned that tear gas had been dispersed outside the chamber. The House evacuation effort was interrupted, however, and roughly two dozen members and reporters huddled in upper gallery, crouching behind seats, as multiple armed officers barricaded the main chamber door. Loud banging noises could be heard, as members exchanged prayers and made calls to loved ones. As the last group of members and staff was escorted from the chamber, multiple protesters appeared to be restrained by police on the House floor.
Lawmakers and staff had already been on high alert as crowds of Trump allies descended upon the Capitol and local DC officials braced for violence. Then around 1 p.m., offices in both the Cannon and Madison buildings were urgently instructed to leave and move to another building. In some hallways, Capitol Police officers ran door-to-door, instructing staff to leave, according to several of those evacuated. The lockdowns and evacuation orders fueled further anxiety inside the Capitol, as staff were told to stay away from windows and doors. Staff in some office buildings were also instructed to take “escape hoods,” reserved for some kind of chemical attack in the building, and head to the tunnels in Longworth. “All of the members of Congress are just texting each other and trying to make sure that everyone is safe,” said Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin on MSNBC as the chaos was unfolding. “I understand as you just reported that in the chamber they’re now trying to don some gas masks. I dug one out of my storage. We’re sheltering in place. I’m glad to see that the president is now putting out a message that this has gone way too far.”
In his statement, President Donald Trump said any new refugees this year should be placed by the US State Department in parts of the country open to hosting them. “Newly admitted refugees should be placed, to the maximum extent possible, in States and localities that have clearly expressed their willingness to receive refugees” and “resettled in communities that are eager and equipped to support their successful integration into American society and the labor force,” Trump said. Critics say that President Trump has abandoned a longstanding US role as a safe haven for persecuted people and that cutting refugee admissions undermines other foreign policy goals. Trump’s Democratic rival and former Vice President Joe Biden has pledged to raise refugee admissions to 125,000 a year if he defeats Trump, although advocates have said the program could take years to recover.
Tens of thousands of refugees have applications in the pipeline for the US, even as increased vetting by the Trump administration and the novel coronavirus have slowed arrivals for the 2020 fiscal year, which had an 18,000 quota. President Donald Trump’s 2021 plan allocates 5,000 slots for refugees facing religious persecution, 4,000 for refugees from Iraq who helped the US, and 1,000 for refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, leaving 5,000 for others. It bans refugees from Somalia, Syria, and Yemen except in “special humanitarian concerns,” citing the risk of terrorism.
President Donald Trumpunveiled a plan to win over the African American vote on September 25, less than two months before Election Day, primarily expanding upon the existing economic-related initiatives the President established in his first term. The proposals include prosecuting the Ku Klux Klan and Antifa as terrorist organizations, making Juneteenth a federal holiday, and bolstering Black economic prosperity. During an Atlanta event announcing what was deemed the Black Economic Empowerment “Platinum Plan,” Trump sought to draw contrasts between his plan for the African American community and Joe Biden’s proposals, arguing that the former vice president “inflicted” damage on the Black community over the last 47 years he’s spent working in Washington. Trump garnered just 8% of the African American electorate in 2016, and an average of recent 2020 polls shows Biden leading Trump with African American voters by an 83% to 8%, or 75-point, margin. “They only care about power for themselves, whatever that means. My opponent is offering Black Americans nothing but the same old, tired, empty slogans,” President Donald Trump argued.
Like many other Republican politicians since the 1960s, President Donald Trump has presented different racial messages when playing to diverse audiences. He defended Confederate symbols. He has called the Black Lives Matter movement a “symbol of hate,” days after retweeting and then deleting a video that included a Florida supporter shouting “White power.” The White House has maintained that Trump did not hear the supporter say the phrase. But on September 25, the President spoke about the pillars of the plan in broad terms, saying, that among other proposals, he would be building up “peaceful” urban neighborhoods with the “highest standards” of policing, bringing fairness to the justice system, expanding school choice, increasing African American home ownership and creating a “national clemency project to right wrongful prosecutions and to pardon individuals who have reformed their (lives).”
The proposal borrows efforts from proposals by other Republicans, such as South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, who played a vital role in the establishment of opportunity zones and remains the sole African American Republican in the Senate. For example, President Donald Trump’s plan proposes making lynching a national hate crime. In 2019, Scott co-sponsored legislation to make lynching a hate crime alongside none other than California Democratic Senator Kamala Harris, who is now the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee. The legislation passed in the Senate but was never passed by the House. As demonstrations rocked the country this summer protesting against police brutality and racism following the death of George Floyd, President Trump sought to console African Americans who have died as a result of police violence. However, he has consistently delivered a law and order message, calling demonstrators “thugs” and “anarchists” and rebuking what he said was protesters’ “mob rule.” A Monmouth University poll released earlier this month found that 82% of Black respondents said Trump’s handling of the protests made the current situation worse.
President Donald Trump’s proposed “Platinum Plan” also proposes recognizing Juneteenth, the widely observed holiday commemorating the end of slavery in the United States, as a federal holiday. The Trump campaign scheduled a rally on Juneteenth in Tulsa, Oklahoma, the site of a 1921 massacre of hundreds of African Americans during racial unrest in the historic section of the city known as “Black Wall Street.” President Trump said before the rally that it was not scheduled on Juneteenth “on purpose,” but after the event, which his campaign rescheduled in order to avoid further criticism, he sought credit for popularizing the holiday. Trump told The Wall Street Journal that “nobody had ever heard of” the holiday before he brought it up. “I did something good: I made Juneteenth very famous,” Trump said. In June, several senators, including Tim Scott and other Republicans, co-sponsored legislation to make Juneteenth a national holiday.
Overall, President Donald Trump’s recently-proposed “platinum plan” represents significant outreach on the part of a Republican Presidential candidate to make inroads with African American voters. Despite his recent outreach to African American voters, President Trump faces an uphill battle at gaining African American support. For example, a January 2020 Washington Post poll found that than 8 in 10 African Americans believe Trump is racist and has contributed to making racism a bigger problem in the US. A majority of the poll’s respondents, 58%, said Trump’s actions as president are “very” bad for African Americans in the nation. Trump has roundly denied accusations of racism. As President, he has faced blistering criticism over his public and private statements, like in 2017, when he blamed “both sides” after violence sparked by a neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Trump also privately referred to some African nations as “s***hole countries” and criticized the protests led overwhelmingly by black NFL players. Last year, the US House of Representatives voted to censure the President’s comments when he told four congresswomen of color to “go back” to where they came from.
President Donald Trump and the Republican Party jointly raised $210 million in August, a robust sum but one dwarfed by the record $364.5 million raised by Democrats and their nominee, Joe Biden. Trump’s campaign released its figure on September 9, several days later than usual, and nearly a week after the Biden campaign unveiled its total, the highest for any one month during a presidential campaign. The President’s reelection team said it brought in more money during its party’s convention than the Democrats did in theirs, and officials insisted they “will have all the resources we need” ahead of November. “Both campaigns are raising massive amounts of money but have very different priorities about how to spend it,” said Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien. “In addition to advertising, President Trump’s campaign has invested heavily in a muscular field operation and ground game that will turn out our voters, while the Biden campaign is waging almost exclusively an air war. We like our strategy better.” The noticeable fundraising gap between the two candidates was certain to further rattle Republicans already nervous about Biden’s advantage over Trump in some battleground states that could decide the election. And whispers about a financial disadvantage led President Trump himself this week to suggest he may put some of his own fortunes into the race.
Joe Biden’s August total spoke to the enthusiasm among Democrats to oust Trump from office. The flood of new contributions came from grass-roots supporters as well as deep-pocketed donors, and should alleviate any lingering concern over whether Democrats will be able to inundate the airwaves in key states. The Trump campaign, however, faces questions about how it has managed to lose a massive financial advantage. Announcing for reelection the day of his inauguration in 2017, which allowed him to begin raising money right away, President Donald Trump built an enormous war chest early on that advisers believed put him at a big advantage over the eventual Democratic nominee.
President Donald Trump’s reelection effort, including the Republican National Committee, has spent more than $800 million so far, while Joe Biden and the Democrats have spent about $414 million through July, according to campaign spending reports. But President Trump’s team has also gone dark on the airwaves for stretches as the general election has heated up, raising questions as to whether it was short on cash. Trump campaign officials have kicked off a review of expenditures, including those authorized by former campaign manager Brad Parscale, who was demoted this summer. Some of his decisions have raised eyebrows, including a $100 million blitz earlier this year before voters were largely paying attention, though that plan was defended by Trump in a Twitter post. Parscale also had a car and driver, unusual perks for a campaign manager, and his spending was the subject of an ad campaign by the Lincoln Project, a group of current and former Republicans looking to defeat Trump. The ad imagined a glitzy Parscale lifestyle full of luxury cars and a tony condo in Florida. The ad infuriated Trump, who has long been sensitive to the perception that others are enriching themselves on his name. And many in the campaign, who largely liked Parscale, grumbled that he rarely showed in the suburban Virginia campaign headquarters, instead frequently calling in from his home in Fort Lauderdale.
Some of the Trump campaign’s expenditures clearly were designed with the President in mind, including a series of cable buys solely in Washington, a Democratic stronghold yet a TV market personally viewed by President Donald Trump, a voracious consumer of television news. Moreover, the campaign dropped millions on a swaggering World Series ad as well as two on Super Bowl game day intended to match former Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg’s $10 million spending that day that totaled more than Trump’s combined advertising in Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa and Minnesota.
Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale had been a favorite of Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, who is perceived to be the de facto campaign manager. But Kushner soured on Parscale since the debacle of President Trump’s intended comeback rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, this summer and the President has complained to advisers that the campaign squandered its massive fundraising advantage, according to two campaign officials not authorized to speak publicly about private conversations. But even Parscale’s internal critics give him credit for helping the Trump campaign construct an unparalleled Republican operation to attract small donors online. Parscale, who did not respond to a request for comment, directed a major investment in digital ads and list-building that appears to have largely paid for itself. Stepien, who replaced Parscale as campaign manager in July, says he is “carefully managing the budget.” He also says the team’s advertising will be “nimble,” and include a TV spree in early-voting states as well as an urban radio campaign in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida that will contrast Trump’s record for African-American voters with Joe Biden. The increased focus on African-American voters has become a key strategy for President Donald Trump, who may win the highest percentage of African-American votes for a Republican candidate since Richard Nixon in 1972.
“We have much more money than we had last time going into the last two months. But if we needed any more, I’d put it up,” President Donald Trump said on September 8, vowing to open his wallet. “If I have to, I would.” Campaign officials, however, privately acknowledge that it is unlikely President Trump will spend much of his own money, something he resisted doing during the general election four years ago. Perhaps in an effort to bury disappointing news, the campaign released its numbers just a short time after the release of explosive excerpts from Bob Woodward’s book in which Trump acknowledges knowingly downplaying the severity of the coronavirus pandemic to the American public. In August, as the President’s campaign held a busy calendar of events, he upped his fundraising haul from $72 million in July. Biden’s campaign raised $49 million in July, and Democratic officials attributed the eye-popping amount raised in August to antipathy toward Trump, the selection of California Senator Kamala Harris as his running mate, and a convention that showcased the nominee’s empathy.
Democrat Joe Biden leads President Donald Trump by 12 percentage points nationally among likely US voters, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll that also showed the number of persuadable voters had shrunk compared with four years ago. The most recent polling poll, released on September 8, found that 52% of likely voters planned to support Biden, while 40% would back Trump. Three percent said they would vote for another candidate, and just 5% said they remained undecided with less than two months to go until the Presidential Election. The survey showed the number of voters who had not yet backed a major-party candidate to be less than half of what it was in 2016, and that Biden currently had the advantage in securing the national popular vote. Even if the remaining undecided voters threw their support behind Trump, the poll showed, he would still lose the popular vote to Biden.
Despite these good poll numbers for Joe Biden, President Donald Trump can still win re-election, however, without winning the national popular vote. US presidential elections are not decided by the national vote but rather who wins the Electoral College, a contest based on a tally of wins from state-by-state contests. Four years ago, Democrat Hillary Clinton got almost 3 million more votes than Trump, only to see her Republican rival narrowly win the Electoral College and the presidency. This was the first time the Reuters/Ipsos poll measured support for the 2020 candidates among likely voters. When measured by registered voters who include those less likely to vote, Biden leads Trump by 8 percentage points, versus his 7-point lead in a similar poll last week.
The poll showed likely voters being primarily motivated by the Coronavirus pandemic, which has killed more than 190,000 Americans and put millions out of work, and restoring trust in government. When asked what was driving their pick for President, 28% said it was the candidate’s perceived ability to handle the Coronavirus, and 23% said it was the ability to restore trust in government. An additional 19% said it was the candidate’s ability to boost the economy, and 14% said they were looking for a candidate who is “tough on crime.” Fifty-one percent of likely voters said Joe Biden would be better at handling the US Coronavirus response, while 38% said Donald Trump would be better. But President Trump has the edge when it comes to their perception of who would be “tough on crime and civil unrest,” with 45% choosing Trump, while 40% said Biden would be better.
On the economy, neither candidate has the upper hand among likely voters: 45% of likely voters said they thought Joe Biden would be better for the national economy and expanding the workforce, while 45% said they thought President Donald Trump would be best. Biden, who has led Trump for much of the year in most national opinion polls, has benefited from a recent migration toward the Democrats among some of the most reliable voters in the United States: college-educated whites. While non-college whites still largely support Trump over Biden, the president has not consolidated the dominant level of support he enjoyed with that group four years ago when he was running against Clinton. So far, opinion polls by other media outlets show Biden with a small edge over Trump in a handful of competitive states, including Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida. That advantage also appears to have narrowed in some cases over the past few weeks.
Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden on August 31 issued a forceful rebuttal to President Donald Trump’s claim that the former Vice President would preside over a nation overwhelmed by disorder and lawlessness, asserting that it was President Trump who had made the country unsafe through his erratic and incendiary governing style. condemned the violence that has occasionally erupted amid largely peaceful protests over racial injustice, and noted that the chaos was occurring on the president’s watch. He said Trump had made things worse by stoking division amid a national outcry over racism and police brutality. “Does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is re-elected?” he said. “We need justice in America. We need safety in America. We’re facing multiple crises — crises that, under Donald Trump, have kept multiplying.” Biden also pressed a broader argument that the President was endangering Americans with his response to the public health and economic challenges the country confronts.
The address was Joe Biden’s most prominent effort yet to deflect the criticism that President Donald Trump and Republicans leveled against him at their convention last week, when they distorted his record on crime and policing. And in a fusillade of tweets over the last 48 hours the President suggested Biden was tolerant of “Anarchists, Thugs & Agitators.” Speaking at the site of a converted steel mill in Pittsburgh with no audience, in a rare campaign appearance outside eastern Pennsylvania or his home state of Delaware, Biden rejected the suggestion that lawlessness would go unchecked under his leadership. “Ask yourself: Do I look like a radical socialist with a soft spot for rioters?” Biden said. “Really? I want a safe America. Safe from Covid, safe from crime and looting, safe from racially motivated violence, safe from bad cops. Let me be crystal clear: safe from four more years of Donald Trump.” The former Vice President sought to refocus the spotlight on Trump and make the election a referendum on the President’s character and his stewardship of the pandemic. He cast Trump as a destabilizing force who had exacerbated the most urgent problems facing the nation, from the public health crisis, international affairs, and unemployment to issues around police brutality, white supremacy, and racism.
When is Slow Joe Biden going to criticize the Anarchists, Thugs & Agitators in ANTIFA? When is he going to suggest bringing up the National Guard in BADLY RUN & Crime Infested Democrat Cities & States? Remember, he can’t lose the Crazy Bernie Super Liberal vote!
The exchange between Joe Biden and President Donald Trump over public safety, law enforcement, and civil rights represents a significant, high-profile clash in an election that is now just nine weeks away. The issue is emerging as a test of whether President Trump can shift voters’ focus away from the Coronavirus pandemic and persuade a small slice of undecided white voters to embrace him as a flawed but fierce defender of “law and order,” or whether Biden can counter that appeal by assailing the President as a provocateur of racial division and social disorder. Biden took pains to differentiate between his support for peaceful protests and his opposition to acts of destruction. “Rioting is not protesting,” he said. “Looting is not protesting. Setting fires is not protesting. None of this is protesting. It’s lawlessness, plain and simple. And those who do it should be prosecuted.”
President Donald Trump has been wielding law-and-order arguments against the former Vice President. In the Pittsburgh speech, Joe Biden tried to turn the story around. He promised he would seek to “lower the temperature in this country,” something he suggested President Trump was unable to do. “He can’t stop the violence because for years he’s fomented it,” Biden said. At a briefing late on August 31, President Trump declined to condemn his supporters’ use of paintballs and pepper spray against protesters in Portland, Oregon, over the weekend. He used the bulk of his time at the podium to criticize Democrats and Biden, saying, “for months Joe Biden has repeated the monster lie that this is a peaceful protest,” and falsely claiming that the former Vice President blamed the police and law enforcement for the violence that was flaring.
As Presidnt Donald Trump increasingly uses the protests as a wedge issue, election analysts in both parties are taking a second look at a Marquette Law School poll of Wisconsin voters that came out in August. The share of Wisconsin voters expressing support for the protest movement that arose after George Floyd’s death dropped to 48%, from 61% in June. Still, most Wisconsin voters said they do not like President Trump’s handling of the protests. 58% disapproved, while just 32% approved, the poll showed. And Trump saw no improvement in his favorability rating after the Republican National Convention, according to an ABC News/Ipsos poll released on August 30. Joe Biden, who for years fashioned himself as a “tough on crime” Democrat, won the Democratic primary as an unapologetic moderate, defeating his chief opponent, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. All summer and throughout their convention, Republicans sought to paint Biden as both soft on crime and overly punitive, a strategy that has yet to show it can define the Democrat to Trump’s advantage.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo praised President Donald Trump’s foreign policy record in a Republican National Convention speech on August 25 that Democrats criticized as a breach of protocol and perhaps the law. Speaking in a recorded video from a Jerusalem rooftop during an official trip, Pompeo, a Trump appointee widely believed to harbor presidential aspirations, said the president had exposed the “predatory aggression” of the Chinese Communist Party while defeating Islamic State militants and lowering the threat from North Korea.
Even before Secretary of State Mike Pompeo spoke, critics pounced, saying Pompeo had broken with decades of protocol in using his appointed office for partisan purposes. The chairman of a Democratic-led US House of Representatives subcommittee announced an investigation into whether Pompeo’s appearance broke federal law and regulations. “The Trump administration and Secretary Pompeo have shown a gross disregard not only of basic ethics, but also a blatant willingness to violate federal law for political gain,” Joaquin Castro, head of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s oversight subcommittee, said in a statement. In a letter to Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun, Castro said Pompeo’s appearance was “highly unusual and likely unprecedented,” and “may also be illegal.” A State Department official told a pool reporter traveling with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that the secretary was appearing in his personal capacity and no State Department personnel or resources were involved.
John Bellinger, the top State Department lawyer under former Republican Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, said the agency had long barred senior political appointees from partisan activity, including attending party conventions, even if they might be permitted under the 1939 Hatch Act limiting the political activities of federal employees. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s address also appeared to violate his instructions restating the department’s prohibition on political activities, which applies to official and private time, sent to personnel in a July 24 cable reviewed by Reuters. In his letter to Biegun, Congressman Joaquin Castro wrote that it was “readily apparent” from documents in his panel’s possession that Pompeo’s appearance may violate the Hatch Act, federal regulations implementing that law and federal rules.
At his Bedminster, New Jersey golf resort on August 10, President Donald Trumpsigned four executive actions to provide economic relief amid the coronavirus pandemic. The actions amount to a stopgap measure, after failing to secure an agreement with Congress. The three memorandums and one executive order called for extending some enhanced unemployment benefits, taking steps to stop evictions, continuing the suspension of student loan repayments, and deferring payroll taxes. President Trump promised that funds would be “rapidly distributed” to Americans in need, although it remains unclear whether the president has the authority to do certain steps unilaterally, without congressional approval. In any case, legal challenges are expected, which could delay any disbursement of funds.
In one memorandum, President Donald Trump authorized the federal government to pay $300 per week for people on unemployment. States would be asked to pay an additional $100, for a total of $400 weekly for unemployed workers. “If they don’t, they don’t. That’s up to them,” President Trump said when asked what happens if governors don’t have the funds available. “The states have money. It’s sitting there.” The previous enhanced unemployment benefits, which added $600 a week to standard state unemployment benefits, expired at the end of July. The text of the memorandum calls for up to $44 billion of federal funds for the benefits to come from the Department of Homeland Security’s Disaster Relief Fund. The White House said states could use funding from the March Coronavirus relief package, the CARES Act, to fund their portion of the benefits. Given the current number of Americans unemployed, those disaster funds would likely last only a handful of weeks.
In an executive order calling to minimize evictions, President Donald Trump directed various federal agencies to make funds available for temporary financial assistance to renters and homeowners facing financial hardship caused by the Coronavirus. “It’s not their fault that this virus came into our country,” he said of renters and homeowners. “It’s China’s fault.” That order also directs the Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to consider whether measures to temporarily halt residential evictions for failure to pay rent “are reasonably necessary to prevent the further spread of COVID-19” from one state to another. A federal moratorium on evictions expired on July 24, allowing landlords to begin issuing 30-day notices to vacate their properties. It is estimated that the temporary ban on evictions covered more than 12 million renters, preventing them from being pushed out of their homes even if they could not pay rent.
President Donald Trump also extended relief for student loan borrowers. Student loan interest rates were cut to zero earlier this year, and students could suspend payments through September. President Trump directed the secretary of education to extend the relief through the end of the year and said an additional extension is likely. And a fourth action defers payroll tax collection for workers earning less than $100,000 a year, beginning September 1. “This will mean bigger paychecks [for a time] for working families, as we race to produce a vaccine and eradicate the China virus once and for all,” Trump told reporters. Trump said the “payroll tax holiday” would last through the end of the year but could be made permanent if he is reelected. The connection to November’s election wasn’t subtle. “If I’m victorious on Nov. 3, I plan to forgive these taxes and make permanent cuts to the payroll tax. I’m going to make them all permanent,” Trump said, then turning to jab congressional Democrats and his opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden. “So they will have the option of raising everybody’s taxes and taking this away. But if I win, I may extend and terminate. In other words, I will extend it beyond the end of the year and terminate the tax. And so, we’ll see what happens.”
Both congressional Democrats and Republicans alike opposed this payroll tax proposal when President Donald Trump was trying to get them to include it in the coronavirus relief package. Payroll taxes fund Medicare and Social Security, and this deferral won’t do anything to help the millions of Americans currently unemployed. Trump is likely doing this through the same mechanism that allowed taxpayers to put off filing their taxes until July 15 this year, says Andrew Rudalevige, a professor at Bowdoin College who specializes in presidential executive actions. “The Treasury secretary is authorized to delay the deadline for any action required under tax law up to one year,” said Rudalevige, in the case of a federally declared disaster, and all states are currently operating under one because of the pandemic. “So payroll tax payments could under this provision be delayed. But not forgiven — those taxes are still owed.” There are already significant concerns about the long-term solvency of the popular social safety net programs. Reducing payroll taxes would hasten those problems.
President Donald Trump’s actions come after weeks of talks between Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill over the next round coronavirus relief. As of August 8, they were still far from reaching an agreement. Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded to President Trump’s executive actions on August 9, calling them “unworkable, weak and narrow policy announcements.” In a statement, they called for Republicans to return to negotiations.
The Trump campaign filed a lawsuit on August 3 against the state of Nevada over its plan to send absentee ballots to all active voters this November in a major expansion of mail-in voting in the battleground state. “The RNC has a vital interest in protecting the ability of Republican voters to cast, and Republican candidates to receive, effective votes in Nevada elections and elsewhere,” the lawsuit, filed by the Trump campaign, the Republican National Committee and the Nevada Republican Party, said. As the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread throughout the country, some states have looked to expand mail-in voting options ahead of November’s election. President Donald Trump, however, has falsely claimed that expanded mail-in voting will lead to fraud in the election.
The Democratic-controlled Nevada state legislature passed a sweeping election bill along party lines over the weekend, and Governor Steve Sisolak, a Democrat, signed the legislation on August 2. Sisolak said in a tweet, “I signed AB 4, which ensures protections for Nevadans to vote safely at the November election during the pandemic. During this global pandemic, I made a commitment that we’d do all we can to allow Nevadans to safely cast a ballot in the upcoming November election.” The legislation will allow election officials to send absentee ballots to every “active registered voter” in the state. It will also extend the deadline for when mail-in ballots can be counted after Election Day, so mailed-in ballots can still be counted if they arrive one week after November 3. The legislation will also ease some restrictions for who can legally handle and submit other people’s ballots, a move that Republicans claimed could lead to voter fraud.
Nevada State Democratic Party Chair William McCurdy called the lawsuit a “sham.” “As states fill the void of Trump’s leadership and begin to step up to the challenge of protecting both voters’ health and their constitutional right to vote, Trump and Republicans are throwing a fit. That is because Trump does not want to hear from the people, he knows what they will say,” he said in a statement. President Donald Trump previously criticized Nevada’s plan to expand mail-in voting and threatened a lawsuit. “In an illegal late-night coup, Nevada’s clubhouse Governor made it impossible for Republicans to win the state,” Trump tweeted. “Post Office could never handle the Traffic of Mail-In Votes without preparation. Using Covid to steal the state. See you in Court!” In addition to Nevada, eight other jurisdictions will mail ballots to all voters in November. Hawaii, Colorado, Oregon, Utah, and Washington state had this plan all along. Vermont, California, and the District of Columbia switched to this method this year because of the Coronavirus pandemic.
In an illegal late night coup, Nevada’s clubhouse Governor made it impossible for Republicans to win the state. Post Office could never handle the Traffic of Mail-In Votes without preparation. Using Covid to steal the state. See you in Court! https://t.co/cNSPINgCY7
Facebook is considering imposing a ban on political ads on its social network in the days leading up to the US Presidental election in November, according to people familiar with the company’s thinking. The potential ban is still only being discussed and has yet been finalized, said the people, who asked not to be named talking about internal policies. A halt on ads could defend against misleading election-related content spreading as people prepare to vote. Still, there are concerns that an ad blackout may hurt “get out the vote” campaigns, or limit a candidate’s ability to respond widely to breaking news or new information. Such an action would amount to a major change for Facebook, which has so far stuck to a policy of not fact-checking ads from politicians or their campaigns. That has prompted criticism from lawmakers and advocates, who say the policy means ads on the platform can be used to spread lies and misinformation. Civil rights groups also argue the company does not do enough to remove efforts to limit voter participation, and a recent audit found Facebook failed to enforce its own voter-suppression policies when it comes to posts from President Donald Trump.
Ad blackouts before elections are common in other parts of the world, including the UK, where Facebook’s global head of policy, Nick Clegg, was once deputy prime minister. Facebook is an important platform for politicians, especially at a time when many people are stuck at home and campaign rallies pose potential health risks due to the coronavirus. In 2016, President Donald Trump used Facebook ads and the company’s targeting capabilities to reach millions of voters with tailored messaging, a strategy that some believe helped win him the election. Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former top security executive, said that any political ad ban could benefit Trump. “Eliminating online political ads only benefits those with money, incumbency or the ability to get media coverage,” he tweeted. “Who does that sound like?”
Political advertising has been a complicated issue for online platforms, and many of them have taken different approaches. Twitter has banned most political ads, but still sells some “cause-based” ads that touch on economic, environmental, or social issues. Google’s YouTube has already sold ad space on its homepage to the Trump campaign for the days leading up to November’s election, a deal that ensures Trump will be highly visible on the video service when people start to vote. In 2016, Russian operatives used Facebook to spread misleading and divisive ads and posts. The company has made a series of changes since then to tighten up its political ad process, including the implementation of stricter requirements for buying marketing spots and the addition of a searchable ad archive.
The US has formally notified the United Nations that it is withdrawing from the World Health Organization, following through on an announcement President Donald Trump made in late May. The move, however, would not be effective until July 6, 2021, officials said, leaving open the possibility that, should President Trump lose reelection, a Joe Biden administration could reverse the decision. The former vice president promptly indicated he would do so. “Americans are safer when America is engaged in strengthening global health. On my first day as President, I will rejoin the WHO and restore our leadership on the world stage,” Biden announced on Twitter.
Americans are safer when America is engaged in strengthening global health. On my first day as President, I will rejoin the @WHO and restore our leadership on the world stage. https://t.co/8uazVIgPZB
The withdrawal of the US would plunge global health governance into the unknown, creating questions about the economic viability of the WHO, the future of the polio eradication program, the system for reporting dangerous infectious disease outbreaks, and myriad other programs that are as pertinent to the health of Americans as they are to people from countries around the world, such as efforts to combat the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Spokesman Tarik Jasarevic said the Geneva-based agency had been informed the official notice had been filed, but had no further information. But Jeremy Konyndyk, a fellow at the Center for Global Development, called the move “reckless and entirely unjustified.” “The disastrous state of the outbreak in the United States is not the result of following WHO guidance but rather is the result of ignoring the agency’s increasingly urgent warnings from late January onward,” he said in a statement. “Had the U.S. followed WHO’s advice on early preparedness, aggressive testing, contact tracing, and other response measures, we would be in a far better place today than we are.”
The US is the WHO’s largest funder, contributing $426 million a year in the 2018-2019 budget period. The US currently owes the WHO $203 million for 2020 and previous years. The notice of withdrawal, signed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, made no mention of funds the country owes to the WHO and the State Department did not immediately reply to a question on whether the United States will pay the outstanding dues. The UN also appeared uncertain of the US intent. “The Secretary-General … is in the process of verifying with the World Health Organization whether all the conditions for such withdrawal are met,” Stephane Dujarric, a spokesman for Secretary-General António Guterres, said in an email. The Trump Administration has said it will work with other partners to achieve its global health goals. But experts have warned the country will lose influence internationally and its efforts may lose momentum, as other countries come to view the U.S. as an unreliable partner. “There will be no incentive to take U.S. needs into account,” said Jimmy Kolker, a longtime U.S. diplomat and former assistant secretary for global affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services in the Obama administration. “It will be much harder than some might assume to find alternate channels for us to engage in global health activities,” Kolker warned. “Our investment will no longer leverage others’ and experts in other countries will have to diversify their partnerships away from the CDC, the NIH or USAID, as these may not be sustainable. Once deals are struck and arrangements made without U.S. involvement, it will be an uphill struggle to retrofit them if the U.S. has an interest in getting involved and decides (as we inevitably will) to halt our withdrawal or rejoin.”
President Donald Trump has moved to blame the WHO for the Coronavirus pandemic, insisting that had it been more aggressive with China in January the outbreak might have been averted. While analysts have acknowledged the agency’s lavish praise of China’s handling of the outbreak may have struck the wrong note, they also noted the WHO does not have the power to force a country to let inspectors visit to assess the situation on the ground, something President Trump insisted the agency should have done. Critics of the administration’s handling of the Coronavirus pandemic also note that in January and February, when the WHO was vociferously urging countries to prepare for the spread of the virus, President Trump himself was praising China’s handling of the outbreak and predicting the virus would stop spreading on its own. Even members of his own party have questioned the move and the timing of it, coming as the WHO leads the global response to Coronavirus, the worst health threat in a century. “Certainly, there needs to be a good, hard look at mistakes the World Health Organization might have made in connection with coronavirus, but the time to do that is after the crisis has been dealt with, not in the middle of it,” Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) said after Trump’s announcement. “Withdrawing U.S. membership could, among other things, interfere with clinical trials that are essential to the development of vaccines, which citizens of the United States, as well as others in the world, need.”
Hundreds of officials who worked for former Republican President George W. Bush as a July 1 are set to endorse Democratic Presidential nominee, Joe Biden, people involved in the effort said, the latest Republican-led group coming out to oppose the re-election of Donald Trump. The officials, who include Cabinet secretaries and other senior members of the Bush administration, have formed a political action committee, 43 Alumni for Biden, to support former Vice President Joe Biden as opposed to President Donald Trump. The Super PAC will launch on July 1 with a website and Facebook page, they said. It plans to release “testimonial videos” praising Biden from high-profile Republicans and will hold get-out-the-vote efforts in the most competitive states.
The group is the latest of many Republican organizations opposing President Donald Trump’s re-election, yet another sign that his radical policies relating to race, foreign policy, and the norms of governance have alienated many Republicans. “We know what is normal and what is abnormal, and what we are seeing is highly abnormal. The president is a danger,” said Jennifer Millikin, one of the 43 Alumni organizers, who worked on Bush’s 2004 re-election campaign and later in the General Services Administration. The other two members who spoke to Reuters are Karen Kirksey and Kristopher Purcell. Purcell worked as a communication official in the Bush White House. Kirksey was on the Bush 2000 campaign, and later in the Agriculture and Labor Departments. Millikin said the group was not yet ready to name all its members or its donors. It has to provide a list of initial donors to the Federal Election Commission by October.
Former President George W. Bush, who is still admired by many moderate Republicans and has seen his overall legacy improve dramatically over the past few years, won praise for saying the death of George Floyd reflected a “shocking failure”, and urged that protesters be heard. Earlier, Bush released a video calling for Americans to unite in the face of the Coronavirus pandemic. Despite policy differences with Biden, “hundreds” of former Bush officials believe the Democrat has the integrity to meet America’s challenges, the 43 Alumni members said. “This November, we are choosing country over party,” said Kristopher Purcell. “We believe that a Biden administration will adhere to the rule of law… and restore dignity and integrity to the White House.” “We really have had overwhelming support for our efforts,” Karen Kirksey said.
43 Alumni for Biden is backing the former Vice president as President Donald Trump’s support slips in the polls. Last month, a group of Republican operatives launched “Right Side PAC,” that, according to the group’s founder Matt Borges, will work to turn “that group of Republicans who feels that President Trump is an existential threat to the country and this party.”A group called Republican Voters Against Trump launched a $10 million ad campaign in May targeting Republican-leaning voters in top swing states to encourage them to support Biden. And a group of “Never Trump” Republicans formed the Lincoln Project in late 2019 and have run negative ads that have drawn the ire of Trump.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1.Supreme Court Blocks President Trump’s Efforts To Eliminate DACA Program
The Supreme Court this week detemrined that President Donald Trump’s 2017 plan to overturn the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program is unconstitutional.
In a major rebuke to President Donald Trump, the US Supreme Court has blocked the Trump administration’s plan to dismantle a program implemented by President Barack Obama in 2012 that has protected 700,000 so-called DREAMers from deportation. The vote was 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the opinion. Under the Obama-era program, qualified individuals brought to the US as children were given temporary legal status if they graduated from high school or were honorably discharged from the military, and if they passed a background check. Just months after taking office, President Trump moved to revoke the program, only to be blocked by lower courts, and now the Supreme Court. Roberts’ opinion for the court was a narrow but powerful rejection of the way the Trump administration went about trying to abolish the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. “We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies,” Roberts wrote. “The wisdom of those decisions is none of our concern. Here we address only whether the Administration complied with the procedural requirements in the law that insist on ‘a reasoned explanation for its action.’ “
2. President Donald Trump Announces Year-Long Suspension of Emplyoment-Based Immigration Visas
President Donald Trump this week signed an executive order suspending employment-based immigration visas for the rest of the year amid the growing Coronavirus pandemic.
President Donald Trump on June 22 issued a proclamation suspending some employment-based visas, including H-1B visas for highly skilled workers, through the end of the year as the US struggles to weather the widening coronavirus pandemic. The Trump administration is touting the move as a way to protect American jobs amid the highest unemployment rate since 1939, but the decision has been panned by a broad range of companies who say they cannot access the labor they need in the US and who warn that the move could lead them to move operations abroad. The order is part of a broad effort by the Trump administration to severely limit immigration into the US during the pandemic. It suspends H-1B visas for highly skilled workers, most H-2B visas for non-agricultural guest workers, many J-1 visas for exchange visitors like teachers, interns, au pairs and camp counselors, and L-1 visas used by companies to transfer foreign workers to locations in the US, officials told reporters on June 22. Food supply chain workers are exempt, as are workers whom the government deems essential to the fight against coronavirus The order will also extend Trump’s April 2020 edict barring green cards for family members of US citizens.
The Senate this week failed to pass a police reform package due to divisions between both parties over the issue of qualified immunity for police officers.
A Republican-sponsored bill meant to rein in police misconduct in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis failed in the US Senate on June 24, leaving congressional efforts to address racial inequities in American policing at an impasse. Democrats, denouncing the measure as irrevocably flawed, defeated a Republican push to move to final debate by a vote of 55-45, short of the 60 votes needed, a month after Floyd’s death in police custody set off weeks of worldwide protests against police brutality. The legislative fight over reform now moves to the House of Representatives, which plans to vote on a more sweeping Democratic bill on June 25. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and other Senate Democrats said they believed the June 24 vote makes it more likely that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, the chamber’s top Republican, will agree to negotiations on a stronger bipartisan measure. McConnell said he would schedule another vote if there was enough progress on closing Republican-Democratic differences. President Donald Trump said he would not accept Democratic reforms and suggested the issue could end in stalemate. “If nothing happens with it, it’s one of those things. We have different philosophies,” he told reporters.
4. Amid A Worsening Coronavirus Pandemic In US, President Donald Trump Announces Plan To Eliminate Federal Funding Of Coronavirus Testing Sites
Amid A Worsening Coronavirus Pandemic In US, President Donald Trump Announces Plan To Eliminate Federal Funding Of Coronavirus Testing Sites
As Coronavirus cases continue to spike across the US, the nation on June 24 saw its largest daily increase in confirmed new infections since the pandemic began, the Trump administration is reportedly planning to cut off federal funding for 13 coronavirus testing sites in five states at the end of the month, a move that is in keeping with the President’s vow to slow screenings for the virus. As reported by Politico on June 24, the federal government is ending its support for 13 drive-thru coronavirus testing sites on June 30, urging states to take over their operations, even as cases spike in several parts of the country. Seven of the sites set to lose federal funding and support are located in Texas, which has seen new Coronavirus cases and hospitalizations skyrocket during the reopening process, a spike that Texas Governor Greg Abbott (one of President Donald Trump’s strongest supporters at the state level) predicted last month in a private call that leaked to reporters. Texas was one of six states that saw a record increase in new infections on Wednesday. The other testing sites that will lose federal support next week are located in Colorado, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and New Jersey.
President Donald Trump on June 22 issued a proclamation suspending some employment-based visas, including H-1B visas for highly skilled workers, through the end of the year as the US struggles to weather the widening coronavirus pandemic. The Trump administration is touting the move as a way to protect American jobs amid the highest unemployment rate since 1939, but the decision has been panned by a broad range of companies who say they cannot access the labor they need in the US and who warn that the move could lead them to move operations abroad. The order is part of a broad effort by the Trump administration to severely limit immigration into the US during the pandemic. It suspends H-1B visas for highly skilled workers, most H-2B visas for non-agricultural guest workers, many J-1 visas for exchange visitors like teachers, interns, au pairs and camp counselors, and L-1 visas used by companies to transfer foreign workers to locations in the US, officials told reporters on June 22. Food supply chain workers are exempt, as are workers whom the government deems essential to the fight against coronavirus The order will also extend Trump’s April 2020 edict barring green cards for family members of US citizens.
An administration official estimated that the restrictions as a whole would prevent some 525,000 people from entering the US through the end of the year, though immigration analysts say they expect the number to be around half that figure. The ban will still be in place on October 1, the start of the government’s new fiscal year, when H-1B visas are typically issued. “American workers compete against foreign nationals for jobs in every sector of our economy, including against millions of aliens who enter the United States to perform temporary work,” President Donald Trump’s proclamation says. “Under ordinary circumstances, properly administered temporary worker programs can provide benefits to the economy. But under the extraordinary circumstances of the economic contraction resulting from the COVID-19 outbreak, certain nonimmigrant visa programs authorizing such employment pose an unusual threat to the employment of American workers.”
Immigration analysts and advocates have criticized the Trump administration for what they see as an effort to use the pandemic as cover to enact a number of restrictive immigration measures the administration has long wished to implement. Immigration hard-liners have pressured the administration for months to act to limit the number of foreign workers allowed into the US. The decision to temporarily suspend worker visas has even divided Congressional Republicans. In a May 27 letter addressed to President Trump, nine Republican senators, including close Trump ally Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, urged the president to reconsider limits on temporary foreign workers, saying that the move would hurt American businesses. “Guest workers are needed to boost American business, not take American jobs,” the letter read. But earlier in May, four Republican Senators wrote to President Donald Trump asking him to do the opposite and instead suspend temporary worker visas amid the pandemic.
In a major rebuke to President Donald Trump, the US Supreme Court has blocked the Trump administration’s plan to dismantle a program implemented by President Barack Obama in 2012 that has protected 700,000 so-called DREAMers from deportation. The vote was 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the opinion. Under the Obama-era program, qualified individuals brought to the US as children were given temporary legal status if they graduated from high school or were honorably discharged from the military, and if they passed a background check. Just months after taking office, President Trump moved to revoke the program, only to be blocked by lower courts, and now the Supreme Court. Roberts’ opinion for the court was a narrow but powerful rejection of the way the Trump administration went about trying to abolish the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. “We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies,” Roberts wrote. “The wisdom of those decisions is none of our concern. Here we address only whether the Administration complied with the procedural requirements in the law that insist on ‘a reasoned explanation for its action.’ “
In 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions simply declared DACA illegal and unconstitutional. “Such an open-ended circumvention of immigration laws was an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the executive branch,” he said at the time. Sessions argued that the program should be rescinded because he said it was unlawful from the start. But, as Chief Justice John Roberts observed, the Attorney General offered no detailed justifications for canceling DACA. Nor did the acting secretary of Homeland Security at the time, Elaine Duke, who put out a memo announcing the rescission of DACA that relied entirely on Sessions’ opinion that the program was unlawful. As Roberts noted, Duke’s memo did not address the fact that thousands of young people had come to rely on the program, emerging from the shadows to enroll in degree programs, embark on careers, start businesses, buy homes and even marry and have 200,000 children of their own who are US citizens, not to mention that DACA recipients pay $60 billion in taxes each year. None of these concerns are “dispositive,” Roberts said, but they have to be addressed. The fact that they were not addressed made the decision to rescind DACA “arbitrary and capricious,” he wrote. And none of the justifications the administration offered after the fact sufficed either, including a memo issued by then-Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen. That memo, said Roberts, was essentially too little, too late. An agency must defend its action based on the reasons it gave at the time it acted, he said, instead of when the case is already in court.
Chief Justice John Roberts also made clear that an administration can rescind a program like DACA, and indeed immigration experts do not disagree with that conclusion. The problem for the administration was that it never wanted to take responsibility for abolishing DACA and instead sought to blame the Obama administration for what it called an “illegal and unconstitutional” program. The Chief Justice did not address that issue. Instead, says immigration law professor Lucas Guttentag, the justices in the majority seemed to be saying, “Why should the court be the bad guy” when the administration “won’t take responsibility” for rescinding DACA by explaining clearly what the policy justifications for the revocation are? Joining the Roberts opinion were the court’s four liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Sotomayor wrote separately in a concurrence to say that while she agreed that rescinding DACA violated the law for the procedural reasons outlined by the Chief Justice, she would have allowed the litigants to return to the lower courts and make the case that rescinding DACA also amounted to unconstitutional discrimination. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the principal dissent, accusing Roberts of writing a political rather than a legal opinion. Joining him were Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito, with separate dissents also filed by Alito and Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
In a Twitter post, President Donald Trump blasted the decision as one of the “horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court.” President Trump also asked the question of if “Do you get the impression that the Supreme Court doesn’t like me?” Former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, on the other hand, celebrated the decision, saying in a statement, “The Supreme Court’s ruling today is a victory made possible by the courage and resilience of hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients who bravely stood up and refused to be ignored.” In an interview with NPR, Ken Cuccinelli, the Trump administration senior official who oversees immigration and citizenship at the Department of Homeland Security, said President Trump is considering his options. “I do expect you will see some action out of the administration,” he said, adding: “He is not a man who sits on his hands.”
These horrible & politically charged decisions coming out of the Supreme Court are shotgun blasts into the face of people that are proud to call themselves Republicans or Conservatives. We need more Justices or we will lose our 2nd. Amendment & everything else. Vote Trump 2020!
While the decision gives DACA and its hundreds of thousands of recipients a lifeline, the issue is far from settled. The court decided that the way President Donald Trump went about canceling DACA was illegal, but all the justices seemed to agree that the president does have the authority to cancel the program if done properly. As for the immediate future of DACA, the consensus among immigration experts is that there is not enough time for President Donald Trump to try again to abolish the program before January. Cornell Law School professor Stephen Yale-Loehr, the author of a 21-volume treatise on immigration law, says, “It’s not remotely possible before the election. But if [Trump] is reelected, he almost certainly will try again” to cancel DACA. For now, though, more individuals eligible for DACA status may be able to apply. Marisol Orihuela, co-director of the Worker & Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic at Yale Law School, notes that the administration has refused to accept new applications since 2017. But she thinks that will change now. “Our understanding is that the program is restored to what it was in 2012 when it went into effect,” she says. Guttentag, who teaches immigration law at Yale and Stanford University, says if President Trump is not reelected, a new administration could repair “much of the damage” that he says has been inflicted on immigrants during the Trump administration. But, he adds that the immigration system is “completely shattered” and needs “fundamental reform.”
Democratic Presidential candidateJoe Biden has opened up a 13-point lead over President Donald Trump, the widest margin this year, according to the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll as Americans grow more critical of President Trump over the Coronavirus pandemic and protests against police brutality. In the June 10-16 poll, 48% of registered voters said they would back Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, in the Presidential election, while 35% said they would support Trump. Biden’s advantage is the biggest recorded by the Reuters/Ipsos poll since Democrats began their state nominating contests this year to pick their party’s nominee to challenge Trump in November. A similar CNN poll from earlier this month showed Biden with a 14-point lead over Trump among registered voters. The Reuters/Ipsos poll also showed that 57% of adults disapproved of Trump’s performance in office, while just 38% approved, marking Trump’s lowest approval rating since November of 2019 when Congress was conducting its impeachment inquiry into the Republican President. In a clear warning sign for Trump, his own support base appears to be eroding. Republicans’ net approval of Trump is down 13 points from March to June, declining every month in that span.
The shift in opinion comes as Americans are whipsawed by the Coronavirus pandemic, the ensuing economic collapse, and the outpouring of anger and frustration following numerous deadly confrontations between police and African-Americans, including the death last month of George Floyd while in Minneapolis police custody. President Donald Trump, who dismissed the threat of the Coronavirus early on, sparred with state governors as they tried to slow its spread and has pushed authorities to allow businesses to reopen despite warnings from health experts about increasing risks of transmission. More than 116,000 people in the US have died from the virus and more than 2 million people have been infected, by far the most in the world. Some states that have reopened such as Florida, Arizona, and Texas are seeing a jump in cases. Altogether, 55% of Americans said they disapproved of Trump’s handling of the Coronavirus, while 40% approved, which is the lowest net approval for the President on the subject since Reuters/Ipsos started tracking the question in early March.
President Donald Trump also has been criticized for the way he has responded to the protests that were sparked by George Floyd’s killing. While nearly two-thirds of respondents sympathized with the protesters, according to the poll, Trump has openly flirted with deploying the military to “dominate” them. Earlier this month, police in Washington DC forcibly removed peaceful protesters so that Trump could pose for photographs in front of a church near the White House. As businesses shuttered across the country because of coronavirus lockdowns, Americans have increasingly turned their focus to the economy and jobs as a top concern. In that area, President Trump still has the upper hand over Joe Biden. 43% of registered voters said they thought President Trump would be a better steward of the economy than Biden, while 38% said Biden would be better.
The Republican Party’s nominating convention has also been impacted by the pandemic, with current public health rules preventing President Donald Trump from delivering his acceptance speech before a full house of delegates and supporters in Charlotte, North Carolina as initially planned. On June 8, a separate campaign adviser said the President and the Republican National Committee were leaning toward moving Trump’s speech to Jacksonville, Florida, where they expect to be allowed to gather in larger numbers. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, one of President Trump’s strongest supporters, has endorsed the idea of having the Republican convention in his home state despite the rapid increase in Coronavirus cases in Florida over the past few weeks.
President Donald Trump is under pressure to reverse his tumbling prospects for re-election and is counting on a rebound in the US economy, which was rocked by the global pandemic. He also is grappling with mass protests that erupted after African-American George Floyd died in police custody. A number of public opinion polls show Joe Biden with a substantial lead over President Trump nationally and in some of the battleground states where the election will be decided. Trump’s political advisers, however, see active Republican enthusiasm for his candidacy based on a record of victories by the 64 party candidates he has endorsed in special elections since the 2018 midterms.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1.President Trump Threatens To Deploy Military In Response To Protests Against Police Brutality, Systemic Racism in the US
To the surprise of few, President Donald Trump this week threatened to use the military to crack down on the ongoing series of protests in the US against police brutality and systemic racism.
As the nation prepared for another series of violent protests sparked by the police killing of George Floyd, President Donald Trump on June 1 threatened to deploy the military if states and cities failed to quell the demonstrations. “I am mobilizing all federal and local resources, civilian and military, to protect the rights of law-abiding Americans,” President Trump said during a hastily arranged address at the White House. “Today I have strongly recommended to every governor to deploy the National Guard in sufficient numbers that we dominate the streets. Mayors and governors must establish an overwhelming presence until the violence is quelled,” Trump said. “If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them,” said the president. Trump stopped short of invoking the Insurrection Act, an archaic law from 1807 that would allow Trump to deploy active-duty U.S. troops to respond to protests in cities across the country. “During his address, Trump said he was taking “swift and decisive action to protect our great capital, Washington DC,” adding, “What happened in this city last night was a total disgrace.” “As we speak, I am dispatching thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults, and the wanton destruction of property.”
2. Senate Republicans Block Measure Condemning President Trump’s Response To Anti-Racism Protesters
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell this week block a measure condemning President Trump’s response to anti-racism protesters
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) blocked a resolution proposed by Senate Democrats that would have censured President Trump’s response to protesters in Washington, D.C., on June 1, when federal law enforcement officers forcefully removed demonstrators from a park across from the White House. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), introduced the resolution on June 2, saying on the Senate floor that the removal of the protesters was “appalling” and “an abuse of presidential power.” Schumer attempted to pass the measure by unanimous consent, which does not require a vote by the whole Senate but can be blocked by any member. McConnell objected, accusing Democrats of pulling a political stunt in the middle of the crisis sparked by the death of George Floyd, who died after a Minneapolis police officer pinned his knee to his neck.
3. Presumptive Democratic Nominee Joe Biden Denounces President Trump For His Response To US Protests Over Racism & Police Brutality
In powerful remarks earlier this week, presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden denounced President Trump for his racial policies and called for an end to police brutality and institutional racism in the US.
Presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden on June 2 blasted President Donald Trump’s response to US protests over racism and police misconduct, vowing to try to heal the country’s racial divide and not “fan the flames of hate.” Speaking in Philadelphia, a city rocked by sometimes violent demonstrations in recent days, the former Vice President sought to draw a vivid contrast between himself and President Trump, whom he will face in the general election. Biden, who served eight years as Vice President under Barack Obama, the first African-American US President, cast himself as the candidate who best understands the longstanding pain and grief in the country’s African-American communities. He said the killing of George Floyd, the African-American man who died at the hands of Minneapolis police last week, was a “wake-up call” for the nation that must force it to address the stain of systemic racism.“We can’t leave this moment thinking we can once again turn away and do nothing,” Biden said. “We can’t.” He accused Trump of turning the nation into “a battlefield riven by old resentments and fresh fears.” “Is this who we want to be?” he asked. “Is this what we want to pass on to our children and grandchildren? Fear, anger, finger-pointing, rather than the pursuit of happiness? Incompetence and anxiety, self-absorption, selfishness?” Biden pledged he would “not traffic in fear or division.”
4. Trump Administration Announces Intentions To Declare Antifa A Terrorist Organization
President Donald Trump this week announced that his administration is considering the left-wing group Antifa a terrorist organization.
President Donald Trump tweeted on May 31 that the US will designate Antifa as a terrorist organization, even though the US government has no existing legal authority to label a wholly domestic group in the manner it currently designates foreign terrorist organizations. Current and former government officials say it would be unconstitutional for the US government to proscribe First Amendment-protected activity inside the US based on its ideology. US law allows terrorist designations for foreign groups since belonging to those groups does not enjoy the same protections. Antifa (short for anti-fascists), describes a broad group of people whose political beliefs lean toward the left-wing of the political spectrum, but do not conform with the Democratic Party platform. Antifa positions can be hard to define, but many members support anti-imperialist viewpoints and policies and protest the amassing of wealth by corporations and elites. Some employ radical or militant tactics to get out their messages. An additional problem with Trump’s is that groups who identify as Antifa are amorphous and lack a centralized leadership structure, though some local activists are highly organized, according to federal law enforcement officials. That has made it difficult for US law enforcement to deal with violence from members of groups that label themselves as Antifa.
The United States of America will be designating ANTIFA as a Terrorist Organization.
President Donald Trumptweeted on May 31 that the US will designate Antifa as a terrorist organization, even though the US government has no existing legal authority to label a wholly domestic group in the manner it currently designates foreign terrorist organizations. Current and former government officials say it would be unconstitutional for the US government to proscribe First Amendment-protected activity inside the US based on its ideology. US law allows terrorist designations for foreign groups since belonging to those groups does not enjoy the same protections. Antifa (short for anti-fascists), describes a broad group of people whose political beliefs lean toward the left-wing of the political spectrum, but do not conform with the Democratic Party platform. Antifa positions can be hard to define, but many members support anti-imperialist viewpoints and policies and protest the amassing of wealth by corporations and elites. Some employ radical or militant tactics to get out their messages. An additional problem with Trump’s is that groups who identify as Antifa are amorphous and lack a centralized leadership structure,though some local activists are highly organized, according to federal law enforcement officials. That has made it difficult for US law enforcement to deal with violence from members of groups that label themselves as Antifa.
The United States of America will be designating ANTIFA as a Terrorist Organization.
President Donald Trump’s call to declare Antifa a terrorist designation comes as Attorney General William Barr and other administration officials have pointed to far-left groups as responsible for many of the violent protests across the country. Federal law enforcement officials stated they are aware of outside groups who are behind some of the property destruction and violence, using the cover of the legitimate protests in Minneapolis and elsewhere. Those domestic extremist groups include anarchists, white supremacists and far-left extremists, some of whom have overlapping affiliations. An announcement by the Justice Department on May 31 to use Joint Terrorism Task Forces around the country to investigate some of the violence in major cities singles out leftist Antifa activity, though US law enforcement officials say there are groups from both the extremist left and right involved in the riots and attacks on police.
President Donald Trump’s and Attorney General William Barr’s focus on left-leaning groups also stands in contrast with repeated warnings in recent years from US law enforcement that the rise of white supremacist groups has become the biggest domestic terrorism challenge. Christopher Wray, the FBI director, has raised concerns about the increase of white supremacist activity driving the domestic terror threat, in some cases surpassing that from foreign terrorist groups. In response to the President’s tweet, ACLU National Security Project Director Hina Shamsi said there is “no legal authority for designating a domestic group” as a terrorist organization. “As this tweet demonstrates, terrorism is an inherently political label, easily abused and misused. There is no legal authority for designating a domestic group. Any such designation would raise significant due process and First Amendment concerns.” The Justice Department has studied the issue of creating a domestic terrorism law to apply to people involved in violence and who belong to domestic extremist groups, but the constitutional issues have been a hurdle to that effort. Despite threats by the President to designate various groups as terrorists, the closest the Trump administration has come is, in recent weeks, the State Department’s designation of a white supremacist group called Russian Imperial Movement, which is a foreign group but has some domestic US supporters, as a specially designated global terrorist group.
Presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden on June 2 blasted President Donald Trump’s response to US protests over racism and police misconduct, vowing to try to heal the country’s racial divide and not “fan the flames of hate.” Speaking in Philadelphia, a city rocked by sometimes violent demonstrations in recent days, the former Vice President sought to draw a vivid contrast between himself and President Trump, whom he will face in the general election. Biden, who served eight years as Vice President under Barack Obama, the first African-American US President, cast himself as the candidate who best understands the longstanding pain and grief in the country’s African-American communities. He said the killing of George Floyd, the African-American man who died at the hands of Minneapolis police last week, was a “wake-up call” for the nation that must force it to address the stain of systemic racism.“We can’t leave this moment thinking we can once again turn away and do nothing,” Biden said. “We can’t.” He accused Trump of turning the nation into “a battlefield riven by old resentments and fresh fears.” “Is this who we want to be?” he asked. “Is this what we want to pass on to our children and grandchildren? Fear, anger, finger-pointing, rather than the pursuit of happiness? Incompetence and anxiety, self-absorption, selfishness?” Biden pledged he would “not traffic in fear or division.”
Joe Biden’s speech on June 2 at Philadelphia’s City Hall marked the first time he has left his home state of Delaware to campaign in person since mid-March when the outbreak of the Coronavirus forced him to halt in-person campaigning indefinitely. While Biden had made public appearances in Delaware in recent days and convened a virtual conference of big-city mayors on June 1, his most recent speech suggested he may soon begin to again move about the country as states slowly re-open. Biden formally launched his White House bid in Philadelphia last year, and it is also where his campaign headquarters, currently empty because of the pandemic, is located. The city was also the birthplace of the US Constitution, which Biden cited in his speech as support of the right to peacefully protest. “Our freedom to speak is the cherished knowledge that lives inside every American,” he said.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) blocked a resolution proposed by Senate Democrats that would have censured President Trump’s response to protesters in Washington, D.C., on June 1, when federal law enforcement officers forcefully removed demonstrators from a park across from the White House. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), introduced the resolution on June 2, saying on the Senate floor that the removal of the protesters was “appalling” and “an abuse of presidential power.” Schumer attempted to pass the measure by unanimous consent, which does not require a vote by the whole Senate but can be blocked by any member. McConnell objected, accusing Democrats of pulling a political stunt in the middle of the crisis sparked by the death of George Floyd, who died after a Minneapolis police officer pinned his knee to his neck.
Speaking after the resolution was introduced, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called George Floyd’s death a “heinous act of criminal violence,” and said that “there’s no doubt that residual racism continues to be a stain on our country.” But the Republican leader argued that peaceful protests had been “hijacked” by violent riots and looting, and said the Democratic resolution would do nothing to ease tensions. “Those are the two issues that Americans want to address: racial justice, and ending riots. Unfortunately, this resolution from my friend the Democratic leader does not address either one of them. Instead, it just indulges in the myopic obsession with President Trump that has come to define the Democratic side of the aisle,” McConnell said. McConnell also proposed a resolution affirming the right to peaceful protest and condemning riots which were then blocked by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
The Democratic-sponsored resolution would have affirmed the constitutional rights of Americans to peacefully protest, as well as state that violence and looting are unacceptable. It also would have condemned President Donald Trump “for ordering Federal officers to use gas and rubber bullets against the Americans who were peaceably protesting in Lafayette Square in Washington, DC on the night of June 1, 2020, thereby violating the constitutional rights of those peaceful protestors.” A Justice Department official said in a statement that Attorney General William Barr was part of the decision to expand the perimeter around the White House, pushing protesters who were assembled there from the area before President Trump delivered remarks from the Rose Garden. Protesters had gathered for the fourth day of demonstrations in response to George Floyd’s death and other instances of police brutality. The protests were described as peaceful before law enforcement deployed tear gas and rubber bullets against demonstrators and cleared them from the area. After walking across the cleared-out Lafayette Park, Trump posed for photographs in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church while holding the Bible, joined by several members of his cabinet, including Attorney General William Barr, Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany and Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
Senate Republicans largely shied away from criticizing President Donald Trump’s June 1 visit to St. John’s Episcopal Church. Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin told reporters he “didn’t see it” when asked about the President’s photo-op. Senator John Kennedy (R-LA), one of President Trump’s strongest Congressional supporters, told reporters at the Capitol that he believed Trump’s visit was “needed.” “I thought what the president did in visiting the church was not only appropriate, it was needed, it sent a message to the American people that its government is going to protect the innocent,” Kennedy said. The church was damaged in a small basement fire set by protesters on Sunday. A handful of Republicans also criticized Trump’s behavior however. Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE) released a statement saying he was “against clearing out a peaceful protest for a photo op that treats the Word of God as a political prop.” Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) told reporters that “I did not think that what we saw last night was the America that I know.” Trump’s visit to the church was also condemned by Reverend Mariann Edgar Budde, who oversees the church and the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, D.C.
As the nation prepared for another series of violent protests sparked by the police killing of George Floyd, President Donald Trump on June 1 threatened to deploy the military if states and cities failed to quell the demonstrations. “I am mobilizing all federal and local resources, civilian and military, to protect the rights of law-abiding Americans,” President Trump said during a hastily arranged address at the White House. “Today I have strongly recommended to every governor to deploy the National Guard in sufficient numbers that we dominate the streets. Mayors and governors must establish an overwhelming presence until the violence is quelled,” Trump said. “If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them,” said the president. Trump stopped short of invoking the Insurrection Act, an archaic law from 1807 that would allow Trump to deploy active-duty U.S. troops to respond to protests in cities across the country. “During his address, Trump said he was taking “swift and decisive action to protect our great capital, Washington DC,” adding, “What happened in this city last night was a total disgrace.” “As we speak, I am dispatching thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults, and the wanton destruction of property.”
As President Donald Trump spoke, riot police and military police outside the White House were using tear gas to clear protesters out of Lafayette Square, a public square in front of the president’s residence. Following his remarks, President Trump left the White House and walked through the square, and it appeared strongly as though the riot police had forcibly cleared the square for the sole purpose of clearing a path for the President. Once he reached the far side of the square, Trump raised a bible in front of St. John’s Church, which had been set on fire by protesters the night before. The President did not try to talk to any of the protesters, however, leaving little doubt as to where his sympathies lay.
President Donald Trump’s address followed a weekend where he threatened the protesters gathered outside the gates of the White House with the promise of “vicious dogs” and “ominous weapons.” During a teleconference with governors on June 1, President Trump berated them for not using harsher tactics to quell the protests that have lit up dozens of American cities since last week, when George Floyd, an unarmed African-American man, was killed by Minneapolis police. “You have to dominate if you don’t dominate you’re wasting your time. They’re going to run over you. You’re going to look like a bunch of jerks. You have to dominate,” the President told governors. Trump pressured the governors to mobilize more National Guard units, called for 10-year prison sentences for violent protesters, and effectively blamed the governors themselves for the racial unrest in their states. “The only time [violent protests are] successful is when you’re weak. And most of you are weak,” Trump can be heard saying on the audio recording. Trump also told the governors he was putting the nation’s highest-ranking military officer “in charge.” “General Milley is here who’s head of Joint Chiefs of Staff, a fighter, a warrior, and a lot of victories and no losses. And he hates to see the way it’s being handled in the various states. And I’ve just put him in charge,” Trump told the governors.
As of June 1, 23 states and the District of Columbia have mobilized more than 17,000 National Guard personnel in support of state and local authorities. More than 45,000 members of the National Guard are already supporting Coronavirus response efforts at their governors’ direction. Inside the White House, there was little consensus over what President Donald Trump should do next. Some aides advised the president to deliver a formal address to the nation, urging calm and unity. Other advisers recommended that Trump take the opposite tack, and escalate the federal response, up to and including Trump invoking the 1807 Insurrection Act to order federal troops into Washington D.C. Proponents of involving the Insurrection Act to quell the protests (the most notable of which being Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas) have pointed to the fact that Presidents Dwight Eisenhower, John F. KennedyLyndon Johnson, and George H.W. Bush invoked the Act in response to racial disturbances during their Presidencies. On the other hand, opponents of such measures argue that they will do little more than to inflame the racial tensions that have steadily increased since President Trump took office and may set negative precedence that may encourage future Presidents to utilize the military to crack down on their political opponents.
To those who claim the military has no role in stopping anarchists and other criminals from tearing apart our cities: read a book.
The military has intervened to maintain public order since the Whiskey Rebellion. Here are a few recent examples.
On May 30, President Donald Trump had attempted to empathize with protesters and with George Floyd’s family during remarks he delivered at a SpaceX launch in Florida.“I understand the pain that people are feeling,” Trump said. “We support the right of peaceful protesters, and we hear their pleas. But what we are now seeing on the streets of our cities has nothing to do with justice or with peace. “The memory of George Floyd is being dishonored by rioters, looters, and anarchists. The violence and vandalism is being led by Antifa and other radical left-wing groups who are terrorizing the innocent, destroying jobs, hurting businesses, and burning down buildings.” But even in his scripted sympathy, Trump politicized the protests to a great extent by blaming “radical left-wing groups” as the main culprits behind the civil disturbances.
Former Vice President Joe Biden’s lead over President Donald Trump has fallen by three points over the last week, according to new polling data. The latest survey by Reuters and Ipsos found that Biden led Trump by six points among registered voters, with 45% backing him and 39% favoring Trump. The former Vice President also had a four-point lead among Independent voters. A third of the group (33%) said they would back Biden, while 29% said the same of Trump. When the same poll was published last week, the presumptive Democratic nominee had a nine-point lead on the president, with 47% of polled voters saying they would back Biden as only 38% opted for Trump. The former Vice President also had a stronger eight-point lead among Independent voters polled last week.
Despite the fact that he lost some ground compared to last week, former Vice President Joe Biden is polling well in the twelve battleground states in the 2020 campaign. For example Joe Biden is polling well ahead of President Donald Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Hampshire, Maine, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona. Additionally, Biden is polling narrowly ahead of Trump in the battleground states of Texas, Georgia, and Utah. Assuming that his lead continues to remain, is likely that former Vice President Joe Biden will win the 2020 election with a substantial electoral college margin and solid popular vote margin.
In their latest survey on the 2020 election, Ipsos pollsters also found that President Donald Trump’s Coronavirus approval rating remained steady this week as the US death toll in the growing Coronavirus pandemic topped 100,000 on May 27. 41% of polled US adults said they approved of the President’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, down by just a single point on last week. 53% told Ipsos they disapproved of Trump’s handling of the outbreak, giving the commander-in-chief a net disapproval rating of 12%. When the same poll was conducted the week before, the President’s net coronavirus disapproval rating was at 10%. President Trump’s rating on healthcare reform will make harder reading for the President and his team, with just 38% of polled Americans approving of his handling of the issue and 52% disapproving. However, the President recorded net approval ratings on the economy and employment, despite almost 40 million Americans filing initial jobless claims since March.
The House of Representatives on May 27 passed legislation calling on President Donald Trump’s administration to impose sanctions on Chinese officials responsible for the oppression of the country’s Uighur Muslim minority. The tally was 413 in favor, and just one opposed. Since the legislation has passed the Senate, approval sent the bill to the White House where congressional aides said they expected President Trump would sign it into law. The vote was historic, the first use of a new system allowing proxy voting because of the coronavirus pandemic.
The bill calls for sanctions against those responsible for the repression of Uighurs and other Muslim groups in China’s Xinjiang province. It singles out the region’s Communist Party secretary, Chen Quanguo, a member of China’s powerful Politburo, as responsible for “gross human rights violations” against them. “Congress sent a clear message that the Chinese government cannot act with impunity,” said Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), who led the push for the legislation. The measure passed the Republican-led Senate by unanimous consent. The overwhelming majority in the Democratic-led House was far more than the two-thirds majority needed to override any veto. The bill also calls on American companies or individuals operating in the Xinjiang region to take steps to ensure their supply chains are not “compromised by forced labor” there. “Today, with this overwhelmingly bipartisan legislation, the United States Congress is taking a firm step to counter Beijing’s horrific human rights abuses against the Uighurs,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement.
Since 2014, the Uighur Muslim community in China has been affected by extensive controls and restrictions upon their religious and cultural practices, as well as social life. In Xinjiang province, the Chinese government has expanded police surveillance to watch for signs of “religious extremism” that include owning books about Uighur, growing a beard, having a prayer rug, or quitting smoking or drinking. The government had also installed cameras in the homes of private citizens. Additionally, the United Nations estimates that close to 1 million Uighur Muslims have been detained in mass prison camps aimed at changing their political thinking, religious beliefs, and identities. The Chinese government has denied any mistreatment at these camps and has claimed that the camps provide vocational training.
The increased efforts to place sanctions on the Chinese government for the human rights abuses carried out against the Uighur Muslim community comes at a time of heightened tensions between the Chinese government and the Trump administration. For example, President Donald Trump has escalated his ongoing trade war against China and has blamed the Chinese government (with little evidence) for planning out the Coronavirus pandemic as a form of biological warfare against the US. Additionally, President Donald Trump has publically floated the idea of launching military strikes against China as a form of retribution for the Coronavirus outbreak.
President Donald Trump on May 27 threatened to regulate or shut down social media companies for stifling conservative voices, a day after Twitter attached a warning to some of his tweets prompting readers to fact check the president’s claims. Without offering evidence, President Trump accused such platforms of bias, tweeting: “Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices. We will strongly regulate, or close them down before we can ever allow this to happen.” Trump, a heavy user of Twitter with more than 80 million followers, added: “Clean up your act, NOW!!!! Trump’s threat to shut down platforms such as Twitter and Facebook was his strongest yet within a broader conservative backlash against Big Tech.
Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices. We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen. We saw what they attempted to do, and failed, in 2016. We can’t let a more sophisticated version of that….
Twitter for the first time attached fact-check labels on President Donald Trump’s tweets after he made unsubstantiated claims on May 26 about mail-in voting. In a pair of early morning posts on May 27, the Republican president again blasted mail-in ballots. President Trump falsely claims that mail-in ballots lead to vote fraud and ineligible voters getting ballots. Twitter and Facebook declined to comment on Trump’s tweets. Asked during Twitter’s annual meeting why the company decided to affix the label to Trump’s mail-in ballot tweets, General Counsel Sean Edgett said decisions about handling misinformation are made as a group. “We have a group and committee of folks who take a look at these things and make decisions on what’s getting a lot of visibility and traction…,” he said. In recent years Twitter has tightened its policies amid criticism that its hands-off approach allowed fake accounts and misinformation to thrive. Tech companies have been accused of anti-competitive practices and violating user privacy. Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon face antitrust probes by federal and state authorities and a US congressional panel. The Internet Association, which includes Twitter and Facebook among its members, said online platforms do not have a political bias and they offer “more people a chance to be heard than at any point in history.”
Republican and Democratic lawmakers, along with the Justice Department, have been considering changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a federal law largely exempting online platforms from legal liability for the material their user’s post. Such changes could expose tech companies to more lawsuits. Republican Senator Josh Hawley, a frequent critic of Big Tech companies and strong supporter of President Donald Trump, sent a letter to Twitter Chief Executive Jack Dorsey asking why the company should continue to receive legal immunity after “choosing to editorialize on President Trump’s tweets.”
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1.House of Representatives Approves Fourth Coronavirus Stimulus Bill Amid Deepening Of Pandemic In US
Amid a worsening Coronavirus outbreak in the US, the House of Representatives this week approved a $3 trillion stimulus packaged aimed at proving the American people relief.
On May 15, the House of Representatives passed a $3 trillion tax cut and spending bill aimed at addressing the devastating economic fallout from the coronavirus outbreak by directing huge sums of money into all corners of the economy. The Trump Administration and Senate Republicans have decried the measure’s design and said they will cast it aside, leaving uncertain what steps policymakers might take as the economy continues to face severe strains. The sweeping legislation, dubbed the “Heroes Act, passed 208-199. Fourteen Democrats defected and opposed the bill, reflecting concerns voiced both by moderates and liberals in the House Democratic caucus about the bill’s content and the leadership-driven process that brought it to the floor. The bill won support from just one Republican, Congressman Peter King of New York, generally regarded as a relatively moderate Republican. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) pushed forward despite the divisions in her caucus and Republican opposition, arguing that the legislation will put down a marker for Democrats’ priorities and set the stage for negotiations on the next bipartisan relief bill. Americans “are suffering so much, in so many ways. We want to lessen their pain,” Pelosi said during the House floor debate. “Not to act now is not only irresponsible in a humanitarian way, it is irresponsible because it’s only going to cost more, more in terms of lives, livelihood, cost to the budget, cost to our democracy.”
2. Iranian Parliament Approves Sweeping Anti-Israel Bill
The Iranian Parliament approved a sweeping anti-Israel bill this week amid increasing tensions between both countries in recent weeks.
The Iranian parliament approved a bill on May 18 including a list of measures against Israel, such as the establishment of an Iranian consulate or embassy in Jerusalem to Palestine, boycott measures, and bans on contact and agreements between Iran and Israel. The bill, featuring 14 articles, passed with 43 votes in favor and no votes against, according to the Iranian IRNA news agency. The bill will be brought before the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee so that the parliament can vote on the law at the beginning of next week.
3. According To Recent Study, The Coronavirus Lockdowns Worldwide Have Caused A 17% Decrease In Global Carbon Emissions
A study published in the Nature Climate Change journal shows that the ongoing Coronavirus lockdown throughout the world have resulted in a sustained decrease in global carbon emissions.
The coronavirus pandemic has forced countries around the world to enact strict lockdowns, seal borders and scale back economic activities. Now, an analysis published May 19 finds that these measures contributed to an estimated 17 percent decline in daily global carbon dioxide emissions compared to daily global averages from 2019. It is a worldwide drop that scientists say could be the largest in recorded history. At the height of coronavirus confinements in early April, daily carbon dioxide emissions around the world decreased by roughly 18.7 million tons compared to average daily emissions last year, falling to levels that were last observed in 2006, according to the new study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change.
4. Federal Judge OKs Lawsuit Alleging That President Trump, Trump Family Collaborated In Fraudulent Marketing Schemes.
A federal judge this week approved a lawsuit against President Donald Trump and his family alleging that they collaborated in a fraudulent marketing scheme to prey on Trump Organization inestors.
A federal judge on May 18 allowed a federal lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump, his three eldest children and his company of collaborating with a fraudulent marketing scheme to prey on investors to proceed. The lawsuit, originally filed in October 2018 and amended a few months later, alleges that in exchange for “secret” payments, Trump and three of his adult children used his former reality TV show “The Celebrity Apprentice” and other promotional events as vehicles to boost ACN Opportunity, a telecommunications marketing company linked to a nonprofit that used Trump’s brand to appeal to teens. The lawsuit also accuses the Trumps of having profited off the poor and vulnerable, as people looking “to enrich themselves by systematically defrauding economically marginalized people looking to invest in their educations, start their own small business, and pursue the American dream.” “Weighing the two ‘most critical’ factors — likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm — against each other, any prejudice that Defendants and ACN may suffer from proceeding with the litigation during the pendency of the appeal does not outweigh the strong likelihood that Defendants and ACN will not succeed on appeal,” US District Court Judge Lorna Schofield wrote in her opinion.
A federal judge on May 18 allowed a federal lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump, his three eldest children and his company of collaborating with a fraudulent marketing scheme to prey on investors to proceed. The lawsuit, originally filed in October 2018 and amended a few months later, alleges that in exchange for “secret” payments, Trump and three of his adult children used his former reality TV show “The Celebrity Apprentice” and other promotional events as vehicles to boost ACN Opportunity, a telecommunications marketing company linked to a nonprofit that used Trump’s brand to appeal to teens. The lawsuit also accuses the Trumps of having profited off the poor and vulnerable, as people looking “to enrich themselves by systematically defrauding economically marginalized people looking to invest in their educations, start their own small business, and pursue the American dream.” “Weighing the two ‘most critical’ factors — likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm — against each other, any prejudice that Defendants and ACN may suffer from proceeding with the litigation during the pendency of the appeal does not outweigh the strong likelihood that Defendants and ACN will not succeed on appeal,” US District Court Judge Lorna Schofield wrote in her opinion.
In response to the new allegations regarding fraudulent marketing schemes, President Donald Trump and his children intent to bring the ruling to an appeals court. A lawyer for the Trumps, Joanna Hendon, said “We intend to promptly move the 2nd Circuit for a stay pending appeal.” Four anonymous plaintiffs brought the suit, including what court papers describe as a hospice caregiver, a self-employed man who was once homeless and a food delivery driver. The Trumps “deliberately misled” consumers about the likely success of their investments, the suit claims, and engaged in “a pattern of racketeering activity.” According to CNN suit is being funded by the nonprofit Tesseract Research Center, which has ties to Democratic candidates.
On May 15, the House of Representatives passed a $3 trillion tax cut and spending bill aimed at addressing the devastating economic fallout from the growing Coronavirus outbreak by directing huge sums of money into all corners of the economy. The Trump Administration and Senate Republicans have decried the measure’s design and said they will cast it aside, leaving uncertain what steps policymakers might take as the economy continues to face severe strains. The sweeping legislation, dubbed the “Heroes Act, passed 208-199. Fourteen Democrats defected and opposed the bill, reflecting concerns voiced both by moderates and liberals in the House Democratic caucus about the bill’s content and the leadership-driven process that brought it to the floor. The bill won support from just one Republican, Congressman Peter King of New York, generally regarded as a relatively moderate Republican. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) pushed forward despite the divisions in her caucus and Republican opposition, arguing that the legislation will put down a marker for Democrats’ priorities and set the stage for negotiations on the next bipartisan relief bill. Americans “are suffering so much, in so many ways. We want to lessen their pain,” Pelosi said during the House floor debate. “Not to act now is not only irresponsible in a humanitarian way, it is irresponsible because it’s only going to cost more, more in terms of lives, livelihood, cost to the budget, cost to our democracy.”
As Washington scrambled to deal with the growing impact of the coronavirus pandemic earlier this year, the Trump administration, state governments, local officials, and businesses took steps to send many Americans home as a way to try to contain the contagion. This led to a mass wave of layoffs that began more than two months ago and has continued every week since, particularly as Americans have sharply pulled back spending. Congress has passed four bipartisan coronavirus relief bills that have already cost around $3 trillion to try to blunt the economic fallout. While Republicans and Trump administration officials agree that more action will be necessary at some point, many say it’s time to pause and see how the programs already funded are working before devoting even more federal funds to the crisis as deficits balloon. “The president has said he would talk about state and local aid, but it cannot become a pretext for bailing out blue states that have gotten themselves into financial trouble, so while he’s open to discussing it he has no immediate plans to move forward,” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said, adding, “The Pelosi bill has been entirely unacceptable.”
In a reflection of clashing priorities that might make it difficult to come to an agreement on additional relief legislation, White House National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow floated slashing the 21 percent corporate tax rate in half for companies that return operations to the United States from overseas, a dramatic change that drew immediate opposition from Democrats. President Donald Trump has also called for a payroll tax cut and new legal liability protections for businesses in any future legislation, policies that have already been rejected by Democrats, and, in the case of the payroll tax cut, some Republicans as well. President Trump himself is pushing for the economy to reopen as quickly as possible and said recently that he’s in “no rush” to sign off on additional spending.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week
1.US Unemployment Rate Hits Highest Level In 80 Years
The Labor Department announced this week that the unemployment rate in the US has hit its highest level since 1939 amid measures to limit the spread of the Coronavirus.
As the Coronavirus spread accelerated in March, President Donald Trump and a number of state and local leaders put forth restrictions that led businesses to suddenly shut down and shed millions of workers. Many businesses and households also canceled all travel plans. Analysts warn it could take as long as five years to return to the 3.5% unemployment rate the nation recorded in February, in part because it is unclear what the post-pandemic economy will look like, even if scientists make progress on a vaccine. President Trump, though, claimed in a Fox News interview that there would be a quick rebound. “Those jobs will all be back, and they’ll be back very soon,” Trump said. Former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump’s expected opponent in November’s presidential election, said that the jobs report illustrated “an economic disaster” that was “made worse” in part by a slow and uneven response to the crisis earlier this year.
The stark employment data could create even more urgency for a number of governors who are debating when to reopen parts of their state economies. Many are weighing the health risks and the economic toll, a harrowing choice, analysts say. Some hope that reopening quickly will get people back to work, but it will be difficult with many businesses operating at partial capacity and parents wrestling with child-care challenges. The sudden economic contraction has already forced millions of Americans to turn to food banks, seek government aid for the first time,or stop paying rent and other bills. As they go without paychecks for weeks, some have also lost health insurance and even put their homes up for sale. There is a growing concern that the damage will be permanent as people fall out of the middle class and young people struggle to launch careers. “The impact on women and youth is particularly shocking and disproportionate,” said Lisa Cook, a professor at Michigan State University and former economic adviser to President Barack Obama. “Those who grew up during the Great Depression were hesitant to spend for the rest of their lives.”
Job losses began in the hospitality sector, which shed 7.7 million jobs in April, but other industries were also heavily affected. Retail lost 2.1 million jobs, and manufacturing shed 1.3 million jobs. White-collar and government jobs that typically prove resilient during downturns were also slashed, with companies shedding 2.1 million jobs and state and local governments losing nearly a million. More state and local government jobs could be cut in the coming weeks as officials deal with severe budget shortfalls. April’s unemployment rate was horrific by any standard, yet economists say it underestimates the extent of the pain. The Labor Department said the unemployment rate would have been about 20 percent if workers who said they were absent from work for “other reasons” had been classified as unemployed or furloughed. The official figure also does not count millions of workers who left the labor force entirely and the 5 million who were forced to scale back to part time.
There is a growing consensus that the economy is not going to bounce back quickly, as President Donald Trump wants, even as more businesses reopen this month. Many restaurants, gyms, and other businesses will be able to operate only at limited capacities, and customers, fearful of venturing out, are proving to be slow to return. And many businesses will not survive. All of this means the economy is going to need far fewer workers for months, or possibly years, to come. “It’s not like turning a light switch and everything goes back to where it was in February,” Loretta Mester, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, said in an interview. “We depopulated everything quickly. Repopulating it will take a lot longer.” Mester said the best cure for the economy at this point is probably more virus testing, monitoring, and investment in a COVID-19 treatment. Without those measures, people are unlikely to go out and spend again, even if stores and restaurants reopen. “There’s still a lot of uncertainty about the second half of the year,” Mester said. “Consumer confidence has been really, really bad since mid-March.”
2. 2020 Election Polling: Joe Biden Leads Donald Trump Nationwide
2020 Election polling released this week shows former Vice President Joe Biden with a clear lead over President Donald Trump.
Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden‘s lead over President Donald Trump now stands at five points, but Trump has an edge in the critical battleground states that could decide the electoral college, according to a new CNN poll. In the new poll, 51% of registered voters nationwide back Biden, while 46% say they prefer Trump, while in the battlegrounds, 52% favor Trump and 45% Biden. Partisans are deeply entrenched in their corners, with 95% of Democrats behind Biden and the same share of Republicans behind Trump. The two are close among independents (50% back Trump, 46% Biden, not a large enough difference to be considered a lead), but Biden’s edge currently rests on the larger share of voters who identify as Democrats. The former Vice President continues to hold healthy leads among women (55% Biden to 41% Trump) and African-Americans (69% Biden to 26% Trump). The two run more closely among men (50% Trump to 46% Biden) and Trump holds a clear edge among whites (55% Trump to 43% Biden). Surprisingly, the poll suggests Biden outpaces Trump among voters over age 45 by a 6-point margin, while the two are near even among those under age 45 (49% Biden to 46% Trump).
Though other recent polling has shown some signs of concern for Joe Biden among younger voters and strength among older ones, few have pegged the race as this close among younger voters. The results suggest that younger voters in the battleground states are tilted in favor of President Donald Trump, a stark change from the last CNN poll in which battleground voters were analyzed in March, even as other demographic groups shifted to a smaller degree. Given the small sample size in that subset of voters, it is difficult to determine with certainty whether the movement is significant or a fluke of random sampling. Nationally, Biden holds a lead over Trump among voters age 65 and older, a group that has been tilted Republican in recent presidential elections.
President Donald Trump’s biggest advantage over Joe Biden in the poll comes on his handling of the economy. Most voters, 54%, say they trust the President to better handle the nation’s economy, while 42% say they prefer Biden. An earlier release from the same CNN poll found the public’s ratings of the economy at their worst level since 2013, as a growing share said the economic damage wrought by the coronavirus outbreak could be permanent. But Biden does have the advantage as more trusted to handle the response to the coronavirus outbreak (51% Biden to 45% Trump) and health care (54% Biden to 42% Trump). Voters divide over which of the two has the stamina and sharpness to be President (49% say Trump, 46% Biden), a frequent attack Donald Trump levels against the former Vice President. But Biden outpaces Trump across five other tested attributes. His advantage is the largest on which candidate would unite the country and not divide it (55% say Biden would, 38% Trump), followed by being honest and trustworthy (53% choose Biden, 38% Trump). Biden is seen as caring more about people like you (54% Biden vs. 42% Trump), better able to manage the government effectively (52% Biden to 45% Trump) and more trusted in a crisis (51% Biden to 45% Trump).
The recent CNN polling shows that a majority of Americans say they have an unfavorable view of President Donald Trump (55%) while fewer feel negative about Joe Biden (46%). Among the 14% of registered voters who say they have a negative impression of both Trump and Biden, the former Vice President is the clear favorite in the presidential race: 71% say they would vote for Biden, 19% for Trump. Congressman Justin Amash (I-MI), who announced he is exploring a run for the presidency on the Libertarian ticket, is unknown to 80% of Americans and is viewed more unfavorably (13%) than favorably (8%). As Biden’s campaign moves closer to the selection of a Vice Presidential running mate, 38% of Democratic voters say choosing a candidate who brings racial and ethnic diversity to the Democratic ticket is one of the top two traits they would like to see in Biden’s choice, 34% name executive experience as a top-two trait, 32% say bringing ideological balance to the ticket is one of their top two criteria, and 31% say representing the future of the Democratic Party is that important. Proven appeal to swing voters and the legislative experience was a top tier concern for about a quarter of voters.
3. House Democrats Unveil $3 Trillion Coronavirus Relief Package
Amid Republican opposition, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a $3 trillion Coronavirus relief package this week.
House Democrats on May 12 unveiled a $3 trillion Coronavirus relief measure, an ambitious package with aid for struggling states and another round of direct payments to Americans that Republicans instantly dismissed as an exorbitantly priced and overreaching response to the Coronavirus crisis. The proposal, which spanned 1,815 pages, would add a fifth installment to an already sweeping assistance effort from the federal government, although its cost totaled more than the four previous measures combined. And unlike those packages, which were the product of intense bipartisan negotiations among lawmakers and administration officials who agreed generally on the need for rapid and robust action, the House bill represents an opening gambit in what is likely to be a bracing fight over what is needed to counter the public health and economic tolls of the pandemic. The new proposal includes nearly $1 trillion for state, local and tribal governments and territories, an extension of unemployment benefits, and another round of $1,200 direct payments to American families. The measure would also provide a $25 billion bailout for the Postal Service, which the beleaguered agency has called a critical lifeline, but President Trump has opposed, and $3.6 billion to bolster election security.
“There are those who said, ‘Let’s just pause,’ ” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, invoking a word used by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who has said lawmakers should “push the pause button” on further coronavirus aid. “The families who are suffering know that hunger doesn’t take a pause. The rent doesn’t take a pause. The bills don’t take a pause. The hardship of losing a job or tragically losing a loved one doesn’t take a pause.” Senate Republicans immediately rejected the measure. But the House will return to session on May 15 to approve it, Democratic leaders said, along with historic changes to the chamber’s rules that will allow lawmakers for the first time to vote without being physically present in the Capitol.
The measure from House Democrats underscored the gulf between the two parties over how to respond to the coronavirus crisis. Economists and policy experts warn that the government’s relief efforts to date, as unparalleled and far-reaching as they have been, have barely sustained individuals and companies affected by the pandemic, and that abandoning them could result in a deep and protracted recession. But Republicans and the White House have begun to argue that a new round of relief should wait, and Senate Majority Leder Mitch McConnell has said any such aid must be paired with a measure to give companies sweeping protections from a wide range of potential lawsuits as they try to reopen during the pandemic. President Donald Trump and White House officials have also indicated they want any further economic aid legislation to contain tax cuts, although they have yet to agree on which ones to pursue. Democrats are headed in the other direction, as Nancy Pelosi suggested in a letter this week in which she encouraged her colleagues to “think big” about additional federal aid.
Even before Democrats presented their proposal on May 12, top Senate Republicans were voicing vehement opposition, urging restraint in doling out another substantial round of taxpayer dollars as the federal government and banks scramble to distribute the funds from the $2.2 trillion stimulus law enacted in March. And with the US recording its largest monthly deficit in history last month, some Republicans have begun to balk at the prospect of another multitrillion-dollar package, calling for more limited relief. Some Republicans, however, are exploring the possibility of broadening the terms of the stimulus law as an alternative to doling out more funds, but still supporting state and local governments. A small group of Republican senators met with President Donald Trump and top administration officials to discuss giving more flexibility in spending previously allocated funds. Senator John Kennedy (R-LA), a close congressional ally of President Donald Trump, said in a statement that he had requested the meeting to discuss his proposal, which would eliminate guardrails set on the $150 billion in the stimulus law, but prohibit the use of the aid for shoring up pension programs. “This is not something designed to deal with reality, but designed to deal with aspirations,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said of the Democrats’ proposal, adding that he would begin discussions with them once Republicans and the White House agreed on how to proceed. “We’re going to insist on doing narrowly targeted legislation
In the legislation unveiled on May 12, Democrats included provisions intended to provide more protections for essential workers. The bill would also provide for $75 billion in mortgage relief and $100 billion for rental assistance. It would substantially expand eligibility and increase the value of some tax credits targeted to the poorest Americans, like the earned-income tax credit. The bill would temporarily suspend a limit on the deduction of state and local taxes from federal income taxes, a move that would disproportionately benefit high-income taxpayers in high-tax areas, and which Democrats have pushed for since the limit was imposed by President Donald Trump’s signature 2017 tax overhaul. The bill also proposes rolling back a widely-criticized tax break for the wealthy included in the stimulus package. That provision permits married couples making at least $500,000 a year to use losses in their business to wipe out their tax bills from gains in the stock market.
Some of the most liberal members of the Democratic caucus, however, balked at the proposal, arguing that it fell short of what was needed to salvage the American economy and support vulnerable populations. The Congressional Progressive Caucus urged its members to officially inform party leaders that they were undecided on the measure, effectively threatening to block it. They also called for the vote to be delayed by a week, and for a meeting of all Democrats to discuss the legislation. “In no circumstance are we ready to vote on this on Friday,” Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), the co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in an interview that “We need a full caucus conversation, an open dialogue, and we need to figure out how to address the crisis with a solution that matches its scale.” Congresswoman Jayapal has called for the federal government to guarantee business payrolls, extend emergency health coverage for the uninsured and tie relief funding for states to requirements that they follow guidelines from health experts as they begin to reopen. She said she grew frustrated when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi informed Democrats on a conference call that a payroll guarantee program would not be included in the proposal.
4. In A Major Defeat For Civil Liberty Advocates, Senate Rejects Proposal Limiting Federal Law Enforcement Officials From Obtaining Internet Search History Data Without A Warrant
The Senate this week rejected a proposal by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) to limit federal law enforcement officials from obtaining internet search history data without a warrant.
The Senate came one vote short on May 12 of approving a proposal to prevent federal law enforcement from obtaining internet browsing information or search history without seeking a warrant. The bipartisan amendment won a solid majority of the Senate but just shy of the 60 votes needed for adoption. The 59-37 vote to allow such warrantless searches split both parties, with Republicans and Democrats voting for and against. The amendment’s authors, Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon and Republican Senator Steve Daines of Montana, have long opposed the expansion and renewal of surveillance laws that the government uses to track and fight terrorists. They say the laws can infringe on people’s rights. “Should law-abiding Americans have to worry about their government looking over their shoulders from the moment they wake up in the morning and turn on their computers to when they go to bed at night?” Wyden asked. “I believe the answer is no. But that’s exactly what the government has the power to do without our amendment.”
The amendment vote came as the Senate considered the renewal of three surveillance provisions that expired in March before Congress left due to the Coronavirus pandemic. The legislation is a bipartisan, House-passed compromise that has the backing of President Donald Trump, Attorney General William Barr, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It would renew the authorities and impose new restrictions to try and appease civil liberties advocates. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), encouraged senators to vote against Wyden and Daines’ amendment, saying the legislation was already a “delicate balance.” He warned changing it could mean the underlying provisions won’t be renewed. “We cannot let the perfect become the enemy of the good when key authorities are currently sitting expired and unusable,” McConnell said on the Senate floor before the vote. The House passed the compromise legislation shortly before the chamber left town two months ago, but McConnell could not find enough support to approve the measure in the Senate, and instead passed a simple extension of the surveillance laws. The close outcome on the Wyden and Daines amendment indicates that a majority of the Senate would like to see the House legislation changed to better protect civil liberties.
Julian Sanchez, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a Libertarian think tank, said it was striking that the amendment failed by only one vote and said the vote total would have been “inconceivable” five years ago. “It suggests a sea change in attitudes” following revelations in problems with how the FBI has used its secret surveillance powers, Sanchez said. “It goes to the sort of collapse in trust in the intelligence community to deploy these authorities in a restrained way.” The Senate did adopt an amendment by Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah and Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont that would boost third-party oversight to protect individuals in some surveillance cases. If the Senate passes the legislation with that amendment intact, the bill would then have to go back to the House for approval instead of to the president’s desk for signature. A third amendment by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, a Republican who is a longtime skeptic of surveillance programs, is expected to be considered before a final vote. Paul’s amendment would require the government to go to a traditional federal court, instead of the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, to get a warrant to eavesdrop on an American.
Bernie Sanders rebounded late in the evening in delegate-rich Western states: He was quickly declared the winner in Colorado and Utah after polls closed there, and he also claimed the largest delegate lode of the primary race, California. Sanders also easily carried his home state of Vermont. Yet Joe Biden’s sweep of states across the South and the Midwest showed he had the makings of a formidable coalition that could propel him through the primaries. As he did in South Carolina, Biden rolled to victory in several states with the support of large majorities of African-Americans. And he also performed well with a demographic that was crucial to the party’s success in the 2018 midterm elections: college-educated white voters. “We were told, well, when you got to Super Tuesday, it’d be over,” a triumphant Biden said at a celebration in Los Angeles. “Well, it may be over for the other guy!” After a trying stretch in February, even Biden appeared surprised at the extent of his success. “I’m here to report we are very much alive!’’ he said. “And make no mistake about it, this campaign will send Donald Trump packing.”
For his part, Bernie Sanders continued to show strength with the voters who have made up his political base: Latinos, liberals and those under age 40. But he struggled to expand his appeal with older voters and African-Americans. The results also called into question Sanders’s decision to spend valuable time over the past week campaigning in both Minnesota and Massachusetts, two states where he had hoped to embarrass rivals on their home turf. The gambit proved badly flawed, as it was Joe Biden who pulled off upset wins in both states, with the help of a last-minute endorsement from Senator Amy Klobuchar that upended the race in Minnesota.
2. President Donald Trump Announces Support For Economic Stimulus Package To Assist Business, Individuals Hurt By Coronavirus
Amid increasing criticism over his response to the Coronavirus outbreak and handling of the slowing economy, President Donald Trump announced his support for an economic stimulus package this week.
President Donald Trump’s decision to push for a stimulus package represented a departure for the administration, which has insisted that the fundamentals of the economy are solid and that the coronavirus would cause only a short-term blip in growth. But the coronavirus threat continues to rattle financial markets. American stocks collapsed on March 9, with the Dow Jones industrial average plummeting by more than 2,000 points for its worst day since 2008 after a free fall in oil prices and a growing number of coronavirus cases. Total coronavirus cases around the globe surpassed 111,000, with confirmed US cases exceeding 600. The worldwide death toll approached 4,000 and rose to 26 in the US
On March 6, President Donald Trump signed an $8.3 billion package of emergency funding to help treat and slow the spread of the virus. The package includes funding for research and development of vaccines as well as money for prevention, preparedness, and response. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who appeared alongside President Trump at the news conference, said the US has “the most resilient economy in the world.” But, “there are parts of the economy that are going to be impacted, especially workers that need to be at home, hard-working people who are at home under quarantine and are taking care of their family,” he said. “We’ll be working on a program to address that.”
At the congressional level Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and a strong ally of President Donald Trump, also has begun exploring the possibility of a stimulus package. “While we continue to assess the economic impacts, Senator Grassley is exploring the possibility of targeted tax relief measures that could provide a timely and effective response to the coronavirus,” said Grassley’s spokesman, Michael Zona. “Several options within the committee’s jurisdiction are being considered as we learn more about the effects on specific industries and the overall economy.” Some economists are recommending broader steps Congress can take in the short term to aid those immediately affected by the virus, such as defraying the health care costs of those infected and reducing the Social Security payroll tax for all workers.
3. The US Begins Withdrawing Troops From Afghanistan
The US military began withdrawing from Afghanistan this week after signing a tentative peace agreement with the Taliban two weeks ago.
US troops have started to leave Afghanistan for the initial troop withdrawal required in the US-Taliban agreement, a spokesman for US Forces in Afghanistan announced on March 9, amid political chaos in the country that threatens the deal. The US will cut the number of forces in the country to 8,600, according to a statement by US Forces Afghanistan spokesman Colonel Sonny Leggett. “In accordance with the US-Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Joint Declaration and the US-Taliban Agreement, US Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A) has begun its conditions-based reduction of forces to 8,600 over 135 days,” Leggett said in the statement quoted by. “USFOR-A maintains all the military means and authorities to accomplish our objectives -including conducting counterterrorism operations against al-Qaeda and ISIS-K and providing support to the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces,” he added. “USFOR-A is on track to meet directed force levels while retaining the necessary capabilities. The pullout came as Afghanistan’s rival leaders were each sworn in as president in separate ceremonies on March 9, creating a complication for the US as it figures out how to move forward on the agreement, signed late last month, and end the 18-year war. The sharpening dispute between President Ashraf Ghani, who was declared the winner of last September’s election, and his rival Abdullah Abdullah, who charged fraud in the vote along with the elections complaints commission, threatens to wreck the next key steps and even risks devolving into new violence.
The US has not tied the withdrawal to political stability in Afghanistan or any specific outcome from the all-Afghan peace talks. Instead, it depends on the Taliban meeting its commitment to preventing “any group or individual, including al-Qaeda, from using the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the US and its allies.” Under the peace agreement, the US troop withdrawal had to begin within 10 days after the deal was signed on February 29. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on March 2 that he had already approved the start of the withdrawal, which would then be coordinated by military commanders in Afghanistan. The US official said that the troops leaving now had been scheduled to depart, but they will not be replaced. Esper has said General Scott Miller, the US commander in Afghanistan, will pause the withdrawal and assess conditions once the troop level goes down to 8,600. The long-term plan is for the US to remove all troops within 14 months if security conditions are met. The agreement with the Taliban followed a seven-day “reduction in violence” period that, from the Trump administration’s viewpoint, was meant to test the Taliban’s seriousness about moving towards a final peace agreement.
4. U.N. Announces Sharp Increase In Iran’s Uranium Stockpile In Violation Of The JCPOA
The UN this week announced that Iran has dramatically increased its uranium production in the wake of the Trump Administration’s decision to abandon the JCPOA and reimpose sanctions on the Iranian economy.
Iran is dramatically ramping up production of enriched uranium in the wake of the Trump administration’s decision to abandon the 2015 nuclear deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed on March 4 while also criticizing the Iranian government for blocking access to possible nuclear-related sites. Inspectors from the IAEA reported a near-tripling of Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium just since November of 2019, with total holdings more than three times the 300-kilogram limit set by the nuclear accord. Iran also substantially increased the number of machines it is using to enrich uranium, the agency said, allowing it to make more of the nuclear fuel faster. The confidential report provided to member states is the first since Iran announced it would no longer adhere to any of the nuclear pact’s restrictions on uranium fuel production, in a protest of the Trump administration’s decision to walk away from the deal. Iran has declined to formally pull out of the agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, in which it had to sharply curtail its nuclear activities and submit to intrusive inspections in exchange for relief from economic sanctions.
Inspectors confirmed that Iran now possesses more than 1,020 kilograms of low-enriched uranium, up from 372 kilograms in the fall, although the IAEA found no evidence that Iran is taking specific steps toward nuclear weapons production. Independent analysts said the bigger stockpile and faster enrichment rate has substantially decreased Iran’s theoretical “breakout” time, the span needed for acquiring enough weapons-grade material for a single nuclear bomb. When the Iranian nuclear was fully implemented in 2015, US officials said that Iran would need about a year to reach the “breakout” point if it chose to make a bomb. Based on the new figures, one Iran analyst calculated that the window has been reduced to about 3½ months. Iran’s enriched uranium soared to “levels not expected just a few weeks ago,” said the analyst, David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington nonprofit specializing in nuclear weapons research.
The IAEA reports are certain to rekindle debate over President Donald Trump’s decision to walk away from the accord, which the Trump administration says failed to address long-term concerns over Iran’s nuclear intentions. Critics of the deal pointed to Iran’s lack of cooperation with IAEA inspectors as evidence that Iran cannot be trusted. “The problem is not breakout at known facilities; it is sneakout at clandestine facilities through advanced centrifuges permitted by JCPOA,” Mark Dubowitz, chief executive of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said in a Twitter posting, using the acronym for the nuclear deal. Other experts said the report highlighted the administration’s folly in torpedoing a deal that was demonstrably working, without having a viable alternative plan for keeping Iran’s nuclear activities in check. “The bottom line: Iran is closer to being able to build a bomb now than under JCPOA and the previous administration, and we are less capable of addressing that danger,” said Jon Wolfsthal, the senior director for arms control on the Obama White House’s National Security Council, in an email.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. Former Vice President Joe Biden Wins South Carolina Democratic Primary
Former Vice President Joe Biden this week won a resounding victory in the South Carolina Democratic Primary, cementing himself as one of the new front-runners for the Democratic nomination.
Former Vice President Joe Biden’s resounding victory in the South Carolina primary was a major win for a politician who has been in public life for nearly 50 years, and his first primary victory in his three presidential runs. Cheers went up at a Biden election-night rally in Columbia when MSNBC called the race, Biden cast the win as the first of many number of dominoes that will now fall his way, noting that some were counting him out just days ago. “Now, thanks to all of you — the heart of the Democratic Party — we just won and we won big . . . and we are very much alive,” Biden said in a victory speech that was pointed directly at Sanders. “We have the option of winning big or losing big. That’s our choice,” Biden told a raucous crowd in Columbia. “We have to beat Donald Trump and the Republican Party, but here’s the deal: We can’t become like them. . . . We can’t have a never-ending war.” The Biden campaign hopes to use Saturday’s win to consolidate support from many of his rivals, hoping that several drop out, which one of them, businessman Tom Steyer, did shortly after the polls closed. “Honestly, I can’t see a path where I can win the presidency,” Steyer said in announcing his decision. Biden also plans a series of high-profile endorsements over the coming days. Congressman Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA) and former Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe announced shortly after Biden’s win that they were backing the former vice president. Nearly half of South Carolina voters said Congressman James Clyburn’s (D-SC) final-week endorsement of Biden was an important factor in their vote, according to exit poll results from Edison Research.
Bernie Sanders, speaking at a February 28 rally in Virginia sought to put the results in perspective, ticking off his previous strong performances in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada. “But you cannot win ’em all . . . and tonight we did not win in South Carolina,” Sanders said. “And that will not be the only defeat. There are a lot of states in this country, and nobody wins them all.” After congratulating Biden, he proclaimed, “And now we enter Super Tuesday — and Virginia!” For all the candidates but Sanders, a further winnowing of the field is crucial to winning the nomination. Sanders is broadly expected to come out of Super Tuesday with a substantial delegate lead in the race, anchored in his huge polling advantage in California. Under party rules, such leads can be difficult to overcome as the race moves on.
With most precincts reporting, Joe Biden was poised to win about half the vote, giving him a symbolic victory over Bernie Sanders, who did not win more than 34% of the vote in any of the first three states. Under party rules, nominees need to secure more than 50 percent of delegates to win the nomination at the convention in Milwaukee. But the continued viability of so many candidates has increased the likelihood that no candidate will be able to secure such a victory with initially pledged delegates alone, setting up the potential for either a brokered convention or a pre-convention horse-trading of delegates by the candidates. Complicating the hunt for the nomination is former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg, who has spent hundreds of millions of dollars advertising his candidacy to the Super Tuesday states, after deciding not to compete in the first four contests. Although his rise in polls had slowed since his first debate performance, Bloomberg still appears positioned to win delegates in many early states, as he continues to swamp his rivals in spending. His advisers vowed Saturday night that Bloomberg will stay in the race at least through Super Tuesday when he will appear on the ballot for the first time. They cited internal campaign data showing that if Bloomberg dropped out it would strengthen Sanders, whose left-leaning policies the former mayor abhors “Mike Bloomberg has not been on the ballot yet,” said Bloomberg campaign manager Kevin Sheekey. “Our campaign is focused on organizing Democrats and building infrastructure in states all around the country.”
After Saturday’s outcome became clear, President Donald Trump tweeted, “Sleepy Joe Biden’s victory in the South Carolina Democratic primary should be the end of Mini Mike Bloomberg’s Joke of a campaign.” Biden’s support among black voters, who made up most of the electorate in South Carolina, appeared ready to lift a campaign that has struggled to find its footing for more than a year. Biden, a national polling leader in 2019, finished in fourth place in Iowa, fifth place in New Hampshire and second place in Nevada. African American voters have been a crucial part of the Democratic Party Coalition since the New Deal era, and Biden, along with other Sanders critics, have argued that it will be hard for the Democratic nominee to defeat Trump if he does not have enthusiastic support from the black community. Sanders has replied that he alone among the Democratic contenders has shown the ability to electrify voters and draw big crowds from a broad portion of the electorate.
Sleepy Joe Biden’s victory in the South Carolina Democrat Primary should be the end of Mini Mike Bloomberg’s Joke of a campaign. After the worst debate performance in the history of presidential debates, Mini Mike now has Biden split up his very few voters, taking many away!
2. In A Bid To Unite Democratic Party, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar Drop Out, Endorse Joe Biden’s Candidacy
In a bid to unite the Democratic Party against President Donald Trump, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar drop out of the Democratic Primary, endorse Former Vice President Joe Biden.
In a last-minute bid to unite the moderate wing of the Democratic Party, Senator Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg on March 2 threw their support behind former Vice President Joe Biden, giving him an extraordinary boost ahead of the Super Tuesday primaries that promised to test his strength against the liberal front-runner, Senator Bernie Sanders. Even by the standards of the tumultuous 2020 campaign, the dual endorsement from Klobuchar and Buttigieg, and their joint appearances with Biden at campaign events in Dallas on March 2, was remarkable. Rarely, if ever, have opponents joined forces so dramatically, as Klobuchar and Buttigieg went from campaigning at full tilt in the South Carolina primary on Saturday to joining on a political rescue mission for a former competitor, Joe Biden, whom they had once regarded as a spent force.
Amy Klobuchar, who sought to appeal to the same moderate voters as Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg, and focused her campaign on calling the Democratic Party’s attention to Midwestern states like her native Minnesota, withdrew from the race after intensive conversations with her aides following Biden’s thumping victory in South Carolina. Rather than delivering a traditional concession speech, Klobuchar told associates she wanted to leverage her exit to help Biden and headed directly for the joint rally. Before a roaring crowd in Dallas, she hailed her former rival as a candidate who could “bring our country together” and restore “decency and dignity” to the presidency. Pete Buttigieg, for his part, endorsed Biden at a pre-rally stop, saying that Biden would “restore the soul” of the nation as president. And Biden offered Buttigieg the highest compliment in his personal vocabulary, several times likening the young politician to his own son, Beau, who died of brain cancer in 2015.
For the three moderates, as well as for Bernie Sanders and other remaining candidates, the crucial question hanging over the fast-moving events was whether any of it would make a difference in Tuesday’s primaries across 15 states and territories, including the critical battlegrounds of California and Texas. Millions of voters are expected to go to the polls, but many states have had early voting underway; more than 2.3 million Democratic and independent ballots have already been processed in California. Bernie Sanders has significant head starts in many of the Super Tuesday states and beyond: His popularity has risen in recent weeks, and so has Democratic voters’ estimation of his electability in a race with President Donald Trump. The Vermont senator has a muscular national grass-roots organization, backed by the most fearsome online fund-raising machine in Democratic politics, one that collected more than $46 million last month, far outdistancing every other candidate in the race.
As news emerged of the shift of centrist support toward Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders projected confidence and defiance, dismissing it as a phenomenon of “establishment politicians” supporting one another. On Twitter, Sanders posted a video criticizing Biden for having supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, linking him to unpopular Republicans like former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney. Additionally, Sanders assailed Biden’s record on the Iraq war and Social Security. “It is no surprise they do not want me to become president,‘’ Sanders said, referring to his moderate opponents.
I do not believe we will defeat Donald Trump with a candidate like Joe Biden who supported the Iraq War. pic.twitter.com/8tII7O3Mal
3. Trump Administration Orders Four Chinese News Outlets in The US to Reduce Staffs
In a major escalation of the ongoing tensions between China and the US, the Trump administration on March 2 ordered four Chinese news outlets operating in the US to reduce the number of Chinese nationals working on their staffs by more than a third
In a major escalation of the ongoing tensions between China and the US, the Trump administration on March 2 ordered four Chinese news outlets operating in the US to reduce the number of Chinese nationals working on their staffs by more than a third. The action comes on the heels of a State Department decision on February 18 requiring five Chinese news organizations considered organs of the government to register as foreign missions and provide the names of employees. China responded by expelling three Beijing-based Wall Street Journal reporters, condemning as “racist” an essay that ran in the news outlet’s opinion section criticizing China’s response to the coronavirus outbreak. American officials said that by March 13, the Chinese news outlets can have no more than 100 Chinese citizens on staff, down from 160 currently employed by the five outlets. The officials said it was an effort to bring “reciprocity” to the US-China relationship and to encourage the ruling Chinese Communist Party to show a greater commitment to a free press. “As we have done in other areas of the US-China relationship, we seek to establish a long-overdue level playing field,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement. “It is our hope that this action will spur Beijing to adopt a more fair and reciprocal approach to US and other foreign press in China. We urge the Chinese government to immediately uphold its international commitments to respect freedom of expression, including for members of the press.”
In announcing the move, senior Trump administration officials cited the disappearance of citizen journalists chronicling the outbreak of the coronavirus in Wuhan. In a report by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China, called “Control, Halt, Delete,” 8 in 10 correspondents said they had encountered interference, harassment or violence while arriving and described the environment for journalists as deteriorating. “We’re witnessing an assault on free speech inside of China that goes even beyond what it was a decade ago,” said an administration official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity under administration rules for briefing reporters. Other officials sought to distinguish the US action from China’s expulsion of nine foreign reporters since 2013 when Xi Jinping ascended to power. The expulsions were usually attributed to the government’s unhappiness with news coverage. American officials said it will be up to the designated outlets to determine which employees to cut and said there will be no restrictions placed on their content or choice of what to cover. But they said they are considering imposing duration limits on Chinese nationals working for the outlets, similar to those used by China on foreign correspondents. The officials pointedly refused to refer to the affected employees as journalists, calling it an insult to free and independent reporters who are not working for “propaganda outlets.”
Every year, hundreds of Chinese citizens are granted visas allowing them to report in the US, though it was not immediately clear how many are currently working as reporters. The move against employees of China’s government-controlled media comes amid an escalating series of critical statements by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo about the Chinese government. He has repeatedly criticized the government’s maltreatment and detention of Muslim Uighurs, warned US allies of risks associated with technology from the Chinese company Huawei and castigated China’s expanding economic influence in developing countries. Pompeo has said China is intent on international domination, and during a January visit to London, he called the Chinese Communist Party “the central threat of our times.” Now, as the world braces for the spreading coronavirus that originated in China, the Trump Administration has taken the battle to the journalistic arena.
4. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Wins Third Israeli Election Held Since 2019
During the third election held in the country since last year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the right-wing coalition won another victory, setting the stage for a coalition government to be formed.
As counting gets underway in Israel’s unprecedented third election in 11 months, initial exit polls projected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party as the winners. But even if the final results bear out these projections from Israel’s three main news channels, Netanyahu will still need to find partners to form a coalition government with a majority in the 120-seat parliament. Just after polling stations closed across Israel, the Israeli TV stations flashed the result of their individual exit polls, all showing Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party ahead of former military chief, Benny Gantz’s centrist Blue and White Party. Exit polls in Israel, as elsewhere, come with a disclaimer. Sometimes they prove to be extremely prescient, while other times they are woefully wide of the mark. Even so, politicians and voters alike still take them seriously and watch them closely. With almost one-quarter of the votes counted, all three main TV stations are projecting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party will finish between three and five seats ahead of its main rival, the Blue and White party of Benny Gantz. But all three channels continue to project that a bloc made up of Likud plus Netanyahu’s preferred coalition partners, the hardline right-wing Yamina, along with the two religious parties, would win 59 seats, which is two seats short of an overall majority.
Israel’s third election in less than a year reflects a political system in deadlock. Following the last poll in September of 2019, both Netanyahu and Gantz were given the chance to try to form a government but neither man was successful in building a coalition with a 61-seat majority. Gantz refused point-blank to sit in a government with Netanyahu due to the charges against the prime minister, while Netanyahu refused to go second in any rotating prime ministership with Gantz. This third campaign saw barbs traded between the two leaders and the release of several secret recordings aimed at damaging both the main campaigns, though particularly that of Blue and White. Casting his vote Monday, Israeli President Reuven Rivlin castigated the country’s politicians. “We don’t deserve another awful and grubby election campaign like the one that ends today, and we don’t deserve this never-ending instability. We deserve a government that works for us.” As the exit polls suggest, the two largest parties are likely to be Netanyahu’s Likud and Gantz’s Blue and White.
Another issue during the campaign was the Trump administration’s “Deal of the Century.” The US president delivered his “Peace to Prosperity” plan at the end of January 2020, with Benjamin Netanyahu standing next to him at the White House. The proposal effectively gives US approval to Israeli annexation of all Jewish settlements in the West Bank, along with the Jordan Valley. Netanyahu has embraced the plan and has talked about a “window of opportunity” to deliver on it, widely seen as meaning before the US presidential election in November. For his part, Gantz also welcomed the plan but said annexation should happen with international coordination. Perhaps the biggest immediate electoral effect of the Trump plan has been to motivate Israel’s Arab community to vote. The Kan News exit poll projects the Joint Arab List, an alliance of the four main Arab parties, on track to win 15 seats. List leader Ayman Odeh hailed it as the best result ever for Arab parties in Israeli elections.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Donald Trump Announces 2021 Fiscal Year Budget
President Donald Trump unveiled his proposed $4.8 trillion budget for the fiscal year 2021 this week.
On January 10, President Donald Trump proposed a $4.8 trillion election-year budget that would slash major domestic and safety net programs, setting up a stark contrast with President Trump’s rivals as voting gets underway in the Democratic presidential primary. The budget would cut Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program and also wring savings from Medicare despite Trump’s repeated promises to safeguard Medicare and Social Security. It aims domestic spending with cuts that are sure to be rejected by Congress, including slashing the Environmental Protection Agency budget by 26.5% over the next year and cutting the budget of the Health and Human Services department by 9%. HHS includes the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which will see a budget cut even as the coronavirus spreads, although officials said funding aimed at combating the coronavirus would be protected.
The budget is a proposal to Congress, and lawmakers have mostly rejected President Donald Trump’s proposed cuts in the past. Still, the budget plan sets up the Trump administration’s policy priorities heading into the November elections and is likely to draw scrutiny. It would target the Education Department is for a nearly 8% cut, the Interior Department would be cut 13.4%, and Housing and Urban Development would be cut 15.2%. The State Department and US Agency for International Development would be cut by 22%. The proposed cuts stand in contrast to proposals by major Democratic candidates to expand environmental, education and health care spending, setting up a clash between President Trump and his 2020 rivals over their major campaign priorities. Not all agencies would face cuts, however. Trump proposes to increase spending for the Department of Homeland Security while keeping military spending at roughly the same level as in last year’s budget. The NASA budget would also increase by 12% as Trump has said he wants the agency to prepare for space travel to Mars. Even with all the proposed spending cuts, the budget would fail to eliminate the federal deficit over the next 15 years, only if the economy grows at an unprecedented, sustained 3% clip through 2025, levels the administration has failed to achieve for even one year so far.
During President Donald Trump’s first year in office, his advisers said their budget plan would eliminate the deficit by around 2028. This new trend shows how little progress the White House is making in dealing with ballooning government debt, something Republican party leaders had made a top goal during the Obama administration. Trump’s first budget projected the deficit in 2021 would be $456 billion. Instead, it is projected to be more than double that amount. Trump has shown little interest in dealing with the deficit and debt, though some Republican leaders say it remains a priority. The $4.8 trillion budget for 2021 would represent a $700 billion surge over levels from 2018. White House officials have blamed congressional Democrats for inaction on the federal deficit. However, Trump has agreed to increase spending throughout the government because it was the condition on which Democrats accepted a higher military budget. “Trying to balance the budget in 10 years is very difficult, so having a longer time horizon makes a lot of sense,” said Marc Goldwein, a senior vice president at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which advocates reducing the deficit. “Fifteen years is still very aggressive.”
President Donald Trump’s budget aims to cut spending on safety-net programs such as Medicaid and food stamps, cutting food stamp spending by $181 billion over a decade. It proposes to squeeze hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare over a decade through cost-saving proposals such as reforming medical liability and modifying payments to hospitals for uncompensated care. The budget cuts Medicaid spending by about $920 billion over 10 years, a change Democrats and administration critics warn would lead to reductions in benefits and the number of people on the health care program. A senior administration official defended the cut, noting it reflects a decrease in the rate at which Medicaid spending would grow rather than a reduction from current spending levels. The official said the administration would save money on Medicaid spending through new work requirements and recouping payments incorrectly spent by the federal government. Liberal economists rejected that argument. “This is a budget that would cause many millions of people to lose health care coverage. That is unambiguous,” said Aviva Aron-Dine, a former Obama official and vice president at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think-tank.
Democrats such as Congressman John Yarmuth (D-KY), chairman of the House Budget Committee, said early reports indicate the budget includes “destructive changes … while extending [Trump’s] tax cuts for millionaires and wealthy corporations.” During the last year that President Barack Obama was in office, the deficit was less than $600 billion, but it has grown significantly since then. The 2017 tax cuts and new domestic spending approved by bipartisan majorities in Congress have widened this gap markedly. However, the Trump administration’s new budget summary contains the line: “All administration policies will pay for themselves, including extending tax cut provisions expiring in 2025.” Without action by Congress and the administration, tax cuts for families and individuals would expire at the end of 2025. Budget experts have projected that extending those tax cuts would reduce revenue by roughly $1 trillion.
2. Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against Trump Administration For Its Failure To Preserve Records Of The President’s Meetings With Foreign Leaders
A federal judge this week dismissed a potential lawsuit against the Trump Administration for its failure to preserve adequate records of the President’s meetings anc calls with foreign leaders.
A federal judge on February 10 dismissed a lawsuit brought by historians and watchdog groups to compel the White House to preserve records of President Trump’s calls and meetings with foreign leaders, saying that Congress would have to change presidential archiving laws to allow the courts to do so. Federal courts have ruled that the Presidential Records Act is one of the rare statutes that judges cannot review and that another law, the Federal Records Act, does not specify exactly how agency heads should preserve records, US District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said in a 22-page opinion. “The Court is bound by Circuit precedent to find that it lacks authority to oversee the President’s day-to-day compliance with the statutory provisions involved in this case,” Jackson wrote of the US Court of the Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. However, the judge added pointedly, “This opinion will not address, and should not be interpreted to endorse, the challenged practices; nor does it include any finding that the Executive Office is in compliance with its obligations.” Jackson said that though those who brought the lawsuit allege Congress expressed “grave concerns” about the practices at issue, it is Congress that has the power to “revisit its decision to accord the executive such unfettered control or to clarify its intentions.”
The lawsuit was filed against the Trump Administration for its record-keeping policies was in May of 2019 by three organizations, government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the National Security Archive at George Washington University, and the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR). The groups alleged that the White House was failing to create and save records as required of Trump’s meetings and communications with foreign leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. The lawsuit preceded Congress’s impeachment inquiry into the White House, which ended last week in a Senate acquittal, that was triggered by a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate unsubstantiated corruption allegations against former vice president Joe Biden, a leading Democratic presidential candidate, and his son Hunter Biden. The groups suing had asked unsuccessfully for an emergency ruling, citing allegations that the episode exposed record-keeping practices “specifically designed to conceal the president’s abuse of his power,” CREW said in a statement. The groups sought a court order to ensure records are not destroyed, misfiled or never created. In a statement, CREW spokesman Jordan Libowitz said the watchdog was “disappointed to see today’s ruling” but is reviewing an appeal.
Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University said it would “certainly appeal.” “Congress assumed presidents would want to save their records. Even [Richard M. Nixon] saved the tapes,” Blanton said, referring to Oval Office audio recordings that helped expose the Watergate scandal. Lawmakers also must decide whether they will give archiving laws “teeth,” making them enforceable and subject to congressional oversight, he said. The Justice Department had moved to dismiss the lawsuit, saying appeals courts have precluded courts from weighing in on presidents’ compliance with the archiving law. Without conceding their arguments for dismissal, department lawyers in October of 2019 promised the court that the White House would not destroy records of Trump’s calls and meetings with foreign leaders while the lawsuit was pending. Justice Department lawyers also said the government had “instructed relevant personnel to preserve the information” sought. They include records of communications with foreign leaders, record-keeping policies and practices, White House or agency investigations into such matters and efforts to return, “claw back” or “lock down” such records.
3. Joe Biden Plummets, Bernie Sanders & Michael Bloomberg Surge In Democratic Primary Polling
Recent polling released this week shows Bernie Sanders and Michael Bloomberg surging ahead of the New Hampshire Democratic Primary on February 11.
Former Vice President Joe Biden has plummeted in a new national poll out on February 10 that also shows Bernie Sanders with a clear lead among Democratic voters heading into the February 11 New Hampshire primary. The new Quinnipiac University poll, conducted after Sanders’ strong showing in the Iowa caucuses a week ago, has the Vermont senator boasting the support of 25% of Democratic voters, making an 8-point lead over Biden and a 4-point increase over the last national survey taken before the caucuses. Biden dropped 9 points to 17% after his dismal performance in Iowa, followed close behind by former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who rose 7 points to 15%, and Senator Elizabeth Warren, who dropped 1 point to 14%. While former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg got a 4-point bump after appearing to narrowly edge Sanders out for first place in the Iowa state delegate count, results which Buttigieg and Sanders are both challenging, Buttigieg came in at fifth place nationally in the Quinnipiac poll, with 10% of the vote. Senator Amy Klobuchar rounds out the top six with 4%, a drop of 3 points, while no other candidate broke 2% in the poll.
The Quinnipiac survey is the latest yet to show a still-fluid race in the Democratic primary but continues a trend in which both Bernie Sanders and Michael Bloomberg are on the rise, while Joe Biden, once considered the prohibitive frontrunner, is losing standing. Sanders looks likely to continue gaining momentum, heading into Tuesday’s primary as the candidate to beat in New Hampshire. Bloomberg’s steady rise, meanwhile, comes as he has continued to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into advertising nationally. He has also shirked the critical spotlight of the debate stage thus far and has been banking on mixed results for his rivals out of the first four early-voting states before the Super Tuesday contests he’s staked his candidacy on.
The February 10 poll finds the former Vice President with his lowest national numbers yet in a poll, but his weakened stance nationally is likely not the only cause for concern for the Biden campaign. The survey also shows that Michael Bloomberg is successfully eating into Joe Biden’s popularity among black voters, a key Democratic voting bloc that had been considered the Vice President’s firewall should he falter in New Hampshire. While Biden is still holding onto his lead among black voters, according to the poll, his support has plummeted from 49% before the caucuses to 27%. Bloomberg, meanwhile, has rocketed into second place among black voters, with 22% support compared to 7% late last month. The poll also brings Bloomberg one step closer toward qualifying for the next Democratic primary debate, which is on February 19 in Nevada. He needs to hit at least 10% in two more polls by February 18 to qualify. So far, Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Sanders, and Warren have qualified for the debate.
4. US Economy Adds 225,000 Jobs In January In A Surprising Sign Of Continued Economic Strength
The American economy in January added 225,000 jobs, signaling continued economic growth heading into the first quarter of the year.
The US economy added 225,000 jobs in January, a surprising sign of continued strength for the economy. The unemployment rate ticked up slightly to 3.6%, mostly due to more people rejoining the labor force. The jobless rate remains near a 50-year low. The areas of strongest job growth came in construction and health care, as well as transportation and warehousing, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retail and manufacturing were the two areas with the most significant job losses. “I can say that it pretty much blew estimates out of the water,” said Beth Ann Bovino, the chief economist at S&P Global. “It’s just a really nice report. I’d also say that the recession fears of last year seem to be a thing of the past when you look at this report.”
President Donald Trump is staking his reelection campaign in part on the strength of the economy, touting the job creation under his administration repeatedly during the State of the Union address. But analysts have urged caution, pointing to other economic measures. Relatively modest wage growth, around 3%, remains a puzzle for economists who say it has not grown as expected given the increasingly tight labor market. Business investment has fallen for three straight quarters. And problems at Boeing as well as fears about the coronavirus have raised fears about more economic headwinds on the horizon. “It’s a powerful antidote, in many ways, with respect to what’s been happening in Washington,” said Mark Hamrick, an economic analyst at Bankrate. “In many ways, we’ve seen a political environment that is violently ill, and yet the economy appears to be very robust. … A year or so ago we were thinking we could be on the precipice of a recession. The reality is that the expansion looks good for some time to come for the future.”
5. President Donald Trump’s Approval Rating Hits Highest Level Yet In His Presidency
In the aftermath of his acquittal, President Donald Trump’s approval rating hits the highest level yet seen in his Presidency.
President Donald Trump’s job approval rating has risen to 49%, his highest in Gallup polling since he took office in 2017. The new poll finds 50% of Americans disapproving of President Trump, leaving just 1% expressing no opinion. The average percentage not having an opinion on Trump has been 5% throughout his presidency. Trump’s approval rating has risen because of higher ratings among both Republicans and independents. His 94% approval rating among Republicans is up six percentage points from early January and is three points higher than his previous best among his fellow partisans. The 42% approval rating among independents is up five points and ties three other polls as his best among that group. Democratic approval is 7%, down slightly from 10%. The 87-point gap between Republican and Democratic approval in the current poll is the largest Gallup has measured in any Gallup poll to date, surpassing the prior record, held by Trump and Barack Obama, by one point.
As President Donald Trump’s job approval rating has improved, so has the image of the Republican Party. 51% of Americans view the Republican Party favorably, up from 43% in September of 2019. It is the first time Republican favorability has exceeded 50% since 2005. Meanwhile, 45% of Americans have a positive opinion of the Democratic Party, a slight dip from 48% in September of last year. Additionally, the poll finds 48% of Americans identifying as Republicans or leaning toward that party, compared with 44% Democratic identification or leaning. Recent Gallup polls had shown a fairly even partisan distribution after the Democratic Party held advantages for much of 2019.
Whether the rise in Trump’s approval rating and the Republican Party’s image is being driven by a backlash against impeachment, the strong economy or other factors may become clearer in the near future. If it is mostly impeachment-based, his approval rating may revert quickly back to pre-impeachment levels, as it did for Clinton. Within two months of his acquittal in February 1999, Clinton’s approval rating returned to where it was before he was impeached, as did the Democratic Party’s advantage in party identification and leaning. If Trump’s higher approval rating is being driven by Americans giving him credit for improvements in the economy, his support may increase over the course of the year, as it did for Ronald Reagan in 1984, Bill Clinton in 1996 and Barack Obama in 2012. All of those recent presidents held office during periods of sustained economic improvement and were re-elected with job approval ratings of better than 50%.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. House Judiciary Committee Approves Articles of Impeachment Against President Trump
The House of Representatives this week approved articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, formally commencing the process that will lead to Congressional votes on whether to impeach the President or not.
On December 13, the House Judiciary Committee approved two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, making him the fourth President in American history to face potential impeachment. In contrast to the previous day’s contentious back-and-forth between the two parties, the December 13 session was devoid of rancor, or even any debate. Immediately after calling the meeting to order, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) the Judiciary Committee Chairman, ordered two votes, one for each article. Both were approved 23-17 along party lines. In brief remarks after the votes, Nadler said, “Today is a solemn and sad day. For the third time in a little over a century and a half, the House Judiciary Committee has voted articles of impeachment against the president for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.” Nadler promised the House “will act expeditiously.” House Democratic leaders are planning to hold the full House vote on articles of impeachment on December 18, according to two Democratic leadership aides.
Speaking to reporters after the vote, President Donald Trump said Democrats were “trivializing impeachment.” “It’s a witch hunt, It’s a sham, It’s a hoax,” President Trump told reporters as he began an unrelated meeting in the Oval Office with Paraguayan President Mario Abdo Benitez. Commenting on the next stage of impeachment, the Senate’s impeachment trial, Trump said he would not mind a lengthy trial and would like to see the whistleblower testify. Judiciary Committee member Debbie Lesk (R-AZ), told reporters that the committee’s action was “a travesty for America, and it’s really tearing America apart.” She added, “I have never in my entire life seen such an unfair, rigged railroad job against the President of the United States.”
The House Judiciary Committee had been expected to approve the articles late on December 12, but later in the day, Congressman Jerrold Nadler pushed the vote to the next morning. “It is now very late at night,” Nadler said, adjourning the hearing. “I want the members on both sides of the aisle to think about what has happened over these last two days and to search their consciences before we cast our final votes.” Nadler’s decision led to vocal objection from Republicans on the committee, including ranking member Doug Collins (R-GA). “You’ve just blown up schedules for everyone,” Collins said. “This is the kangaroo court that we’re talking about.” Throughout the day on December 12, committee members delivered partisan talking points in support of or in opposition to Trump’s impeachment. Republicans offered several amendments that were rejected.
Assuming that the House of Representatives votes to impeach President Donald Trump, the Senate would then begin a trial to determine whether to remove President Trump from office or, much more likely in the Republican-led chamber, acquit him. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said in a December 12 interview on Fox News that there is “zero chance the president will be removed from office.” McConnell said he was hoping that there would be no Republican defections in the Senate trial and that he was working closely with White House lawyers, pledging “total coordination.”
Thus far, the only Republican Senators who may potentially vote to impeach President Trump are Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, and Richard Burr. All three are considered to be “Never Trump” conservatives who are particularly opposed to the President’s conduct regarding foreign policy. On the other hand, Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia will likely vote to acquit President Trump because he represents a state in which President Trump has his highest approval ratings, as well as the fact that he is arguably the most conservative Democrat currently in Congress, and routinely votes to the right of several moderate Republican Senators including Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski. For example, Joe Manchin voted in favor of President Trump’s agenda a majority of the time and expressed an openness to support Trump’s re-election campaign in 2020.
2. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Conservative Party Win Overwhelming Electoral Victory, Setting Up The UK’s Removal From The European Union By Late 2020
Defying the opinions of international observers, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party won an overwhelming victory in the UK general elections, setting up the conclusion of the Brexit process.
UK prime minister Boris Johnson, secured a crushing victory in the December 12 UK general election as voters backed his promise to “get Brexit done” and take the country out of the European Union by the beginning of 2020. The Conservative Party captured 364 of the 650 seats in the House of Commons, a comfortable majority of 80 seats and the party’s best showing in a parliamentary election since 1987. Prime Minister Boris Johnson will now move swiftly to ratify the Brexit deal he sealed with the European Union, allowing the UK to exit the bloc, more than 40 years after it originally joined, at the end of next month, nearly a year later than initially planned and three-and-a-half years after UK voters held a referendum on the issue. Prime Minister Boris Johnson must now negotiate a multi-part deal governing the UK’s future relationship with the world’s largest trading bloc, a process most experts think could take years, but he has promised can be completed during an 11-month transition period due to end in December 2020.
The Labor Party, whose leader, the veteran socialist Jeremy Corbyn, had presented voters a manifesto offering a second Brexit referendum and a radical expansion of the state, was plunged into bitter recriminations after the party won just 203 seats, its worst result since 1935. Labour lost seats it had held for long decades in former industrial areas in the Midlands and north of the country England as voters who had overwhelmingly backed Brexit in the June 2016 referendum swung towards the Conservatives. His critics blamed the party’s losses on Corbyn’s ambiguity over Brexit and said voters had expressed antipathy to him during the campaign. Corbyn, who was elected leader in 2015, has alienated moderates by shifting the party firmly away from the center that brought Labour three successive election victories under Tony Blair.
As well as promising to “get Brexit done”, Prime Minister Boris Johnson pledged to increase spending on health, education and the police and was handed a boost early in the campaign when arch-Eurosceptic Nigel Farage said his Brexit party, which failed to win any seats, would not compete in hundreds of seats to avoid splitting the pro-Brexit vote. His thumping majority should now allow him to ignore the threat of rebellion by Eurosceptics in his own party, possibly opening up the prospect of a softening in the hardline approach he has so far adopted towards Brexit.
3. Amnesty International Report Reveals That At Least 300 Individuals Were Killed In Last Months Economic Protests In Iran
Amnesty International this week released a report alleging that the Iranian government killed over 300 protesters during last month’s series of riots regarding the Iranian government’s decision to ration gasoline.
Other Democratic priorities included in the bill are a 3.1 percent pay raise for civilian federal employees, $7.6 billion in funding for the 2020 Census and record funding for education programs including Head Start Approval of the pay raise, which would be the largest since 2009, ends a year of back and forth over a boost for some 2.1 million executive branch workers. Trump initially recommended no increase, but then in late summer backed a 2.6 percent increase to be paid across the board. “Federal employees have many allies in Congress and we commend all of them for their persistence in getting House and Senate negotiators to include the average 3.1 percent raise in their final compromise spending agreement,” National Treasury Employees Union President Tony Reardon said in a statement.
Republicans highlighted a $22 billion increase in defense spending, which Democrats agreed to over the summer as part of a two-year, $2.7 trillion budget accord that also suspended the federal debt cap for the remainder of President Donald Trump’s first term. Other Republican wins included funding to advance a Republican-supported Veterans Affairs program aimed at privatizing some VA health care delivery, as well as the preservation of several policy restrictions related to abortion and gun rights. President Trump has yet to send a clear signal of support for the spending deal, though Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has played a personal role in shepherding the deal to the finish, meeting with congressional leaders twice last week. Trump, however, initially rejected a tentative 2019 spending deal negotiated on Capitol Hill a year ago, plunging the federal government into the record shutdown.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Trump Announces Deal With Mexico to Forestall Planned Tariff Increases
In a surprising turn of events, President Donald Trump announced that the US and the Mexican government reached a deal forestalling the planned tariff increases on Mexican imports to the US.
President Donald Trump backed off his plan to impose tariffs on all Mexican goods and announced through Twitter on June 7 that the US had reached an agreement with Mexico to reduce the flow of migrants to the Southwestern border. President Trump tweeted the announcement only hours after returning from Europe and following several days of intense and sometimes difficult negotiations between American and Mexican officials. Trump’s threat that he would impose potentially crippling tariffs on the US’ largest trading partner and one of its closest allies brought both countries to the brink of an economic and diplomatic crisis, only to be yanked back from the precipice nine days later. The threat had rattled companies across North America, including automakers and agricultural firms, which have built supply chains across Mexico, the US, and Canada.
I am pleased to inform you that The United States of America has reached a signed agreement with Mexico. The Tariffs scheduled to be implemented by the U.S. on Monday, against Mexico, are hereby indefinitely suspended. Mexico, in turn, has agreed to take strong measures to….
Business leaders in the US, Mexico, and Canada had warned that the Trump Administration’s proposed tariffs would increase costs for American consumers, who import a whole host of goods ranging from automobiles to appliances from Mexico, and prompt retaliation from the Mexican government in the form of new trade barriers that would damage the US economy. But the trade war ended before it began, forestalling that economic reckoning and an intraparty war that President Donald Trump had created by threatening tariffs to leverage immigration policy changes. Trump’s tactic had drawn protests from Republicans, including many Senators who have long opposed tariffs and worried the measure would hurt American companies and consumers. In an unusual show of force against their own party’s President, Republican Senators had threatened to block the tariffs if President Trump moved ahead with them, and had demanded a face-to-face meeting with Trump before any action. For Mexico, Trump’s threat was a replay of past episodes in which he ranted about the country’s lack of immigration enforcement. This year, he threatened to shut down the entire Southwestern border, backing off only after aides showed him evidence that Mexican authorities were taking aggressive action to stop migrants.
According to a US-Mexico Joint Declaration distributed late on June 7, Mexico agreed to, “take unprecedented steps to increase enforcement to curb irregular migration,” including the deployment of its national guard throughout the country to stop migrants from reaching the US. The declaration, distributed by the State Department, said Mexico had also agreed to accept an expansion of a Trump administration program that makes some migrants wait in Mexico while their asylum claims are heard in the US. “The United States looks forward to working alongside Mexico to fulfill these commitments so that we can stem the tide of illegal migration across our southern border and to make our border strong and secure,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement. But the declaration by the two countries included an ominous warning, as well, stating that if Mexico’s actions “do not have the expected results,” additional measures could be taken. The declaration said the two countries would continue talking about other steps that could be announced within 90 days to increase enforcement to curb irregular migration,” including the deployment of its national guard throughout the country to stop migrants from reaching the US.
2. House of Representatives Votes to Hold AG Barr, White House Counsel McGahn in Contempt of Congress.
The House of Representatives this week voted to hold Attorney General William Barr and White House Counsel Don McGahn in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over documents related to the Mueller investigation.
The House of Representatives voted on June 11 to allow a congressional committee to enforce subpoenas by taking uncooperative executive-branch officials to court using a civil-contempt resolution. A civil-contempt resolution is different from criminal contempt of Congress, which can result in lofty fines and even jail time. The move comes after the House Judiciary Committee advanced contempt of Congress resolutions for both Attorney General William Barr and former White House counsel Don McGahn, marking the most severe congressional action against President Donald Trump’s administration since Democrats gained a majority in the House of Representatives.
The 229-191 vote fell straight along party lines. The resolution required only a simple majority and needed to be passed in only one chamber of Congress. It came after the House Judiciary Committee hammered out the details of the contempt resolution in a marathon hearing. Democrats on the committee had issued a subpoena for Attorney General Barr to hand over a full, unredacted copy of the special counsel report detailing the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, as well as the underlying evidence. But Barr refused to comply with the committee’s demands. In McGahn’s case, President Donald Trump instructed him to not testify before the committee, angering Democrats clamoring to haul in the central figure in Mueller’s obstruction case and the one official named more times than anyone else in Mueller’s report.
Being held in contempt of Congress is a rare but severe penalty, which has happened fewer than 30 times throughout US history. The most recent case of an Attorney General being found in contempt was when Republicans went after Eric Holder during the tail end of President Barack Obama’s first term in 2012. Attorney General Holder had refused to turn over documents relating to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives’ gun-walking scandal known as “Fast and Furious.” A federal judge ultimately tossed out the case in 2014. In William Barr’s case, he could face a lengthy legal battle as Holder did. Whether he will or not is up to the US attorneys, who could very well not pursue the criminal contempt of Congress.
3. Amid Increasing Political Tensions With US, China Boosts Relationship with Russia in Recent Summit Meeting
In a June 5 summit meeting, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced their intentions to boost economic and military ties in the face of increased US pressures.
China and Russia have signed more than US$20 billion of deals to boost economic ties in areas such as technology and energy following Xi Jinping’s summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The June 5 meeting between the two leaders, who have spoken of their desire to boost practical cooperation in the face of increasing rivalry with the US, marked the start of Xi Jinping’s three-day visit to Russia to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between both countries.
On June 6, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said that the two sides aimed to increase the volume of trade between the two countries to US$200 billion a year following last year’s 24.5 percent rise to a record level of US$108 billion. Gao Feng, a spokesman for the ministry, said the deals covered areas such as nuclear power, natural gas, automobiles, hi-tech development, e-commerce, and 5G communications. The deals were the first concrete results of the warm words exchanged between the leaders, who agreed to deepen their “unprecedented” strategic partnership for “mutual advantage.” “We discussed the current state of, and prospects for, bilateral cooperation in a businesslike and constructive manner, and reviewed, in substance, important international issues while paying close attention to Russia-China cooperation in areas that are truly important for both countries,” Putin said in a joint press statement with Xi.
Xi Jinping, who had previously told Russian media that he “treasured” the relationship with Putin, whom he described as “my best friend”, said the two countries would work to “build mutual support and assistance in issues that concern our key interests in the spirit of innovation, cooperation for the sake of mutual advantage, and promote our relations in the new era for the benefit of our two nations and the peoples of the world”. Putin also highlighted the energy cooperation between the two countries, adding that Russia was China’s leading oil exporter and the Eastern route of a gas pipeline between Russia and China will enter service later this year.
Steve Tsang, director of the SOAS China Institute at the University of London, said China’s efforts to edge closer to Russia underlined changes in their relations with the US. “The context has changed. The restart of the trade war, the US measures against Huawei as well as China’s responses suggest that China and the US are entering a process of decoupling, not only in the economic relationship but more generally,” Tsang said. “This implies a structural change in the global strategic line-up. As this progresses, China under Xi will need to strengthen its capacity to face the US and its allies. Putin’s Russia comes in handy in this context.”
4. Newest Jobs Report Shows US Job, Wage Growth Declining Dramatically, Sparking Fears of Recession
Job growth declined sharply during May, according to data released by the Labor Department.
Job growth in the US declined dramatically in May, with nonfarm payrolls up by just 75,000 even as the unemployment rate remained at a 50-year low, according to a Labor Department Report issued on June 7. The decline was the second in four months that payrolls increased by less than 100,000 as the labor market continues to show signs of weakening. In addition to the weak total for May, the previous two months’ reports saw substantial downward revisions. March’s count fell from 189,000 to 153,000 and the April total was taken down to 224,000 from 263,000, for a total reduction of 75,000 jobs.
The unemployment rate remained at 3.6%, in line with forecasts and the lowest since early 1957. A broader measure that encompasses discouraged workers and the underemployed holding part-time jobs for economic reasons, sometimes called the real unemployment rate, fell further, from 7.3% to 7.1%, its lowest reading since December 2000. That decline came to a sharp drop of 299,000 in the part-time for economic reasons category. Among individual groups, the rate for African Americans fell sharply, from 6.7% to 6.2%, while Asian Americans saw a gain from historically low levels, up from 2.2% to 2.5%. Wages gains also slowed a bit. Average hourly earnings year over year were up 3.1%, one-tenth of a point lower than expectations. The average work week held steady at 34.4 hours.
The weak May jobs report comes at a time in which the US economy is at a critical crossroad point for the first time in nearly a decade. Investors have been worried about slowing growth amid an escalating trade war between the US and its biggest global partners, China and Mexico. Global growth is slowing as well, with the World Bank earlier this week revising its forecasts lower. Federal Reserve officials have been watching the data closely. In recent days, comments from several central bank leaders seem to have opened the door for rate cuts, though the timing remains uncertain. Markets are now pricing in a summer reduction, likely in July, followed by another cut in September or October followed by a third in early 2020. Economic data points, though, have remained positive if slowing a bit. The Atlanta Fed expects second-quarter GDP to be up 1.5% after the 3.1% growth in the first quarter.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Trump’s Tax Returns Leaked, Revealing Decade of Business Losses
According to tax documents leaked this week, President Donald Trump lost over 1 billion between 1985 and 1994, calling into question the claim that he is a “brilliant businessman.”
President Donald Trump’s tax filings from 1985 to 1994 show that he had accumulated more than a billion dollars in business losses over the course of a decade, according to newly revealed tax information obtained by the New York Times on May 8. In the 10 years covered, Trump racked up nearly $1.2 billion in core business losses, according to the New York Times’ analysis of the President’s federal income tax information from those years. The loss paints what the New York Times called a bleak picture of Trump’s businesses, which he has always touted as successful. The New York Times’ analysis of the tax information includes how President Donald Trump was already deep in financial trouble in 1987 when he published his infamous book “The Art of the Deal,” a bestseller that focused on his business career as a so-called self-made billionaire. In 1985, his core businesses reported a loss of more than $46 million and carried over a $5.6 million loss from earlier years. President Trump has long blamed his first round of business reversals and bankruptcies on the 1990-93 Recession, but the New York Times analysis shows that his fortune was already on its way down much earlier.
The tax results also show that President Donald Trump appears to have lost more money during that decade than nearly any other individual taxpayer. His core businesses reportedly lost over $250 million each year in 1990 and 1991, which the New York Times said is more than double those of the nearest taxpayers in its sampling of high-income earners for those years. Notably, the investigation reveals that the president did not pay federal income taxes for eight out of the ten years analyzed. The analysis notes that President Donald Trump at one time tried to delay his collapse by playing the role of a corporate raider, in which he would acquire company shares with borrowed money, publicly announce he was contemplating a takeover and then quietly sell his shares on the resulting stock price bump.
Overall, the revelation of information shows that President Donald Trump is not the “brilliant businessperson” that he had long claimed to be. Charles Harder, one of President Trump’s financial attorneys said that the tax information was false without citing any errors and reportedly told the newspaper on May 8 that IRS transcripts “are notoriously inaccurate.” The Trump administration continued to refuse to release his federal tax returns this week, with the Treasury Department announcing on May 7 that it will not comply with House Democrats’ request for the President’s tax returns, openly defying federal law. The New York Senate is on the verge of passing a bill that would allow Congress to view Trump’s state tax returns, which are expected to have much of the same information as his federal returns.
I won the 2016 Election partially based on no Tax Returns while I am under audit (which I still am), and the voters didn’t care. Now the Radical Left Democrats want to again relitigate this matter. Make it a part of the 2020 Election!
Congressman Bill Pascrell (D-NJ), who serves on the House Ways and Means Committee working to get President Donald Trump’s tax returns, said in response to the report that the President’s “entire tenure is built upon the most colossal fraud in American political history.” “As these records make clear, Trump was perhaps the worst businessman in the world. His entire campaign was a lie,” Pascrell said in a statement. “He did not pay taxes for years and lost over one billion dollars, how is that possible? How did he keep getting more money and where on earth was it all going? We need to know now.” Congressman Pascrell also stressed that Congress must still see Trump’s actual tax returns and that the IRS is legally obligated to hand them over. “We now have another part of the truth,” Pascrell said. “We need a lot more.”
2. US Deploys Aircraft Carrier to Persian Gulf Amid Steadily Increasing Tensions with Iran
The Trump Administration ordered the deployment of several US aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf, increasing the chances for war with Iran.
On May 6, it was announced that the Trump administration is sending an aircraft carrier group to the Persian Gulf ahead of schedule and warning that Iran and its allies are showing “troubling and escalatory” indications of a possible attack on American forces in the region. Exactly what prompted the action was unclear, but it marked a further step in sharply rising tensions between the Trump administration and the Iranian government. “The United States is not seeking war with the Iranian regime, but we are fully prepared to respond to any attack, whether by proxy, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or regular Iranian forces,” National Security Advisor John Bolton said. Neither Bolton nor other officials would provide any details about the supposed threat, which comes as the Trump administration wages a campaign of intensifying pressure against Iran and nearly a year after it withdrew from an Obama-era nuclear deal with Tehran.
With its “maximum pressure campaign,” President Donald Trump is trying to get Iran to halt activities (that many consider to be humanitarian at their core) such as supporting Shi’a socio-political groups opposed to the ideologies of Zionism and Wahhabism. “Our objective is to get the Islamic Republic of Iran to behave like a normal nation,” said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo during a visit to Finland. “When they do that, we will welcome them back.” Secretary Pompeo said the actions undertaken by the US have been in the works for a while. The request for the accelerated move came over the weekend from the military’s US Central Command after reviewing various intelligence reports for some time, according to the US official.
Since he assumed office in early 2017, President Donald Trump has advocated a hardline policy against Iran (at the urging of Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf States) with the ultimate goal of bringing about the collapse of the current Iranian government and paving the way for the reinstallation of the Pahlavi monarchy. Last month, President Trump announced the US would no longer exempt any countries from US sanctions if they continue to buy Iranian oil, a decision that primarily affects countries such as China, India, South Africa, Japan, South Korea, Italy, Greece, France, Germany, and Ireland. The US also recently designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist group, the first ever for an entire division of another government. Moreover, President Trump withdrew from the Obama administration’s landmark nuclear deal with Iran in May 2018 and, in the months that followed, reimposed punishing sanctions including those targeting Iran’s oil, shipping, manufacturing, and banking sectors.
3. Trump Administrations Proposed Peace Plan for Israel-Palestinian Conflict Revealed
The Trump Administration’s proposed plan to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was released this week.
The main points of President Donald Trump’s much-derided plan for the Middle East, the so-called “deal of the century,” were leaked by a Hebrew-language news outlet in Israel on May 8. Israel Hayom published the main points of the deal from a leaked document circulated by the Israeli Foreign Ministry. The main points of the agreement were put together by Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who has extensive ties to both Saudi Arabia and Israel and proposed by the Trump administration.
The agreement would involve a tripartite treaty to be signed between Israel, the PLO, and Hamas, and a Palestinian state will be established in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Additionally, the settlement blocs in the West Bank (which are illegal under international law) would form part of Israel, and Israel and Palestine would share Jerusalem with Israel maintaining general control. The Palestinians living in Jerusalem would be citizens of the Palestinian state but Israel would remain in charge of the municipality and therefore the land. The newly formed Palestinian state would pay taxes to the Israeli municipality in order to be in charge of education in the city for Palestinians. The status quo at the holy sites will remain and Jewish Israelis will not be allowed to buy Palestinian houses and vice versa. Egypt will offer the new Palestinian state land to build an airport, factories and for agriculture which will service the Gaza Strip.
The US, EU, and Gulf states would fund and sponsor the deal for five years to establish the Palestinian state, the leaked document claims. The proposed Palestinian state would not be allowed to form an army but could maintain a police force. Instead, a defense agreement will be signed between Israel and Palestine in which Israel would defend the new state from any foreign attacks. Upon signing the agreement, Hamas would have to disarm and its leaders would be compensated and paid salaries by Arab states while a government is established. If Hamas or any Palestinian bodies refuse this deal, the US will cancel all of its financial support to the Palestinians and pressure other countries to do the same. On the other hand, if Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas signs the deal but Hamas and Islamic Jihad do not agree to it, a war would be waged on the Gaza Strip with the full backing of the US. However, if Israel refuses the deal the US would cease its financial support. The US currently pays $3.8 billion a year to support Israel.
Overall, the international reaction to the Trump Administration’s proposed Middle East process has been mixed. Whereas the leadership of both Israel and Saudi Arabia have endorsed the plan and have pledged to work to implement it, the Palestinian leadership is likely to reject the proposal. Prior to the leaks, The Palestinian leadership in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza have already issued statements saying that such a plan would be rejected as it does not follow the previous international agreements that grant Palestinians a future state in pre-1967 borders. The news leaks make it more likely that the deal is doomed to fail before it is even released publically as most Palestinian factions would reject such terms that favor the Israeli side.
4. Trade War Between US and China Escalates
President Donald Trump escalated the ongoing US-China trade war this week by placing a 25% tariff on all Chinese imports to the US.
President Donald Trump escalated his trade war with China on May 10 to tax nearly all of China’s imports as punishment for what he said was Beijing’s attempt to “renegotiate” a trade deal. President Trump’s decision to proceed with the tariff increase came after a pivotal round of trade talks in Washington on May 9 failed to produce an agreement to forestall the higher levies. In his comments at the White House on May 9, Trump vacillated between threatening China and suggesting a deal could still happen. Trump said he had received a “beautiful letter” from President Xi Jinping of China and would probably speak to him by phone, but said he was more than happy to keep hitting Beijing with tariffs. “I have no idea what’s going to happen,” Trump said. “They’ll see what they can do, but our alternative is, is an excellent one,” Trump added, noting that American tariffs on $250 billion worth of Chinese products were bringing “billions” into the US government. China’s Ministry of Commerce said that the government “deeply regrets that it will have to take necessary countermeasures.” It did not specify what those countermeasures might be. “It is hoped that the US and Chinese sides will meet each other halfway and work together” to resolve their dispute, the statement added.
The renewed brinkmanship has plunged the world’s two largest economies back into a trade war that had seemed on the cusp of ending. The US and China were nearing a trade deal that would lift tariffs, open the Chinese market to American companies and strengthen China’s intellectual property protections. But discussions fell apart last weekend when China called for substantial changes to the negotiating text that both countries had been using as a blueprint for a sweeping trade pact. President Donald Trump, angered by what he viewed as an act of defiance, responded by threatening to raise existing tariffs to 25 percent and impose new ones on an additional $325 billion worth of products. China has said it is prepared to retaliate should those tariffs go into effect. “We were getting very close to a deal then they started to renegotiate the deal,” President Trump said. “We can’t have that.”
What Does The Release of the Mueller Report Mean For The Trump Presidency
The two-year long investigation led by Robert Mueller found no evidence that President Donald Trump or any of his aides coordinated with the Russian government’s 2016 election interference, according to a summary of the special counsel’s key findings made public on March 24. Mueller, who spent nearly two years investigating Russia’s effort to sabotage the 2016 Presidential Election, found no conspiracy “despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign,” Barr wrote in a letter to lawmakers. Mueller’s team drew no conclusions about whether President Trump illegally obstructed justice, Barr said, so he made his own decision. The Attorney General and his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, determined that the special counsel’s investigators had insufficient evidence to establish that the president committed that offense. Attorney General Barr cautioned, however, that Mueller’s report states that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him” on the obstruction of justice issue.
The release of the findings was a significant political victory for President Donald Trump and lifted a cloud that has hung over his Presidency since before he took the oath of office. It is also likely to alter discussion in Congress about the fate of the Trump presidency, as some Democrats had pledged to wait until the special counsel finished his work before deciding whether to initiate impeachment proceedings. President Trump and his supporters trumpeted the news almost immediately, even as they mischaracterized the special counsel’s findings. “It was a complete and total exoneration,” Trump told reporters in Florida before boarding Air Force One. “It’s a shame that our country had to go through this. To be honest, it’s a shame that your president has had to go through this.” Trump added, “This was an illegal takedown that failed.”
The Fake News Media has lost tremendous credibility with its corrupt coverage of the illegal Democrat Witch Hunt of your all time favorite duly elected President, me! T.V. ratings of CNN & MSNBC tanked last night after seeing the Mueller Report statement. @FoxNews up BIG!
Attorney General William Barr’s letter was the culmination of a tense two days since Robert Mueller delivered his report to the Justice Department. Barr spent the weekend poring over the special counsel’s work, as President Donald Trump strategized with lawyers and political aides. Hours later, Barr delivered his letter describing the special counsel’s findings to Congress. Barr’s letter said that his “goal and intent” was to release as much of the Mueller report as possible, but warned that some of the reports were based on grand jury material that “by law cannot be made public.” Barr planned at a later date to send lawmakers the detailed summary of Mueller’s full report that the attorney general is required under law to deliver to Capitol Hill. Despite the comprehensive nature of the report on the Mueller investigation, many Congressional Democrats expressed concern regarding its findings. For example, shortly after the release of the Mueller findings, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a Twitter post that he planned to call Barr to testify about what he said were “very concerning discrepancies and final decision making at the Justice Department.”
There must be full transparency in what Special Counsel Mueller uncovered to not exonerate the President from wrongdoing. DOJ owes the public more than just a brief synopsis and decision not to go any further in their work.
It can be argued that the release of the Mueller report is beneficial for President Donald Trump going into the 2020 Election.
Overall, the findings of the Mueller report will have a significant impact on American politics going forward. The biggest takeaway from the report is that there is no tangible evidence explicitly connecting President Donald Trump to Russian efforts to sway the 2016 Presidential Election in his favor. The lack of evidence in this area weakens the efforts to impeach President Trump. While there is ample evidence that Trump committed serious financial crimes prior to his Presidency and was involved in White Supremacist hate groups such as the KKK since at least the 1970s, the US Consitution makes it difficult at best to indict a sitting President. The only area that Trump can potentially be indicted on is his attempt to cover up his affair with Stormy Daniels and violate campaign finance laws by doing so, though there is little will on the part of Congress to pursue these charges.
Additionally, it can be argued that the partial exoneration of President Donald Trump will have a positive effect on his poll numbers going into 2020. For example, President Trump’s approval rating has hovered between 42-48% over the past few months. Many observers note that the President’s approval ratings remained in this range due to the ongoing Mueller investigation. With the Mueller investigation behind him, it is likely that Trump’s approval ratings will increase over the coming months assuming that the economy remains strong and no major foreign policy issues will emerge. These higher approval ratings may linger into 2020 and might be enough to (unfortunately) carry Trump to a second term in office.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. The Long-Awaited Mueller Report Is Released, Finding No Direct Evidence of Trump-Russia Collusion in the 2016 Election
The log-awaited Mueller report was released this week, finding no direct evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump’s 2016 Campaign and the Russian government.
The two-year long investigation led by Robert Mueller found no evidence that President Donald Trump or any of his aides coordinated with the Russian government’s 2016 election interference, according to a summary of the special counsel’s key findings made public on March 24. Mueller, who spent nearly two years investigating Russia’s effort to sabotage the 2016 Presidential Election, found no conspiracy “despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign,” Barr wrote in a letter to lawmakers. Mueller’s team drew no conclusions about whether President Trump illegally obstructed justice, Barr said, so he made his own decision. The Attorney General and his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, determined that the special counsel’s investigators had insufficient evidence to establish that the president committed that offense. Attorney General Barr cautioned, however, that Mueller’s report states that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him” on the obstruction of justice issue.
The release of the findings was a significant political victory for President Donald Trump and lifted a cloud that has hung over his Presidency since before he took the oath of office. It is also likely to alter discussion in Congress about the fate of the Trump presidency, as some Democrats had pledged to wait until the special counsel finished his work before deciding whether to initiate impeachment proceedings. President Trump and his supporters trumpeted the news almost immediately, even as they mischaracterized the special counsel’s findings. “It was a complete and total exoneration,” Trump told reporters in Florida before boarding Air Force One. “It’s a shame that our country had to go through this. To be honest, it’s a shame that your president has had to go through this.” Trump added, “This was an illegal takedown that failed.”
The Fake News Media has lost tremendous credibility with its corrupt coverage of the illegal Democrat Witch Hunt of your all time favorite duly elected President, me! T.V. ratings of CNN & MSNBC tanked last night after seeing the Mueller Report statement. @FoxNews up BIG!
Attorney General William Barr’s letter was the culmination of a tense two days since Robert Mueller delivered his report to the Justice Department. Barr spent the weekend poring over the special counsel’s work, as President Donald Trump strategized with lawyers and political aides. Hours later, Barr delivered his letter describing the special counsel’s findings to Congress. Barr’s letter said that his “goal and intent” was to release as much of the Mueller report as possible, but warned that some of the reports were based on grand jury material that “by law cannot be made public.” Barr planned at a later date to send lawmakers the detailed summary of Mueller’s full report that the attorney general is required under law to deliver to Capitol Hill. Despite the comprehensive nature of the report on the Mueller investigation, many Congressional Democrats expressed concern regarding its findings. For example, shortly after the release of the Mueller findings, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a Twitter post that he planned to call Barr to testify about what he said were “very concerning discrepancies and final decision making at the Justice Department.”
There must be full transparency in what Special Counsel Mueller uncovered to not exonerate the President from wrongdoing. DOJ owes the public more than just a brief synopsis and decision not to go any further in their work.
2. Trump recognizes Golan Heights as Israeli Territory
In a widely-denounced move, President Donald Trump recognized Israeli control over the Golan Heights on March 25.
On March 25, US President Donald Trump recognized Israel’s 1981 annexation of the Golan Heights in an election boost for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, prompting a sharp response from Syria and Lebanon, which once held the strategic land. With Netanyahu looking over his shoulder at the White House, President Trump signed a proclamation officially granting US recognition of the Golan Heights as Israeli territory, a dramatic shift from decades of US policy. The move, which Trump announced in a Twitter post last Thursday, appeared to be the most overt gesture by the Republican Party to help Netanyahu, who had been pressing Trump for the move since February 2017. Israel captured the Golan in the 1967 Six-Day War and annexed it in 1981 in a move condemned by the UN. In signing the proclamation, President Donald Trump said that, “This was a long time in the making.” Netanyahu welcomed Trump’s action and said Israel had never had a better friend as US President. Additionally, Netanyahu harkened back to the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Yom Kippur War in justifying Israel’s need to hang on to the Golan. “Just as Israel stood tall in 1967, just as it stood tall in 1973, Israel stands tall today. We hold the high ground and we should never give it up,” he said.
After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!
Overall, the international reaction to President Donald Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights as Israeli Territory was overwlmingly negative. Both Syria and Lebanon reacted swiftly to Trump’s proclamation, calling it a “blatant attack” on their sovereignty and territorial integrity and saying it had a right to reclaim the Golan. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who has refused to talk to the United States since Trump ordered the U.S. embassy moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, expressed his “absolute rejection” of the Golan move in a statement issued by the Palestinian Authority news service Wafa. “The presidency reaffirmed that sovereignty is not decided by either the US or Israel no matter how long the occupation lasts,” the statement said. Moreover, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani harshly criticized President Donald Trump for recognizing the Golan Heights as part of Israel and said the move was against international law. “No one could imagine that a person in America comes and gives the land of a nation to another occupying country, against international laws and conventions. Such action is unprecedented in the current century,” Rouhani said in a statement. Additionally, several staunch allies of the US and Israel including France, the UK, Germany, and Saudi Arabiasimilarly condemned President Trump’s Actions.
3. Trump Administration Announces Support for Judicial Efforts to Overturn Obamacare
The Trump Administration announced its intention to convince the courts to overturn the Affordable Car Act (“Obamacare”) on March 25.
In a significant shift, the Trump Administration says that it backs a full invalidation of the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare“), the signature Obama-era health law. The Justice Department presented its position in a legal filing on March 25 with the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans, where an appeal is pending in a case challenging the measure’s constitutionality. A federal judge in Texas ruled in December that the law’s individual mandate “can no longer be sustained as an exercise of Congress’s tax power” and further found that the remaining portions of the law are void. He based his judgment on changes to the nation’s tax laws made by Congressional Republicans in 2017.
If the Trump Administration’s position prevails, it would potentially eliminate health care for millions of people and disrupt the US health-care system, from removing no-charge preventive services for older Americans on Medicare to voiding the expansion of Medicaid in most states. A court victory would also fulfill Republican promises to undo a prized domestic accomplishment of the previous administration but leave no substitute in place.
The change comes as newly empowered Democrats in the House have vowed to protect Obamacare from Republican attacks. In midterm races last fall that restored their majority in the House of Representatives, Democrats hammered their rivals for pursuing an eight-year crusade against the law, commonly known as Obamacare. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) pledged in a Twitter post on March 25 that Democrats would “fight relentlessly” to preserve “affordable, dependable health care.” “Trump and his administration are trying to take health care away from tens of millions of Americans,” warned Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA), who is among the Democratic aspirants who have signaled support for a Medicare-for-all system. In 2020, Harris added, “we need to elect a president who will make health care a right.”
Tonight in federal court, the Trump Admin declared all out war on affordable, dependable health care. In the courts, in the Congress, all across America, Democrats will fight relentlessly to #ProtectOurCare! https://t.co/WLZl5X9GGr
4. Senate Blocks “Green New Deal” in Partisan Vote
The Senate this week blocked a vote on the “Green New Deal,” a progressive climate change legislative program championed by Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortes and Senator Ed Markey
On March 26, the Senate blocked the Green New Deal, a progressive climate change resolution that Republicans view as prime fodder heading into the 2020 presidential election. The Senate voted 0-57 on taking up the resolution, with 43 Democrats voting present. The measure was widely expected to fall short of the 60 votes needed to overcome the procedural hurdle. Most Democrats were expected to vote present, a move that allowed them to avoid taking a formal position. Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV), Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), Doug Jones (D-AL) and Angus King (I-ME) voted with Republicans against the measure. Republicans have seized on the measure as an example of Democrats shifting to the left ahead of next year’s presidential election. Every Democratic senator running for the party’s nomination in 2020 has co-sponsored the Senate Green New Deal resolution.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) lashed out at the proposal ahead of the vote on Tuesday, calling it an item on the “far-left wish list that many of our Democratic colleagues have rushed to embrace.” “The American people will see, they will see which of their senators can do the common sense thing and vote no on this destructive socialist daydream. And they will see which senators are so fully committed to a radical left-wing ideology that they can’t even vote no on self-inflicted economic ruin,” he said. The resolution, introduced last month by Congressman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), strives for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in the United States while creating millions of “good, high-wage jobs.” It faced pushback from conservatives as well as some Democrats for being too broad and including wishlist items not directly related to climate change, like expanding family farming and transitioning away from air travel.
Leading into March 26’s vote, Democrats accused Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of trying to set up a “gotcha” vote since no hearings were held on the fast-tracked legislation, which was widely expected to fail to get the 60 votes needed to ultimately pass the Senate. Speaking at a rally early on March 26, Senator Markey blasted Republicans for putting on a “sham vote.” “They are calling a vote without hearings, without expert testimony, without any true discussion of the costs of climate inaction and the massive potential for clean energy job creation in our country. And that is because Senator McConnell wants to sabotage the call for climate action,” Markey said. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) added that Republicans were making “a mockery of the legislative process” by bringing the Green New Deal resolution up for a vote just to have the Senate vote it down. “Republicans want to force this political stunt to distract from the fact that they neither have a plan nor a sense of urgency to deal with the threat of climate change. … It’s a political act. It’s a political stunt,” Schumer said.
According to a Wall Street Journal report, former Vice President Joe Biden contacted a group of his supporters on March 19 to ask for help in raising several million dollars from major donors, making it known he is planning to enter the 2020 presidential election. Biden has been contemplating a White House run for some time and continues to lead in polls among Democrats as a favorite to take on President Donald Trump. Biden would enter a crowded field of close to 20 presidential candidates that have already declared, or are expected to announce that they will be joining the 2020 race. The report said Biden asked at least a half-dozen supporters for help in lining up major donors. Biden also reportedly expressed concern he may not have the same immediate success in raising political funds online as other Democrats, such as Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Congressman Beto O’Rourke of Texas. O’Rourke, who formally entered the 2020 race on March 14, raised more than $6 million in the first 24 hours, trouncing the $5.9 million Bernie Sanders raised in the first 24 hours.
A day before the Wall Street Journal report, President Donald Trump criticized Biden’s indecision about running for President, calling him “another low I.Q. individual!” in a Twitter post. Despite some concern for his indecisiveness regsrding making the plunge into the Democatic primaries, Joe Biden still retains much support among Democratic Primary voters. A CNN Poll released on March 19 shows Joe Biden enjoys 28 percent support among the crowded field of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. Bernie Sanders comes in second with 20 percent support followed by Kamala Harris, who is third with 12 percent.
Joe Biden got tongue tied over the weekend when he was unable to properly deliver a very simple line about his decision to run for President. Get used to it, another low I.Q. individual!
The reaction to former Vice President Joe Biden’s candidacy is mixed. It can be argued that Joe Biden perhaps has the most comprehensive record of any of the candidates running, having served in the Senate for 36 years before becoming Vice President. During his time in the Senate, Biden emerged as a leader on both international and legal issues, having served as both the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Additionally, Biden developed a reputation as a dedicated, honest, and hard-working politician during his time in the Senate and earned the universal respect of his colleagues. Joe Biden also took an active role as Vice President, working closely with President Barack Obama on both foreign and domestic policy. Despite his strong resume and depth of experience, some liberal activists have expressed concern with Joe Biden’s record regarding criminal justice issues, foreign policy, and votes in favor of confirming conservative Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas in the 1986 and 1991 respectively.
Overall, it seems that Joe Biden has the strongest chance out of all the Democratic Presidential candidates for several reasons. The first reason is that he retains much appeal in several states in the industrial Midwest (namely, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan). All three of these states voted for President Donald Trump by narrow margins in 2016 and are vulnerable to flipping back to the Democrats with the right candidate. Considering Joe Biden’s political record in support of many policies that benefit this area of the country, as well as his time as Vice President during the Obama administration, he might be the right candidate to flip these three states, which are worth 46 Electoral Votes in total, which would give Biden 278 Electoral Votes, slightly more than what is required to win the Presidency.
Another reason why Joe Biden could potentially defeat Donald Trump is because his appeal in the Midwest could force the Trump Administration to play defense in what is typically an area of the country that votes Republican. While it is unlikely for Joe Biden to come close to winning states such as Ohio and Iowa considering how far to the right they have swung in recent years, his presence on the ballot would slightly improve Democratic support in those states, which would trigger President Trump to make unnecessary campaign stops in those states. By distracting the Trump campaign, Joe Biden would be able to campaign in several of the key swing states such as Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Arizona, New Hampshire, and Maine. While Biden may not carry all of these states, his campaigning in all of them will help out Democratic Congressional candidates, which may be enough to secure a Democratic Senate majority and larger House majority after the 2020 elections.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. At Least 49 People Killed in Terrorist Attack At Two New Zealand Mosques
Two horrific terrorist attacks occurred at two New Zealand Mosques during friday prayers this week.
On March 15, at least 49 people were killed in mass shootings at two New Zealand mosques full of worshippers attending Friday prayers in a terrorist attack broadcast in a horrific, live video by an immigrant-hating, far-right, white supremacist wielding at least two rifles. One man was arrested and charged with murder, and two other armed suspects were taken into custody while police tried to determine what role they played. “It is clear that this can now only be described as a terrorist attack,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said, noting that many of the victims could be migrants or refugees. She pronounced it “one of New Zealand’s darkest days.” The attack shocked people across the nation of 5 million people, a country that has relatively loose gun laws but is so peaceful even police officers rarely carry firearms.
https://youtu.be/TPWxqhO00OM
The gunman behind at least one of the mosque shootings left a 74-page manifesto (in which he cited US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu as inspirations for his hatred of Muslims) that he posted on social media under the name Brenton Tarrant, identifying himself as a 28-year-old Australian white supremacist who was out to avenge attacks in Europe. Using what may have been a Go-Pro helmet camera, he live-streamed to the world in graphic detail his assault on worshippers at Christchurch’s Masjid Al Noor (a predominantly Shi’a Mosque), where at least 41 people were killed. An attack on a second mosque in the city not long after killed several more. Police did not identify those taken into custody and gave no details except to say that none of them had been on any watch list. They did not immediately say whether the same person was responsible for both shootings. Prime Minister Ardern alluded to anti-immigrant sentiment as the possible motive, saying that immigrants and refugees “have chosen to make New Zealand their home, and it is their home. They are us.” As for the suspects, Ardern said, “these are people who I would describe as having extremist views that have absolutely no place in New Zealand.”
A Syrian refugee, a Pakistani academic, and their sons were among the 49 people killed. Syrian refugee Khaled Mustafa and his family moved to New Zealand in 2018 because they saw it as a safe haven, Syrian Solidarity New Zealand said on its Facebook page. His older son, Hamza Mustafa, was killed and his younger son was wounded. Victims hailed from around the world. Naeem Rashid and his son Talha Rashid, were among six Pakistanis who were killed in the mosques, according to Mohammad Faisal, spokesman for Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.”He used to teach at a university,” Dr. Khurshid Alam said of his brother. “My nephew (Talha) was a student.”Shah Mahmood Qureshi, foreign minister of Pakistan, confirmed the deaths and offered his sympathies to the families as well as a “promise to facilitate them to the best of our abilities.” Additionally, several worshippers from Iran, Palestine, and Jordan were among those killed as well.
The terrorist attack sparked much horror and revulsion throughout the world. Pope Francis denounced the “senseless acts of violence” and said he was praying for the Muslim community and all New Zealanders. Additionally, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull similarly condemned the attack, stating that “Today our love, prayers and solidarity are with the people of New Zealand whose compassion, humanity and diversity will triumph over this hateful crime.” Perhaps the strongest criticism came from Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, who noted that bigotry and rotten ideologies such as white supremacy directly resulted in the attacks and called upon the New Zealand government to bring those who carried out the “racist, inhumane and barbaric” attack to justice. Zariff also pointed out that the same type of prejudice led to “Israeli thugs entering a mosque in Palestine to insult Muslims.”Additionally, the Iranian government called for an emergency session of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in response to the attacks.
On the other hand, US President Donald Trump has been criticized for his poor response to the terror attack. While President Trump did express his condolences for the attack in a Twitter post, he discounted the fact that the perpetrator of the attack cited him as an influence on his views and that white nationalism is a growing threat throughout the world. In contrast to President Trump’s implicit endorsement of white nationalism and discrimination against Muslims (mostly in the Shi’a sect), New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has called for a global fight to root out racist right-wing ideology in the wake of the attack.
“What New Zealand experienced here was violence brought against us by someone who grew up and learned their ideology somewhere else. If we want to make sure globally that we are a safe and tolerant and inclusive world we cannot think about this in terms of boundaries,” said Ardern.
My warmest sympathy and best wishes goes out to the people of New Zealand after the horrible massacre in the Mosques. 49 innocent people have so senselessly died, with so many more seriously injured. The U.S. stands by New Zealand for anything we can do. God bless all!
2. Enforcement of Consumer-Protection Laws Sinks Under the Trump Administration
A bombshell report released this week shows that enforcement of longstanding protection laws decreased dramatically under the Trump Administration.
President Donald Trump has long positioned himself as a “tough on crime” politician, who is in favor of a pure retributivist approach to crime prevention and allowing the death penalty for even the most minor crimes. Despite this public persona, a report by Public Citizen released on March 13 revealed that this stance does not extend to “lawbreaking corporations.” Over the first two years of Trump’s presidency, enforcement activity at the nation’s top three consumer protection agencies that resulted in fines of at least $5,000 plummeted 37 percent from the last two years under former President Barack Obama, according to Consumer Carnage, the watchdog group’s new report. “Trump, who once asserted that he was ‘not going to let Wall Street get away with murder,’ now is allowing industry after industry to get away with just about anything,” said Alan Zibel, the report’s lead author and research director for Public Citizen’s Corporate Presidency Project. “Trump’s appointees’ apparent belief that enforcement of consumer protection laws should be a last resort,” Zibel noted, “represents a dramatic about-face from Trump’s claim of populism during his campaign.”
The report shows that the drop at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) “has been especially egregious,” particularly under the reign of Mick Mulvaney, who is now the head of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Kathy Kraninger, who previously served under Mulvaney at OMB, now runs the CFPB, and has continued Mulvaney’s efforts to gut the agency. The CFPB, as the report highlights, “completed 11 enforcement actions of $5,000 or more against corporations in 2018, down 54 percent from 24 in 2017, when the CFPB was still run by an Obama appointee.” “Under this president, federal agencies have slashed fines, declined to bring cases against corporate wrongdoers, and gutted enforcement programs,” said Public Citizen president Robert Weissman, summarizing the current conditions. “The result is a government that is eager to throw consumers under the bus.” Weissman specifically laid blame on the individuals President Trump has charged with overseeing the three top federal consumer protection agencies. As he put it, “Members of the Trump administration have made abundantly clear they perceive their function as serving and assisting corporations instead of holding them accountable for lawbreaking.”
3. California Governor Gavin Newsom Signs Executive Order Placing Moratorium on the Death Penalty
California Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order this week placing a moratorium on the death penalty in his state, citing the fact that the cost finality and racial imbalance among death penalty inmate makes the punishment “immoral”
On March 13, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed an executive order that will impose a moratorium on carrying out the death penalty, arguing that the cost, finality and racial imbalance among death-row inmates make the punishment immoral and a public policy “failure.” Newsom will suspend the practice through an executive order that will give a reprieve from execution, though not release, to California’s 737 death row inmates, about a quarter of the nation’s population awaiting capital punishment. The order will also overturn California’s lethal injection protocol and close the execution chamber at San Quentin State Prison, where the state’s most notorious criminals have been put to death. “I do not believe that a civilized society can claim to be a leader in the world as long as its government continues to sanction the premeditated and discriminatory execution of its people,” Newsom said. “In short, the death penalty is inconsistent with our bedrock values and strikes at the very heart of what it means to be a Californian.”
Despite California’s reputation as one of the most liberal states, it retains the countries largest death row population. Additionally, even as California has shifted left on several criminal justice issues, voters have chosen to retain capital punishment, rejecting a 2016 state ballot measure to abolish it. In that same election, state voters narrowly approved a proposal to speed up the pace of executions by limiting the time for appeals to five years. Given its size, any change to California’s death row carries immediate implications for the status of American capital punishment. Governor Newsom’s order comes as the punishment is on the decline nationwide, with executions less common and fewer states carrying them out. Last year, 25 people were executed, significantly down from the 98 executions nationwide in 1999. Despite the decline in the overall rate of executions, public support for the death penalty has drastically increased since President Donald Trump assumed office in 2017, with a solid 60% of the population favoring the death penalty according to recent polling.
Overall, Governor Gavin Newsom’s executive order placing a moratorium on the death penalty resulted in a mixed reaction. “A moratorium in California has enormous symbolic value,” said Robert Dunham, the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. “It’s part of the momentum we are seeing.” On the other hand, Michele Hanisee, the president of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys of Los Angeles said that reprieves for condemned inmates would be, “in effect, invalidating the law” that California voters have repeatedly affirmed, despite the liberal values that dominate the state. Newsom’s plan also promoted a sharp rebuke from President Donald Trump, who himself is a strong supporter of the death penalty for even the most minor crimes. “Defying voters, the Governor of California will halt all death penalty executions of 737 stone cold killers,” the president wrote in a Twitter post. “Friends and families of the always forgotten VICTIMS are not thrilled, and neither am I!”
Defying voters, the Governor of California will halt all death penalty executions of 737 stone cold killers. Friends and families of the always forgotten VICTIMS are not thrilled, and neither am I!
4. Former Vice -President Joe Biden Beings Planning Presidential Run
Former Vice President Joe Biden began planning for a 2020 Presidential run this week by meeting with supporters, potential donors.
According to a Wall Street Journal report, former Vice President Joe Biden contacted a group of his supporters on March 19 to ask for help in raising several million dollars from major donors, making it known he is planning to enter the 2020 presidential election. Biden has been contemplating a White House run for some time and continues to lead in polls among Democrats as a favorite to take on President Donald Trump. Biden would enter a crowded field of close to 20 presidential candidates that have already declared, or are expected to announce that they will be joining the 2020 race. The report said Biden asked at least a half-dozen supporters for help in lining up major donors. Biden also reportedly expressed concern he may not have the same immediate success in raising political funds online as other Democrats, such as Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Congressman Beto O’Rourke of Texas. O’Rourke, who formally entered the 2020 race on March 14, raised more than $6 million in the first 24 hours, trouncing the $5.9 million Bernie Sanders raised in the first 24 hours.
A day before the Wall Street Journal report, President Donald Trump criticized Biden’s indecision about running for President, calling him “another low I.Q. individual!” in a Twitter post. Despite some concern for his indecisiveness regsrding making the plunge into the Democatic primaries, Joe Biden still retains much support among Democratic Primary voters. A CNN Poll released on March 19 shows Joe Biden enjoys 28 percent support among the crowded field of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. Bernie Sanders comes in second with 20 percent support followed by Kamala Harris, who is third with 12 percent.
Joe Biden got tongue tied over the weekend when he was unable to properly deliver a very simple line about his decision to run for President. Get used to it, another low I.Q. individual!
Overall, the reaction to former Vice President Joe Biden’s candidacy is mixed. It can be argued that Joe Biden perhaps has the most comprehensive record of any of the candidates running, having served in the Senate for 36 years before becoming Vice President. During his time in the Senate, Biden emerged as a leader on both international and legal issues, having served as both the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Additionally, Biden developed a reputation as a dedicated, honest, and hard-working politician during his time in the Senate and earned the universal respect of his colleagues. Joe Biden also took an active role as Vice President, working closely with President Barack Obama on both foreign and domestic policy. Despite his strong resume and depth of experience, some liberal activists have expressed concern with Joe Biden’s record regarding criminal justice issues, foreign policy, and votes in favor of confirming conservative Supreme Court judges Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas in the 1986 and 1991 respectively. Despite these issues, Joe Biden is leading President Donald Trump by anywhere between 9-17% in most public opinion polls and might be able to win back several Midwestern states that the Democrats lost in the 2016 Election.
On March 11, President Donald Trump sent to Congress a record $4.75 trillion budget plan that calls for increased military spending and sharp cuts to domestic programs like education and environmental protection for the 2020 fiscal year. President Trump’s budget, the largest in federal history, includes a nearly 5% increase in military spending and an additional $8.6 billion for construction of a wall along the border with Mexico. It also contains what White House officials called a total of $1.9 trillion in cost savings from mandatory safety-net programs, like Medicaid and Medicare, the federal health care programs for the elderly and the poor. The budget is not likely to have much effect on actual spending levels, which are controlled by Congress. Democratic leaders in both the House and the Senate pronounced the budget dead on arrival and President Trump’s budgets largely failed to gain traction over the previous two years, when fellow Republicans controlled both chambers. Here is are the main takeaways from the budget:
Despite proposing the “most spending reductions ever sent to Congress,” as one of President Donald Trump’s top aides stated, the budget deficit is expected to hit at least $1 trillion this year and stay above $1 trillion every year until at least 2024. This budget deficit is unprecedented in a time of economic growth and resulted from the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act, which reduced revenues by as much as $1.5 trillion. Additionally, the budget predicts no economic recession for at least another decade and 3% economic growth each year for the foreseeable future, an extremely optimistic picture considering that the US is nearly a decade into its current economic expansion. To meet this goal, the US economy would have to grow at a 3% rate for the next few years with no economic recession, something that the US economy has never achieved before.
Arguably the departments that have seen their biggest boost in funding this year are the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs, which have all received a nearly 10% increase this year. The increased funding for the Defense Department will likely be used to help the Pentagon prepare for potential military conflicts with Iran and Venezuela (two countries that President Trump and members of his administration have repeatedly expressed interest in attacking). Additionally, President Trump’s budget also requests a slight increase in funding for NASA, with the goal of fully funding the proposed “Space Force” as well as a manned mission to Mars by the late 2030s. Under Trump’s budget proposal, ten major departments and agencies would see their budgets slashed by 10% (or more) in the next year alone, including Agriculture, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, State, Transportation, Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency. In particular, the EPA and HHS will see their funding cut by as much as 1/3 over the next year.
President Trump’s budget also includes nearly $9 billion for the border wall and draconian cuts to entitlement programs for the poor, elderly, and disabled such as Medicaid, SNAP, Social Security, and Housing Vouchers. Trump also wants to implement controversial policies to require more people receiving such benefits to find work or actively search for jobs. Many advocates for the poor say stringent regulations are already in place, but the Trump administration wants to go further, and it is calculating it can save a lot of money by doing so. The budget also includes a $845 billion cut to Medicare over the next decade. Trump wants to “reduce wasteful spending” on Medicare by expanding the list of treatments that require prior authorization before the procedure can be done and putting medical providers on notice who charge more than others. The administration argues these cost savings are bipartisan ideas that will help ensure Medicare can last for many years to come, but some claim it will result in people who need treatment having it delayed or not receiving it because of extra paperwork and hurdles.
Under President Trump’s plan, state governments would play a larger role in crafting policies. For example, much of Medicaid would become “block grants” so states get a lump sum amount from the government and then have to figure out how to spend it effectively. The net result would be a $241 billion reduction in Medicaid spending over the next decade for the federal government. Trump also wants to do away with the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program that pays off student loans for people who enter various government jobs. His budget calls for streamlining the student loan repayment system and having colleges and universities “share a portion of the financial responsibility associated with student loans.” The details are thin on how all of that would work, but Trump banks on his various changes to student loans saving the federal government $207 billion over the next decade.
Here are that main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Donald Trump Proposes Record $4.75 Trillion Budget
President Donald Trump sent to Congress this week a $4.75 trillion budget that will result in four consecutive trillion dollar deficits, make draconian cuts to domestic programs.
On March 11, President Donald Trump sent to Congress a record $4.75 trillion budget plan that calls for increased military spending and sharp cuts to domestic programs like education and environmental protection for the 2020 fiscal year. President Trump’s budget, the largest in federal history, includes a nearly 5% increase in military spending and an additional $8.6 billion for construction of a wall along the border with Mexico. It also contains what White House officials called a total of $1.9 trillion in cost savings from mandatory safety-net programs, like Medicaid and Medicare, the federal health care programs for the elderly and the poor. The budget is not likely to have much effect on actual spending levels, which are controlled by Congress. Democratic leaders in both the House and the Senate pronounced the budget dead on arrival and President Trump’s budgets largely failed to gain traction over the previous two years, when fellow Republicans controlled both chambers.
President Donald Trump’s budget quickly antagonized Democrats while making clear the contours of how he plans to run for re-election. It is replete with optimistic economic assumptions and appeals to his core group of constituents (Evangelical Protestants and White Catholics), and it includes deep diminutions to programs that Democrats hold dear. Additionally, the budget projects trillion-dollar deficits until 2025 and does not balance the budget until 2035 at the earliest. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called the proposal “a gut punch to the American middle class.” He said President Trump’s requested cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, “as well as numerous other middle-class programs, are devastating, but not surprising.” Additionally, Congressman John Yarmouth (D-KY) the chairman of the House Budget Committee said that the “budget is a recipe for American decline.” “It’s laughable that this budget is subtitled ‘Promises Kept,’ because in fact there are a lot of promises that have been violated in this budget,” Congressman Yarmouth further added.
Even some prominent Republicans greeted the President’s budget request somewhat coolly because it did not go far enough to reduce the growing national debt. Congressman Steve Womack (R-AR) noted that only by cutting mandatory spending could the federal government seriously reduce deficits and debt. “President Trump’s budget takes steps in the right direction, but there is still much work to do,” Congressman Womack said in a statement. On the other hand, Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) reacted positively to the budget, claiming in a Twitter post that it is the only viable plan that will lead to an eventual balanced budget. In response to the budget’s mixed reaction, administration officials fanned out to defend the budget. Russ Vought, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, blamed Democrats and Congress for the ballooning deficit, even though Democrats have not had full control of Congress since 2011. “We do have large deficits. That’s why we’re here transparently saying that we have a problem as a country,” Vought said. “It takes a long time to get out of that mess.”
President Trump’s budget:
-Funds the border security wall -Cuts wasteful government spending -Supports our military -ACTUALLY GETS TO BALANCE#DoWhatWeSaid
2. Democrats Reject Fox News as 2020 Debate Host, Citing Its Close Ties to President Trump
The Democratic Party this week rejected Fox News’ bid to hose several Democratic Primary debates, citing the networks close ties to President Donald Trump
The Democratic National Committee said on March 6 that it has barred Fox News (arguably the most-watched TV network in American history) from hosting or televising a candidate debate for the party’s 2020 primary election, an unusually pointed criticism of a cable news channel whose pundits, commentators, and reporters are closely aligned with President Donald Trump. The committee’s chairman, Tom Perez, said in a statement that Fox News “is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates.” Perez cited an article published this week by The New Yorker that reported on ties between the President and the network, which he deemed an “inappropriate relationship.”
Fox News, which devotes nearly all of its programming to propaganda in support of President Donald Trump, was seen in broadcast circles as a long shot to sponsor a gathering of Democratic candidates. But the network had made an aggressive pitch to party officials, noting, for instance, that the “Fox News Sunday” anchor, Chris Wallace, had won plaudits after moderating the third general election debate in 2016. “We hope the D.N.C. will reconsider its decision to bar Chris Wallace, Bret Baier, and Martha MacCallum, all of whom embody the ultimate journalistic integrity and professionalism, from moderating a Democratic presidential debate,” Bill Sammon, managing editor of Fox News’s Washington bureau, said in a statement. “President Donald Trump weighed in on March 6, sarcastically praising the Democrats’ decision. “Good, then I think I’ll do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates!” he wrote on Twitter. President Trump often tweets idle threats, but his message raised the prospect that he could boycott debates in the 2020 race if he took issue with the network affiliation of a chosen moderator. In early 2016, President Trump did boycott a primary debate, which was ironically sponsored by Fox News. He had objected to the inclusion of the anchor Megyn Kelly as a moderator.
Democrats just blocked @FoxNews from holding a debate. Good, then I think I’ll do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates!
Televised coverage of Presidential campaigns is a relatively new innovation itself, having only started in when NBC’s pioneering New York TV station W2XBS presented coverage of the 1940 campaign (to ~3,000 TV set owners in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania). Televised Presidential candidate debates, on the other hand, are an even more recent development, having only started in 1960 with the famous Kennedy-Nixon debates, which many believe helped sway the election in John F. Kennedy’s favor and secured him a narrow victory over Richard Nixon. Since then, Presidential debates have become sought-after events for networks eager to score high ratings and serve as gatekeepers in the early months of the nominating cycle, when viewers are forming their initial impressions of the candidates. Democratic officials had signaled some openness to collaborate with Fox News on a debate in 2019 or 2020, saying they were trying to reach a broad national audience. But the party came under pressure this week after the report in The New Yorker, by the veteran journalist Jane Mayer, which laid out the sometimes symbiotic relationship between Trump and the network he follows closely. Fox News did not sponsor a formal debate during the 2016 Democratic nominating process, but it did host a town hall debate featuring Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders in March 2016.
3. February Job Report Reveals Mixed Economic Picture
According to the Department of Labor, job growth slowed sharply in February, revealing a mixed economic picture in the US
Job growth came to a near halt in February after a blistering start to the year, with nonfarm payrolls increasing by just 20,000 even as the unemployment rate fell to 3.8 percent (its lowest level since 1970), the Labor Department reported on March 9. February 2019 was the worst month for job creation since September 2017, when two major hurricanes hit the employment market, offset somewhat by a solid increase in wages. The month fell short of the relatively modest expectations of 180,000 from economists surveyed by Dow Jones. The unemployment rate had been projected at 3.9 percent from January’s 4 percent. “I think it’s a very fluky number,” Larry Kudlow, director of the National Economic Council under President Donald Trump, told CNBC in a “Squawk on the Street” interview.
The jobless rate fell in part because of the vagaries the Labor Department uses to calculate the headline rate, there was an increase of 198,000 in those considered not in the labor force, while those classified as unemployed fell by 300,000 and the ranks of the employed decreased by 45,000, according to the household survey. A more encompassing unemployment rate that counts discouraged workers as well as those holding jobs part time for economic reasons often called the “real” unemployment rate, plunged to 7.3 percent in February from 8.1 percent in January (its lowest level since 2001). Those employed part-time for economic reasons tumbled by 837,000 to 4.3 million while those completing temporary jobs fell by 225,000, which a Labor Department official said was a consequence of the government shutdown that ended in late January. “A shockingly low jobs figure for February does not change the labor market narrative by itself,” said Ben Ayers, senior economist at Nationwide. “The three-month trend in job gains remains solid while survey data suggest no letup in demand for workers by employers.” Among major worker groups, the jobless rate for Hispanics also declined sharply to 4.3 percent from 4.9 percent in January. The rate for African-Americans rose two-tenths of a point to 7 percent, while the level for whites dropped to 3.3 percent from 3.5 percent.
In addition to the lower overall unemployment rate, the report showed that average hourly earnings increased by 3.4 percent year over year, easily the best of the economic recovery that began in 2013. That compares with a 1.5 percent increase in the consumer price index for all urban consumers from January 2018 to January 2019. Economists had been expecting a wage increase of 3.2 percent. “Certainly the headline is somewhat shocking given how big January’s number was,” said Marvin Loh, global macro strategist at State Street. “It certainly shows a weakening trend given where we were six or nine months ago. But it also shows that wage growth, and expectations that this low unemployment rate is going to drive higher wages, is still there.”
The job numbers came amid questions about growth in 2019 following a year where GDP accelerated at close to a 3% pace. Economists generally expect very little growth in the first quarter as the US recovers from a lackluster holiday shopping season and concerns persist about a global slowdown that is finding its way into the domestic economy. Federal Reserve officials of late have said they also see growth decelerating, citing weakness in China’s economy that comes on top of the US-China trade war. Other worries include a messy Brexit and a weakening US housing market and business investment picture.
4.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Rules Out Impeaching President Trump
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi annouced this week that she would not support the impeachment of President Donald Trump, arguing that such a position will divide the country and directly play into the hands of the President
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi set a high bar for the impeachment of President Donald Trump, saying he is “just not worth it” even as some on her own party clamor to start proceedings. Pelosi said in an interview with The Washington Post on March 11 that she would not be in favor of impeaching Trump. “Unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country,” Pelosi said. While she has made similar comments before, Pelosi is making clear to her caucus and to voters that Democrats will not move forward quickly with trying to remove Trump from office. And it is a departure from her previous comments that Democrats are waiting on special counsel Robert Mueller to lay out findings from his Russia investigation before considering impeachment.
That thinking among Democrats has shifted in part because of the possibility that Mueller’s report will not be decisive and because his investigation is more narrowly focused. Instead, House Democrats are pursuing their own broad, high-profile investigations that will keep the focus on Trump’s business dealings and relationship with Russia, exerting congressional oversight without having to broach the subject of Impeachment. Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), one of the lawmakers leading those investigations, said he agrees with Pelosi and Congress needs “to do our homework.” Congressman Cummings said impeachment “has to be a bipartisan effort, and right now it’s not there.” “I get the impression this matter will only be resolved at the polls,” Cummings said.
Some new freshman Democrats who hail from solidly liberal districts have not shied away from the subject of impeaching President Trump. For example, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) used a vulgarity in calling for Trump’s impeachment the day she was sworn in. Billionaire activist Tom Steyer, who is bankrolling a campaign pushing for Trump’s impeachment, shot back at Pelosi on Monday: “Speaker Pelosi thinks ‘he’s just not worth it?’ Well, is defending our legal system ‘worth it?’ Is holding the president accountable for his crimes and cover-ups ‘worth it?’ Is doing what’s right ‘worth it?’ Or shall America stop fighting for our principles and do what’s politically convenient.” Other lawmakers who have called for impeachment looked at Pelosi’s comments more practically. Congresman Brad Sherman (D-CA), who filed articles of impeachment against Trump on the first day of the new Congress in January, acknowledged that there is not yet public support for impeachment, but noted that Pelosi “didn’t say ‘I am against it if the public is clamoring for it.’”
Republicans alternately praised Pelosi and were skeptical. White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said “I agree” in response to Pelosi’s words. Sanders added of impeachment, “I don’t think it should have ever been on the table.” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said it was a “smart thing for her to say,” but Congressman Doug Collins (R-GA), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said he does not think it’s “going to fly” with some of Pelosi’s members. “I do believe what Speaker Pelosi understands is that what they want to do is going to require far more than what they have now, so I think they are hedging their bet on it,” Collins said. Freshman Democrats who are from more moderate districts and will have to win re-election again in two years have been fully supportive of Pelosi’s caution. “When we have something that’s very concrete, and we have something that is compelling enough to get a strong majority of Americans, then we’ll do it,” said Congresswoman Katie Hill (D-CA). “But if it’s going to be a political disaster for us, then we’re not going to do it.”
On February 27, 2019, Michael Cohen, who acted as President Donald Trump’s attorney from 2006 to 2018, appeared before the House Oversight Committee for questioning regarding the President’s alleged crimes. Although his testimony did not point to any direct evidence of President Trump directly colluding with the Russian government to influence the results of the 2016 Presidential Election or the 2018 Midterm Elections, Cohen’s testimony painted a scathing picture of the Trump Administration overall. Through his testimony, Cohen alleged that Trump approved a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels in 2017, had knowledge of the 2016 WikiLeaks email dump in advance, and wanted Congress to receive misleading testimony about his close ties to Russia. Cohen expressed remorse for his actions and his loyalty to Trump during a blockbuster hearing before the House Oversight Committee that lasted more than seven hours.
In the hearing, Michael Cohen described President Trump as an “intoxicating” presence. “It seems unbelievable that I was so mesmerized by Donald Trump that I was willing to do things for him that I knew were wrong.”I regret the day I said ‘yes’ to Mr. Trump. I regret all the help and support I gave him along the way,” said Cohen in a 20-page opening statement. “I am not protecting Mr. Trump anymore.” In his closing remarks, Cohen addressed the President head-on, ticking off items on a lengthy list of criticism of Trump’s behavior in office, ranging from his weather-based decision to skip a ceremony honoring veterans to his attacks on law enforcement, the media, and others. “You don’t use the power of your bully pulpit to destroy the credibility of those who speak out against you. You don’t separate families from one another or demonize those looking to America for a better life. You don’t slander people based on the god they pray to, and you don’t cuddle up to our adversaries at the expense of our allies,” he said. “And finally, you don’t shut down the government before Christmas and New Year’s to appease your base. This behavior is churlish, it denigrates the office of the president, and it’s un-American, and it’s not you.” Cohen also used the hearings to make new claims that contradicted Trump’s previous statements regarding his ties to Russia, though he said that he knew of no direct evidence that Trump or his Presidential campaign colluded with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Michael Cohen also provided the committee with a series of documents, including letters he authored threatening Trump’s high school, college and the College Board from releasing his grades and SAT scores, according to Cohen’s prepared opening statement. Cohen also presented a pair of reimbursement checks he received for the $130,000 hush payment he made to porn star Stormy Daniels weeks before the 2016 presidential election to keep her quiet about her allegation of a 2006 affair with Trump, an affair Trump says did not happen. Cohen’s documentation and testimony said Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), “raises grave questions about the legality of President Trump’s conduct and the truthfulness of his statements while he was president.”
Over the course of the hearings, Democrats sought to ask Michael Cohen substantive questions and generally respected his time, whereas the Republican members on the committee largely sought to discredit and delegitimize Cohen’s testimony, with one lawmaker describing him as a “pathological liar” due to his previous false statements to Congress. Congressmen Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Mark Meadows (R-NC), two of President Donald Trump’s strongest Congressional allies, claimed that the Democrats are merely using Michael Cohen to “try to remove the president from office because Tom Steyer told them to.” Additionally, Congressman Meadows correctly pointed out during the hearing that Cohen acted in violation of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 26(b)(3) (which governs Attorney-Client Privilege) by recording his conversations with President Trump and revealing confidential information that was discussed with the President. Moreover, President Trump predictably responded to the hearings by stating that Cohen “lied a lot” and stated that the hearings were “fake” and a partisan tool used by the Democrats.
Michael Cohen was one of many lawyers who represented me (unfortunately). He had other clients also. He was just disbarred by the State Supreme Court for lying & fraud. He did bad things unrelated to Trump. He is lying in order to reduce his prison time. Using Crooked’s lawyer!
Despite the fact that nothing entirely substantive was revealed during Cohen’s questioning, the information that was revealed indicated a pattern of deceit and misinformation on the part of President Trump. While there is yet to be found any compellint evidence tying the Trump campaign to the Russian government’s effort to alter the results of the 2016 Presidential Election and the 2018 Midterm elections, it is likely that President Trump is complicit in some form of a cover-up of his associate’s wrongdoings. This revelation may ultimately result in the end of the Trump Presidency.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s Personal Attorney, Gives Explosive Testimony Before Congress
Michael Cohen, who served as President Donald Trump’s persona attorney from 2006-2018, gave explosive Congressional testimony this week detailing the Presidents alleged wrongdoings.
On February 27, Michale Cohen, who acted as President Donald Trump’s attorney from 2006 to 2018, appeared before the House Oversight Committee for questioning regarding the President’s alleged crimes. Although his testimony did not point to any direct evidence of President Trump directly colluding with the Russian government to influence the results of the 2016 Presidential Election or the 2018 Midterm Elections, Cohen’s testimony painted a scathing picture of the Trump Administration overall. Through his testimony, Cohen alleged that Trump approved a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels in 2017, had knowledge of the 2016 WikiLeaks email dump in advance, and wanted Congress to receive misleading testimony about his close ties to Russia. Cohen expressed remorse for his actions and his loyalty to Trump during a blockbuster hearing before the House Oversight Committee that lasted more than seven hours.
In the hearing, Michael Cohen described President Trump as an “intoxicating” presence. “It seems unbelievable that I was so mesmerized by Donald Trump that I was willing to do things for him that I knew were wrong.”I regret the day I said ‘yes’ to Mr. Trump. I regret all the help and support I gave him along the way,” said Cohen in a 20-page opening statement. “I am not protecting Mr. Trump anymore.” In his closing remarks, Cohen addressed the President head-on, ticking off items on a lengthy list of criticism of Trump’s behavior in office, ranging from his weather-based decision to skip a ceremony honoring veterans to his attacks on law enforcement, the media, and others. “You don’t use the power of your bully pulpit to destroy the credibility of those who speak out against you. You don’t separate families from one another or demonize those looking to America for a better life. You don’t slander people based on the god they pray to, and you don’t cuddle up to our adversaries at the expense of our allies,” he said. “And finally, you don’t shut down the government before Christmas and New Year’s to appease your base. This behavior is churlish, it denigrates the office of the president, and it’s un-American, and it’s not you.” Cohen also used the hearings to make new claims that contradicted Trump’s previous statements regarding his ties to Russia, though he said that he knew of no direct evidence that Trump or his Presidential campaign colluded with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Michael Cohen also provided the committee with a series of documents, including letters he authored threatening Trump’s high school, college and the College Board from releasing his grades and SAT scores, according to Cohen’s prepared opening statement. Cohen also presented a pair of reimbursement checks he received for the $130,000 hush payment he made to porn star Stormy Daniels weeks before the 2016 presidential election to keep her quiet about her allegation of a 2006 affair with Trump, an affair Trump says did not happen. Cohen’s documentation and testimony said Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), “raises grave questions about the legality of President Trump’s conduct and the truthfulness of his statements while he was president.”
Over the course of the hearings, Democrats sought to ask Michael Cohen substantive questions and generally respected his time, whereas the Republican members on the committee largely sought to discredit and delegitimize Cohen’s testimony, with one lawmaker describing him as a “pathological liar” due to his previous false statements to Congress. Congressmen Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Mark Meadows (R-NC), two of President Donald Trump’s strongest Congressional allies, claimed that the Democrats are merely using Michael Cohen to “try to remove the president from office because Tom Steyer told them to.” Additionally, Congressman Meadows correctly pointed out during the hearing that Cohen acted in violation of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 26(b)(3) (which governs Attorney-Client Privilege) by recording his conversations with President Trump and revealing confidential information that was discussed with the President. Moreover, President Trump predictably responded to the hearings by stating that Cohen “lied a lot” and stated that the hearings were “fake” and a partisan tool used by the Democrats.
Michael Cohen was one of many lawyers who represented me (unfortunately). He had other clients also. He was just disbarred by the State Supreme Court for lying & fraud. He did bad things unrelated to Trump. He is lying in order to reduce his prison time. Using Crooked’s lawyer!
President Donald Trump and North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un’s Second Summit Abruptly Ends Without Concrete Agreement Between Both Leaders
President Donald Trump and North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un’s long-awaited summit meeting broke down this week.
President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un abruptly broke off their long-awaited summit on February 27, canceling a planned signing ceremony. “Sometimes you have to walk, and I think that was one of these times,” President Trump said at a press conference that was moved forward by almost two hours after the talks collapsed. “We had some options. At this time we decided not to do any of the options. We’ll see where that goes.” Trump further added.
The President indicated that the discussions stalled due to Kim’s demand that all sanctions be lifted in exchange for concessions on Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program. The summit ended with a handshake, according to President Trump, who characterized the talks as “very friendly.” President Trump said Kim has a “certain vision, it’s not exactly our vision but it’s a lot closer than it was a year ago.” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the news conference that he hopes a deal will be reached “in the weeks ahead.” He added: “We didn’t get all the way. We asked him to do more, he was unprepared to that. I’m still optimistic.” While President Donald Trump has said he was not in a hurry to make a comprehensive pact with Kim, Trump touted a “very strong partnership” with the North Korean leader before departing Vietnam for the US empty-handed. Trump also said that Kim had pledged that “testing will not start” of rockets or missiles “or anything having to do with nuclear.”
The apparent breakdown in talks is sure to come as a relief to many North Korea experts, including some Democratic and Republican lawmakers, who worried Trump was ready to make concessions to Kim without securing a firm and verifiable disarmament commitment. In rare remarks to Western reporters before the summit was abbreviated, Kim, who spoke through an interpreter, said that he was willing to consider “denuclearizing.” “If I’m not willing to do that, I wouldn’t be here right now,” Kim said as he sat across the negotiating table from Trump. President Trump himself repeatedly emphasized that he was in “no rush” to get a comprehensive agreement with Kim, playing down expectations for a full nuclear disarmament pact.
President Donald Trump praised Kim for discontinuing missile launches after their first summit in Singapore last year. “We don’t want the testing. And we’ve developed something very special with respect to that.” Kim said during his opening remarks in Hanoi that skeptics of the relationship would be watching closely and see the two leaders “side by side as if they’re watching a fancy movie.” Kim and Trump had a one-on-one session in the morning, followed by a meeting with a larger group of officials from both sides. But everything fell apart around the lunch hour. Before the summit’s unexpected ending, Kim was asked whether he was confident he could strike a deal with Trump. “It’s too early to say,” Kim replied. “I would not say I’m pessimistic.” President Trump said he was willing to take his time — a necessity, it appears, if he is going to eventually persuade Kim to disarm. “Chairman Kim and myself, we want to do the right deal,” Trump said. “Speed is not important.”
3. Netanyahu Indicted
Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu To Be Indicted On Corruption Charges
Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was indicted on corruption charges this week
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be indicted on bribery and breach of trust charges arising from three separate corruption investigations, pending a hearing, Israel’s attorney general announced late on February 27. The announcement, close to April’s general election, marks a dramatic moment in Israeli politics and a major blow to Netanyahu as he seeks a fifth term in office. Netanyahu repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, denouncing the investigations as a media-led witchhunt (much like his close friend US President Donald Trump. In a prime time broadcast shortly after the announcement, Netanyahu blamed the left for pressuring Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, a Netanyahu appointee, to issue an indictment “The left understands that they will not beat me at the ballot box,” Netanyahu said. “They exerted extraordinary pressure on the attorney general to issue an indictment even though there is nothing, to influence the elections and to crown a left-wing government.” “This entire house of cards will collapse. I am sure of it 4,000%,” he added, referencing one of the cases against him.
Prime Minister Netanyahu is entitled to a hearing on the impending indictment before charges are formally issued, but that is not expected to take place until after the election. Under Israeli law, Netanyahu is not required to step down if he is indicted. He is only required to step down if he is convicted and that conviction is upheld through the appeals process, which could take years. Netanyahu’s main challenger in the upcoming elections, former military Chief of Staff Benny Gantz, called on him to resign after the attorney general’s announcement. “Because of the circumstances which have arisen, sitting [in a future government] with Benjamin Netanyahu is not something which is on the table,” Gantz said in response to Netanyahu’s statement. “Benjamin Netanyahu — I turn to you this evening. Get over yourself and show national responsibility. Resign from your position. If you prove that you are innocent, you can return to the public realm and again lead your movement,” Gantz added.
The recent developments cloud an already murky Israeli political landscape, as well as raises questions regarding Benjamin Netanyahu’s record as Prime Minister. Whereas supports of Zionism (both in Israel and abroad), as well as several Arab leaders, have praised Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to defend Israel, Netanyahu’s record as Prime Minister is far more mixed overall. Opponents of Benjamin Netanhayu have long criticized his government for its human rights abuses against the Palestinian people (which have been deemed as “war crimes” by the United Nations). Netanyahu’s political enemies will use the ongoing investigations, coupled with other questionable policies, against him, but his coalition partners must now decide whether to support a leader who is likely to be indicted or withdraw support and risk angering their shared right-wing voter base. Thus far, key coalition partners have said they will still support Netanyahu because he is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
4. Trump Gives Incoherent Speech
President Donald Trump Gives “Incoherent” Speech At The Annual CPAC Conference
President Donald Trump gave his third speech at the annual CPAC conference this week
In the longest speech of his presidency to date, President Donald Trump riled up the audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on March 2, letting loose on topics ranging from the Russia investigation and the Democratic presidential field to free speech on college campuses. President Trump, still reeling from a blistering week both at home and abroad, claimed he was being “sarcastic” and “having fun with the audience” when during the 2016 campaign he urged Russia to hack Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s emails. “I’ve learned with the fake news, if you tell a joke, if you are sarcastic, if you’re having fun with the audience, if you are on live television with millions of people and 25,000 people in an arena, and if you say something like ‘Russia, please, if you can, get us Hillary Clinton’s emails! Please, Russia, please! Please get us the emails! Please!’” Trump said in a mocking tone. Trump was referring to a press conference in July 2016 during which he said, “Russia if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens that’ll be next.” According to an indictment from special counsel Robert Mueller, Russians made their first attempt to hack Clinton’s personal servers that same day.
President Donald Trump’s remarks, which ran for more than two hours, came just days after he returned from a trip abroad to meet with North Korean leaders, during which he suggested that North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un was not responsible for the death of American college student Otto Warmbier. “I’m in such a horrible position because in one way I have to negotiate. The other way, I love Mr. and Mrs. Warmbier, and I love Otto. And it’s a very, very delicate balance. He was a special young man and to see what happened was so bad,” Trump said, appearing to explain his previous comments. “All of the sudden they’re trying to take you out with bullshit,” Trump said, about Mueller’s probe. “Robert Mueller never received a vote, and neither did the person who appointed him,” Trump continued, as he attempted to portray Mueller’s team as a group of the “angriest Democrats.”
March 2 marked President Trump’s CPAC speech since he was elected president. In the past, Trump has used CPAC to energize his conservative base, and this was no exception. President Trump used the speech to attack the Democrats as socialists, warned once again of a caravan at the southern border full of “stone cold killers,” and referred to 2020 Democratic candidates as “maniacs,” accusing their party of supporting “extreme late-term abortion.” President Trump also attacked 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, lamenting that he should not have referred to Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) as “Pocahontas” so early on in the election cycle. “I should’ve saved the Pocahontas thing for another year because I’ve destroyed her political career and now I won’t get a chance to run against her, and I would’ve loved it,” Trump told the crowd. “I don’t want to knock out all the good stuff and end up with somebody that’s got talent.” Trump also invited activist Hayden Williams on stage as he announced he plans to sign an executive order “very soon” requiring colleges and universities to support free speech if they want to receive federal grants.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. A Coalition of 16 States Files Suit Against Trump Administration for its National Emergency Declaration
A group of 16 states filed a lawsuit on February 20 to block President Donald Trump’s plan to build a border wall without the consent of Congress.
In a widely-expected move, a coalition of 16 states filed a federal lawsuit on February 20 to block President Donald Trump’s plan to build a border wall without permission from Congress, arguing that Trump’s decision to declare a national emergency is unconstitutional. The lawsuit, brought by states with Democratic governors (except for Maryland) seeks a preliminary injunction that would prevent the President from acting on his emergency declaration while the case plays out in the courts. The complaint was filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, a San Francisco-based court whose judges have ruled against an array of other Trump administration policies, including on immigration and the environment.
Accusing President Donald Trump of “an unconstitutional and unlawful scheme,” the suit says the states are trying “to protect their residents, natural resources, and economic interests from President Donald Trump’s flagrant disregard of fundamental separation of powers principles ingrained in the US Constitution.” The complaint, filed by the attorneys general of nearly a third of the states and representing millions of Americans, immediately became the heavyweight among a rapid outpouring of opposition to the President Donald Trump’s emergency declaration. When announcing his declaration, President Trump announced he was instituting a national emergency at the US-Mexico border because Congress did not provide enough money for a wall, that has stood as one of the most enduring promises from his 2016 campaign.
In filing the case in the San Francisco-based Northern District, the attorneys general chose a jurisdiction that has repeatedly been at odds with the president. The court’s judges have ruled against the Trump administration in at least nine important cases. Judges there, for example, have ruled against efforts by the Commerce Department to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census, numerous rollbacks of environmental regulations, and efforts to curtail asylum for migrants and the Department of Homeland Security’s revocation of special “temporary protected status” for hundreds of thousands of immigrants legally living in the US. Cases appealed from that court go to the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, which has become a whipping post for President Trump, who has derided it as “a complete and total disaster” and “a thorn in our side.”
President Donald Trump has said that his declaration is allowed under the National Emergencies Act of 1976 and that the law has been used dozens of times under Presidents ranging from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush, to Barack Obama. Outside analyses, including by the Brennan Center for Justice, have shown that virtually all such emergencies involved sanctions against foreign governments and groups for reasons such as human rights violations, rather than to spend money Congress intended for other purposes.
2. House Democrats Introduce Legislative Effort to Ensure the Release of Robert Mueller’s Report on Trump Campaign’s Supposed Election Meddling
The House Democrats this week introduced legislation to ensure the release of Robert Mueller’s report on the Trump campaign’s alleged collusion with Russia.
House Democrats introduced new legislative efforts to ensure special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report regarding possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia will be publicly released. Congressmen Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) and David Cicilline (D-Ri) inroduced the Special Counsel Transparency Act on February 26. It is a companion to an identical bill introduced in the Senate by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) (usually a strong supporter of President Donald Trump) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). The bill would require the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release any unclassified portions of Robert Mueller’s final conclusions. The DOJ would also have to provide a written explanation to Congress should it determine any piece of unclassified information is not appropriate for the public.
“Ensuring Trump cannot build a wall around the Special Counsel’s work is essential to preserving our democracy,” Doggett said in a statement. “For the rule of law to stand, the Administration cannot be allowed to sit on the report. This legislation safeguards over a year of taxpayer-funded law enforcement work and assures the right of Americans to see justice served. I hope the House can give strong approval to this reasonable legislation that already enjoys bipartisan support in the Senate.” The legislation would also require Robert Mueller’s team to provide the House and Senate Judiciary committees with explanations regarding the decision to pursue or decline prosecution and any discussions it had with the DOJ about the scope of the probe. It also mandates that a report to Congress include an annex of classified materials.
I hope the House can give strong approval to this reasonable legislation—the Special Counsel Transparency Act—that already enjoys bipartisan support in the Senate. pic.twitter.com/oa8QO7yWje
Attorney General William Barr will decide whether the Mueller report is made public. He did not commit to making the full report public during his confirmation hearings. However, he has vowed that the White House would not be able to “correct” anything in the report and that he would try to release as much as he can. “Sadly, Attorney General Bill Barr made it clear during his confirmation hearing that he plans to abide only by Department of Justice policies that are convenient for he and President Trump,” said Congressman Cicilline, a member of the House Judiciary Committee. “He should not be the person who decides what Congress and the public get to see.” Six Democratic House committee chairmen sent a letter to Barr last week demanding the probe’s final conclusions be released “without delay and to the maximum extent permitted by law.” Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), a signatory of the letter and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, also threatened Sunday to subpoena the report if its findings are not publicized.
https://youtu.be/N_dF69-Mp0E
3. North Carolina Orders New US House Election After ‘Tainted’ Vote
The North Carolina elections board on February 21 ordered a new election to be held for the states 9th Congressional District amid allegations of voter fruad on the part of Republican candidate Mark Harris.
North Carolina’s elections board on February 21 ordered a new election for a House of Representatives seat after officials said corruption surrounding absentee ballots tainted the results of a 2018 vote that has embarrassed the Republican Party. The bipartisan board’s 5-0 decision came after Republican candidate Mark Harris, confronted by days of evidence that an operative for his campaign orchestrated a ballot fraud scheme, called for a new vote in the state’s 9th Congressional District. “It’s become clear to me that the public’s confidence in the 9th District seat general election has been undermined to an extent that a new election is warranted,” Harris said on the fourth day of the hearing in Raleigh, the state capital. Elections Board Chairman Bob Cordle said, “the corruption” and “absolute mess” with absentee ballots had cast doubt on the entire contest. “It certainly was a tainted election,” Cordle said. “The people of North Carolina deserve a fair election.”
The Congressional race in North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District is the last unsettled 2018 congressional contest, and the outcome will not change the balance of power in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives. Evidence of voter fraud by the Harris campaign turned the tables on the Republican Party, which has accused Democrats with little evidence of encouraging individual voter fraud in races such as the 2016 presidential election.
Harris’ request for a new vote came as a surprise after he spent months trying to fend off a recount. Harris led Democrat Dan McCready by 905 votes out of 282,717 ballots cast on November 6, but elections officials refused to certify him the winner because of allegations of irregularities in the vote. Mark Harris capitulated after his son testified he had warned his father of potentially illegal activity by Republican political operative Leslie McCrae Dowless. North Carolina law requires that a new primary nominating election also be conducted in the district, which covers parts of Charlotte and the southeast of the state. Republicans have held the seat since 1963. If Democrats pick up the seat, they would widen their 235-197 majority in the House after taking control of the chamber from President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans in the November elections.
4. Muhammadu Buhari Elected to Second Term as Nigeria’s President
Muhammadu Buhari was elected to a second term as Nigeria’s President this week.
On February 25, Nigerian election officials declared that Muhammadu Buhari had won a second term as president of Africa’s most populous country, where voters rejected a corruption-stained candidate in favor of a leader who promised to continue a campaign to eliminate graft. Not long after the polls closed, election officials found it apparent that Buhari had defeated the leading candidate, Atiku Abubakar, by a wide margin in an election that was marred by violence. In his post-election statement, President Buhari said he planned to keep working to improve security and the economy, and to fight corruption. He asked supporters “not to gloat or humiliate the opposition. Victory is enough reward for your efforts.”
In response to the results, Atiku Abubakar released a statement calling the results a “sham election” and saying that he would contest the outcome in court. He cited what he called a “statistical impossibility” of the results in some states, where turnout was high despite the fact that life there has been upended by war, as well as anomalies in states that are opposition strongholds. Referring to violence in some states in the south where, he said, soldiers had fired on civilians, Abubakar added, “The militarization of the electoral process is a disservice to our democracy and a throwback to the jackboot era of military dictatorship.” Local civil society groups had also ticked off lists of irregularities during the voting. At one point Abubakar demanded a halt to the counting.
Consequently, I hereby reject the result of the February 23, 2019 sham election and will be challenging it in court.
Nigeria’s Presidential election was in many ways a referendum on honesty, as voters once again embraced a candidate who declared to reduce the rampant levels of corruption that gave Nigeria a mediocre reputation in the past. Additionally, the election served as a referendum on the policies of President Buhari. Despite some questionable policies and poor poll numbers, Buhari was able to secure a second term due to a lower than expected turnout and lack of enthusiasm on the part of Abubakar supporters. Another factor that influence turnout was the fact that election officials decided to delay the vote by a week just hours before polls were to have opened. Numerous registered voters had made long journeys to their home districts to vote because Nigeria has no absentee balloting system. When officials postponed the election, many people gave up and returned home.
Here are the main events that occured in Politics this week:
1. Senator Cory Booker Announces His Intention to Run for the 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination
#Booker
Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) became the eight major Democratic Presidential candidate this week.
On February 1, Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), the former mayor of Newark who has projected an upbeat political presence at a deeply polarized time, entered the 2020 Democratic primaries, embarked on a campaign to become the nation’s second African American president in a Democratic primary field that is the most diverse in American history. Booker announced his candidacy on the first day of Black History Month to the sound of snare drums and with a clarion call for unity. In an email to supporters, he drew on the spirit of the civil rights movement as he laid out his vision for a country that will “channel our common pain back into our common purpose.” “The history of our nation is defined by collective action; by interwoven destinies of slaves and abolitionists; of those born here and those who chose America as home; of those who took up arms to defend our country, and those who linked arms to challenge and change it,” Booker said in an accompanying video.
Senator Cory Booker’s announcement had long been anticipated. He was among the most conspicuous campaigners for other Democrats during the 2018 midterm election, making 39 trips to 24 states as he honed a central message, that this was a “moral moment in America” that is likely to frame his future critiques of the Trump administration. In an interview on SiriusXM’s Joe Madison show, Senator Booker touted “the coalitions that we need to build in this country,’’ adding “we’ve got to begin to see each other with a far more courageous empathy to understand that we have one destiny in America.”
The 2020 Democratic primary field now features two African American contenders (Senators Cory Booker and Kamala Harris) and four women (Senators Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, and Kirsten Gillibrand, and Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard). In addition, there is also a Hispanic candidate, Julián Castro, the former Housing and Urban Development Secretary under President Barack Obama, and a gay candidate, Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana. This diverse field reflects a party in which women and candidates of color have injected a surge of new energy, and given urgency to the Democrats’ imperative of ousting President Donald Trump, who himself has a long history of bigoted and sexist statements that serve to rally his gullible supporters. Additionally, this diverse Presidential field follows midterm elections in which women and minority candidates for Congress won in release numbers and have assumed some critical positions in party ranks.
2. Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz Announces Third-Party Presidential Run
#Starbucks #ThirdParty #Independent
Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz announced his intentions to run as a third-party candidate in the 2020 Presidential Election this week.
On January 27, Howard Schultz, the former CEO of Starbucks, announced that he was considering a Presidential run as an Independent candidate opposed to both the Democratic and Republican Parties. Generally considered to hold conservative views on economic issues, liberal positions on social issues, and supportive of a moderate foreign policy platform, Schultz feels that he would be the ideal candidate to represent the growing number of Americans who do not identify with either of the main political parties. “We have a broken political system with both parties basically in business to preserve their own ideology without recognition and responsibility to represent the interests of the American people,” Schultz said in an interview announcing his candidacy. “Republicans and Democrats alike — who no longer see themselves as part of the far extreme of the far right and the far left — are looking for a home,” he added. “The word ‘independent,’ for me, is simply a designation on the ballot.”
Overall, the reaction to Howard Schultz’ proposed third party candidacy has been overwhelmingly negative, with many commentators and politicians alike pointing out that his presence on the ballot would have the effect of spitting the Democratic and Independent voteto the point in which President Donald Trump would easily win re-election to a second term. Shortly after his announcement, Congressman David Cicilline (D-RI) tweeted, “Howard, I like your coffee, but please don’t do this. You’re not going to win.” Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg also stated that “In 2020, the great likelihood is that an independent would just split the anti-Trump vote and end up re-electing the president” when asked to comment on the candidacy of Schultz. Additionally, former head of the Council of Economic Advisors Jason Furman took issue with Schultz’s focus on reducing entitlement spending as a way to eliminate the budget deficit, noting that large deficits are a function of falling revenues, rather than surging entitlement spending.
Howard, I like your coffee, but please don’t do this. You’re not going to win. You’re just going to make it easier for @realDonaldTrump to win.
Independents have a long history running for the Presidency, but thus far they have had very little success. Over the past Century, the only third-party candidates who have came won any votes in the Electoral College were Strom Thurmond in 1948 and George Wallace in 1968, who both won a majority of Southern states due to their strong opposition to the Civil Rights Movement and right-wing populist positions on the political issues of the time. In 1992, Ross Perot won the medal for the best popular vote performance of a recent independent candidate, a mediocre showing of 19%. In 2000, Ralph Nader, with 3% of the popular vote, was widely blamed for necessitating Al Gore the Presidency. Even when Theodore Roosevelt ran for a third, non-consecutive presidential term in 1912 under the “Bull Moose” banner, he only won 88 electoral votes and less than 20% of the popular vote. These trends show that Howard Schultz likely has a limited chance for success if he runs as an Independent candidate in 2020.
3. Donald Trump confirms US withdrawal from INF nuclear treaty
#NuclearWeapons #ArmsControl
President Donald Trump officially withdrew the US from the INF nuclear arms control treaty this week, sparking fears of a renewed arms race with Russia.
On February 1, President Donald Trump confirmed that the US is leaving the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, saying “we will move forward with developing our own military response options” to Russia’s suspect missile development. In a written statement, President Trump said that the US would be suspending its compliance with the 1987 treaty on Saturday, and would serve formal notice that it would withdraw altogether in six months. Trump left the door open to the treaty being salvaged in that 180-day window, but only if Russia destroys all of its violating missiles, launchers and associated equipment. Since 2013, the US has alleged that Russia has developed a new ground-launched cruise missile which violated the INF prohibition of missiles with ranges between 500km and 5,500km. Russia for several years denied the missile existed but has more recently acknowledged its existence, saying its range does not violate INF limits.
4. New Jersey becomes Fourth State to Increase Minimum Wage to $15 Per Hour
#NewJersey #MinimumWage
New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed into a law increasing the state’s minimum wage to $15 per hour over a 5-year period this week.
On February 4, New Jersey became the latest state to boost its hourly minimum wage to $15 after Democratic Governor Phil Murphy signed into law a measure phasing in the higher rate over five years. Murphy signed the bill alongside Lieutenant Governor Sheila Oliver and Democratic legislative leaders at a raucous event in Elizabeth where advocates cheered, “Ready for 15,” carried banners with their union affiliation and applauded loudly once the bill was signed. “It is a great day to make some history for New Jersey’s working families,” Murphy said. “And that’s just what we’re going to do. We’ve talked long enough about putting New Jersey on a responsible path to $15 an hour minimum wage. Today we start our way on this path.” New Jersey joins California, Massachusetts, New York and the District of Columbia in phasing in the higher rate. The $15 wage is a prominent policy goal of left-leaning groups, as well as the fulfillment of a key campaign promise by Murphy.
Governor Murphy, Senate President Steve Sweeney, and Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin announced a deal on the higher wage last month following yearslong efforts by left-leaning groups and unions in the state to raise the wage. Republican Governor Chris Christie vetoed a similar bill in 2016 to raise the wage. Republicans and many businesses testified during hearings that the higher wage will increase costs and hurt commerce. Others worried if a recession hits, the high wage could be untenable for businesses. “The amount of job loss that we are going to see among small businesses will be tragic,” state Senator Declan O’Scanlon said in a statement. In an interview, Governor Murphy dismissed these concerns, stating that a higher wage will ultimately lead to increased economic growth and work to bring many individuals and families at last out of poverty.
The bill raises the current $8.85 minimum wage to $10 an hour in July, and then increases the rate by $1 in subsequent years until it reaches $15 in 2024, but not for all workers. Farmworkers’ wages will climb to $12.50 over five years, for example. Workers for small businesses and seasonal employees will see their minimum wage reach $15 an hour only in 2026. Tipped workers, who currently have a minimum hourly wage of $2.13, will see it climb to $5.13 an hour by 2024. A constitutional amendment that raised the minimum wage and requires it to climb with inflation went into effect in 2013 in New Jersey. Once the wage reaches $15 in 2024, it will continue to increase based on the consumer price index because of that amendment.
Here are the main political events that occurred throughout the past year. From Trump’s bizarre antics to foreign policy triumphs and tragedy to political scandals at the highest levels of government, 2018 was an exciting and unforgettable year in the realm of Politics.
January
New Infrastructure Bill and a Renewed Nuclear Arms Race
#Infrastructure
President Trump proposed an ambitious infrastructure reform bill meant to help the US regain a competitive advantage when compared to emerging economies throughout the world.
January 2018 got off to an interesting start in terms of political developments. Shortly before his January 30 “State of the Union Address,” President Donald Trump proposed an ambitious $1.5 trillion infrastructure bill with the goal of modernizing the American economy and allowing it to maintain a competitive advantage with rising global powers such as Russia, China, Iran, India, and South Korea. “America is a nation of builders, We built the Empire State Building in just one year. Isn’t it a disgrace that it can now take 10 years just to get a permit approved for a simple road?” said Trump shortly after announcing the proposal. Thus far, Congress has not moved to push forward the proposal, though it is likely that the House of Representatives (which is under Democratic control as of January of 2019) may take action on the proposal sometime next year.
#Nuclearweapons
Defense Secretary Jmaes Mattis announced major changes to the US nuclear policy in a report issued at the end of January.
Much to the dismay of disarmament advocates and activists in the peace movement, the Trump Administration announced an aggressive nuclear weapons strategy at the end of January. The new policy, as announced by Defense Secretary James Mattis, called for the introduction of “low-yield nuclear weapons” on submarine-launched ballistic missiles and the development of nuclear submarine-launched cruise missiles. Despite being called “low-yield” these new weapons could potentially cause as much damage as the nuclear bombs dropped by the US on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The main point of this change in policy, according to the Trump Administration, is to pressure US rivals such as Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea into giving in to US demands in terms of both their internal and external policies. This policy may also trigger a renewed nuclear arms race and increase the risk of a nuclear war to a level even higher than it was during the peak of the Cold War (1955-1962).
February
School Shootings & New Presidential Historian Rankings
#TragetyInFlorida
A school shooting in a Florida high school on February 14 resulted in the deaths of 17 individuals and renewed public debate over the issue of gun control.
On February 14, a mass shooting occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. 17 people were killed and 15 were wounded, making it one of the deadliest school massacres since Columbine some 19 years earlier. The shooting was carried out by Nikolas Jacob Cruz, a 19-year old high school senior with a known past of threatening his fellow students, posting hate content on his social media accounts, and bragging about killing animals. Additionally, Cruz holds extremist views and advocated the killing of African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Muslim-Americans, and the LGBT community. Politicians on both sides of the political aisle have condemned the shooting and reached out to the victims. Bith President Donald Trump and Florida Governor Rick Scott immediately expressed strong support for the victims and their families and called for an end to school shootings. The shooting also renewed public debate over the issue of gun control. For example, student survivors organized the group Never Again MSD to demand legislative action to prevent similar shootings from occurring again and to call out US lawmakers (mostly Republicans, but a few Democrats as well) who have received campaign contributions from the National Rifle Association (NRA).
#Bottomranked?
According to the most recent rankings by the American Political Science Association, President Donald Trump now ranks as the worst President in US History.
On February 19, the most recent Presidential historical rankings were released by the American Political Science Association. The new rankings, to the surprise of none, place Donald Trump at the very bottom of the list (below even the infamous James Buchanan). Additionally, the rankings place Barack Obama as the eight greatest President in US history, one place above Ronald Reagan and one spot below Dwight Eisenhower. Despite their low ranking of Trump, the authors of the study do indicate that Trump has plenty of time to improve his ranking considering that he has more than two years left in his first term.
March
Trump Cabinet Shake-ups & Growing Protests in the Gaza Strip
#Tillerson
President Donald Trump dismissed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson amid a declining relationship and a disappointing tenure.
On March 13, President Donald Trump announced that he has fired Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and nominated CIA Director Mike Pompeo to succeed him. Tillerson’s departure followed months of tension between him and Trump. President Trump publicly undercut Secretary Tillerson’s diplomatic initiatives numerous times since he came to office over a year ago. For example, President Trump criticized Tillerson’s positions on Iran, the European Union, NATO, and Russia. For Tillerson’s replacement, President Donald Trump named CIA Director Mike Pompeo and moved up Gina Haspel to the post of CIA director. In a Twitter post, Trump stated that “Mike Pompeo, Director of the CIA, will become our new Secretary of State. He will do a fantastic job! Thank you to Rex Tillerson for his service! Gina Haspel will become the new Director of the CIA, and the first woman so chosen. Congratulations to all!” Despite the optimistic tone of President Trump regarding these changes, they point to an Executive Branch in continual flux and crisis.
#Gaza
Major protests broke out in the Gaza Strip at the end of march due to Israel’s ongoing blockade of the territory.
On March 30, tens of thousands of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip participated in non-violent protests as part of the Great Return March. Palestinian participants soon began walking towards the fence that separates the strip from Israel and were met with live fire from the Israeli military that saw hundreds of people injured and 16 killed. The protests were held to commemorate Land Day and demonstrate for the rights of Palestinian refugees to be resettled in Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Secretary Avigdor Lieberman responded to the protests by claiming that Hamas, which has controlled Gaza since 2007, had sent women and children to the fence as human shields. The Israeli response drew widespread criticism around the world, with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres calling for an independent inquiry into Friday’s events. Additionally, several countries in the Middle East condemned the response to the protests by the Israeli government. Perhaps the country that most forcefully condemned the actions of Israel was Iran. In a Twitter post on March 31, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif stated that “On the eve of Passover (of all days), which commemorates God liberating Prophet Moses and his people from tyranny, Zionist tyrants murder peaceful Palestinian protesters – whose land they have stolen – as they march to escape their cruel and inhuman apartheid bondage.” On the other hand, the US blocked a UN Resolution denouncing the Israeli response and placed the blame squarely on the part of the Palestinian protestors.
April
Tensions in Syria & Growing Support for Marijuana Legalization
#Syria #ChemicalWeapons
The US and several of its European allies launched airstrikes in Syria in response to allegations of chemical weapons use by the Assad government.
The US and several of its allies launched airstrikes on April 13 against several Syrian military targets in response to a supposed chemical attack near Damascus ordered last week by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that killed nearly 40 people. These are not the actions of a man, they are crimes of a monster instead,” President Trump said of Assad’s presumed chemical attack in an oval office address. The operations carried out by the US, UK, and France in Syria were somewhat limited than originally anticipated. The main target in the operation was the Barzah Research and Development Center, a scientific research center located outside of Damascus. The facility was hit with 76 missiles, utterly destroying the facility and setting back the Syrian chemical weapons program back at least several years according to Secretary of Defense James Mattis. The international reaction to the US strike in Syria was mixed overall. Several US allies in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia and Israel applauded the strike and pledged to expand their support for regime change in Syria. On the other hand, Russia, Iran, China, as well as several socio-political organizations active in the Middle East such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthi Movement forcefully condemned the strikes.
#MarijuanaLegalization
President Donald Trump announced his approval for efforts to protect the rights of states that have already legalized marijuana, shifting away from his “law-and-order” image.
Previously a strong opponent of Marijuana legalization, President Donald Trump also took an interesting turn regarding this policy issue in April. Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO), a strong supporter of efforts at the state level to legalize marijuana, said on April 13 that President Trump made the pledge to him in a conversation two days earlier. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Gardner’s account was accurate and the president supported states’ rights in the matter. Senator Cory Gardner has been pushing to reverse a decision made by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in January that removed prohibitions that kept federal prosecutors from pursuing cases against people who were following pot laws in states such as Colorado that have legalized the drug. “President Trump has assured me that he will support a federalism-based legislative solution to fix this states’ rights issue once and for all,” Gardner said in a statement to the press. Additionally, Gardner pledged to introduce bipartisan legislation keeping the federal government from interfering in state marijuana markets.
May
US Withdraws from Iranian Nuclear Deal & Renewed Social Conservatism
#JCPOA
President Donald Trump controversially withdrew from the 2015 Iranian Nuclear deal on May 8.
On May 8, President Donald Trump pulled the plug on the Iranian nuclear agreement, saying that the Iranian government has failed to live up to its obligations and violated the spirit of the accord. Yet since no tangible evidence that was presented, the unilateral decision places the US in violation of the treaty and subject to international scorn. Despite withdrawing from the agreement, the Trump Administration announced that it would be willing to renegotiate a “tougher, more comprehensive deal” with Iran. President Donald Trump proposed that any new agreement with Iran would include indefinite restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program (the original agreement only lasted 15 years and became noticeably less strong after the first 10 years), as well as restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program. Additionally, the Trump Administration stated that a new agreement would also limit Iran’s foreign policy and their humanitarian efforts to defend both the Shi’a Muslims of Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, as well as the Palestinian people. In response to Iran agreeing to these new provisions, the Trump Administration would remove all sanctions against the Iranian government, restart diplomatic ties, and work to modernize the Iranian economy.
#Abortion #SocialConservatism
Iowa Governor and staunch Trump ally Kim Reynold signed into law the nations strictest anti-abortion bill on May 4.
On May 4, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds (a devout Catholic and strong supporter of President Donald Trump) signed a law banning most abortions if a fetal heartbeat can be detected, or at around six weeks of pregnancy, marking the strictest abortion regulation in the nation. The Republican governor signed the legislation in her formal office at the state Capitol as protesters gathered outside chanting, “My body, my choice!” Reynolds acknowledged that the new law would likely face litigation, but said that “This is bigger than just a law, this is about life, and I’m not going to back down.” The ban has propelled Iowa to the front of a push among conservative statehouses jockeying to enact restrictive regulations on the medical procedure. Backers of the legislation hope it could challenge Roe vs. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling that established women have a right to terminate pregnancies until a fetus is viable. Critics argued the bill would ban abortions before some women even know they are pregnant, which will likely set up Iowa for a legal challenge.
June
Peace Between the US & North Korea?, Scientific Discoveries, & Another Trumpcastrophe
#Trump #KimJonUn #Rocketman
President Donald Trump and North Korean President Kim Jong-un held their historic summit meeting on June 12.
On June 12, US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un attended a historic summit meeting in Sentosa, Singapore. This meeting was notable in that it was the first meeting between the leaders of the US and North Korea. In their meeting, both President Trump and Kim -Jong-un signed a joint statement agreeing to security guarantees for North Korea, new peaceful relations, the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, recovery of soldiers’ remains, and follow-up negotiations between high-level officials. After nearly seven decades of US aggression towards North Korea and provocative statements on the part of President Trump, this meeting may signal a new chapter in US-North Korea relations and may bring about a just and lasting peace in the Korean Penninsula
#Mars #AncientAliens #NASA
NASA Finds Ancient Organic Material, possibly linked to life, on the Martian surface.
On June 7, the US space agency (NASA) says its Mars exploration vehicle has discovered chemical substances necessary for life. Scientists reported that NASA’s Curiosity Rover found large amounts of organic molecules in a thousands-year-old rock in an area called the Gale Crater. The area on Mars is believed to have once contained a large lake that evaporated due to some unknown cataclysm a millennia ago. The discovery of organic molecules suggests that ancient conditions on Mars may have supported life. Ashwin Vasavada a scientist working on the Curiosity project stated that the chances of being able to find signs of ancient life (perhaps even remnants of a humanoid civilization that existed millions of years ago) with future missions “just went up.” Additionally, Jennifer Eigenbrode (an astrobiologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center) noted that there is a strong possibility that the organic molecules were, in fact, created by some form of ancient life on the Martian surface. The impact of these findings is significant because it may result in increased funding for space programs such as NASA, as well as higher levels of support for space exploration efforts. Currently, the total budget for NASA represents less than 0.5% of the federal budget and an overwhelming majority of Americans today feel that the federal government spends far too much on space exploration and that the money would be better spent on education, public health, and developing alternative energy sources. The discovery of the potential of life on Mars might create the perception in the eyes of the American people that further space research and exploration is worth it and that the federal government should rethink its priorities to make such efforts a reality
#Trumpism
In his second G7 conference as President, Donald Trump and his erratic policies decrease certainty in the future role of the US in the eyes of European leaders.
In his second G7 Summit since assuming office, President Donald Trump alienated the closest allies of the US at the annual summit of the group in Canada with his aggressive trade declarations and a surprising suggestion that Russia should be readmitted to the exclusive club of major economic powers. After leaving early, President Trump went on Twitter to blow up the agreement forged at the meeting. Trump exited the Quebec resort on June 9 where the group had gathered, leaving other world leaders whipsawed and uncertain about their future relationship with the US, to head to Singapore for a summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Tuesday. Trump’s actions added to the anxiety of longtime US allies, who are alarmed to see him lashing out against them while he is advocating for Russian President Vladimir Putin and cozying up to North Korea. Most political observers feel that the G7 summit ended in abject failure and only served to highlight the ideological and political divisions between Trump and Western allies and fueled fears that the most successful alliance in history is beginning to erode. “What worries me most, however, is the fact that the rules-based international order is being challenged, quite surprisingly not by the usual suspects but by its main architect and guarantor, the US,” said Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council.
PM Justin Trudeau of Canada acted so meek and mild during our @G7 meetings only to give a news conference after I left saying that, “US Tariffs were kind of insulting” and he “will not be pushed around.” Very dishonest & weak. Our Tariffs are in response to his of 270% on dairy!
A New Supreme Court Justice & the Putin-Trump Bromance Continues
#Kavanaugh #SupremeCourt
President Donald Trump announced his selection of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court this week.
In a prime-time address on July 9, President Donald Trump nominated Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to fill Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s seat on the Supreme Court. Presenting Judge Kavanaugh at the White House, President Trump described him as “one of the finest and sharpest legal minds in our time,” and stated that he is a jurist who would set aside his political views and apply the Constitution “as written.” Kavanaugh was selected from a list of “25 highly qualified potential nominees” considered by the Trump Administration. The main reasons cited by President Trump for the nomination of Kavanaugh included his “impeccable credentials, unsurpassed qualifications, and a proven commitment to equal justice under the law” with the emphasis that “what matters is not a judge’s political views, but whether they can set aside those views to do what the law and the Constitution require.” In his remarks, Judge Kavanaugh, who once clerked for Justice Kennedy, said he would “keep an open mind in every case.” But he declared that judges “must interpret the law, not make the law.”
#Putin #Trump
President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in a controversial summit in Finland.
Amid chaos following his bizarre antics at the June G-7 Summit and the ongoing investigations into allegations that the Russian government colluded with his 2016 Presidential campaign, President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir in Helinski, Finland on July 16 in their first-ever summit meeting. The summit marked the first official meeting between the leaders after previous unofficial talks between Trump and Putin at the 2017 G20 conference in Vienna. In addition to meeting with Putin, Trump also met the Finnish President Sauli Niinistö in the Presidential Palace. Some of the topics Trump pledged to discuss with Putin include the ongoing Syrian Civil War, the tensions between Russia and Ukraine, the steadily declining relationship between the US and Iran, and measures to reduce the threat of nuclear war between the US and Russia.
August
Environmental Policy Changes & A Death of Moderate Republicanism
#McCain
Senator and 2008 Republican nominee John McCain died on August 25 after being diagnosed with an incurable form of cancer one year ago.
John McCain, who endured six years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam before becoming the 2008 Republican presidential nominee and serving Arizona for nearly 36 years in Congress, died On August 25 at age 81. Destined to be remembered among the political giants of American history, McCain disclosed in July 2017 that he had been diagnosed with a deadly form of brain cancer called glioblastoma. McCain was a two-time presidential candidate, losing the GOP nomination in 2000 to then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush and the general election in 2008 to Barack Obama. Despite the fact that he generally aligned with Neoconservatives on foreign policy and called for increased US military intervention in the Middle East, John McCain developed a reputation as a moderate Republican overall and as a strong opponent of the Truman Administration. Despite the fact that politicians on both sides of the aisle praised Senator McCain and his accomplishments, President Donald Trump had a muted reaction to McCain’s death, refusing to issue a statement praising McCain’s life and opting to not fly the flag at half-staff (which is the typical custom of the President to do when a member of Congress dies in office) in honor of McCain.
"Some lives are so vivid, it is difficult to imagine them ended. Some voices are so vibrant, it is hard to think of them stilled. John McCain was a man of deep conviction and a patriot of the highest order.” […] Full statement by President George W. Bush https://t.co/FQVYWIUyGLpic.twitter.com/W8LCxJXRLi
— George W. Bush Presidential Center (@TheBushCenter) August 26, 2018
#Environmentalism
President Donald Trump announced his intention to roll-back the “Clean Power Plan,” as well as other Obama-era environmental regulations.
On August 21, the Trump administration revealed a plan to scale back an Obama-era rule designed to cut planet-warming emissions from the nation’s power plants. The proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency will reportedly hand authority to states to create their own rules for coal-fired power plants. That would give states the option to impose looser restrictions that allow utilities to emit more greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and other pollutants — or to defer taking any action. The measure also stands to relieve pressure on the coal industry, a sector President Donald Trump has vowed to revive. Coal miners have seen their fortunes fade as coal-fired plants retire ahead of schedule, under pressure from cheap natural gas and falling prices for renewable energy projects.
More stringent regulations implemented in 2015 by former President Barack Obama put stress on the coal industry by requiring power plants to undertake expensive upgrades or shut down. President Obama’s signature Clean Power Plan established the first nationwide rules for carbon emissions. It set emissions goals for each state and gave them many options to reduce climate pollution, with the goal of cutting the nation’s emissions by 32 percent below 2005 levels. The new plan from the Trump Administration does not set a hard goal for nationwide emissions reductions, according to reports. It is projected to allow 12 times more greenhouse gas to be emitted over the next decade than under the Clean Power Plan and asks states to focus on requiring coal plants to take steps to run more efficiently. In contrast, the Clean Power Plan allowed states to meet their goals by taking measures that would push coal out of the energy mix, including adding more solar and wind farms or converting coal plants to natural gas facilities. The Trump plan would also give states a chance to forgo creating any new rules by allowing them to explain why they do not need to take action. It is possible that several states (namely Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia, Tennessee, Missouri, Louisiana, and Arkansas) could pursue that option, given significant opposition to Obama’s plan.
September
A Supreme Court Showdown & More Trumpisms
#Kavanaugh #SupremeCourt
Sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh were revealed early in September.
What was expected to be a relatively easy confirmation hearing for Brett Kavanaugh took an interesting turn in September with the revelation that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford, currently a Palo Alto University Psychology professor back when they were in high school in the 1980s. On September 16, Ford went public with her allegation of sexual misconduct on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Brett Kavanaugh immediately denied the allegations, stating that”he had never done anything like what the accuser describes — to her or to anyone. Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday. I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the Committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity.” Despite the serious allegations against him, Judge Kavanaugh was ultimately confirmed by the Senate by a close 51-49 vote on September 28, with all Republicans except Lisa Murkowski voting in favor, and all Democrats except the arch-conservative Joe Manchin voting against Kavanaugh.
#Trumped
President Donald Trump delivers a speech to the United Nations General Assembly.
In his September 25 speech at the UN General Assembly, US President Donald Trump urged all the other nations to reject globalism and embrace nationalism while he was interrupted by derisive laughter from other world leaders. Over the course of the bombastic address, Trump highlighted the (imaginary) achievements of his presidency, lashed out at enemies, Iran foremost among them, and railed against multilateralism in its spiritual home, the UN general assembly. In one of the more remarkable moments in the history of the annual UN summit, the chamber broke out in spontaneous laughter at Trump’s claim that “in less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.” Clearly taken aback, Trump said: “I didn’t expect that reaction, but that’s OK.”
Overall the international community has reacted negatively to President Donald Trump’s speech, noting that its tone and theme of the address are in direct contradiction to the core values that the United Nations had promoted since its founding nearly 75 years ago. In response to the speech, UN secretary general António Guterres said President Trump’s fiery rhetoric shows that “democratic principles are under siege” throughout the world. Additionally, French President Emmanuel Macron denounced the spread of global lawlessness, “in which everyone pursues their interest,” and noted that the policies of President Trump are partially to blame for this troubling trend. On the other hand, the governments of Russia, Israel, and Saudi Arabia have praised President Trump, arguing that his speech was a “very welcoming statement.”
October
Political Violence & Turmoil in Saudi Arabia
#Khashoggi
Jamal Khashoggi, a major Saudi dissdent, was assassinated by the Saudi government on Turkish soil on October 2, revealing the brutal face of Saudi Arabia.
On October 2, Jamal Khashoggi, a dissident Saudi Journalist for the Washington Post, was assassinated at the Saudi consulate in Turkey by agents employed by Mohammed bin Salman, the current Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. Known as a strong critic of the current government of Saudi Arabia, Khashoggi developed a reputation as an opponent of Zionism and the Israeli government, a critic of the ongoing Saudi War in Yemen, and a critic of the oppression of Shi’a Muslims by the Saudi government. These actions made him a prime target to be eliminated by the Saudi government. The international community generally reacted negatively to the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi, although US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu implicitly praised the Saudi government for carrying out his assassination and stated that Khashoggi was a “Muslim Brotherhood operative, a pro-jihad, pro-Iranian, pro–[Tayyip] Erdoğan Jew-hater. A supporter of Iran. Basically, he died as a warrior on the wrong side of the war on terror.” Despite the lack of punishment by the international community for their crime, the assassination of Khashoggi did raise some doubts regarding the human rights record of Saudi Arabia.
#Pittsburgh
A Pittsburgh-area synagogue was the site of one of the worst religiously-motivated mass shootings in US history on October 27.
Armed with an AR-15-style assault rifle and at least three handguns, a man shouting anti-Semitic slurs opened fire inside a Pittsburgh synagogue on October 27, killing at least 11 congregants and wounding four police officers and two others. The public reaction to the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting was one of condemnation. Calling it the “most horrific crime scene” he had seen in 22 years with the FBI, Robert Jones, special agent in charge in Pittsburgh, said the synagogue was in the midst of a “peaceful service” when congregants were gunned down and “brutally murdered by a gunman targeting them simply because of their faith.” “We simply cannot accept this violence as a normal part of American life,” said Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf in a news conference in Pittsburgh shortly after the incident occurred. “These senseless acts of violence are not who we are as Pennsylvanians and are not who we are as Americans.” Additionally, President Donald Trump similarly condemned the shooting, stating that “It’s a terrible, terrible thing what’s going on with hate in our country and frankly all over the world, and something has to be done.”
November
Midterm Election Shake-up
#CongressionalChanges
The 2018 midterm elections in the US revealed an extremely mixed and divided political picture.
On November 6, the US midterm elections were held and ultimately revealed an increasingly divided American electorate. In the House of Representatives, the Democrats gained nearly 40 seats, narrowly regaining control over that legislative body for the first time since 2010. Additionally, the Democrats also gained control of key governorships in Wisconsin, Illinois, New Mexico, and Michigan. Despite Democratic gains in certain areas of the country, the Republicans expanded their Senate majority by 3 seats, picking up seats in Missouri, North Dakota, Indiana, and Florida as well as by holding onto vulnerable seats such as Texas and Mississippi. These mixed results reveal the fact that the American electorate is divided in their opinions of President Donald Trump and may spell trouble for the President in accomplishing his agenda over the next two years.
#IranSanctions
President Donald Trump reimposed sanctions against Iran on November 5 in response to alleged human rights violations on the part of the Iranian government,
Described as the “biggest series of sanctions ever implemented by the US against another country,” the Trump Administration imposed a series of crushing and punitive sanctions against Iran on November 5. The package of severe economic penalties imposed against Iran by the US is the most significant part of President Trump’s decision last May to abandon the Iranian nuclear agreement of 2015 (JCPOA), which he has described as a “disaster” and a significant security risk for US allies in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. Despite the stringent nature of the sanctions, there are several exceptions that could reduce their effectiveness. For example, Iran’s biggest oil customers India and China are exempt from the sanctions. Despite several gaps, Iran’s shipping, banking, and oil industries could take a significant hit and its already weakened currency could plunge even further due to the sanctions.
The international reaction to the newly imposed sanctions against Iran by the US has been overwhelmingly negative. Despite countries such as Saudi Arabia and Israel enthusiastically supporting the Trump Administration’s policy, other countries such as the UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Russia were quick to condemn the sanctions as “punitive” and as having no justification. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said that his country would “proudly break” the reimposed sanctions and that Iran was engaged in “an economic war” with the US, and Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammed Javad Zarif, an outspoken critic of President Trump, said the sanctions reinforced what he called the growing isolation of the United States. The outcome of the sanctions against Iran is unclear at this point. While some observers note that the sanctions may result in the Iranian government ultimately collapsing, recent events show that in times of elevated sanctions, the Iranian economy has instead adapted and, in some cases, thrived due to its effective use of Import Substitution Industrialization (ISI) policies. Additionally, the reimposition of US sanctions against Iran raises the specter of war to a level unseen in recent years. For example, the Iranian military tested new missiles as part of its air defense system hours after the sanctions resumed, and announced that it has every right to retaliate against the US in response to the sanctions.
December
Death of a Statesman & Withdraw from Syria & Afghanistan?
#Bush41
Former President George H.W. Bush (1989-93) passed away this week at the age of 94, leaving behind an extensive legacy of public service.
On December 1, former US President George H.W. Bush (1989-93) passed away at his home in Houston, Texas at the age of 94. Largely considered by historians to have been an “average” President along the lines of Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, and William Howard Taft, Bush assumed office at the end of the Cold War and was arguably one of the most experienced President in US history, having served in Congress between 1966 and 1970 (Bush was one of the few Southern Congressmen who supported the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which banned racial discrimination in the realm of housing), as UN Ambassador and CIA Director during the Nixon and Ford Administrations, and as Vice President under Ronald Reagan (1981-89). Despite his achievements in the foreign policy realm, Bush was perceived to have mishandled the Recession of 1990-93 and came across as aloof to the needs of the American people. Both of these factors resulted in Bush losing re-election in a close three-way race to then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton in 1992. Despite his lackluster Presidency, Bush remained active in public life and actively campaigned and supported his son George W. Bush in his successful 2000 and 2004 Presidential bids. In recent years, Bush emerged as a major critic of President Donald Trump, having refused to vote for him in 2016, instead opting to support Hillary Clinton instead.
As with the death of Senator John McCain earlier this year, the life and legacy of President George H.W. Bush was praised by politicians on both sides of the aisle. Additionally, President Donald Trump was roundly criticized for his actions at the state funeral, as he refused to express his condolences to the Bush family and did not acknowledge former President Barack Obama and his 2016 Presidential rival Hillary Clinton. These actions seem to show that President Donald Trump is indeed a narcissist who only cares about himself at the expense of others.
#WithdrawFromSyria&Afghanistan
President Donald Trump surprisingly announced that the US would be withdrawing from Syria and Afghanistan over the next few months.
In a surprising announcement on December 19, President Donald Trump announced that the US would begin withdrawing its troops from Syria and Afghanistan over the next few months, arguing that the US has all but accomplished its goals in both countries. Ironically stating that the US “should not become the policeman of the Middle East,” President Trump announced his plan in a video posted on Twitter. In announcing the withdrawal from both countries, Trump claimed that he was doing so because the US had defeated the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in Syria, as well as the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Does the USA want to be the Policeman of the Middle East, getting NOTHING but spending precious lives and trillions of dollars protecting others who, in almost all cases, do not appreciate what we are doing? Do we want to be there forever? Time for others to finally fight…..
The reaction to President Donald Trump’s proposed withdrawal of US forces from both countries has been met with much support from even some of the President’s strongest critics. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), generally an opponent of the Trump Administration’s foreign policy, stated that he was “very proud” of President Trump from making such a move. Additionally, Senators Bernie Sanders (I/D-VT), and Jeff Merkley (D-OR), similarly praised Trump’s decision. Despite much support for his decision, many Republican officeholders and commentators condemned the decision, calling it “premature” and “misguided.” Additionally, Defense Secretary James Mattis similarly opposed the decision and announced his resignation from the Trump cabinet as a result.
Overall, 2018 was a very exciting and eventful year in terms of politics at all levels. From #Trumpscandals to #Foreignpolicychallenges, this year had it all. Here’s to hope that 2019 will be an equally interesting year in terms of political events!
On November 23, the US government released a long-awaited report stating the effects of global warming and climate change in the US are worsening and that the potential for irreversible environmental damage is steadily increasing. The report’s authors, who represent numerous federal agencies, say they are more certain than ever that climate change poses a severe threat to Americans’ health and pocketbooks, as well as to the country’s infrastructure and natural resources. And while it avoids policy recommendations, the report’s sense of urgency and alarm stands in stark contrast to the lack of any apparent plan from President Trump to tackle the problems, which, according to the government he runs, are increasingly dire.
The Congressionally mandated document, the first of its kind issued during the Trump administration, details how climate-fueled disasters and other types of worrisome changes are becoming more commonplace throughout the country and how much worse they could become in the absence of efforts to combat global warming. The report notes that Western mountain ranges are retaining much less snow throughout the year, threatening water supplies below them. Coral reefs in the Caribbean, Hawaii, Florida and the Pacific territories administered by the US are experiencing severe bleaching events. Wildfires are devouring ever-larger areas during longer fire seasons. And the country’s sole Arctic state, Alaska, is seeing a staggering rate of warming that has upended its ecosystems, from once ice-clogged coastlines to increasingly thawing permafrost tundras.
The National Climate Assessment’s publication marks the government’s fourth comprehensive look at climate change impacts on the US since 2000. The last came in 2014. Produced by 13 federal departments and agencies and overseen by the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the report stretches well over 1,000 pages and draws more definitive, and in some cases more startling, conclusions than earlier versions. The authors argue that global warming “is transforming where and how we live and presents growing challenges to human health and quality of life, the economy, and the natural systems that support us.” And they conclude that humans must act aggressively to adapt to current impacts and mitigate future catastrophes “to avoid substantial damages to the U.S. economy, environment, and human health and well-being over the coming decades.” “The impacts we’ve seen the last 15 years have continued to get stronger, and that will only continue,” said Gary Yohe, a professor of economics and environmental studies at Wesleyan University who served on a National Academy of Sciences panel that reviewed the report. “We have wasted 15 years of response time. If we waste another five years of response time, the story gets worse. The longer you wait, the faster you have to respond and the more expensive it will be.”
That urgency is at odds with the stance of the Trump administration, which has rolled back several Obama-era environmental regulations and incentivized the production of fossil fuels. President Trump also has said he plans to withdraw the nation from the Paris climate accord and questioned the science of climate change just last month, saying on CBS’s “60 Minutes” that “I don’t know that it’s man-made” and that the warming trend “could very well go back.” Furthermore, as the Northeast faced a cold spell this week, Trump tweeted, “Whatever happened to Global Warming?” This shows a misunderstanding that climate scientists have repeatedly tried to correct, a confusion between daily weather fluctuations and long-term climate trends. President Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday’s report. However, the administration last year downplayed a separate government report calling human activity the dominant driver of global warming, saying in a statement that “the climate has changed and is always changing.”
In the East, it could be the COLDEST New Year’s Eve on record. Perhaps we could use a little bit of that good old Global Warming that our Country, but not other countries, was going to pay TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS to protect against. Bundle up!
According to a New York Times article published on November 20, President Donald Trump told the White House counsel in the spring that he wanted to order the Justice Department to prosecute two of his political opponents: his 2016 challenger, Hillary Clinton, and the former FBI director James Comey. Donald McGahn, a Justice Department lawyer, rebuffed the President, saying that he had no authority to order prosecution. McGahn noted that while he could request an investigation, that could prompt accusations of abuse of power. To underscore his point, McGahn had White House lawyers write a memo for President Trump warning that if he asked law enforcement to investigate his rivals, he could face a range of consequences, including possible impeachment.
A White House spokesman declined to comment on the allegations, stating that they are false and without any factual basis. A spokeswoman for the FBI declined to comment on the president’s criticism of Wray, whom he appointed last year after firing James Comey. “Mr. McGahn will not comment on his legal advice to the president,” said McGahn’s lawyer, William A. Burck. “Like any client, the president is entitled to confidentiality. McGahn would point out, though, that the President never, to his knowledge, ordered that anyone prosecute Hillary Clinton or James Comey.”
It is not clear which accusations President Donald Trump wanted prosecutors to pursue. He has accused Former FBI director James Comey, without evidence, of illegally having classified information shared with The New York Times in a memo that Comey wrote about his interactions with the President. The document contained no classified information. President Trump’s lawyers also privately asked the Justice Department last year to investigate Comey for mishandling sensitive government information and for his role in the Clinton email investigation.
In his conversation with McGahn, President Trump asked what stopped him from ordering the Justice Department to investigate James Comey and Hillary Clinton. He did have the authority to ask the Justice Department to investigate, McGahn said but warned that making such a request could create a series of problems. McGahn promised to write a memo outlining the President’s authorities in terms of investigating political opponents. In the days that followed, lawyers in the White House Counsel’s Office wrote a several-page document in which they strongly cautioned President Trump against asking the Justice Department to investigate anyone. The lawyers laid out a series of consequences. For starters, Justice Department lawyers could refuse to follow Trump’s orders even before an investigation began, setting off another political firestorm. If charges were brought, judges could dismiss them. And Congress, they added, could investigate the President’s role in a prosecution and begin impeachment proceedings. Ultimately, the lawyers warned, President Trump could be voted out of office if voters believed he had abused his power.
A Federal Judge in California ruled against President Trump’s recent immigration executive order this week.
A federal judge on November 20 ordered the Trump administration to resume accepting asylum claims from migrants no matter how they entered the US, dealing a temporary setback to the President’s attempt to clamp down on a huge wave of Central Americans crossing the border. Judge Jon Tigar of the US District Court for the Northern District of California issued a temporary restraining order that blocks the government from carrying out a new rule that denies protections to people who enter the country illegally. The order, which suspends the rule until the case is decided by the court, applies nationally. “Whatever the scope of the president’s authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden,” Judge Tigar wrote in his order.
As a caravan of several thousand people journeyed toward the Southwest part of the US border, President Donald Trump signed an executive order two weeks ago that banned migrants from applying for asylum if they failed to make the request at a legal checkpoint. Only those who entered the country through a port of entry would be eligible, Trump said, invoking national security powers to protect the integrity of the US borders. Within days, the administration submitted a rule to the federal register, letting it go into effect immediately and without the customary period for public comment. But the rule overhauled longstanding asylum laws that ensure people fleeing persecution can seek safety in the US, regardless of how they entered the country. Advocacy groups, including the Southern Poverty Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union, sued the administration for effectively introducing what they deemed an asylum ban.
After the judge’s ruling on Monday, Lee Gelernt, the ACLU attorney who argued the case, said, “The court made clear that the administration does not have the power to override Congress and that, absent judicial intervention, real harm will occur.” “This is a critical step in fighting back against President Trump’s war on asylum seekers,” Melissa Crow, senior supervising attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center, one of the other organizations that brought the case, said in a statement. “While the new rule purports to facilitate orderly processing of asylum seekers at ports of entry, Customs and Border Protection has a longstanding policy and practice of turning back individuals who do exactly what the rule prescribes. These practices are clearly unlawful and cannot stand.”
President Donald Trump, when asked by reporters about the court ruling on Tuesday, criticized the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the liberal-leaning court where the case will likely land, calling it a “disgrace.” He labeled Judge Tigar an “Obama judge.” Trump Administration officials signaled that they would continue to defend the policy as it moved through the courts. “Our asylum system is broken, and it is being abused by tens of thousands of meritless claims every year,” Katie Waldman, spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, and Steve Stafford, the Justice Department spokesman, said in a statement. They said the president has broad authority to stop the entry of migrants into the country. “It is absurd that a set of advocacy groups can be found to have standing to sue to stop the entire federal government from acting so that illegal aliens can receive a government benefit to which they are not entitled,” they said. “We look forward to continuing to defend the executive branch’s legitimate and well-reasoned exercise of its authority to address the crisis at our southern border.”
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. In Stunning Rebuke of Trump Administration, The Democrats Retake House of Representatives
The Democratic Party regained control of the House of Representatives this week, potentially serving as a major roadblock to President Trump’s agenda.
Democrats took control of the House on November 6, a victory that will transform a Republican-controlled chamber that supported and protected President Donald Trump at every turn into a legislative body ready to challenge him politically. Victories in Republican-held suburban seats in both safe Democratic states such as California, Virginia, New York, New Jersey, as well as in swing states such as Texas, Georgina, and Florida allowed the Democrats to gain at least 25 seats, giving them control over the House of Representatives for the first time since 2010. The House Democrats aim to quickly usher in a new era and tone in Washington, starting with a legislative package of anti-corruption measures aimed at strengthening ethics laws, protecting voter rights and cracking down on campaign finance abuses.
“Tomorrow will be a new day in America,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) declared from the Democratic Party headquarters in Washington. “It’s about restoring the Constitution’s checks and balances to the Trump administration. It’s about stopping the GOP and Mitch McConnell’s assaults on Medicare, Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, and the health care of 130 million Americans living with pre-existing medical conditions.” Pelosi promised action on lowering the cost of prescription drugs and rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure and pledged to pursue bipartisanship where possible. “A Democratic Congress will work for solutions that bring us together because we have all had enough of division,” she said.
Despite his relentless criticism of her, President Donald Trump called Pelosi to congratulate her on her party’s success and acknowledged her call for bipartisanship. Additionally, in a Twitter post, President Trump stated that Nancy Pelosi deserved to become Speaker of the House after her parties win and urged Democrats to support her. Despite his relatively conciliatory tone, there are many points of possible conflict between President Trump and the new Democratic House majority. For example, Democrats are likely to launch investigations into numerous aspects of the Trump administration, from its ties to Russia to the President’s tax returns, as well as to step up oversight into Trump’s executive actions on immigration, the environment, and other regulations. “The country gave us a mandate to provide some check and balance on the executive that that has been sorely missing these last two years,” said Congressman Gerry Connolly (D-VA). “And that involves rigorous oversight and accountability. … This is not a time for holding back or being less than vigorous.”
In all fairness, Nancy Pelosi deserves to be chosen Speaker of the House by the Democrats. If they give her a hard time, perhaps we will add some Republican votes. She has earned this great honor!
The retaking of the House of Representatives serves as a significant vindication for Nancy Pelosi, who became the first female House speaker in 2006, only to lose the majority in 2010 as voters rebelled against former President Barack Obama’s health care law in the first midterm elections of his Presidency. Midway through President Trump’s first term, the elections once again focused on health care, only this time Democrats were on the attack against Republicans, attacking the Republicans over attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act and its signature protections for people with preexisting conditions. Republicans who rode their opposition to Obamacare to the House majority in 2010 were forced to backtrack in many cases, insisting that they did support such protections.
Despite their resounding victory in the House elections, the Democratic party faces internal divisions as well. Even though their restored majority comes thanks to many moderate candidates who beat Republicans in districts that narrowly voted for Trump in 2016, the party will also welcome newcomers who ran on distinctly progressive agendas, calling for Medicare-for-all or abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. Those lawmakers include New York’s Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who defeated longtime Democrat Joseph Crowley in a June primary, and Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib, who is set to claim the seat once held by veteran lawmaker John Conyers Jr. That mix will be sure to create tensions over the party’s priorities, especially with a restive liberal base that has already begun calling for impeachment proceedings against Trump.
Heading into Election Day, Republicans had said their best-case scenario after the election was a narrower House majority than the 45-seat margin they now command. Republicans had pledged that, if returned to power in the House, they would get to work on a new 10 percent tax cut for the middle-class Trump spoke of in the closing days of the campaign. “We’ve known from the beginning that history was not on our side this election cycle. And big money was not on our side,” House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) said, citing a “motivated base” on the Democratic side who inundated Republican incumbents with small donations to their challenges.
House Republicans also face leadership questions heading into the next Congress, as well as internal ideological differences. On the Republican side, with House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-WI) retiring from Congress, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) is his likeliest successor as the top Republican leader in the majority or minority. But he may not get there without a fight, since Scalise is also eyeing the job, and Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH), a leader of the House Freedom Caucus and unwavering supporter of President Donald Trump, is the choice of some conservatives.
2. Republicans Expand Senate Majority Despite Losing House of Representatives
Despite losing control over the House of Representatives, the Republican Party increased their Senate majority with Trump-aligned candidates defeating moderate Democrat incumbents.
Despite losing control of the House of Representatives by a substantial margin, Republicans cemented control of the Senate for two more years on November 6 and positioned themselves for a more conservative majority, with victories by candidates who aligned with President Donald Trump. North Dakota Congressman Kevin Cramer, Indiana businessman Mike Braun, Florida Governor Rick Scott, and Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley, all staunch Trump allies, won seats held by Democrats. The last time such a situation occurred under a Republican President was in 2002 when President George W. Bush’s post-9/11 popularity was enough for the Republicans to regain control of the Senate in that year’s midterm election.
The results held implications for coming battles over the federal judiciary, trade, health care, government spending, and immigration. President Donald Trump’s worldview is expected to be reflected strongly in those debates in the wake of Tuesday’s elections. The outcomes also held significance for President Trump himself. Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) spoke Tuesday night, according to McConnell spokeswoman Antonia Ferrier. “The leader and the president had a great conversation, and he thanked the president for all his help,” she said. The Senate Democratic caucus, meanwhile, is poised to shift to the left. The ouster of key centrists willing to work with Trump and the presence of several liberal senators gearing up for possible presidential runs could cause more polarization in the chamber.
With the map in their favor, Republicans — who currently control both chambers of Congress — were on track to preserve and possibly expand their 51-to-49 advantage in the Senate. Analysts across the political spectrum had favored them to remain in power, even as they said Democrats were likely to wrest control of the House. Some of the most closely watched Senate races pitted moderate/conservative Democrats against conservative Republicans who embraced Trump. Races in Missouri, North Dakota, Indiana, West Virginia, and Tennessee fell into this category. Even before Tuesday’s vote, Senate Republicans were poised for a more pro-Trump roster next year.
Democrats tried to defeat candidates who marched in lockstep with Trump by running on preserving health-care protections and other so-called “kitchen table” issues. In key races, they fell short. In North Dakota, Kevin Cramer’s defeat of Senator Heidi Heitkamp means that a close ally of Trump will replace one of the chamber’s few moderate Democrats. Trump personally recruited Cramer to run. On major issues, Cramer endorsed Trump’s positions. In Indiana, Businessman Mike Braun ran in Trump’s mold, as an outsider eager to shake up Washington. He defeated a pair of House members in the Republican primary before beating centrist Democratic Senator Joe Donnelly on Tuesday. In Missouri, Attorney General Hawley ousted Senator Claire McCaskill in a race with similar dynamics. Hawley, like Cramer, championed Trump’s views on trade, even as he faced criticism that farmers in his state would suffer under the President’s tariffs.
Despite having an unfavorable map, the Democratic Party did succeed in picking up two states in the Southwest. In Arizona, Democratic Congresswoman Krysten Sinema was able to defeat Republican Congresswoman Martha McSally by a close margin, becoming the first Democrat elected to the Senate from Arizona since 1988. In Nevada, Congresswoman Jacky Rosen unseated Senator Dean Heller, a one-time Trump critic who since warmed up to the President in recent weeks. Moreover, several vulnerable Democratic Senators such as Joe Manchin (WV), Jon Tester (MT), and Sherrod Brown (OH) were able to overcome the trends in their states and win re-election. In the Texas Senate race, Democratic candidate Beto O’Rourke was also able to nearly defeat Ted Cruz despite the latter gaining much support in recent weeks, showing that Texas is trending rapidly towards the Democratic party.
Despite gaining seats in this election cycle, the Senate Republican agenda is not expected to be nearly as ambitious as the past two years, when the Republicans controlled the federal government following Trump’s surprise win. The Democratic House takeover will likely be an impediment to reaching an agreement on most issues. Still, the Senate will have to navigate some high-stakes battles. The Trump Administration is preparing for a massive post-midterm shake-up, which could trigger nominations for Attorney General and other Cabinet posts the Senate would be tasked with confirming in the months ahead. Additionally, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel has made confirming conservative federal judges a top priority, which will be easy to accomplish with a more favorable Senate composition.
3. Democrats Make Gains in Gubernatorial, State Legislative Elections
The Democratic Party made key gains in this weeks gubernatiroal elections, setting up a fight regarding Congressional redistricting efforts in 2020.
Democrats tried on November 6 to fight their way back to power in state capitols across the country by reclaiming governor’s seats in several key states, marking significant steps in their national strategy to reverse years of Republican gains in state capitols. Despite this, their victories in Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, were balanced by Republicans holding on to the governorships in Florida, Ohio, and Arizona. Additionally, the Georgia gubernatorial race remains too close to call and will likely be settled in a run-off race.
The defeat of Republican Scott Walker in Wisconsin completed a sweep for the Democratic party in the upper Midwest. Governor Walker was a top target of Democrats and a polarizing figure in his state, sweeping into office during the tea party wave of 2010 and gaining national attention by leading a rollback of union rights that led to protests inside the state Capitol. Walker survived a recall attempt before falling short in a bid for the Republican presidential nomination. The win by Democrat Tony Evers gives his party a chance to undo some of Walker’s accomplishments, including a strict voter ID law, a law that effectively ended collective bargaining for public workers, and gerrymandering that helped the Republicans gain control of a majority of Wisconsin’s Congressional seats. Democrats hope their victories signal a resurgence for their party in America’s heartland, where President Donald Trump romped in 2016. “I think the message is a simple one. A candidate with a moderate tone but progressive in thinking can win in the heartland,” former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, a Democrat who served from 1999-2007, said in a press release. “Winning the governorships is huge in beginning the process of changing the direction of our politics.”
In Michigan, Democrat Gretchen Whitmer defeated Republican Bill Schuette, ending nearly 24 non-consecutive years of Republican control of the state. The former legislative leader will become the second female governor in a state where Democrats heavily targeted other statewide and legislative offices. Republican Governor Bruce Rauner in Illinois easily lost his bid for a second term to Democrat J.B. Pritzker. The billionaire appears to have capitalized on both Governor Rauner’s lack of popularity, as well as President Donald Trump’s extremely low popularity in Illinois overall. In Kansas, Democratic state lawmaker Laura Kelly defeated Republican Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a close ally of Trump. New Mexico also tipped into the Democratic column, as did Maine, where despite President Donald Trump’s relatively strong approval rating, Democratic Attorney General Janet Mills won the race to succeed combative Republican Governor Paul LePage, who was term-limited after eight years in office.
Democrats Andrew Cuomo in New York and Tom Wolf in Pennsylvania easily won re-election, as did two Republicans in Democratic-leaning states, Larry Hogan in Maryland and Charlie Baker in Massachusetts. In Iowa, Republican Governor Kim Reynolds (who earlier this year signed a controversial anti-abortion bill into law) broke the Democrats’ run of Midwest success by being narrowly elected to a full term. In all, voters were choosing 36 governors and ~6,000 state legislators in general and special elections that have attracted record amounts of spending from national Democratic and Republican groups. Republicans are in control more often than not in state capitols across the country, but Democrats were trying to pull a little closer in Tuesday’s elections. The political parties are trying not only to win now but also to put themselves in a strong position for the elections two years from now that will determine which party will have the upper hand in redrawing congressional and state legislative districts.
https://youtu.be/7wyYRks6PwM
4. Attorney General Jess Sessions Resigns
Amid much conflict with President Donald Trump, Attorney General Jeff Session resigned this week, potentially risking the special counsel probe into President Trump’s connection with Russia and alleged financial crimes.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigned on November 7 at President Donald Trump’s request, ending the tenure of a beleaguered loyalist whose relationship with the president was ruined when Sessions recused himself from the control of the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign. In a letter to Trump, Sessions wrote that he had been “honored to serve as Attorney General” and had “worked to implement the law enforcement agenda based on the rule of law that formed a central part of your campaign for the presidency.” Trump tweeted that Sessions would be replaced on an acting basis by Matthew G. Whitaker, who had been serving as Sessions’ chief of staff. “We thank Attorney General Jeff Sessions for his service, and wish him well!” President Trump tweeted. “A permanent replacement will be nominated at a later date.”
….We thank Attorney General Jeff Sessions for his service, and wish him well! A permanent replacement will be nominated at a later date.
A Justice Department official said Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker would assume authority over the special counsel probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, though his role will be subject to the normal review process for conflicts. Because Sessions recused himself, the special counsel probe had been overseen by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who also has had strained relations with President Trump, but is considered safe in his position for the moment. Rosenstein went to the White House on Wednesday afternoon for what an official said was a pre-scheduled meeting.
Though Sessions’ removal was expected, the installation of Whitaker sparked fears that the president might be trying to exert control over the special counsel investigation led by former FBI director Robert Mueller. A legal commentator before he came into the Justice Department, Whitaker had mused publicly about how a Sessions replacement might reduce Mueller’s budget “so low that his investigation grinds to almost a halt.” He also wrote in an August 2017 column that Mueller had “come up to a red line in the Russia 2016 election-meddling investigation that he is dangerously close to crossing,” after CNN reported that the special counsel could be looking into Trump and his associates’ financial ties to Russia. Trump has told advisers that Whitaker is loyal and would not have recused himself from the investigation, current and former White House officials said. Whitaker said in a statement: “It is a true honor that the President has confidence in my ability to lead the Department of Justice as Acting Attorney General. I am committed to leading a fair Department with the highest ethical standards, that upholds the rule of law, and seeks justice for all Americans.”
Democrats and others issued statements Wednesday urging that Mueller is left to do his work and vowing to investigate whether Sessions’ ouster was meant to interfere with the special counsel. “Congress must now investigate the real reason for this termination, confirm that Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker is recused from all aspects of the Special Counsel’s probe, and ensure that the Department of Justice safeguards the integrity of the Mueller investigation,” Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement. Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that “No one is above the law, and any effort to interfere with the Special Counsel’s investigation would be a gross abuse of power by the President. While the President may have the authority to replace the Attorney General, this must not be the first step in an attempt to impede, obstruct or end the Mueller investigation.” Senator-elect Mitt Romney (R-UT) tweeted that it was “imperative” Mueller’s work be allowed to continue “unimpeded.” Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) said that “no new Attorney General can be confirmed who will stop that investigation.”
I want to thank Jeff Sessions for his service to our country as Attorney General. Under Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker, it is imperative that the important work of the Justice Department continues, and that the Mueller investigation proceeds to its conclusion unimpeded.
Two close Trump advisers said the President does not plan on keeping Whitaker permanently. Among those said to be under consideration for the job are Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, former U.S. attorney general Bill Barr and former federal judges Janice Rogers Brown and J. Michael Luttig. An administration official said the president has also considered selecting another U.S. senator for the position, on the grounds that a lawmaker might have an easier confirmation, but so far GOP lawmakers have privately expressed little interest in the position. Two other officials said former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie might be under consideration.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions was the first US Senator to endorse Donald Trump and was the biggest supporter of the President’s policies on immigration, crime, and drug policy. Despite Attorney General Sessions’ agreement with President Trump on many policies, their relationship was overshadowed by the Russia investigation, specifically, Sessions’s recusal from the inquiry after it was revealed that he had met more than once with the Russian ambassador to the United States during the 2016 campaign, even though he had said during his confirmation hearing that he had not met with any Russians. Trump has never forgiven Sessions for his recusal, which he regarded as an act of disloyalty that denied him the protection he thought he deserved from his attorney general. “I don’t have an attorney general,” Trump said in September. Privately, Trump has derided Sessions as “Mr. Magoo,” a cartoon character who is elderly, myopic and bumbling, according to people with whom the president has spoken.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week: 1. Florida Trump Supporter Charged With Attempting to Assassinate Democratic Party Leaders With Pipe Bombs
Ceasar Sayoc, a Florida-based Trump supporter, was charged with mailing several pipe bombs to prominent Democrats, CNN executives this week.
On October 23, several pipe bombs packed with shards of glass were intercepted en route to several prominent Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama, in an unnerving wave that deepened political tensions and fears two weeks before national midterm elections. None of the seven bombs detonated and nobody was hurt as authorities in New York, Washington DC, Florida, and California seized the suspicious packages. One of the explosives was sent to CNN, which prompted the evacuation of the Time Warner Center in Manhattan where the news outlet has its offices. The targets of the bombs were some of the figures most frequently criticized by President Donald Trump, who still assails Clinton at rallies while supporters chant “lock her up” two years after he defeated her and she largely left the political scene. Trump also often singles out cable news network CNN as he rails against the “fake news” media.
The suspect in the attempted bombing is Cesar Sayroc, a 56-year-old resident of Florida. A registered Republican and strong supporter of President Donald Trump, Sayoc was previously charged in 2002 for threatening to “throw, project, place, or discharge any destructive device.” Additionally, Sayoc was known for posting anti-Democratic material on social media sites such as Twitter. Recent activity in what appear to be two social media accounts belonging to Sayoc paint a picture of a staunch supporter of Trump and Ron DeSantis, the GOP nominee for governor who the president has endorsed, as well as Republican Governor Rick Scott. Other posts vilify Gillum, Tallahassee’s mayor, who is locked in a fierce battle with DeSantis. A Wednesday post included an anti-Gillum meme with the caption “$500,000 SOROS PUPPET” and a photo of the liberal philanthropist George Soros, who has contributed to Gillum’s campaign and had a bomb delivered to his home this week, holding a puppet meant to resemble Gillum. Other posts criticize the Clintons and accuse David Hogg, one of the survivors of the Parkland school shooting earlier this year of working with Soros to oust Republicans from Congress.
Despite his known radical viewpoints and violent past, many observers note that Cesar Sayoc is the person they would have least expected to attempt such a horrific attack on leading Democratic Party politicians. Daniel Lurvey, a Miami-Dade defense attorney who represented Sayoc in two theft cases in 2013 and 2014, described Sayoc as an average guy who did not seem the type to mail suspected pipe bombs. “If I went down my list of clients and you said to pick the Top 20 that you think might be capable of this, he wouldn’t even be close,” Lurvey told the press in an interview. For his attempted murder of American political leaders, Sayroc potentially faces a 48-year jail sentence, as well as other legal penalties.
The reaction to the attempted assassination of leading Democratic party politicians has thus far been mixed. Despite condemning the attempted attacks, President Donald Trump sought to minimize their impact and in a Twitter post repeated the false claim that the media has tried to pin the responsibility for Sayroc’s action on himself and his administration. This sentiment was later echoed by Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Overall, the attempted assassination of opposition political leaders shows that the rhetoric by President Trump and his fellow Republicans has served little than to increase the partisan divide in US politics and convince their most hardcore supporters to resort to illegitimate tactics to prevent rival political leaders from having a voice.
Funny how lowly rated CNN, and others, can criticize me at will, even blaming me for the current spate of Bombs and ridiculously comparing this to September 11th and the Oklahoma City bombing, yet when I criticize them they go wild and scream, “it’s just not Presidential!”
2. Pittsburgh synagogue Shooting Leaves 11 Dead, 4 Wounded in One of the Worst Acts of Religious Violence in US History
A Pittsburgh-area synagogue was the site of one of the worst religiously-motivated mass shootings in US history on October 27.
Armed with an AR-15-style assault rifle and at least three handguns, a man shouting anti-Semitic slurs opened fire inside a Pittsburgh synagogue on October 27, killing at least 11 congregants and wounding four police officers and two others. In a rampage described as among the deadliest against the Jewish-American community, the assailant stormed into the Tree of Life Congregation, where worshipers had gathered in separate rooms to celebrate their faith, and shot indiscriminately into the crowd, shattering what had otherwise been a peaceful morning. The assailant, identified by law enforcement officials as Robert Bowers, fired for several minutes and was leaving the synagogue when officers, dressed in tactical gear and armed with rifles, met him at the door. According to the police, Bowers exchanged gunfire with officers before retreating back inside and barricading himself inside a third-floor room. After his capture, federal officials charged Bowers with 29 criminal counts. They included obstructing the free exercise of religious beliefs, defined as a hate crime under federal law, and using a firearm to commit murder. Bowers also faces state charges, including 11 counts of criminal homicide, six counts of aggravated assault and 13 counts of ethnic intimidation.
The public reaction to the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting was one of condemnation. Calling it the “most horrific crime scene” he had seen in 22 years with the FBI, Robert Jones, special agent in charge in Pittsburgh, said the synagogue was in the midst of a “peaceful service” when congregants were gunned down and “brutally murdered by a gunman targeting them simply because of their faith.” “We simply cannot accept this violence as a normal part of American life,” said Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf in a news conference in Pittsburgh shortly after the incident occurred. “These senseless acts of violence are not who we are as Pennsylvanians and are not who we are as Americans.” Additionally, President Donald Trump similarly condemned the shooting, stating that “It’s a terrible, terrible thing what’s going on with hate in our country and frankly all over the world, and something has to be done.”
In addition to the widespread condemnation of the attack within the US, many foreign political leaders expressed their condolences, including many Arab and Muslim politicians. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated in a press conference that he was ‘heartbroken and appalled by the murderous attack on a Pittsburgh synagogue today.” Additionally, Mohammed bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia and a strong supporter of Israel forcefully condemned the shooting, stating that “houses of worship are meant to provide a safe and spiritual refuge. Those who desecrate their sanctity attack all humanity. Perhaps the strongest condemnation of the attack came from Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, who said in a Twitter post that “Extremism and terrorism know no race or religion, and must be condemned in all cases,” and that “The world deserves better than to have to live with weaponized demagoguery.”
Extremism and terrorism know no race or religion, and must be condemned in all cases. The world deserves better than to have to live with weaponized demagoguery. Thoughts and prayers with victims of terrorist attack on Pittsburgh synagogue and their loved ones.
Overall, the Pittsburgh synagogue shotting reveals that religious bigotry and violence is far from a settled issue in the US. For example, the Justice Department noted that there were at least 1,800 violent incidents motivated by religious bias in 2017, a 57% spike when compared to 2016. Many observers claim that this increase in religious bigotry is attributed to President Donald Trump’s bigoted rhetoric towards non-Christians. Additionally, the shooting reveals a major split within the American Jewish community regarding President Trump. Despite making major inroads with the Jewish vote in 2016 (with the Jewish vote going from 25% to 33% Republican when compared to 2012) due to his strong support for Israel, advocacy for a neo-conservative foreign policy, and opposition to the interests of both Shi’a Muslims and the Palestinian people, many American Jewish leaders have expressed concern regarding the divisive rhetoric spouted off by President Trump, arguing that it is encouraging violence and discrimination against religious minorities in the US.
3. Afghanistan Holds First Parliamentary Elections Since 2010
The first Parliamentary elections in Afghanistan in nearly a decade were held this week.
Voting under threat of Taliban violence, Afghans across the country cast ballots in parliamentary elections held on October 22 during one of the most fragile moments in the 17 years since the US and NATO-led invasion of the country. The election was supposed to be held in 2015 but was delayed several times due to widening political schisms and worsening security within the country. And where the voting did go ahead, it did so under the shadow of a Taliban vow to punish those who took part. There was no voting at all in two critical provinces, and the government said ahead of the vote that only two-thirds of polling stations would open because of security issues. In response to the elections, the Taliban announced that they would be attacking polling places to prevent Afghan citizens from voting, though security forces prevented dramatic attacks that many feared had the potential to occur. Despite the efforts of Afghanistan’s security forces, at least 78 people were killed in scattered attacks, and at least 470 were wounded in smaller attacks targeting dozens of districts. In the city of Kabul alone, more than a dozen attacks were reported by officials.
The election commission of Afghanistan put voter turnout at more than three million, what observers saw as a realistic figure with increased monitoring and fraud prevention mechanisms helping to prevent ballot-box stuffing. The commission said the 400 locations that faced technical problems would vote the next day. The province of Kandahar, where voting was postponed after its police chief was killed last week, will vote next week. Despite the threats of violence from the Taliban and other militant groups, many citizens of Afghanistan were eager to participate in the election. “I have been waiting here for five hours, and the voting hasn’t started,” said Nawroz Ali, 83, outside a polling station in central Kabul. “The police told me to sit in the sun, get some sun, and when it opens, I will be first.”
Overall, many international observers applaud the government of Afghanistan regarding the conduct of the election despite some lingering issues with violence and logistical and political problems. The Transparent Election Foundation of Afghanistan noted that the elections are a step forward for Afghanistan and represent a positive trend of increased citizen participation in its political system. “Afghans, despite all of the security issues and threats, demonstrated a massive turnout in today’s elections,” the organization said in a report. Despite the growing levels of political participation within Afghanistan, many international observers note that the country has a long way to go to recover from decades of warfare, imperialism by Western powers, authoritarianism, and political instability.
4. President Donald Trump Announces His Intention to Roll-back the “Birthright Citizenship” Provision of the 14th Amendment
President Donald Trump announced his intention to end the practice of birthright citizenship this week.
President Donald Trump has said that birthright citizenship “has to end” and believes he can enact that policy without having to amend the Constitution. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution, adopted in 1868 following the Civil War to guarantee the equal citizenship rights of freed slaves, established the concept of birthright citizenship. It states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” But in an interview with Axios, a part of which was published late on October 29, Trump said he believed he could end the practice with an executive order. “It was always told to me that you needed the Constitutional amendment,” he said. “Guess what? You don’t.”
In practice, the 14th Amendment has conferred citizenship on anyone born in the US, regardless of the legal status of their parents, and the idea was upheld in several Supreme Court cases, including United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) In the Ark case, the court held that a child born to foreign citizens here permanently and legally “becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.” Despite the fact that the practice of birthright citizenship has long been viewed as constitutional, the practice has gained controversy in recent years with conservative political groups, many of whom argue that the amendment was not meant to qualify foreign citizens to automatically become US citizens provided that they were born on US soil.
The proposal by President Donald Trump has sparked a mixed reaction. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) applauded Trump’s attack on birthright citizenship, tweeting in part “This policy is a magnet for illegal immigration, out of the mainstream of the developed world, and needs to come to an end.” On the other hand, the ACLU condemned the potential executive order via tweet, calling the move a “blatantly unconstitutional attempt to fan the flames of anti-immigrant hatred in the days ahead of the midterms.” Additionally, critics noted that President Trump’s statement that the US is the only country in the world who offers birthright citizenship is false. Many countries in the Western Hemisphere offer birthright citizenship including both Canada and Mexico.
Finally, a president willing to take on this absurd policy of birthright citizenship. https://t.co/kCa0ko7P76
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week: 1. Russian Woman Indicted for Attempting to Interfere in the 2018 Midterm Elections
A Russian national was indicted this week for attempting to use websites such as Facebook in interfere with the results of the 2018 Midterm elections to have candidates favorable to President Trump and the Republican party be elected.
A Russian woman who allegedly worked on funding online propaganda efforts to manipulate voters in the 2016 and 2018 elections was charged with a federal crime on October 19 as part of a broader conspiracy to hurt American democracy. Elena Alekseevna Khusyaynova, 44, of St. Petersburg, Russia, was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States for managing the financing of the social media troll operation that included the Internet Research Agency, which special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators charged with crimes earlier this year. Prosecutors who unsealed the complaint Friday say she aided the Russian effort to “inflame passions” online related to immigration, gun control, and the Second Amendment, the Confederate flag, race relations, LGBT issues, the Women’s March and the NFL National Anthem debate from December 2016 until May of 2018. The social media efforts specifically focused on the shootings of church members in Charleston, South Carolina, and concert attendees in Las Vegas, Nevada, the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally, which left one counter-protester dead, and police shootings of African-American men, the complaint says.
NEW: Elena Khusyaynova, a Russian woman who works for an oligarch close to Putin has been charged with attempting to meddle in the 2018 midterm election. 2018, not 2016. Be woke people! https://t.co/Efc8Es84hp
The criminal charge says the Russians’ online manipulation effort focused on multiple political viewpoints and candidates but frequently zeroed in on the Republican Party’s most well-known leaders. In one effort to spread an online news article about the late Senator John McCain’s position on a border wall to stop illegal immigration, an alleged conspirator directed others to “brand McCain as an old geezer.” They also attempted to paint House Speaker Paul Ryan as “a complete and absolute nobody incapable of any decisiveness” and as a “two-faced loudmouth.” They aimed other efforts at stories about Jeb Bush, Senator Marco Rubio, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, pushed to “fully support” Donald Trump, and called Mueller “a puppet of the establishment,” according to the complaint.
The effort had an operating budget of $35 million, prosecutors say, and was allegedly funded by Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin and his companies. Prigozhin has not responded to a criminal charge he faces from Mueller for funding the scheme before the 2016 election. “The conspiracy has a strategic goal, which continues to this day, to sow division and discord in the US political system, including by creating social and political polarization, undermining faith in democratic institutions, and influencing US elections, including the upcoming 2018 midterm election,” said the criminal complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia. The online scheme directed its proponents to “effectively aggravate the conflict between minorities and the rest of the population,” prosecutors quoted one member of the effort saying. Khusyaynova also worked with Concord Management and Catering, another defendant in the Mueller probe, to take in funds. Concord is represented by lawyers in the US and is the only Russian defendant to plead not guilty so far. Khusyaynova had not been previously charged with a crime.
Federal authorities issued a warrant for her arrest on September 28. But it had been kept secret for the three weeks since then so it would not derail “other government efforts to disrupt foreign influence efforts,” a court filing released Friday said. Prosecutors did not elaborate. Prosecutors say Khusyaynova oversaw those financing, budgeting and expense payments of the corporatized propaganda effort, called “Project Lakhta.” The money came in from Concord, which received some of its funding from the Russian government to feed school children and the military, prosecutors allege. The millions of dollars allowed the Russians to buy social media analytic services, secure server space and domain names, and plant online advertisements and to stage political rallies and protests in the US. Sometimes, the Russians would use fake Americanized names like “Bertha Malone” or “Helen Christopherson” on Facebook, or handles like “@TrumpWithUSA” “@swampdrainer659” or “@UsaUsafortrump” on Twitter. One Twitter account the group ran, @wokeluisa, amassed 55,000 followers in one year, tweeting about Flint, Michigan’s drinking water crisis and encouraging voters to register in the 2018 midterm elections.
The new case marks the 27th time a Russian has been charged with a crime related to 2016 election interference or by Robert Mueller, whose mandate is to investigate those crimes. In another open case, the Justice Department indicted 12 Russian military intelligence officers for hacking the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign and spreading those documents online to influence the election. A 26th Russian national was indicted in June alongside now-convicted former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort for alleged witness tampering. Typically, criminal cases against Russian nationals hang in the court system with no progress after the initial charge, because the European nation does not extradite its citizens to the US when people are charged. The cases in effect allow the US to “name and shame” defendants, as court-watchers call the practice. The defendants are unlikely to ever appear in US court.
Overall, the revelation of these indictments shows that the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin have continued to engage in an elaborate campaign of “information warfare” to interfere with the Midterm elections next month and increase the chances that candidates favorable to the policies of US President Donald Trump will be elected. Thus far, President Trump has not reacted forcefully to the allegations, claiming that the charges against the Russian government are little more than a “partisan witch hunt” and that his administration will do nothing to implement measure meant to secure the integrity of the American electoral system during a pivotal time in the country’s history.
2. President Donald Trump Announced Intention to Withdraw from a 1987 Nuclear Arms Treaty with Russia
President Donald Trump announced his intentions to withdraw the US from the INF treaty with Russia this week.
On October 19, President Donald Trump announced that the US would be withdrawing from a 31-year-old treaty with Russia that eliminated a class of nuclear weapons after he accused Russia of violating the agreement. “We’re the ones that have stayed in the agreement, and we’ve honored the agreement, but Russia has not unfortunately honored the agreement,” Trump told reporters in Nevada, “so we’re going to terminate the agreement, we’re going to pull out.” Signed by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in their landmark 1987 summit meeting, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) banned the US and Soviet Union from having “ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers,” and required the destruction of the missiles, launchers and “associated support structures and support equipment,” according to the State Department. The two countries eliminated 2,692 missiles after the treaty’s “entry-into-force” in 1988, the State Department said in a report on the effects of the treaty.
President Trump said that he will withdraw from a landmark arms control agreement the U.S. signed with the Soviet Union, accusing Russia of violating the pact. https://t.co/PMD1e9y8cR
Despite the fact that most international observers lauded the agreement as a positive step towards denuclearization and global peace, US officials in recent years have accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of violating the agreement, as well as seeking to start a renewed nuclear arms race (despite the fact that the Russian government has reduced their own defense spending steadily since 2016). In testimony before Congress in 2017, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Paul Selva said that military officials “believe that the Russians have deployed a land-based cruise missile that violates the spirit and intent” of the treaty. The Obama administration said Russia violated the INF treaty in 2014 by testing a ground-launched cruise missile. But the Obama administration “chose not to leave the agreement because of objections from the Europeans (particularly Germany) and out of concern that it would rekindle an arms race,” The New York Times noted.
Overall, the reaction to President Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw from the INF treaty has been mixed. National Security Adviser John Bolton applauded the decision, stating that “the treaty was outmoded, being violated and being ignored by other countries. So under that view, exactly one country was constrained by the INF Treaty: the United States.” On the other hand, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov told Tass News agency that withdrawal from the treaty “would be a very dangerous step, which, I’m sure, won’t be just understood by the international community, but arouse serious condemnation of all members of the world community, who are committed to security and stability and are ready to work on strengthening the current regimes in arms control.” The end of the INF treaty could also weaken the New START Treaty, as NPR’s David Welna noted of the significant remaining arms reduction agreement with Russia, which was signed in 2010. New START includes a limit to 1,550 nuclear warheads on deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles for each country.
The Trump Adiminstration was roundly criticized this week for its inaction regarding immigration policy.
The Trump administration has not settled on a plan for what to do if a migrant caravan arrives at the Southern border, despite threats by President Donald Trump to declare a national emergency or rescind aid from the countries whose people are journeying north. Top immigration officials and close Trump advisers are still evaluating the options in closed-door meetings that have gotten increasingly heated in the past week, including one that turned into a shouting match as the caravan of about 7,000 people pushes North, according to administration officials and others with knowledge of the issue. They spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the topic. The caravan, at least 1,000 miles away, comes on the heels of a surge in apprehensions of families at the border, which has riled President Trump but has also given him a fresh talking point to rally his rabid, far-right base ahead of the midterm elections just two weeks away. In a Twitter post, President Trump stated that the Mexican government is solely to blame for the caravan heading to the US border, and falsely claimed that individuals of Middle Eastern descent also make up a sizable percentage of the participants in the caravan.
Sadly, it looks like Mexico’s Police and Military are unable to stop the Caravan heading to the Southern Border of the United States. Criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed in. I have alerted Border Patrol and Military that this is a National Emergy. Must change laws!
Despite President Donald Trump taking up the issue on the campaign trail, many individuals in the President’s inner circle are grappling with the same problems that have plagued them for months, absent any law change by Congress. Some in Trump’s administration, like Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, advocate for a diplomatic approach using relationships with Honduras, Mexico, and El Salvador and the United Nations to stop the flow of migrants arriving in the US. “We fully support the efforts of Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico as they seek to address this critical situation and ensure a safer and more secure region,” Nielsen said in statement earlier this week that noted her department was closely monitoring the possibility of gangs or other criminals that prey on those in “irregular migration.” On the other hand, others in the Trump administration such as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton have called for a more forceful approach, including declaring a state of emergency (which would give the administration broader authority over how to manage people at the border), rescinding aid, or giving parents who arrive to the US a choice between being detained months or years with their children while pursuing asylum, or releasing their children to a government shelter while a relative or guardian seeks custody.
The ongoing tensions in the Trump Administration over the issue reached their peak last Thursday when Secretary Nielsen suggested going to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights in a meeting with White House chief of staff John Kelly. National security adviser John Bolton, a longtime critic of the UN, exploded over the idea, the officials and people said. Nielsen responded that Bolton, not a frequent attendant of the immigration meetings, was no expert on the topic, they said. White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders later said in a statement: “While we are passionate about solving the issue of illegal immigration, we are not angry at one another. However, we are furious at the failure of Congressional Democrats to help us address this growing crisis.”
Overall, events such as the migrant caravan illustrate the fact that President Donald Trump’s policy regarding the immigration crisis is a failure. The President’s hardline rhetoric towards immigrants who solely want to come to the US to seek a better life has contributed to the intense partisan rhetoric regarding US immigration policy and has made politicians in both parties even less likely to come up with a lasting solution to the issue. Additionally, President Trump’s bigoted rhetoric has done little more than to play into his far-right base and has encouraged the spread of xenophobic ideas in a rapidly-changing society.
4. Landmark Affirmative Action Case Goes to Trial This Week, Potentially Putting the Doctrine at Stake
A landmark affirmative action case dealing with Harvard’s affirmative action policy went to trial this week.
A lawsuit against Harvard brought on behalf of Asian-American students who failed to gain admission went to trial on October 16 in one of the most significant race-based cases in decades, with affirmative action policies across the country at stake. The lawsuit was crafted by conservative advocates who have long fought racial admissions practices that traditionally benefited African-American and Hispanic students. Their ultimate goal is to reverse Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, a landmark 1978 Supreme Court case that upheld admissions policies that consider the race of students for campus diversity.
The plaintiffs in the case are led by Edward Blum, a conservative activist who has devised a series of claims against racial policies, including an earlier affirmative action lawsuit on behalf of Abigail Fisher against the University of Texas and several challenges to the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the critical vote in 2016 when the court last endorsed race-based admissions in the University of Texas case, was replaced by Judge Brett Kavanaugh earlier this month. Gorsuch succeeded the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who had opposed all affirmative action and criticized the University of Texas program, but died before that case was heard before the Supreme Court. The Students for Fair Admissions group Blum founded when he filed the Harvard case in November 2014 contends the university engages in unlawful “racial balancing” as it boosts the chances of admissions for African-Americans and Hispanics and lowers the chances for Asian Americans.
Harvard’s practices, said Edward Blum, are “the same kind of discrimination and stereotyping that it used to justify quotas on Jewish applicants during the 1920s and 1930s.” That assertion has deeply resonated with some Asian Americans who fear they are held to a higher standard than other applicants to prestigious universities. Yet Asian-American advocates, representing a wide swath of backgrounds and educational experiences, have come in on both sides of the case. Some who back the lawsuit are seeking to end all consideration of race in admissions, while others, siding with Harvard, argue that universities should be able to consider race for campus diversity and that some Asian Americans, particularly those with ties to Southeast Asian countries, may have had fewer educational opportunities before applying to college.
The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund filed a brief on behalf of 25 Harvard student and alumni organizations comprising blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans and whites. The Legal Defense Fund calls the lawsuit an effort “to sow racial division” and emphasizes the Supreme Court’s repeated endorsement of the 1978 case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. Those subsequent rulings, however, turned on a single vote, either that of Kennedy or Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who retired in 2006. The Trump administration, which is separately scrutinizing race-based admissions practices at Harvard through its Education and Justice departments based on a complaint from more than 60 Asian American groups, has backed Students for Fair Admissions.
Harvard, the country’s oldest institution of higher education, denies that it engages in racial balancing or limits Asian-American admissions. It defends its longstanding efforts for racial diversity as part of the educational mission and says admissions officers undertake a “whole-person evaluation” that includes academics, extracurricular activities, talents, and personal qualities, as well as socioeconomic background and race. Since the case was filed, both sides have mined similar statistical evidence and testimony but with sharply contrasting conclusions — all of which will now be presented before US District Court Judge Allison Burroughs, a 2014 Obama appointee. “Each party relies on expert reports to show the presence or absence of a negative effect of being Asian American on the likelihood of admission … and claims that there is substantial — or zero — documentary and testimonial evidence of discriminatory intent,” Burroughs said in an order last month rejecting requests from both sides to rule for each, respectively, before trial.
Elections to the US Senate will be held November 6, 2018, with 33 of the 100 seats in the Senate being contested in regular elections and two seats being contested in special elections. The winners will serve six-year terms from January 3, 2019, to January 3, 2025. Currently, Democrats have 26 seats up for election, including the seats of two independents who caucus with them. Republicans have only nine seats up for election. Republicans can only afford to have a net loss of one Senate seat and still have a working majority of 50 Senators and Republican Vice President Mike Pence, who is able to cast a tie-breaking vote in accordance with Article One of the US Constitution. Three of the Republican seats are open as a result of retirements in Tennessee, Utah, and Arizona. Democrats are defending ten seats in states won by Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, while Republicans are only defending one seat in a state won by Hillary Clinton in 2016. According to FiveThirtyEight, Democrats face the most unfavorable Senate map in 2018 that any party has ever faced in any election (even more so than in the 1980 Senate elections). The current polling shows many competitive races that the Republicans have a slight edge in. As such, it is entirely possible that the Republicans will defy the usual midterm election trend and have a net gain of several Senate seats.
Here is a complete list of the Senate seats up in 2018 and an analysis of the likely results of each race:
Congresswomen Marth McSally and Krysten Sinema are locked in a close Senate race in Arizona
Arizona:
One-term Republican Jeff Flake, a Libertarian-aligned Republican and major critic of President Donald Trump, was narrowly elected with ~49% of the vote in 2012. Flake has declared he will retire at the end of his only Senate term due to his dissatisfaction with the direction that the Republican party is going in and the fact that many Republican senators have thus far lacked the backbone to stand up to the destructive aspects of President Trump’s agenda. On the Republican side, Congresswoman Martha McSally won the Republican nomination in a close three-way primary on August 28, 2018, against Joe Arpaio and Kelli Ward (two candidates aligned with both President Donald Trump and the Tea Party movement). The Democrats have settled on Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema, who easily secured the Democratic nomination. Even though previously polling showed Congresswoman Sinema in the lead with between 47 and 51% of the vote, Congresswoman McSally has picked up some momentum over the past week and is now leading by roughly 3-6%. As such, the Arizona Senate race is now considered to be leaning towards the Republican party and will likely remain close until the very end.
Longtime Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein is widely-expected to win re-election.
California:
Four-term Democrat Dianne Feinstein, first elected in a 1992 Special election and re-elected by large margins in 1994, 2000, 2006, and 2012, is running for a fifth (and likely final) term in the Senate. Feinstein secured top spot in Calfornia’s June 5 Jungle Primary and will face off against fellow Democrat and California State Senate President Kevin de León, who is running as a somewhat conservative Democrat. Based on the fact that Calfornia is one of the most Democratic states in the country and has not elected a Republican to the Senate since 1988, it is likely that Dian Feinstein will win re-election with at least 60% of the vote.
Freshmen Senator Chris Murphy is running for a second term.
Connecticut:
One-term Democrat Chris Murphy, an impassioned advocate for expanded gun control measures and strong supporter of Robert Mueller’s investigations into the crimes committed by the Trump campaign during the 2016 campaign, is running for his second term. Murphy was first elected to the Senate with ~55% of the vote in 2012, matching President Barack Obama’s winning margin in Connecticut in that year’s Presidential election. On the Republican side, businessman Matthew Corey won his parties nomination pretty much unopposed. Based on current polling, Chris Murphy will likely win re-election with between 54-59% of the vote.
Three-term incumbent Democrat Tom Carper is expected to win re-election by a landslide margin.
Delaware:
Three-term Democrat Tom Carper won re-election with 66% of the vote in 2012. He announced he was running for re-election during an interview on MSNBC on July 24, 2017. He defeated Dover community activist Kerri Evelyn Harris for the Democratic nomination. Sussex County Councilman Robert Arlett won the Republican nomination. Polling shows Tom Carper ahead with roughly 60% of the vote, making Delaware one of the safest Democratic Senate seats this election cycle.
Incumbent Democrat Bill Nelson and his Republican challenger, popular Florida governor Rick Scott, are facing off against each other in a tight Senate race.
Florida:
Three-term Democrat Bill Nelson was re-elected with 55% of the vote in 2012. He is seeking re-election to a fourth term in office. On the Republican side, Florida Governor Rick Scott won the Republican nomination. First elected in 2010 and re-elected in 2014, Scott’s term as Governor of Florida is set to end by January 2019, due to term limits. Edward Janowski is running as an independent candidate in the election as well. Current polling shows Rick Scott ahead by anywhere between 3-6% and as having a much higher level of name recognition than Bill Nelson. As such, Florida is likely one of the Senate seats that the Republican party will pick up this election cycle.
One-term Democrat Mazie Hirono is running for a second term.
Hawaii:
One-term Democrat Mazie Hirono was elected with 63% of the vote in 2012 and is running for re-election. Ron Curtis was selected by the Hawaii Republican party as the nominee for the Senate. Mazie Hirono is well ahead in the polls and looks likely to win re-election in a state that has not elected a Republican to the Senate since 1970.
One-term Democrat Joe Donnelly is running for a second term.
Indiana:
One-term Democrat Joe Donnelly was elected with ~50% of the vote in 2012 and is running for re-election. State Representative Mike Braun won the May 8 Republican primary, defeating Congressman Luke Messer and Todd Riorka by a close margin. Most polling shows a close race but is it is likely that President Donald Trump’s strong approval rating in Indiana, as well as Joe Donnelly’s opposition to Judge Brett Kavanaugh and liberal positions on social issues in a generally conservative state, will be enough to carry Mike Braun over the top on election day.
Independent Senator Angus King is running for a second term.
Maine:
One-term Independent Senator Angus King was elected in a three-way race with ~53% of the vote in 2012 and is running for re-election. King has caucused with the Democratic Party since taking office in 2013, but he has left open the possibility of caucusing with the Republican Party in the future. State Senator Eric Brakey ran unopposed for the Republican nomination, whereas Public school teacher and founder of UClass Zak Ringelstein ran unopposed for the Democratic nomination. The election will be conducted with ranked choice voting, as opposed to “First-past-the-post voting”, after Maine voters passed a citizen referendum approving the change in 2016 and a June 2018 referendum sustaining the change. Despite the fact that President Donald Trump is relatively popular in Maine, Angus King will likely win re-election with approximately 40-45% of the vote due to his strong popularity with independent voters and some Democrats.
Moderate Democratic incumbent Ben Carin is running for a third term to the Senate.
Maryland:
Two-term Democrat Ben Cardin was re-elected with 56% of the vote in 2012. He won the Democratic primary unopposed. Tony Campbell won the Republican nomination in a four-way race. Other candidates include Libertarian Arvin Vohra and Independent Neal Simon. Based on current polling, Ben Carin should easily win re-election with over 60% of the vote due to the declining popularity of President Donald Trump in Maryland and his own popularity and reputation as a moderate Democrat.
Elizabeth Warren is likely to win a second Senate term by a strong margin against her Republican opponent.
Massachusetts:
One-term Democrat Elizabeth Warren was elected with 54% of the vote in 2012 and is running for a second term. State Representative Geoff Diehl won the Republican nomination in a three-way race. Current polling shows Elizabeth Warren well ahead and winning anywhere between 65-75% of the vote, making Massachusetts a Senate seat that is safe for the Democrats.
Democrat Debbie Stabenow is favored to win a fourth Senate term.
Michigan:
Three-term Democrat Debbie Stabenow was re-elected with 59% of the vote in 2012. She was renominated without Democratic opposition. On the Republican side, businessman John James was nominated. Independent candidate Marcia Squier is also running. Even though President Donald Trump narrowly won Michigan in the 2016 election and still remains somewhat popular in the state, John James thus far has run a lackluster campaign and will likely lose by a high single-low or double-digit margin.
Two-term Democrat Amy Klobuchar is running for a third Senate term.
Minnesota:
Two-term Democrat Amy Klobuchar was re-elected with 65% of the vote in 2012. She is running for a third term. State Representative Jim Newberger was nominated by the Republican party. Even though Minnesota is trending towards the Republican party at the national level (and will likely vote for President Donald Trump for re-election in 2020), Amy Klobuchar is a popular incumbent and will likely win by a 15-20% margin.
Appointed Democrat Tina Smith is running in a special election for former Senator Al Franken’s seat.
Minnesota (Special) Election:
Two-term Democrat Al Franken announced that he would resign in December 2017, following allegations of sexual harassment. Mark Dayton, Governor of Minnesota, appointed Lt. Gov. Tina Smith on January 2, 2018, as an interim Senator until the November 2018 election. She defeated primary challenger Richard Painter in the Democratic primary held on August 14. Incumbent Tina Smith is running against Republican Karin Housley in the general election for a full term ending January 3, 2021. Much like with the case of Klobuchar, Tina Smith is a popular incumbent and will win by a 10-15% margin.
Two-term Republican Roger Wicker is running for a third term to the US Senate
Mississippi:
One-term Republican Roger Wicker won re-election with 57% of the vote in 2012. He was appointed in 2007 and won a special election in 2008 to serve the remainder of former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott’s term. He is running for re-election to a third term. David Baria won the Democratic nomination in a run-off on June 26. Roger Wicker is currently ahead in the polls and will likely be re-elected with at least 60% of the vote.
Appointed Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith is running in a special election.
Mississippi (Special) Election:
Seven-term Republican Thad Cochran, who won re-election with ~60% of the vote in 2014, announced that he would resign April 1, 2018, due to health reasons. Phil Bryant, Governor of Mississippi, announced on March 21, 2018, that he would appoint Mississippi Agriculture Commissioner Cindy Hyde-Smith to fill the vacancy. She will be running in the special election. Former US Secretary of Agriculture and Congressman Mike Espy is the Democratic nominee. Tea Party Republican Chris McDaniel is also running. Based on current polling, the Mississippi Senate race will likely go to a run-off due to the fact that no candidate is polling with 50% or more of the vote. Based on the fact that run-off elections in the South usually result in low turnout amongst Democratic voters, it is likely that Cindy Hyde-Smith will prevail with ~52-53% of the vote to serve the remainder of the Senate term.
Two-term Democrat Claire McCaskill is one of the more vulnerable Senate Democrats this election cycle.
Missouri:
Two-term Democrat Claire McCaskill was re-elected with ~55% of the vote in 2012. She was renominated for a third term after defeating several weak challengers. Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley won the Republican nomination, defeating Libertarian Republican Austin Peterson and Alt-Right candidate Courtland Stykes. Current polling shows a relatively tight race, with both McCaskill and Hawley leading at various point in the race. Based on Missouri’s strong Republican lean (it voted for President Donald Trump by over 20% in 2016), as well as the fact that Claire McCaskill holds social views far out of the mainstream of most Missouri voters, it is likely that Josh Hawley will defeat her by a 3-6% margin.
Democrat Jon Tester is running for re-election in a state that is becoming increasingly unfriendly to the Democratic party.
Montana:
Two-term Democrat Jon Tester was re-elected with 49% of the vote in 2012. He won the Democratic nomination in the June 5 primary with no opposition. State Auditor Matthew Rosendale won the Republican nomination in the June 5 primary. State Senator Albert Olszewski, former judge Russell Fagg, and Troy Downing also ran for the Republican nomination. Polling shows a very tight race between Tester and Rosendale, with both candidates statistically tied. The Montana Senate race will likely come down to the wire on election day and as such, there are no clear indications as of yet who will merge victorious.
Republican Deb Fischer is likely to win re-election in a state that hasn’t voted for a Democratic Senator since 2006.
Nebraska:
One-term Republican Deb Fischer was elected with 58% of the vote in 2012. She ran for and won the Republican nomination in the May 15 primary. Lincoln Councilwoman Jane Raybould ran for and won the Democratic nomination in the May 15 primary. Other Democrats who ran include Frank Svoboda, Chris Janicek, and Larry Marvin, who was a candidate in 2008, 2012, and 2014. Based on Nebraska’s strong Republican lean (it has not voted for a Democratic Presidential nominee since 1964), Deb Fischer will easily win re-election with over 65% of the vote.
Republican Dean Heller faces an uphill battle against Democrat Jackey Rosen.
Nevada:
Incumbent Republican Dean Heller is the Republican nominee. He was appointed to the seat in 2011 and then elected with 46% of the vote in 2012. Heller considered running for governor but chose to seek re-election. Nevada is the only state in the midterm elections that has an incumbent Republican Senator in a state that Hillary Clinton won in 2016. Representative Jacky Rosen is the Democratic nominee. Based on the fact that Dean Heller won his first term by a very narrow margin in a state that has consistently trended Democratic since 2008, he will likely lose re-election by anywhere between 1-5%
Democrat Bob Menendez faces an unexpectedly strong challenge by Republican Bob Hugin in New Jersey.
New Jersey:
Republican Bob Hugin was nominated to face two-term Democrat Bob Menendez, who was re-elected with 59% of the vote in 2012. Menendez was originally appointed to the seat in January 2006 by then-New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine. He is running for a third term. New Jersey represents one of several pick-up opportunities for the Republicans in 2018, as Bob Menendez is not a particularly strong candidate and is still perceived as a corrupt politician despite the fact that he was cleared of all criminal charges in a widely-publicized trial last year. Additionally, President Donald Trump remains somewhat popular in parts of New Jersey such as Monmouth, Ocean, Salem, and Cape May counties, all areas that have high populations and high voter turnout in midterm elections. Current polling shows Hugin leading anywhere by 1-5%. As such, New Jersey is likely to flip Republican this election cycle
Despite running a strong campaign,2012 and 2016 Libertarian Presidential nominee Gary Johnson is unlikely to defeat popular Democratic incumbent Martin Heinrich.
New Mexico:
One-term Democrat Martin Heinrich was elected with 51% of the vote in 2012. He is running for re-election. Mick Rich won the Republican nomination unopposed. Aubrey Dunn Jr., New Mexico Commissioner of Public Lands and otherwise the first Libertarian to ever hold statewide elected office in history, announced his run for the seat but stepped aside in August to allow former Governor of New Mexico, Gary Johnson’s candidacy. Current polling shows Martin Heinrich ahead with ~55% of the vote in this heavily Democratic state, and Libertarian Gary Johnson in second place. Based on his strong polling numbers, Martin Heinrich will likely win re-election without too much difficulty.
Democratic incumbent and possible 2020 Presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand is likely to win re-election with at least 70% of the vote.
New York:
Up for re-election is One-term Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand, who was elected with 72% of the vote in 2012. She had previously been appointed to the seat by then-New York Governor David Patterson in 2009 to fill the seat held by Hillary Clinton prior to her appointment as Secretary of State in the Obama Administration and won a special election for the remainder of the term in 2010. Private equity executive Chele Chiavacci Farley has been nominated for the Senate by both the Republican and Conservative Parties, which often runs fusion candidates in New York. Kirsten Gillibrand is currently leading Chele Chiavacci Farely by 32% in the most recent poll of the race and is likely to cruise to re-election by an overwhelming margin
Despite leading in the polls earlier this year, Democrat Heidi Heitkamp is now expected to lose re-election to the Senate.
North Dakota:
One-term Democrat Heidi Heitkamp was elected with 50% of the vote in 2012. She won the Democratic nomination unopposed. Congressman Kevin Cramer won the Republican nomination in the June 12 primary, defeating several minor candidates. Even though Heidi Heitkamp was previously thought to have a strong chance to be elected to a second term due to the fact that North Dakota has a recent history of voting for Democratic candidates at the Congressional level, Congressman Cramer has closed the gap in recent weeks and is leading by anywhere between 6-12% The main factors explaining Congressman Cramer’s newfound lead is the fact that Heitkamp was vocal in her opposition to Judge Brett Kavanaugh, as well as the fact that President Donald Trump remains extremely popular in North Dakota. Based on these factors, North Dakota is widely expected to be a Republican gain.
Populist Democrat Sherrod Brown is likely to defy the trends of his state and win re-election by a comfortable margin.
Ohio:
Two-term Democrat Sherrod Brown was re-elected with 51% of the vote in 2012. He is running and was unopposed in the Democratic primary. Congressman Jim Renacci ran for and won the Republican nomination in the May 8 primary. Other Republicans who ran include investment banker Michael Gibbons, businesswoman Melissa Ackison, Dan Kiley, and Don Elijah Eckhart. Even though Ohio is rapidly trending towards the Republican party, as well as the fact that President Donald Trump has a relatively high (54%) approval rating in the state overall, Congressman Renacci has consistently been behind in the polls by anywhere from 4-18% depending on the pollster. As such, Senator Brown will likely defy the trends of his state and win re-election.
Democrat Bob Casey is running for a third Senate term.
Pennsylvania:
Two-term Democrat Bob Casey Jr. was re-elected with 54% of the vote in 2012. He is running and won the Democratic primary unopposed. Congressman Lou Barletta ran for and won the Republican nomination in the May 15 primary. Even though Pennsylvania is trending towards the Republican party due to an aging population and declining population in cities such as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, Bob Casey is likely to win re-election by a 10% margin. The main reasons why Bob Casey is likely to win a third Senate term is because Congressman Barletta has thus far run a lackluster campaign, as well as the fact that Bob Casey is a relatively moderate Democrat regarding social issues and has solely focused his campaign on economic issues pertinent to Pennsylvania voters.
Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse is running for a third term and faces little legitimate opposition from the Republicans.
Rhode Island:
Two-term Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse was re-elected with 64% of the vote in 2012. He is running for a third term. Former Rhode Island Supreme Court Associate Justice Robert Flanders is the Republican nominee. Even though President Donald Trump performed relatively decent for a Republican in Rhode Island, as well as the fact that the Republicans are likely to win the Rhode Island gubernatorial election this year, Sheldon Whitehouse has led by commanding margins in all pre-election polls and looks likely to win a third Senate term.
Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn has narrowed the gap considerably against former Tennessee governor Phil Bredesen in recent weeks and looks likely to hold the Tennessee Senate seat for the Republicans.
Tennessee:
Two-term Republican Bob Corker was re-elected with 65% of the vote in 2012. announced his intentions to run for re-election as early as 2016 but changed his mind and announced his intent to retire in September of 2017. Generally a “moderate Republican” in terms of his political views, Senator Corker stated that the main reason he decided to retire is due to his opposition to many of the policies of President Donald Trump and the fact that the Republican party is shifting away from its past values of traditional conservatism to a platform aligned with the far-right. Ultra-conservative Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn easily won the Republican nomination, whereas former governor (2003-2011), whereas former Tennessee governor (2003-11) Phil Bredesen won the Democratic nomination.
Even though polls earlier in the year have shown former Governor Bredesen leading by as much as 10%, the race has considerably tightened in recent weeks, with Congresswoman Blackburn now holding a 14% lead in the polls. Several factors have resulted in the Tennessee Senate race becoming less competitive. One such factor is the fact that Tennessee has rapidly trended towards the Republican party since 2010 due to the defeat or retirement of many of the more conservative Democrats who dominated in the Applacian and Ozarks regions of the country, the increasingly socially liberal positions of the Democratic party as a whole, and changes in the demographics of the state. Additionally, President Donald Trump won Tennessee by a resounding margin in 2016 (and is likely to improve on his already large victory margin when he runs for re-election in 2020) and has campaigned heavily for Congresswoman Blackburn in recent weeks. As such, it is likely that the Republicans will hold the Tennessee Senate seat by anywhere from a 10-15% margin.
Congressman Beto O’Rourke has a good chance to defeat Republican Ted Cruz due to his positive, issue-focused campaign, as well as the fact that Texas is trending towards the Democratic party.
Texas:
One-term Republican Ted Cruz was elected with ~55% of the vote in 2012, slightly underperforming Republican nominee Mitt Romney in Texas. Ted Cruz overwhelmingly won the Republican primary on March 6, 2018, defeating TV producer Bruce Jacobson, Houston energy attorney Stefano de Stefano, former mayor of La Marque Geraldine Sam, Mary Miller, and Thomas Dillingham. On the Democratic side, Congressman Beto O’Rourke won the Democratic nomination on March 6, 2018, by a large margin.
Texas represents a surprisingly strong pick-up opportunity for the Democratic party. The main reason why the Texas Senate race is competitive is that Texas is rapidly trending towards the Democratic party. Historically, Texas was one of the first Southern states to trend towards the Republicans during the 1950s and as recently as 2004, voted Republican by an almost 25% margin. In recent years, however, Texas has swung towards the Democratic party, with Hillary Clinton only losing by a 7-8% margin in 2016. Additionally, Ted Cruz is one of the most unpopular Senators currently in office due to his aggressive, partisan tactics, as well as a volatile personality. On the other hand, Congressman O’Rourke has run a positive, issue-focused campaign and represents a fresh face for a rapidly changing electorate in a traditionally conservative state. As such, Congressman O’Rourke is likely to narrowly win the Texas Senate race this year.
2012 Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney is running for Senate in Utah and is likely to win by a large margin.
Utah:
Seven-term Republican Orrin Hatch was re-elected with 65% of the vote in 2012. Hatch is the President pro tempore of the United States Senate, as well as the second-most-senior Senator. Before the 2012 election, Hatch said that he would retire at the end of his seventh term if he was re-elected. Hatch initially announced his re-election campaign on March 9, 2017, but later announced his plans to retire on January 2, 2018. Former 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is running for the seat. Professor James Singer was running for the Democratic nomination, but he dropped out and endorsed Salt Lake County Councilwoman Jenny Wilson, who made her Senate bid official on July 17, 2017. Even though the Democratic party felt that the Utah Senate race had the potential to become competitive due to President Donald Trump’s unpopularity in the state, Mitt Romney has thus far run a very strong campaign and attempted to frame himself as a “Never Trump” Republican who is unafraid of breaking away from the President on certain issues. As such, the Utah Senate race should end up in a strong Republican victory.
2016 Democratic primary candidate Bernie Sanders is expected to win a third term with at least 75% of the vote.
Vermont:
Two-term Independent Senator Bernie Sanders was re-elected with 71% of the vote in 2012. Sanders, one of two independent members of Congress, has caucused with the Democratic Party since taking office in 2007. In November 2015, Sanders announced his plans to run as a Democrat, rather than an Independent, in all future elections. He won the nomination easily. The Vermont Republican party nominated Lawrence Zupan, an obscure candidate that does not even have a legitimate campaign website. Based on his strong popularity and extremely weak opponent, Bernie Sanders is expected by be re-elected with anywhere between 75-80% of the vote.
2016 Democratic Vice-Presidential nominee Tim Kaine is heavily favored to win a second term.
Virginia:
One-term Democratic Senator and Hillary Clinton’s running-mate in 2016 Tim Kaine was elected with 53% of the vote in 2012. He was re-nominated unopposed. Prince William County Supervisor and prominent “Alt-Right” political leader Corey Stewart is the Republican nominee. Matt Waters is the Libertarian nominee. Based on the fact that Virginia is a state that has been trending towards the Democratic party at a high rate since at least 2004, as well as the fact that President Donald Trump is highly unpopular in the Virginia overall (his disapproval rating in the state is a whopping 73%), Tim Kaine is likely to win re-election with anywhere between 55-60% of the vote.
Three-term Democrat Maria Cantwell is expected to win a fourth term in a heavily Democratic state.
Washington:
Three-term Democrat Maria Cantwell was re-elected with 61% of the vote in 2012. She is running for a fourth term. Much like California, Washington holds non-partisan blanket primaries, in which the top two finishers advance to the general election regardless of party. Cantwell and former state Republican Party chair Susan Hutchison are facing each other in November. Based on current polling, Maria Cantwell is widely expected to cruise to re-election by at least 16%.
Conservative Democrat (and Trump supporter) Joe Manchin is expected to narrowly win a second full Senate term against relatively weak opposition.
West Virginia:
One-term conservative Democrat Joe Manchin was elected with 61% of the vote in 2012. He originally won the seat in a 2010 special election. Manchin is running for re-election and won the May 8 Democratic primary. Environmental activist Paula Jean Swearengin also ran for the Democratic nomination. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey received the Republican nomination in the May 8 primary. Congressman Evan Jenkins, coal miner Bo Copley, Jack Newbrough, Don Blankenship, and Tom Willis ran for the Republican nomination. Even though West Virginia was President Donald Trump’s second-best state in the 2016 Presidential Election and is overwhelming Republican in terms of voting, Patrick Morrisey has been struggling in the polls, with Senator Manchin leading him by anywhere from 4-8%. As such, West Virginia is likely a lost cause of the Republicans this election cycle. Despite the fact that Joe Manchin is favored to win re-election, there is a possibility that he will end us switching over to the Republican party due to his support for much of President Donald Trump’s agenda, as well as differences with the Democratic party leadership on issues such as abortion, LGBT rights, gun control, and environmental policy.
Democrat Tammy Baldwin is favored to win a second term to the US Senate.
Wisconsin:
One-term Democrat Tammy Baldwin was elected with 51% of the vote in 2012. She is running for a second term. State Senator Leah Vukmir and businessman and member of Wisconsin Board of Veterans Affairs Kevin Nicholson ran for the Republican nomination, with Vukmir proceeding to win. Even though President Donald Trump won Wisconsin in 2016 and is poised to do so again in 2020, Leah Vukmir has thus far run an extremely poor campaign. As such, Senator Baldwin will likely win re-election by at least 20%.
Republican John Barrasso is expected to easily win a second Senate term in one of the countries most Republican states.
Wyoming:
One-term Republican John Barrasso was elected with 76% of the vote in 2012. Barrasso was appointed to the seat in 2007 and won a special election in 2008. He is running for a second full term. 59-year-old Gary Trauner, a Jackson Hole businessman and Congressional candidate in 2006 and 2008, is the Democratic nominee. Considering that Wyoming was President Donald Trump’s best state in 2016, as well as the fact that the last time a Democrat won a statewide election in Wyoming was in 2006, Senator Barrasso will likely win re-election with at least 70% of the vote.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week: 1. Brett Kavanaugh Confirmed to the Supreme Court By a Close Senate Vote
Brett Kavanaugh was narrowly confirmed to the Supreme Court by the Senate this week.
The Senate voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court on October 6, ushering in a generational conservative majority and delivering a huge victory to President Donald Trump after a vicious confirmation battle inflamed by allegations of sexual assault against the nominee. As shrieks of “shame, shame, shame” echoed from the public galleries, divided and angry senators voted 50-48 to endorse a lifetime seat on the court for Kavanaugh. The protests underscored the vital importance of an appointment that will have sweeping consequences for some of the nation’s most contested disputes over abortion, LGBT rights, the scope of presidential power and the role of religion in society. The bitter fight over Kavanaugh now moves into the epicenter of the campaign for the midterm elections in November. Republicans are convinced it will motivate their sleepy base and help them have a net gain of three or four Senate seats. Democrats believe a backlash against the GOP from females voters could help deliver the House of Representatives. And the nature of the fight over Kavanaugh will trigger recriminations inside the Senate and political reverberations outside for years to come. In the end, Republicans were able to use their stranglehold on Capitol Hill and the White House to muscle through the confirmation in a power play that reflected the momentous importance of Trump’s 2016 election victory over Hillary Clinton.
President Donald Trump took a victory lap before an enthusiastic crowd at a rally in Topeka, Kansas, on what he hailed as a “historic night.”
“I stand before you today on the heels of a tremendous victory for our nation, our people and our beloved Constitution,”
He dismissed the allegations against Kavanaugh by accusing Democrats of waging a “shameless campaign of political and personal destruction.” Democrats furiously accused the GOP of short-circuiting efforts to examine Ford’s allegations and of rushing the nomination through while ignoring the changed political dynamics surrounding complaints of misconduct against powerful men ushered in by the #MeToo movement. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called the nomination “one of the saddest moments in the history of the Senate,” and said, “this chapter will be a flashing red warning light of what to avoid.” Republicans “conducted one of the least transparent, least fair, most biased processes in Senate history, slanting the table from the very beginning to produce their desired result,” he added. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) described Kavanaugh as a “superstar.” McConnell, who stalled Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the court in his final year in office and for whom the new conservative majority represents a defining achievement, predicted that Democratic tactics during confirmation battle would electrify Republican voters in November. “They managed to deliver the only thing we had not been able to figure out how to do, which is to get our folks fired up,” McConnell said. “The other side is obviously fired up, they have been all year.”
The path to Kavanaugh’s confirmation cleared on Friday when two wavering Republicans, Susan Collins (R-ME) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ), said they would vote for Kavanaugh after concluding that Ford’s allegations, voiced by her in an emotional hearing last week, could not be corroborated. Their move meant that McConnell could forge the narrowest of majorities to clear Kavanaugh, despite the fact that another Republican, Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), opposed him. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), a Democrat facing a tough re-election fight in West Virginia, a state where the President rolled to victory in 2016, also supported Kavanaugh. Murkowski ultimately withdrew herself from the final tally as a gesture of goodwill toward her Republican colleague, Steve Daines (R-MT), who supports Kavanaugh but was in Montana to walk his daughter down the aisle at her wedding. But the move did not affect the ultimate result of the vote.
Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation leaves the Senate traumatized with Republicans and Democrats as estranged as at any time in recent memory, reflecting the cavernous divides in the country itself during a presidency that has ignited rare political passions. It represents the culmination of a decades-long project by the conservative movement to construct a like-minded majority on the Supreme Court which has been a defining and unifying cause in successive congressional and presidential campaigns. The new profile of the court immediately makes Trump a consequential president, for all of the chaos and discord that rages around his White House, and means his legacy will include an achievement that eluded previous Republican presidents — all of whom had more authentic conservative credentials. The ferocious nature of the confirmation battle could also have an impact on the Court itself, as Kavanaugh’s vehement and politicized defense of his own behavior raised questions about his temperament and whether he could genuinely be an honest broker and implementer of the law in the most sensitive cases.
2. New York State Begins Investigation Into President Donald Trump’s Alleged Tax Evasion
New York state began investigations into the alleged financial crimes committed by President Trump prior to his assuming office.
New York City officials said on October 4 that they had joined state regulators in examining whether President Donald Trump and his family underpaid taxes on his father’s real estate empire over several decades. The announcement came in response to an investigation published this week in The New York Times that showed how President Trump had participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, that significantly increased the fortune he received from his parents. “We are now just starting to pore through the information,” said Dean Fuleihan, the city’s first deputy mayor. Some of Trumps’ tax evasion maneuvers uncovered by the New York Times warranted investigation as potential crimes, former prosecutors said, but the statute of limitations on any such charges has long since expired. The inquiries will also explore whether civil penalties and bills for back taxes are warranted. City officials said interest and penalties of up to 25 percent could be added to any unpaid taxes.
One type of tax that the city will examine is the real estate transfer tax. Officials said the extremely low valuations the Trump family placed on buildings that passed from Fred C. Trump to his children through trusts could have resulted in underpaid transfer taxes. The Times reported that through several aggressive and potentially illegal maneuvers, the Trumps claimed that 25 apartment complexes transferred to Donald Trump and his siblings from their father were worth just $41 million. Donald Trump sold those buildings within a decade for more than 16 times that amount. Fuleihan said the city would also explore whether another tax avoidance maneuver by Trump and his siblings resulted in Fred Trump’s empire underpaying property taxes. That maneuver involved a company, created by the Trump family in 1992, called All County Building Supply & Maintenance. All County existed largely on paper, The Times found. Its work, such as it was, consisted of adding 20 percent or more to the cost of goods and services bought by Fred Trump. The padded amount was split between Donald Trump and his siblings, essentially a gift from their father that avoided the 55 percent gift tax at the time.
Fuleihan further stated that the scheme as described by the New York Times would have artificially driven down the profitability of Fred Trump’s buildings. And because city property taxes on rental buildings are based in part on profits reported by owners, All-County would have had the effect of lowering the property tax burden. Fuleihan said the city and state agencies are cooperating on the effort. The State Department of Taxation and Finance announced on Wednesday that it was “pursuing all appropriate avenues of investigation.” In addition to the tax scheme investigations into President Donald Trump, another state agency is looking into whether tenants in Fred Trump’s rent-regulated apartments saw their rents unduly increased because the Trumps used the padded All County invoices to apply for rent increases, as the New York Times found. State regulations allow owners of rent-regulated buildings to ask for increases to recover the “actual and verified cost” of some improvements to buildings, said Freeman Klopott, a spokesman for the State Division of Housing and Community Renewal.
President Donald Trump criticized the investigation into his and his family’s use of dubious tax schemes over the years and the origins of his wealth, calling the article an “old, boring and often told hit piece.” in a Twitter post. Referring to the New York Times as the “Failing New York Times,” President Trump did not offer an outright denial of the facts in the report, such as the fact that the money he made during his decades in real estate came from tax schemes of dubious legality, the existence of records of deception in documenting the family’s financial assets, and that the beginning of the president’s so-called self-made fortune dates back to his toddler years when, by the time he was 3 years old, Mr. Trump earned $200,000 a year in today’s dollars from his father. A growing number of Democrats in Congress, meanwhile, cited the article in renewing their longstanding demands for President Trump to release his income tax returns, something he has steadfastly declined to do, breaking with four decades of practice by previous presidents. Ron Wyden (D-OR), asked the IRS on Wednesday to open an investigation into The Times’s findings. “It is imperative that I.R.S. fully investigate these allegations and prosecute any violations to the fullest extent of the law,” Wyden said in a statement. A spokesman for the IRS said the agency would not comment on whether it was taking any action in response to the New York Times’s investigation.
The Failing New York Times did something I have never seen done before. They used the concept of “time value of money” in doing a very old, boring and often told hit piece on me. Added up, this means that 97% of their stories on me are bad. Never recovered from bad election call!
3. US Congress Passes Landmark Bill to Combat the Growing Opioid Crisis
In a rare bipartisan gesture, the US Senate passed a comprehensive opioid treatment bill this week
In a rare gesture of bipartisanship, the Senate passed the final version of a sweeping opioids package on October 3 and will send it to President Donald Trump for signature just in time for lawmakers to campaign on the issue before the November midterm elections. The vote was 98 to 1, with only Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) opposing it. The bill unites dozens of smaller proposals sponsored by hundreds of lawmakers, many of whom face tough reelection fights. It creates, expands and reauthorizes programs and policies across almost every federal agency, aiming to address different aspects of the opioid epidemic, including prevention, treatment, and recovery. The opioid abuse treatment bill marks a moment of bipartisan accomplishment at an especially rancorous time on Capitol Hill as senators debate Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. “We are in the midst of contentious disagreement about the Supreme Court. But at the same time, we have an urgent, bipartisan consensus, a virtually unanimous agreement, to deal with the most urgent public health epidemic facing our country today in virtually every community,” said Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate health committee and lead sponsor of the bill.
Senator Rob Portman (R-OH), who sounded the alarm on opioid addiction four years ago, is credited with the portion of the law that could have the greatest effect. It will require the US Postal Service to screen packages for fentanyl shipped from overseas, mainly China. Synthetic opioids that are difficult to detect are increasingly being found in pills and heroin and are responsible for an increase in overdose deaths. “I will say getting that passed, to me, is just common sense. I think it’s overdue. I’m disappointed it took us this long,” Portman said in a floor speech Tuesday. “How many people had to die before Congress stood up and did the right thing concerning telling our own post office you have to provide better screening?” The bill’s passage comes a year after President Donald Trump declared the opioid crisis a national emergency. The Senate vote is the last step before he signs the measure into law. The House passed it 393 to 8 last week.
Public-health advocates laud the bill’s increased attention to treatment, which they say is the key component to overcoming addiction. The legislation would create a grant program for comprehensive recovery centers that include housing and job training, as well as mental and physical health care. It would increase access to medication-assisted treatment that helps people with substance abuse disorders safely wean themselves. Another significant aspect of the bill is the change to a decades-old arcane rule that prohibited Medicaid from covering patients with substance abuse disorders who were receiving treatment in a mental health facility with more than 16 beds. The bill lifts that rule to allow for 30 days of residential treatment coverage. The opioid crisis has hit communities in all states. Some believe that lawmakers focused on it in part because they wanted to claim an election-year win. Although it contains provisions that help address the problem, it does not dedicate the level of funding and long-term commitment needed to fight a crisis of this magnitude, many experts say.
“This legislation edges us closer to treating addiction as the devastating disease it is, but it neglects to provide the long-term investment we’ve seen in responses to other major public health crises,” said Lindsey Vuolo, Associate Director of Health Law and Policy at Center on Addiction. “We won’t be able to make meaningful progress against the tide of addiction unless we make significant changes to incorporate addiction treatment into the existing health care system.” Congress has appropriated $8 billion this year for opioid-related programs, but there is no guarantee of funding for subsequent years. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Congressman Elijah E. Cummings (D-MD) have proposed committing $100 billion over ten years to fighting the opioid crisis. Their proposal is modeled after Congress’s robust response to HIV/AIDS during the latter part of the Reagan Administration. “I hope Congress doesn’t think they can put this behind them because they passed these bills,” said Patrick Kennedy, a former Democratic congressman of Rhode Island and a mental health advocate. “It takes an urgency as we had during HIV-AIDS. That will call to mind what it takes to address a crisis, and it takes political will.”
4. International Court of Justice Orders The US To Ease Iran Sanctions
In a widely expected move, the ICJ ruled that the new sanctions implemented on Iran by the US are illegal and amount to “economic warfare.”
In a significant victory for the Iranian government and a major setback for the Trump Administration, The International Court of Justice (ICJ) this week has ordered the US to ease sanctions it re-imposed on Iran after abandoning the Iranian Nuclear Agreement in May. In his arguments before the ICJ, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif said the sanctions violated the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the US, which grants the ICJ jurisdiction over disputes. On the other hand, US lawyers argued that the ICJ should not have the authority and that Iran’s assertions fell outside the bounds of the treaty. The ICJ Judges ruled that the US had to remove “any impediments” to the export of humanitarian goods, including food, medicine, and aviation safety equipment. It also said the reasons cited by President Donald Trump for re-imposing the sanctions were unfounded because the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had repeatedly confirmed that Iran was complying with the terms of the 2015 nuclear accord signed by Tehran and six world powers. The ICJ has ruled previously that the 1955 treaty is valid even though it was signed before the 1979 Revolution in Iran, which saw the US-backed shah overthrown and heralded four decades of hostility between the two countries.
In its final ruling, the 15-judge panel rejected Iran’s call for them to order the reinstated US sanctions to be terminated without delay, and for the US to compensate Iran for the revenue losses it has incurred. But the judges did order the US to “remove, by means of its choosing, any impediments arising from the measures on 8 May to the free exportation to the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran” of: medicines and medical devices, foodstuffs and agricultural commodities, spare parts, equipment and, services necessary for the safety of civil aviation. Overall, the ruling by the ICJ is notable for several reasons. The ruling is the first time international judges have ruled on what’s been described as a case of “economic warfare.” It is a provisional measure issued in response to Iran’s urgent request ahead of the second round of sanctions scheduled to be reinstated next month. The decision could encourage European companies, which ceased trading with Iran for fear of falling foul of President Trump, to reconsider their position, specifically those dealing in the humanitarian items outlined by the judges.
https://youtu.be/rkyiN2YAmVQ
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif said the decision “vindicates the Islamic Republic of Iran and confirms the illegitimacy and oppressiveness” of US sanctions. On the other hand, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo accused Iran of abusing the ICJ for political ends and said the court had rejected all of its “baseless requests.” Secretary Pompeo announced that the US was terminating the Treaty of Amity, adding: “This is a decision that is, frankly, 39 years overdue.” He also said the US had “solid” evidence that Iran was to blame for recent attacks against the US consulate in the Iraqi city of Basra and the embassy in Baghdad. “These latest destabilizing acts in Iraq are attempts by the Iranian regime to push back on our efforts to constrain its malign behavior. Clearly, they see our comprehensive pressure campaign as serious and succeeding.”
UN top court rules that US must comply with obligations violated by re-imposing sanctions on Iranian people when exiting #JCPOA. Another failure for sanctions-addicted USG and victory for rule of law. Imperative for int’l community to collectively counter malign US unilateralism. pic.twitter.com/8AMGL0tqXU
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week: 1. In Explosive UN Speech, President Donald Trump Denounces Globalism, Praises Nationalism
President Donald Trump delivers a speech to the United Nations General Assembly.
In his September 25 speech at the UN General Assembly, US President Donald Trump urged all the other nations to reject globalism and embrace nationalism while he was interrupted by derisive laughter from other world leaders. Over the course of the bombastic address, Trump highlighted the (imaginary) achievements of his presidency, lashed out at enemies, Iran foremost among them, and railed against multilateralism in its spiritual home, the UN general assembly. In one of the more remarkable moments in the history of the annual UN summit, the chamber broke out in spontaneous laughter at Trump’s claim that “in less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.” Clearly taken aback, Trump said: “I didn’t expect that reaction, but that’s OK.”
President Donald Trump arrived late for the summit, only coming an hour before he was due to speak. When he arrived at the green marble podium, Trump expounded on his visceral dislike of multilateral institutions, which he portrayed as significant threats to US sovereignty. “Americans govern America,” Trump said. “We reject the ideology of globalism, and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism.” With regards to its emphasis on sovereignty and nationalism, the 34-minute speech echoed much of his first UN General Assembly speech last year.
Foreign policy observers note that the main contrast with the earlier statement was the countries that he targeted as enemies of the US. In contrast to last year’s speech (when President Trump infamously denounced North Korea and hits President Kim Jong-un), President Donald Trump used this year’s address as an opportunity to condemn the Iranian government and call for regime change. “Iran’s leaders sow chaos, death, and destruction. They do not respect their neighbors or borders, or the sovereign rights of nations. Instead, Iran’s leaders plunder the nation’s resources to enrich themselves and to spread mayhem across the Middle East and far beyond,” said Trump. In contrast to his strident criticism of the Iranian government throughout the speech, President Donald Trump praised the governments of Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Qatar, stating that they have pledged “billions of dollars to aid the people of Yemen and Syria.” He made no mention of the role of Saudi and UAE forces in the Yemeni conflict, where they have been accused of war crimes because of the civilian death toll from their coalition’s bombing campaign. They are also accused of dragging their heels over efforts to find a peace settlement. Trump, however, claimed his Gulf allies were “pursuing multiple avenues to ending Yemen’s horrible, horrific civil war.”
Overall the international community has reacted negatively to President Donald Trump’s speech, noting that its tone and theme of the address are in direct contradiction to the core values that the United Nations had promoted since its founding nearly 75 years ago. In response to the speech, UN secretary general António Guterres said President Trump’s fiery rhetoric shows that “democratic principles are under siege” throughout the world. Additionally, French President Emmanuel Macron denounced the spread of global lawlessness, “in which everyone pursues their interest,” and noted that the policies of President Trump are partially to blame for this troubling trend. On the other hand, the governments of Russia, Israel, and Saudi Arabia have praised President Trump, arguing that his speech was a “very welcoming statement.”
2. Senate Judiciary Committee Votes to Send Brett Kavanaugh’s Nomination to the Full Senate for Final Vote
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted this week to advnace Bett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Senate for a final vote.
On September 28, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to recommend Brett Kavanaugh for a lifetime appointment for the US Supreme Court despite allegations of sexual assault but says it will request that an FBI investigation is conducted to determine the extent of Judge Kavanaugh’s misconduct. The FBI investigation is a caveat put forth by retiring Republican Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ), who said he wants the FBI to investigate the claims of sexual misconduct before he will vote to confirm or not confirm Kavanaugh in the Senate, even though he voted in favor of Kavanaugh during the meeting Friday. In a statement following the vote, the committee explained in a statement: “The supplemental FBI background investigation would be limited to current, credible allegations against the nominee and must be completed no later than one week from today.” The committee vote came after a day of emotional testimony from both Judge Kavanaugh as well as Christine Ford, one of the women accusing him of sexual misconduct. During the hearings, Judge Kavanaugh was criticized for his poor performance, erratic behavior, an inability to answer even the most simple questions. These actions have led some critics to conclude that Judge Kavanaugh is not fit for the Supreme Court even if the investigation clears him of any serious wrong-doing.
Senator Jeff Flake was the deciding vote and did not commit to either side until early in the morning of September 28. In a written statement, Flake said: “I left the hearing yesterday with as much doubt as I had certainty.” “What I do know is that our system of justice affords a presumption of innocence to the accused, absent corroborating evidence.” But before the vote was expected to take place at 1:30 p.m., senators met behind closed doors. They reconvened around 2 p.m. Flake said he asked to delay the vote before the full Senate by one week to allow an FBI investigation. That is when Flake explained he needed more information before he could promise to vote for Kavanaugh in the Senate.
The Judiciary committee vote was on party lines; 11 Republicans voted in favor of recommending Kavanaugh, 10 Democrats voted against. Majority leader Mitch McConnell will now call for a vote in the Senate to confirm him. The Republicans control the Senate with a narrow 51-49 majority, but as the midterms are approaching, it may not stay that way for long (estimates show that the Republicans will likely have a net gain of three seats, giving them a 54-46 majority, at the same time as they lose control of the House of Representatives). Three senators have not taken firm positions on Kavanaugh: Susan Collins (R-ME), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Joe Manchin (D-WV). Commenting on the vote, President Donald Trump said he did not yet pick an alternative if the Senate doesn’t confirm Kavanaugh. He also said he would not interfere in the process. “I’m going to let the Senate handle that. They’ll make their decisions,” Trump told reporters at the White House Friday afternoon. Based on the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee gave him a preliminary endorsement, as well as the fact that his testimony seemed to at least partially persuade the three undecided Senators, it is likely that Brett Kavanaugh will be confirmed by a 52-48 margin. Despite his confirmation, Brett Kavanaugh will likely develop a reputation as a mediocre and ethically-challenged Supreme Court Justice appointed by one of the worst Presidents in US history.
3. US, Mexico, and Canada Agree To New Trade Agreement
The US, Mexico, and Canada agreed on a new trade deal this week meant to replace the 25-year-old NAFTA agreement.
On September 30, the United States, Canada, and Mexico reached an agreement to update the North American Free Trade Agreement, the 1994 pact that governs more than $1.2 trillion worth of trade among the three nations, after nearly one year of tense negotiations. The new deal (known as the United States-Mexico Canada Free Trade Agreement) will not go into effect right away. Most of the key provisions do not commence until 2020 because leaders from the three countries have to sign it and then Congress and the legislatures in Canada and Mexico have to approve it, a process that is expected to take months.
Overall, the treaty itself includes many new provisions governing trade between all three countries. One such area of change is in the automotive production industry. To qualify for zero tariffs beginning in 2020, a car or truck made in any of the three countries must have 75 percent of its components manufactured in Canada, Mexico or the United States, a substantial boost from the current 62.5 percent requirement. Additionally, a new rule in the agreement stipulates that a significant percentage of the work done on the car must be completed by workers earning at least $16 an hour. While many economists think these new rules will help some North American workers, they also warn that both new and used car prices may rise and that some small cars may no longer be made in North America because they would be too expensive under the new requirements. There are also concerns that automakers might not make as many cars in North America to export to China and elsewhere overseas because costs would be higher in the USMCA region than making the vehicles in Asia.
In addition to the changes regarding the automotive industries in all three countries, the treaty includes several other provisions. The agreement stipulates that Canada must open up to US dairy products, potentially benefitting American dairy farmers (a reliably Republican group that will credit President Trump for boosting their economic fortunes), increased environmental and labor rights, increased intellectual property protection, and an improved dispute resolution process. Moreover, the new treaty gives American pharmaceutical corporations and increased market share in both Canada and Mexico.
Overall, the leadership of all three countries praised the new trade agreement as a positive step and an example of constructive dialogue between different countries. In a Twitter post, President Trump praised the agreement as a “great deal for all three countries” that goes a “long way to solving the many deficiencies and mistakes in NAFTA.” Despite much praise for the agreement, some observers argue that it does not address the underlying issues of worker exploitation and environmental degradation. Additionally, it is also claimed that the main purpose of the new trade agreement is to improve President Trump’s already strong popularity in the industrial Midwest and ultimately will have a negative impact on the US economy.
Late last night, our deadline, we reached a wonderful new Trade Deal with Canada, to be added into the deal already reached with Mexico. The new name will be The United States Mexico Canada Agreement, or USMCA. It is a great deal for all three countries, solves the many……
4. China Postpones Military Talks with US Over Sanctions
China cancelled its annual military talks with the US this week due to new US sanctions.
China has postponed joint military talks with the United States in protest against Washington’s move to impose sanctions on the Chinese military for buying Russian fighter jets and surface-to-air missile systems. The Defense Ministry said in a statement on September 29 that it had recalled Navy Chief Commander Shen Jinlong from a visit to the US and postponed talks between Chinese and US military officials in Beijing planned for next week. The statement added that China’s military reserved the right to take further countermeasures against the latest US-imposed sanctions, without giving further details. Earlier in the day, China’s Foreign Ministry had summoned US Ambassador to Beijing Terry Branstad and “lodged solemn representations over US sanctions against (the) Chinese military.”
The US State Department imposed the sanctions on September 27 on the Equipment Development Department (EED), a branch of the Chinese military responsible for weapons procurement, for engaging in “significant transactions” with Russia’s major weapons exporter Rosoboronexport. The sanctions are aimed at blocking the EED and its director, Li Shangfu, from the possibility of applying for export licenses and participating in the US financial system. According to the US State Department, the sanctions on Beijing are linked to its decision to purchase 10 Russian SU-35 fighter jets in 2017 as well as S-400 surface-to-air missile system-related equipment in 2018.
Defense Ministry spokesman Wu Qian said that China’s decision to buy fighter jets and missile systems from Russia was a typical act of cooperation between two sovereign countries and Washington had “no right to interfere.” The ministry spokesman also warned that the United States would face “consequences” if it did not immediately revoke the bans. The Trump Administration views China’s purchases from Russia as a breach of a sweeping US sanctions bill enacted in 2017 titled Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or CAATSA.
The S-400 system, whose full name is the Triumph Mobile Multiple Anti-Aircraft Missile System (AAMS), is an advanced Russian missile system designed to detect, track, and destroy planes, drones, or missiles as far as 402 kilometers away. The defense system is capable of downing US F-35 stealth fighters. China became the first international buyer of Russia’s S-400 Triumph in 2015 as part of a 3-billion-dollar deal and received the first batch of the missile systems in April. China will reportedly receive a total of two S-400 regiments, and the second regimental set is expected to be delivered by the end of 2018.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. North and South Korea Hold Summit, Commit to “Era of No War”
The leaders of North and south Korea held a historic summit this week, pledging to speed up efforts for regional peace.
In their third summit meeting this year on September 19, North Korean President Kim Jong-un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in announced that North Korea would close an essential missile test facility in the presence of “international experts” and potentially destroy its primary nuclear complex if the United States agrees to equal measures. Speaking to the media Wednesday after a brief signing ceremony, Kim and Moon also vowed to bring peace to the Korean Peninsula once and for all, something they first committed to at their April summit. “The world is going to see how this divided nation is going to bring about a new future on its own,” Kim said to applause from those gathered. Moon and Kim also teased a potential historic fourth meeting between the two leaders, this time in the South Korean capital. The signed agreement stated that Kim would travel to Seoul “as soon as possible,” something no North Korean leader has ever done.
In addition to the joint statements by the leaders of both countries, the North and South Korean defense ministers also signed a 17-page accord in which the two countries vowed to “cease all hostile acts against each other.” “The era of no war has started,” said Moon, the first South Korean president to visit Pyongyang since 2007. “Today the North and South decided to remove all threats that can cause war from the entire Korean peninsula.” The two countries also pledged to submit a joint bid to host the 2032 Summer Olympics, create rail and road links, stop military drills aimed at each other, remove 11 guard posts in the demilitarized zone by the end of the year, and normalize the Kaesong Industrial complex and Kumgang tourism project as soon as the conditions allow. Shortly after the announcement, US President Donald Trump praised the summit meeting and called its developments “very exciting” in a Twitter post.
Kim Jong Un has agreed to allow Nuclear inspections, subject to final negotiations, and to permanently dismantle a test site and launch pad in the presence of international experts. In the meantime there will be no Rocket or Nuclear testing. Hero remains to continue being……..
South Korean President Moon and his top advisers have consistently said they want to make inter-Korea meetings a regular part of North-South relations and see them as a helpful step in establishing a permanent peace. “Chairman Kim and I share the history of having held hands like lovers and crossed the Military Demarcation Line together twice,” Moon said during a toast at a banquet Tuesday evening. “The fact that the leaders of Koreas can meet without limit in time or place symbolically demonstrates that a new age of inter-Korean relations has arrived,” he added. Ahead of this week’s talks, it was expected that two leaders would continue to work to formally end to the Korean War, which ended in a truce 65 years ago. While a formal peace regime officially ending the Korean War would need to be supported by the US and China, the other participants in the war, experts agree that there is nothing to stop the two Koreas declaring an end to the war themselves, or signing a bilateral peace treaty. A big part of any negotiation to end the war would be the status of the thousands of US troops stationed in South Korea as part of the two countries’ alliance. The North has long seen the US military’s large footprint in South Korea as a direct threat.
2. Rwandan Government Approves Release of Nearly 2,000 Political Prisoners
The Rwandan government released nearly 2,000 political prisoners this week, including noted opposition activist Victoire Ingabire.
On September 18, Paul Kagame, Rwanda’s president, authorized the early release of more than 2,000 prisoners, including a leading opposition figure who was jailed in 2012 for conspiring to undermine the government. The administration gave no further explanation for its decision to release Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, whose detention had garnered international attention. Gospel singer Kizito Mihigo, jailed for ten years in 2015 after making a song that criticised the government, was also freed. The release may give opposition members and regime critics some hope that President Kagame could be ready to ease his tight grip on Rwandan politics, but international observers remain skeptical of his true intentions.
Even though Paul Kagame is praised for transforming the central African nation from a failed state haunted by the memory of a brutal genocide in the early 1990s into a thriving economy, critics argue that he has done so at the expense of political competition. Several critics who have gone into exile have died in mysterious circumstances, and dozens of opposition figures have been imprisoned. In power since 2000, Kagame spearheaded a constitutional referendum in 2015 to allow him to remain president until 2034. He won re-election last year with 99 percent of the vote and has permitted his ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front to dominate much of the economy.
The most high-profile released prisoner, Victoire Ingabire, returned from exile in the Netherlands in 2010 to take part in the Rwandan Presidential election but was blocked from competing. Two years later she was charged with inciting the population, forming an army to overthrow the government and downplaying the impact of the genocide, in which some 800,000 ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed. Last year a pan-African court ruled that Ingabire’s rights had been violated during her trial, but Rwanda ignored the ruling. The court, based in Tanzania, did not order Ingabire’s release but gave the Rwandan government six months to “rectify the harm done.” “It took me by surprise but I hope this is the start of the opening of the political space in Rwanda”, Ingabire told Radio France International after she was released. The opposition leader said she had no plans to cease her political activities. Despite the fact that Rwanda continues to have a poor human rights record, it can be argued that the release of political prisoners is a sign that the country is beginning to liberalize, albeit slowly.
3. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe Wins Third Term
Japan’s nationalist Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was re-elected to a third term this week, becoming Japan’s longest-serving post-war Prime Minister.
On September 20, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was re-elected as head of his ruling Liberal Democratic Party in a landslide, paving the way for up to three more years as the nation’s leader and a push toward a constitutional revision. In Thursday’s leadership vote, Abe handily defeated his sole challenger, Shigeru Ishiba, a former defense minister. Abe won 553, or about 70 percent, of 807 votes. The decisive victory may embolden Abe to pursue his long-sought amendment to Japan’s US-drafted pacifist constitution, although the hurdles remain high and doing so would carry political risks. “It’s time to tackle a constitutional revision,” Abe said in a victory speech. Abe said he’s determined to use his last term to pursue his policy goals to “sum up” Japan’s postwar diplomacy to ensure peace in the country. “Let’s work together to make a new Japan,” he said.
Shinzo Abe, who has served as Japan’s Prime Minister since December 2012, has cemented control of his party and is poised to become Japan’s longest-serving leader in August 2021. In his coming term, Abe has several policy challenges, including dealing with Japan’s aging and declining population, a royal succession in the spring, and a consumption tax hike to 10 percent he has already delayed twice. Amid international effort to denuclearize North Korea, Abe seeks to meet with Kim Jong Un to resolve their disputes, including the decades-old problem of Japanese citizens abducted to the North. He faces China’s increasingly assertive activity in the region and intensifying trade friction with the US that could shake his friendly relations with President Donald Trump. Abe said he will meet with Trump next week in New York, where they attend the annual UN assembly, to discuss bilateral trade and “the roles Japan and America should play in establishing global trade rules.”
Overall, most observers view an extended term for Abe as a positive event that will improve the stability of Japan. “A stable government under a strong leader is good for the economy and diplomacy, and Prime Minister Abe has established a rather significant presence in diplomacy,” said Yu Uchiyama, a University of Tokyo politics professor. But his long and strong leadership has caused a lack of political competitiveness. “The biggest concern about Japanese politics is how to restore competition in politics and reactivate democracy,” Uchiyama said. Additionally, critics of Abe also point out to the fact that he has strengthened the Prime Ministers Office at the expense of the Japanese Parliament. Despite this criticism, Abe has remained a popular figure in Japan and has played a major role in reshaping the Japanese political system.
4. Terrorists attack Iran military parade, killing 25 people and Wounding at least 60
Western-supported militants attacked an Iranian military parade on Saturday, killing 25, injuring at least 60.
Militants disguised as soldiers opened fire on September 22 on an annual Iranian military parade in the country’s oil-rich southwest, killing at least 25 people and wounding over 60 in the deadliest terror attack to strike the country in nearly a decade. Women and children scattered along with Revolutionary Guard soldiers as heavy gunfire rang out at the parade in Ahvaz, the chaos captured live on state television. The attack came as rows of Revolutionary Guardsmen marched down Ahvaz’s Quds (Jerusalem) Boulevard in one of the many ceremonies commemorating the 30th Anniversary of Iran’s victory in the nine-year-long Iran-Iraq War. Both ISIS, as well as Wahhabi separatists (sponsored by Saudi Arabia, the US, and Israel), once only known for nighttime attacks on unguarded oil pipelines, claimed responsibility for the brazen assault.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif blamed regional countries and their “US masters” for funding and arming the separatists, issuing a stark warning as regional tensions remain high in the wake of the US withdraw from the Iranian nuclear deal.“Iran will respond swiftly and decisively in defense of Iranian lives,” Zarif wrote on Twitter. Additionally, the Iranian government quickly summoned the Ambassadors from Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates for questioning. In response to the allegations, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley dismissed Iran’s assertion on Sunday that Washington and its Gulf allies were to blame for a deadly parade attack and used her speech as another opportunity to criticize Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. “He’s (Rouhani) got the Iranian people protesting, every ounce of money that goes into Iran goes into his military, he has oppressed his people for a long time and he needs to look at his own base to figure out where that’s coming from,” Haley said in a CNN interview. “He can blame us all he wants. The thing he’s got to do is look at the mirror.”
Terrorists recruited, trained, armed & paid by a foreign regime have attacked Ahvaz. Children and journos among casualties. Iran holds regional terror sponsors and their US masters accountable for such attacks. Iran will respond swiftly and decisively in defense of Iranian lives. pic.twitter.com/WG1J1wgVD9
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. US Re-imposes Sanctions On Iran Three Months After Withdraw From Nuclear Agreement
President Donald Trump signed an executive order this week reimposing and tightening US sanctions against Iran.
On August 7, President Donald Trump announced that he would be reimposing sanctions on Iran that had been lifted as a part of the 2015 nuclear deal. The May decision to withdraw from the Iran deal officially dubbed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), gave a 90-day wind-down period for some business activities, and a 120-day wind-down period for others. Some sanctions were reimposed on August 8, whereas others will be reimposed on November 5. In a Twitter message posted shortly before his appearance at a campaign rally in Ohio, President Trump stated that the Iran sanctions have officially been cast. “These are the most biting sanctions ever imposed, and in November they ratchet up to yet another level. Anyone doing business with Iran will NOT be doing business with the United States. I am asking for WORLD PEACE, nothing less!,” stated the President in a Twitter post.
The Iran sanctions have officially been cast. These are the most biting sanctions ever imposed, and in November they ratchet up to yet another level. Anyone doing business with Iran will NOT be doing business with the United States. I am asking for WORLD PEACE, nothing less!
According to the text of the executive order, the reimposed sanctions are meant to advance the goal of applying financial pressure on the Iranian government in pursuit of a comprehensive and lasting solution to a number of politics that the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia claim (without any factual backing) are contributing to the destabilization of the Middle East. “The president has been very clear,” said US State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert in a statement to the press. “None of this needs to happen. He will meet with the Iranian leadership at any time to discuss a real comprehensive deal that will contain their regional ambitions, will end their malign behavior, and deny them any path to a nuclear weapon,” Nauert further stated.
https://youtu.be/ghGjwtQTphQ
The sanctions that go back into effect immediate impact any purchase of US bank notes by Iran’s government, Iran’s trade in precious metals like gold, graphite, aluminum, steel, coal and software in industrial processes, Iran’s automotive sector, transactions related to the Iranian rial, and Iran’s issuing of sovereign debt, according to the White House. The sanctions that will be reimposed in November include those on Iran’s port operators and energy, shipping and shipbuilding sectors, any of Iran’s petroleum-related transactions, and foreign financial institutions with the Central Bank of Iran. Additionally, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has stated that the Trump administration is “not looking to grant waivers” to companies or governments who want to continue to receive Iranian oil imports, but is “glad to discuss and look at requests on a case-by-case basis.”
The international reaction to the new sanctions against Iran has generally been negative. Even though Israel and Saudi Arabia praised the decision on the part of the Trump administration (claiming that it would result in the collapse of the Iranian government and pave the way for Reza Pahlavi to come to power in Iran), many other countries such as the UK, France, Russia, China, Italy, and Germany condemned the decision, arguing that new sanctions are morally wrong and that any efforts to topple the Iranian government are counterproductive at best. Additionally, the Iranian government denounced the new sanctions and has vowed a “proportional reaction.” “The main goal of America in approving these sanctions against Iran is to destroy the nuclear deal and we will show a very intelligent reaction to this action,” said Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi.
2. Saudi Arabia Recalls Ambassador To Canada Over Human Rights Concerns Raised On The Part Of The Canadian Government
The relationship between Saudi Arabia and Canada declined this week due to criticism of the Saudi human rights record on the part of the Canadian government.
On August 6, Saudi Arabia announced that it was expelling the Canadian ambassador and had recalled its envoy while freezing all new trade, in protest of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s calls for the release of jailed activists. The Saudi government gave the Canadian ambassador 24 hours to leave the country, in an abrupt rupture of relations over what it slammed as “interference” in its internal affairs. The move, which underscores a newly aggressive foreign policy led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, comes after Canada demanded the immediate release of human rights campaigners swept up in a recent crackdown. “The Canadian position is an overt and blatant interference in the internal affairs of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” the Saudi foreign ministry tweeted. The ministry also announced, “the freezing of all new trade and investment transactions with Canada while retaining its right to take further action.”
The dispute between both countries began last week with a series of tweets by Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland stating that the Canadia government was “gravely concerned” over a new wave of arrests of women and human rights campaigners in the kingdom, including award-winning gender rights activist Samar Badawi. Badawi was arrested along with fellow campaigner Nassima al-Sadah, the latest victims of what Human Rights Watch called an “unprecedented government crackdown on the women’s rights movement”. The arrests come weeks after more than a dozen women’s rights campaigners were detained and accused of undermining national security and collaborating with enemies of the state. The Saudi foreign ministry voiced anger over the Canadian statement. “Using the phrase ‘immediately release’ in the Canadian statement is very unfortunate, reprehensible, and unacceptable in relations between States,” the ministry tweeted.
Very alarmed to learn that Samar Badawi, Raif Badawi’s sister, has been imprisoned in Saudi Arabia. Canada stands together with the Badawi family in this difficult time, and we continue to strongly call for the release of both Raif and Samar Badawi.
The ongoing rupture in the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Canada reinforces the new foreign policies that have been implemented by Mohammed bin Salman since he assumed the role of Crown Prince last year. Even though Salman has introduced a series of progressive reforms (much like what Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi of Iran did through his misguided “White Revolution” series of reforms in 1962-63), he has pursued an aggressive foreign policy, cracking down harshly on dissent both at home and abroad. Additionally, the outsized reaction to the tweet underscores how Saudi Arabia is taking a much harsher stance against what it perceives as Western interference in its internal affairs on issues like human rights, perhaps emboldened by the US willingness under Donald Trump to de-emphasize rights issues when it comes to its allies. Saudi Arabia and the US have been enjoying an exceptionally close relationship, as both Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Trump share similar concerns about Iran, as well as support for Israel. By contrast, Trump and Trudeau locked horns during the G7 summit in June in an unusually public manner.
3. Post Election Violence Continues In Zimbabwe
Post-election violence continued in Zimbabwe this week, rocking the struggling, conflict-torn country.
After holding elections on July 30, Zimbabwe has again descended into violence. At least six people were killed on the streets of the capital two days after the vote. Since then human-rights groups have recorded more than 150 alleged cases of abuse against opposition supporters (including that of the husband and wife above), most seemingly at the hands of soldiers. The true figure is almost certainly many times higher. Hundreds of MDC members have fled their homes, including Tendai Biti, one of the bloc’s senior figures, whose claim for asylum in Zambia was rejected on August 8.
Since taking power via a coup last November, President Emmerson Mnangagwa has sought to convince the world that Zimbabwe is “open for business” following nearly four decades of rule by Robert Mugabe. The culmination of this plan was meant to be a convincing victory in the election, which even if neither free nor fair, would be orderly enough to win him the blessing of foreign governments. They would then encourage creditors to lend the country much-needed foreign currency. Instead, the exact opposite scenario is taking place. Instead of convincing western investors that the country is entering into a new period of stability, the recent post-election violence shows that Zimbabwe has a long way to go before its political situation will be stabilized.
The reaction to the election violence in Zimbabwe at the international level has been negative. In response to the post-election violence, President Donald Trump signed into law legislation expanding the already-stringent sanctions that the US has had in place against Zimbabwe since 2001. Some of the conditions put forward in the legislation include the establishment of an independent electoral commission, the banning of military involvement in politics, and allowing the Zimbabwean diaspora to vote in elections from abroad.
4. Trump Administration Announces Plan To Establish “Space Force” Branch of US Military
The Trump Administration announced that it would be creating a “Space Force” branch of the US military, with the stated goal of better preparing the US military to deal with cosmic threats.
In a speech on August 9, Vice President Mike Pence announced that President Donald Trump has authorized plans to create a new branch of the US military dedicated to fighting warfare in space. The United States Space Force, as proposed by President Trump, would be a new branch of the military by 2020, on par with the army, navy, air force, marines and coast guard. An independent branch cannot be created until Congress approves it, but the Administration can take several steps on its own to prepare for the launch of a new force, the first since the air force was formed shortly after World War II. Officials plan to create a Space Operations Force, an “elite group of warfighters specializing in the domain of space” drawn from various branches of the military, in the style of existing special operations forces, Pence said.
The main rationale for creating the SpaceForce, according to the Trump Administration, is the need to counter galactic threats from US rivals such as Russia and China. In recent years, both Russia and China have been developing weapons that can be used to track and destroy communications satellites used by the US military and civilians alike. The estimated cost for the initial establishment of the Space Force would be approximately $8 Billion over a five-year period and is expected to cost at least several Billion more to get the branch up and running.
Overall, the reaction to the proposed Space Force has been somewhat mixed, with many pointing to the apparent lack of need for such a branch.“Maybe, just maybe, we should make sure our people are not dying because they lack health insurance before we start spending billions to militarize outer space,” stated Senator Bernie Sanders (I/D-VT) in a Twitter post. Additionally, former NASA astronaut Mark Kelly said Trump’s plan for a new military space branch is “redundant” and “wasteful.” Despite much opposition to the new proposal, Congressmen Mike Rodgers (R-AL) and Jim Cooper (D-TN), both endorsed the plan, stating that “we have been warning for years of the need to protect our space assets and to develop more capable space systems.”
Maybe, just maybe, we should make sure our people are not dying because they lack health insurance before we start spending billions to militarize outer space. #SpaceForce
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week
1. President Donald Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Meet in Helinski For Controversial Summit
President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin this week in a controversial summit in Finland.
Amid chaos following his week-long European trip and the ongoing investigations into allegations that the Russian government colluded with his 2016 Presidential campaign, President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir in Helinski, Finland on July 16 in their first-ever summit meeting. The summit marked the first official meeting between the leaders after previous unofficial talks between Trump and Putin at the 2017 G20 conference in Vienna. In addition to meeting with Putin, Trump also met the Finnish President Sauli Niinistö in the Presidential Palace. Some of the topics Trump pledged to discuss with Putin include the ongoing Syrian Civil War, the tensions between Russia and Ukraine, the steadily declining relationship between the US and Iran, and measures to reduce the threat of nuclear war between the US and Russia.
The summit between President Trump and Putin was wrought with controversy from the moment of its announcement. On June 14, a group of leading Senate Democrats urged Trump to forgo meeting Putin face-to-face and instead called on the President to work to remove the Putin regime from power and pressure the Russian government into stopping their supposed malign activities on the world stage. The letter was written by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and endorsed by Senators Mark Warner (D-VA), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), and many others. Additionally, Trump tweeted on the morning of the summit that the relationship between Russia and the US has “never been worse,” blaming the declining relationship on “foolishness and stupidity” on the part of the US, and referenced the ongoing Special Counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections, calling it a “witchhunt”. Trump also indicated his inclination to accept Putin’s denial of Russian interference, saying “President Putin says it’s not Russia. I don’t see any reason why it would be.”
Our relationship with Russia has NEVER been worse thanks to many years of U.S. foolishness and stupidity and now, the Rigged Witch Hunt!
The Helsinki 2018 meeting began with Niinistö officially welcoming Putin, followed by Trump. The bilateral discussions between Putin and Trump mainly took place in the Finnish Presidential Palace, with Trump and Putin met with only interpreters present. The bulk of the meeting was conducted in secrecy, leading to much confusion and questions regarding the content that was discussed. In the closing press conference press conference, Trump and Putin praise each other and appeared to be in broad agreement on all policy issues. Much to the shock of Western observers, President Trump exonerated Putin of interfering in the 2016 election, directly going against the overwhelming consensus in the intelligence community that Russia indeed interfered in the election and potentially swayed the vote in as many as ten states. Trump also used the press conference to criticize the ongoing investigation into his campaign by Special Counsel Robert Muller, calling it a “partisan witch-hunt.”
Overall, the reaction to President Donald Trump’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin has been negative. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called it a “sad day for America,” and Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) called for American interpreter Marina Gross, who sat in on the private meeting with Putin, to be questioned before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Additionally, many Republicans strongly criticized President Trump. Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) claimed Trump “made us look like a pushover,” whereas Senator Ben Sasse called Trump’s remarks “bizarre and flat-out wrong.” 2008 and 2012 Republican Presidential Nominees John McCain and Mitt Romney also condemned the meeting and the President’s actions. Romney said Trump’s siding with Putin rather than US intelligence agencies was “disgraceful and detrimental to our democratic principles”, while McCain called the summit “one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory.” Despite the overall negative reaction to the summit by political leaders of both parties, President Trump’s approval rating among Republican voters increases in the wake of the summit, with many of his strongest supporters expressing the belief that Russian collusion in the 2016 Election was a positive turn of events.
2. Violence and Turmoil Threatens Pakistan’s Unstable Political Situation
Amid a hotly-contested general election, several events this week threaten to further destabilize Pakistan and prevent the country from exiting a long period of political turmoil.
Several events this week have threatened to upend the already unstable political situation in Pakistan. On July 19, Nawaz Sharif, the Prime Minister of Pakistan from 2013 until his removal from office in 2017, returned to his country to begin serving a ten-year prison sentence. In a July 6 court decision, Sharif was sentenced to 10 years in prison and handed an almost $11 million fine over corruption charges related to his family’s purchase of overseas properties. His daughter Mariam Nawaz was also found guilty and is facing seven years in prison and a $2.6 million fine. Her husband Captain Safdar has received a one-year jail sentence. All three have been barred from engaging in politics for 10 years and four properties in London will be confiscated by the Pakistani state, according to the verdict.
The return of Nawaz Sharif to Pakistan occurred amid a heightened level of violence and turmoil facing the country in the wake of the bombing of a political rally in Baluchistan province on July 15, as well as tensions surrounding the upcoming general elections on July 25. Th suicide bomb attack resulted in the deaths of nearly 150 people and injured 186. Nawabzada Siraj Raisani, who was campaigning for an assembly seat in Balochistan, was killed in the bomb blast along with dozens of others. ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack in an email, stating that the attack was meant to intimidate the Shi’a Muslim community of Pakistan and discourage their participation in the political process. The Balochistan government announced two days of mourning and political parties in the province announced the suspension of political activities in the aftermath of deadly suicide bombing.
Despite the ongoing tensions within the country, many observers feel that the July 25 general election has the potential transform Pakistan for the better and allow the country to at last gain a sense of stability after nearly 4 decades of military rule. “For the first time in our history, fair elections are going to be held,” stated Fawad Chaudhry, a spokesman for the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) political party. As campaigning enters the final stretch, charismatic populist and former cricket star Imran Khan and the deposed leader’s brother, Shahbaz Sharif, have emerged as the two frontrunners. Additionally, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, the 29-year-old son of former leader Benazir Bhutto, is also attracting widespread support, seeking to reestablish his family’s party as a viable political force. Most polling suggests that the election is too close to call, and could result in coalition negotiations which will ultimately leave Bhutto Zardari’s smaller party with the balance of power.
3. Israel Launches Broad Air Assault in Gaza Following Border Violence
Israel resumed its sustained siege against Gaza this week with the commencement of a sustained bombing campaign.
On July 20, the Israeli government launched a large-scale attack against Hamas in the Gaza Strip after a Palestinian sniper killed an Israeli soldier along the border fence during a day of escalating hostilities. Successive explosions rocked Gaza City at nightfall, and the streets emptied as warplanes struck dozens of sites that Israel said belonged to Hamas. Israeli military analysts said the aerial assault was one of the most intense since a cease-fire ended 50 days of fighting in the Gaza Strip in 2014. The ferocity of the bombings raised fears that the hostilities could spiral into an all-out war that will further devastate the Gaza Strip. After nearly seven hours of siege by the Israeli government, a Hamas spokesman announced that the cease-fire had been restored with the mediation of Egypt and the UN. At least four Palestinians were killed by initial Israeli artillery and tank fire. Hamas said that three of the four were members of its military wing.
https://youtu.be/XkaUJa2PkMA
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel Isreali Defense Minister, Avigdor Lieberman defended the actions by their government, warning of the commencement of a major siege of against the Gaza Strip unless Hamas ceases its supposed attacks against Israeli targets. Additionally, US Ambassador to the UN Nikk Haley and Senior Advisor to the President Trump Jared Kushner enthusiastically defended the Israeli government, stating that Netanyahu and Lieberman acted appropriately and that their actions will increase the chances for peace in the Middle East. On the other hand, Nickolay E. Mladenov, the United Nations special coordinator in the Middle East, had urged the Israeli government and Hamas “to step back from the brink” in a strongly worded post on Twitter on Friday night. “Not next week. Not tomorrow. Right NOW!” he wrote. “Those who want to provoke #Palestinians and #Israelis into another war must not succeed.”
🔴 Everyone in #Gaza needs to step back from the brink. Not next week. Not tomorrow. Right NOW! Those who want to provoke #Palestinians and #Israelis into another war must not succeed.
4. Israel Passes Controversial “Jewish Nation-State” Law
Amid much criticism, the Israeli Parliament passed the “Jewish Nation-State” Law on July 19.
On July 19, the Israeli parliament adopted a controversial and bigoted law defining the country as the nation-state of the Jewish people, provoking fears it will lead to blatant discrimination against its Palestinian citizens. The legislation, adopted by a relatively close 62 to 55 margin, makes Hebrew the country’s national language and defines the establishment of Jewish communities as being in the national interest. The bill also strips Arabic of its designation as an official language, downgrading it to a “special status” that enables its continued use within Israeli governmental and educational. “This is a defining moment in the annals of Zionism and the history of the state of Israel,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the Knesset after the vote. The nation-state bill was first introduced in 2011 by Avi Dichter, a member of the Likud Party and a center-right conservative. The main goal of the law was to establish the unique Jewish right to an Israeli homeland as one of Israel’s constitutional rules. When the final version passed this week, Dichter declared that “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens.”
Overall, the reaction to the new Israeli law has been mixed. In addition to praise among conservative Israeli politicians, noted American White Supremacist and Fascist political activist Richard Spencer endorsed the law. “I have great admiration for Israel’s nation-state law, Jews are, once again, at the vanguard, rethinking politics and sovereignty for the future, showing a path forward for Europeans,” Spencer stated in a press release. On the other hand, countries such as Egypt, Jordan, and even Israeli ally Saudi Arabia denounced the law, stating that it is discriminatory against Israel’s large Arab minority and threatens to further Israel’s reputation as an “apartheid state.” Additionally, several liberal Jewish leaders and orgnizations expressed outrage with the law. “The damage that will be done by this new nation-state law to the legitimacy of the Zionist vision … is enormous,” wrote Rick Jacobs, the head of the Union for Reform Judaism, in a press release. J Street, a liberal Zionist organization, called it “a sad day for Israel and all who care about its democracy and its future.”
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Donald Trump Selects Brett Kavanaugh As His Supreme Court Nominee
President Donald Trump announced his selection of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court this week.
In a prime-time address on July 9, President Donald Trump nominated Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to fill Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s seat on the Supreme Court. Presenting Judge Kavanaugh at the White House, President Trump described him as “one of the finest and sharpest legal minds in our time,” and stated that he is a jurist who would set aside his political views and apply the Constitution “as written.” Kavanaugh was selected from a list of “25 highly qualified potential nominees” considered by the Trump Administration. The main reasons cited by President Trump for the nomination of Kavanaugh included his “impeccable credentials, unsurpassed qualifications, and a proven commitment to equal justice under the law” with the emphasis that “what matters is not a judge’s political views, but whether they can set aside those views to do what the law and the Constitution require.” In his remarks, Judge Kavanaugh, who once clerked for Justice Kennedy, said he would “keep an open mind in every case.” But he declared that judges “must interpret the law, not make the law.”
In choosing Judge Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump opted for a veteran of Republican politics with close ties to the Bush family. After graduating from Yale Law School in 1990, Kavanaugh worked as a law clerk for Judge Walter Stapleton of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit shortly before clerking for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. After his Supreme Court clerkship, Kavanaugh worked for Ken Starr as an Associate Counsel in the Office of the Independent Counsel;in that capacity, he handled a number of the novel constitutional and legal issues presented during that investigation and was a principal author of the Starr Report to Congress on the Monica Lewinsky-Bill Clinton and Vincent Foster investigation Before joining the Bush Administration in 2003, Judge Kavanaugh worked for the Bush 2000 campaign in Florida.
The reaction to Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination has been split along party lines. Senate Republicans (with the notable exceptions of Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, and Rand Paul) have generally expressed strong support for Kavanaugh’s nomination. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stated that Kavanaugh is “highly regarded throughout the legal community” and intends to hold confirmation hearings before the November midterm elections. Several vulnerable Senate Democrats such as Joe Manchin (D-WV), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), and Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) have also announced that they might support Kavanaugh. Additionally, several liberal legal scholars such as Akhil Reed Amar and Alan Dershowitz expressed support for Kavanaugh’s nomination.
On the other hand, Many Senate Democrats such as Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Kalama Harris (D-CA), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) denounced Brett Kavanaugh’s selection and intended on opposing his confirmation. Additionally, social conservative organizations such as the American Family Association and March to Life expressed concerns about Kavanaugh’s views on social issues, stating that he lacked the “backbone” to overturn cases such as Roe V. Wade, Obergefell v. Hodges, and National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
2. President Donald Trump Embarks On European Tour, Antagonizing Allies With Unorthodox Behavior
President Donald Trump embarked on his second European trip this week, frustrating allies with his unorthodox and unpredictable behavior and actions.
On July 8, President Donald Trump embarked on a weeklong European trip that took him through a series of meetings at the annual North Atlantic Treaty Organization gathering, a stop in Great Britain to meet with Prime Minister Theresa May, Queen Elizabeth II and other political leaders, and a visit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helenski, Finland. But in typical Trumpian manner, the President blew through all the diplomatic norms of engaging with American allies, instead alienating and puzzling them through his unpredictable actions.
In talks in Belgium with the leaders of the 29-country Atlantic alliance, President Trump escalated his criticism of American allies in Europe, demanding that NATO countries double their military spending targets and saying that Germany was “captive to Russia” because of its energy imports. The president ultimately left reaffirming his support for the alliance but offering vague threats of a potential American withdrawal. President Trump’s remarks sent officials scrambling for answers, triggered ripples of dismay among defense officials and alarmed members of Trump’s own party enough that one worried aloud the President is trying to “tear down” the nearly 70-year long alliance that has helped to unify Europe in the face of threats from countries such as Russia.
The reaction to President Donald Trump’s NATO trip has generally been negative. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-TN), a major critic of President Trump, stated that he is concerned that the President is trying to “tear down” NATO and “punch our friends in the nose.” through his harsh and unpredictable rhetoric. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), typically a strong supporter of Trump stated that he subscribes “to the view that we should not be criticizing our president while he is overseas, but let me say a couple of things. NATO is indispensable.” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and European leaders pushed back against Trump’s blistering attacks on Germany and other partner nations, as they attempted to downplay notions that the alliance may be fracturing. “The strength of NATO is that despite these differences, we have always been able to unite around our core task to protect and defend each other because we understand that we are stronger together than apart,” Stoltenberg told Trump over breakfast.
3. Twelve Russian Intelligence Officers Indicted For Hacking The Clinton Presidential Campaign And The Democratic National Committee
Twelve Russian operatives were indicted in the Russia-Trump probe this week due to their theft of documents related to the Clinton 2016 campaign.
On July 12, the Justice Department indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, the 2016 Clinton presidential campaign and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The allegations came in the latest indictment from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 Elections and ties to President Donald Trump’s successful campaign. According to the indictment, the officers worked for a military agency known as GRU, which hacked into computers of individuals working on the election with the goal of stealing and releasing documents unfavorable to Hillary Clinton, who advocated a hard line against the Russian government and called for the removal of Vladimir Putin from power.
Starting in June 2016, the intelligence officers released thousands of documents using online pseudonyms, such as “Guccifer 2.0” and “DC Leaks.” They used a network of computers around the world, to conceal their identities. They also broke into the computers of those charged with overseeing elections, including state election officials and secretaries of state (primarily in key states such as Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Texas, Arizona, and Wisconsin), as well as companies in charge of election technology and software. In total, the indictment charges 11 spies with conspiracy to commit computer crimes, eight counts of aggravated identity theft, and conspiracy to launder money. Two of the defendants are charged with a separate conspiracy to commit computer crimes. The indictment comes just days before President Donald Trump is set to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki.
The reaction to the indictments has resulted in a mixed reaction from American political leaders. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have called on President Donald Trump to cancel his meeting with Vladimir Putin in response to the allegations. Additionally, Senators Mark Warner (D-VA) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) responded to the indictments by calling on President Trump to expand the already-strong sanctions the US has in place against Russia and work with the international community to remove the Putin regime from power. In its response to the indictments, In an unusual response to the Russian indictments Friday, the Trump Administration issued a statement full of bullet points emphasizing that no Americans were charged and further reiterating that Russia’s supposed election meddling did not impact the actual vote in the 2016 Election and that President Trump was not personally aware of efforts by the Russian government to influence the election in his favor
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. Supreme Court Upholds Trump Executive Order Banning Travel & Immigration To/From Six Muslim Majority Countries
In a close decision, the Supreme Court upheld President Trump’s executive order banning residents from 6 majority-Muslims countries to the US.
On June 26, the Supreme Court upheld President Trump’s ban on travel from several predominantly Muslim countries, delivering Trump a key political victory and an endorsement of his power to control immigration at a time of political upheaval about the treatment of migrants at the Mexican border. In a close 5 to 4 decision, the court said that the President’s power to secure the country’s borders, delegated by Congress over decades of immigration lawmaking, was not undermined by President Trump’s incendiary statements about the dangers he claimed that Muslims (predominantly of the Shi’a sect) pose to the US. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that Trump had statutory authority to make national security judgments in the realm of immigration. The more liberal members of the court denounced the decision. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the decision was similar to Korematsu V. United States, a 1944 decision that endorsed the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II. Sotomayor praised the court for officially overturning Korematsu in its decision on Tuesday, but by upholding the travel ban, Justice Sotomayor said that the court “merely replaces one gravely wrong decision with another.”
President Donald Trump, who has battled court challenges to the travel ban since the start of his administration, hailed the decision to uphold his third version as a “tremendous victory” and promised to continue using his office to defend the country against terrorism, crime and extremism. “This ruling is also a moment of profound vindication following months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country,” Trump said in a statement issued by the White House soon after the decision was announced.
Despite the fact that President Donald Trump and many members of the Republican Party strongly endorsed the Supreme Court’s decision, civil liberty groups throughout the country denounced the ruling. Jamal Abdi, the Vice President of Policy at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), condemned the ruling, arguing that it goes against the principles of the US Constitution and the ideas of tolerance and respect for all individuals regardless of their ethnicity, culture, or religion.“ The Supreme Court has added Trump’s Muslim Ban to the list of American moral failures that future generations will lament. This travesty of justice is a far cry from the Supreme Court that struck down segregation and bans on same-sex marriage. History will view this decision along with other outrageous decisions that upheld and solidified official government-sanctioned discrimination,” said Abdi in a statement. Additionally, Abdi stated that his organization will be at the forefront of all efforts to convince Congress to repeal this discriminatory measure and to prevent such policy from setting a negative precedent for future Presidential decisions.
2. Justice Anthony Kennedy Retires From The Supreme Court
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement from the nation’s highest court, ending 30 years of service.
On June 27, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, a crucial swing vote on the Court as well as a largely liberal Republican, announced that he intends on retiring at the end of July, giving President Donald Trump another chance to fundamentally reshape the highest court in the land. His departure could have major and long-lasting effects on American public policy, particularly on issues such as abortion rights, gay rights, civil rights for non-white Americans, and civil liberties. and gay rights nationwide. Kennedy’s planned retirement announcement immediately raised questions about how long the court would stand by its earlier rulings on the issue of abortion such as Roe V. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood V. Casey (1992).
In a statement, Kennedy stated that it was “the greatest honor and privilege to serve our nation in the federal judiciary for 43 years, 30 of those years in the Supreme Court.” He also sent a letter to Trump on Wednesday notifying the president of his decision. “For a member of the legal profession, it is the highest of honors to serve on this Court,” he wrote. “Please permit me by this letter to express my profound gratitude for having had the privilege to seek in each case how best to know, interpret and defend the Constitution and the laws that must always conform to its mandates and promises.”
Despite his past opposition to Justice Kennedy on several issues, President Donald Trump called Kennedy a “great justice” who has displayed “tremendous vision and heart.” in a press conference on June 28. President Trump’s first nominee to the court, Neil Gorsuch, has already had an enormous effect on U.S. policy in narrowly decided rulings this week related to Trump’s ban on travel from certain countries, abortion and labor unions. The president said his next choice would come from a previously released list of 25 candidates, which includes the ultra-conservative Appeals Judges Thomas Hardiman and William Pryor, as well as Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), a respected conservative legal scholar known for his work on civil liberties issues.
The retirement of Justice Kennedy immediately sparked much debate amongst members of Congress and legal scholars alike regarding the future of the nations highest court. Members of the Republican Party feel that Kennedy’s retirement will cement the court’s conservative majority (which has been dominant on the court since the Presidency of Ronald Reagan) and result in conservative decisions on cases ranging from Abortion, Gay Rights, Religious Freedom, and Civil Rights. On the other hand, liberals feel that a shift in a more conservative direction goes directly against the values held by a majority of American people. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) promised a Senate vote on whomever President Trump nominates by the fall. With only one Republican vote needed to derail a nomination, Democrats are hoping they might be able to sway the liberal Republican Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AL) and Susan Collins (R-ME). On the other hand, several conservative Democratic senators such as Joe Manchin (D-WV) have announced that they would support President Trump’s nominee under certain conditions.
3. Recep Tayyip Erdogan Re-elected As Turkish President
In a resounding referendum on his policies, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was re-elected on June 25 in a somewhat controversial race.
On June 24,Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan emerged victorious in a high-stakes election, defeating the most serious challenge to his 15-year political dominance in Turkey and tightening his grip on the nation. In spite of ever-growing opposition to his policies and a steadily declining economy, Erdogan declared himself the winner shortly before official results were confirmed. With nearly 98% of the votes counted, Sadi Guven, chief of Turkey’s Supreme Election Board, said that Erdogan had won an absolute majority, avoiding a runoff against his main challenger Muharrem Ince. State media put Erdogan at 52% of the vote, over 20% more than Ince’s vote total. “The winners of the June 24 elections are Turkey, the Turkish nation, sufferers of our region and all oppressed (people) in the world,” Erdogan said in a victory address in the Turkish capital Ankara.
President Erdogan starts a new five-year term as president with sweeping new powers granted in a narrowly-won referendum last year, denounced by his critics as an attempt to garner increased power and influence. Under the new Turkish governmental system, the office of prime minister is abolished, parliament’s powers reduced, and the president is accorded a wide-ranging executive authority. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said that the implementation of the constitutional amendments “is important for our stability and economic development.” It’s a new system for us,” he said, adding that it was approved by the Turkish electorate.
The reaction to Erdogan’s election victory was somewhat mixed. Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated Erdogan on his re-election, stating that “the outcome of the vote fully confirms Erdogan’s great political authority, broad support of the course pursued under his leadership towards solving vital social and economic tasks facing Turkey and enhancing the country’s foreign policy positions.” Additionally, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani similarly endorsed Erdogan’s re-election, expressing hope that the increasingly-strong relations between Iran and Turkey will deepen further. On the other hand, the leadership of the European Union (EU) questioned the results of the election and the changing nature of the Turkish government, stating that changes in governmental structure will reduce Turkey’s chances of joining the EU.
4. The government of Saudi Arabia Lifts Long-Standing Ban on Women Driving
The government of Saudi Arabia ended it’s long-standing ban on women drivers this week.
Much to the shock of numerous international observers, the government of Saudi Arabia lifted its ban on women driving on June 25. The end of the controversial ban brings the ultra-conservative nation in line with the rest of the world and represents the culmination of years of campaigning by rights activists who have sometimes been arrested, imprisoned, and tortured for their efforts. More than 120,000 women applied for the drivers license the day the ban was lifted, according to senior Ministry of Interior and Traffic Directorate officials. “Demand for obtaining driving licenses is very high,” said Maj. Gen. Mansour Al Turki, the official spokesman of the Ministry of Interior.
The change in policy, first announced in September of 2017, liberates many Saudi women from the constraints of needing to hire a male driver to travel even the smallest distances, allowing many to join the workforce, grow their own businesses, and the ability to travel throughout the country unencumbered. The removal of the ban was a key centerpiece of Vision 2030, an ambitious plan to modernize the authoritarian monarchy being spearheaded by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS)
Despite the fact that the plan represents a positive change in Saudi policy, much reform needs to be done to improve the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia. Numerous other restrictions on women’s everyday lives remain in place under the male guardian system, including the right to work, travel abroad, and the freedom to marry without one’s guardian’s permission. Additionally, numerous activists who have fought for the right for women to drive were arrested by the Saudi government last month for their efforts to bring attention to the plight that Saudi women face on a daily basis.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politicsthis week:
1. President Donald Trump Signs Immigration Executive Order Meant to Curtail the Separation of Migrant Children from Parents
On June 20, President Donald Trump on signed an executive order designed to keep together immigrant families who have been detained at the U.S.-Mexico border, while also retaining his administration’s so-called “zero-tolerance” immigration policy. “I didn’t like the sight or the feeling of families being separated,” President Trump said from the Oval Office, but at “the same time, we are keeping a very powerful border, but continue to be zero tolerance.” Trump’s executive order would keep most families together under the Department of Homeland Security, except in cases where an adult may pose a threat to a child. “You’re going to have a lot of happy people,” Trump further said as he signed the order. While the order could possibly work to quell the furor over the controversial practice of separating families at the border, it marks a stunning reversal for President Donald Trump, who has prided himself as being a hardline opponent of illegal immigration.
Vice President Mike Pence, who also appeared with Trump at the signing, said that the order would enable families to stay together in the immediate future, but added that it was still up to Congress to come up with a permanent solution, presumably as part of a larger immigration package. The executive order by President Donald Trump is certain to encounter legal challenges, much like President Obama’s 2014 immigration executive order. Some advocates will argue that children staying in detention centers violates the 1997 decision known as the Flores agreement. Although the Executive Order mandates that Attorney General Jeff Sessions request a US district court to modify the agreement, Trump acknowledged he could be headed for a fight. “There may be some litigation,” he conceded.
The separations at the border began earlier this year when Attorney General Jeff Sessions mandated that all people caught crossing into the US illegally be referred for criminal prosecution. Under that policy, adults were sent to jail under the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security, while children have been held in facilities run by the Office of Refugee Resettlement. Since the policy was implemented, over 2,000 children have been separated, according to government figures. The backlash, spurred by images of children crying, audio documenting the separation, and personal accounts from those experiencing it, was swift and intense and came from both sides of the aisle, as well as from international organizations and figures. Until June 19, the Trump Administration had been vociferously defending his immigration policy. President Trump insisted on June 18, that illegal immigrants were “infesting” the country, and asserted that the only other option was to release all the undocumented immigrants detained at the border. However, Trump insisted that his executive order was not a sign of his backing down. “The border’s just as tough,” he told reporters. “They can come in through ports of entry if they want. That’s a whole different story. And that’s coming in through a process, and the process is what we want.”
2. The US Withdraws from UN Human Rights Council, Alledging Anti-Israeli Bias
The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on June 19 in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members. UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, who has sought major changes on the council throughout her tenure, issued a blistering critique of the panel, saying it had grown more callous over the past year and become a “protector of human rights abusers and a cesspool of political bias.” She cited the admission of Congo as a member even as mass graves were being discovered there, and the failure to address human rights abuses in Venezuela and Iran. “I want to make it crystal clear that this step is not a retreat from our human rights commitments,” she said during a joint appearance with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at the department. “On the contrary. We take this step because our commitment does not allow us to remain a part of a hypocritical and self-serving organization that makes a mockery of human rights.” Haley went further to accuse governments with mediocre human rights records of seeking seats on the council to avoid scrutiny and then resisting proposals for reform. “When we made it clear we would strongly pursue council reform, these countries came out of the woodwork to oppose it,” Haley said. “Russia, China, Cuba, and Egypt all attempted to undermine our reform efforts this past year.”
The decision to leave the 47-nation body was more definitive than the lesser option of staying on as a nonvoting observer. It represents another retreat by the Trump administration from international groups and agreements whose policies it deems as out of sync with American interests on trade, defense, climate change and, human rights. Additionally, the decision leaves the council without the US playing a key role in promoting human rights around the world. “By withdrawing from the council, we lose our leverage and allow the council’s bad actors to follow their worst impulses unchecked — including running roughshod over Israel,” said Congressman Eliot Engel (D-NY), the top Democrat on the House committee that oversees the State Department. “However, this administration’s approach when it sees a problem is to take the United States off the field,” he added. “That undermines our standing in the world and allows our adversaries to fill the void.”
The US is midway through a three-year term on the council, which is intended to denounce and investigate human rights abuses. A U.S. departure deprives Israel of its chief defender at a forum where Israel’s human rights record UN human rights chief slammed the Trump Administration’s policy of separating migrant parents from their children after they enter the United States at the Mexican border, calling it “unconscionable” and akin to child abuse.
3. Latest Efforts to Hold Talks on Ending Sudan Civil War Fail
The most recent efforts to negotiate an end to South Sudan’s Civil War ended in failure this week as both sides refused to meet face-to-face.
The latest attempt at ending South Sudan’s five-year civil war failed on June 22, when President Salva Kiir rejected working again with rival Riek Machar after their first face-to-face meeting in almost two years. “This is simply because we have had enough of him,” government spokesman Michael Makuei said. The rivals met this week in neighboring Ethiopia at its prime minister’s invitation, shaking hands and being coaxed into an awkward embrace as they held direct talks. They shook hands again as regional heads of state and met to discuss the civil war in the world’s youngest nation. But it soon became clear that while South Sudan’s government was open to having the opposition in the vice president’s role, it would not accept Machar’s return to that post. Machar fled the country after new fighting broke out in the city of Juba in July 2016, ending a brief attempt at peace in which he returned to his role as Kiir’s deputy.
Opposition spokesman Lam Paul Gabriel said “there was nothing agreed upon in the talks” but that the face-to-face meeting with South Sudan’s president was useful “because we are able to see violence in Salva’s eyes.” Gabriel also accused the East African regional bloc of favoring South Sudan’s government and putting its own interests ahead of “genuine peace,” adding: “This is completely disappointing.” The warring sides are to meet again on June 25 in Kenya. Machar will attend the Khartoum meeting, Makuei said. “We believe that peace is going to come in the coming one month or so,” South Sudan’s Cabinet affairs minister, Martin Elia Lomoro, told reporters even as observers expressed skepticism.
South Sudan’s civil war, which started just two years after the country won independence from Sudan, has continued despite multiple attempts at peace deals. Tens of thousands of people have died and millions have fled to create Africa’s largest refugee crisis since the 1994 Rwandan genocide. Millions of others still in the country are near famine, while the warring sides have been blamed for obstructing or slowing the delivery of desperately needed aid.
The latest attempt at a cease-fire in December was violated within hours. Both sides have been accused of widespread abuses such as gang rapes against civilians, including along ethnic lines. A number of South Sudan officials have been accused by human rights groups of profiting from the conflict and blocking the path to peace, and the US has threatened to withdraw aid to the country. Early this month the UN Security Council adopted a United States-sponsored resolution that threatens an arms embargo on South Sudan and sanctions six people, including the country’s defense chief, if fighting doesn’t stop and a political agreement is not reached. The resolution asks Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to report to the council on that by June 30.
4. Canadian Parliament Approves Bill Legalizing Marijuana
The Canadian government passed legislation allowing the recreational use of marijuana this week, become the second country in the world to do so.
On June 19, the Canadian parliament voted to legalize the recreational use of cannabis, making Canada the first G7 country to legalize marijuana. The law regulates its cultivation, sets limits on possession and prohibits marketing that would encourage consumption. When the law comes into effect, Canada will be the second country in the world, after Uruguay, to make it legal to puff marijuana for pleasure. Bill Blair, a Liberal Party member of the Canadian Parliament, stated that if the bill is passed this week, marijuana could be legal by September, lining up with a late-summer schedule proposed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau last month.
Concerns expressed about the bill by members of Parliament include how to keep marijuana away from children and how to address organized crime and traffic deaths related to marijuana use. The current bill restricts marijuana production, possession and sale to those over the age of 18. Canadian Senator Peter Harder acknowledged his colleagues’ reservations about the bill’s specifics in a statement on June 18. “Given the exceptional amount of work that went into the Senate’s study of this bill, I understand that some of these outcomes are frustrating for some,” he said. “I know that some of these frustrations are rooted in deeply held policy views and personal values and that much disagreement will not end with our vote on this message, whatever its result.”
This video by CaspianReport discusses President Donald Trump’s decision to unilaterally withdraw from the Iranian nuclear agreement. On May 8, President Donald Trump pulled the plug on the Iranian nuclear agreement, saying that the Iranian government has failed to live up to its obligations and violated the spirit of the accord. Yet since no tangible evidence that was presented, the unilateral decision places the US in violation of the treaty and subject to international scorn. Despite the decision, much remains to be seen regarding what steps both Iran and the US will take next.
In July 2015, an agreement was concluded with Iran, China, France, Italy, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union, which is known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). It provided that Iran’s nuclear activities would be limited, in exchange for a reduction in some of the US sanctions implemented against the country in 1979, 1984, 1987, 1995, 2006, and 2010. According to the JCPOA, the President of the United States would certify that Iran would adhere to the terms of the agreement every ninety days.
Ever since he announced his candidacy for President in early 2015, Donald Trump made the renegotiation of the JCPOA one of his main campaign promises, stating at a campaign rally that “this deal, if I win, will be a totally different deal. This will be a totally different deal. Ripping up is always tough.” Trump described the Iran deal as “the worst deal ever,” and argued that its implementation will lead to “a nuclear holocaust” and the destruction of Israel and Saudi Arabia. Under the Trump administration, the State Department did certify that Iran was compliant with the agreements terms in both March and July of 2017. On October 14, 2017, President Trump announced that the United States would not make the certification provided for under U.S. domestic law, on the basis that the suspension of sanctions was not “proportionate and appropriate,” but stopped short of terminating the deal.
Despite withdrawing from the agreement, the Trump Administration announced that it would be willing to renegotiate a “tougher, more comprehensive deal” with Iran. President Donald Trump proposed that any new agreement with Iran would include indefinite restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program (the original agreement only lasted 15 years and became noticeably less strong after the first 10 years), as well as restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program. Additionally, the Trump Administration stated that a new agreement would also limit Iran’s foreign policy plans. In response to Iran agreeing to these new provisions, the Trump Administration would remove all sanctions against the Iranian government, restart diplomatic ties, and work to modernize the Iranian economy.
Overall, the withdrawal was praised by most members of the Republican Party, supporters of the neo-conservative movement, and countries such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. Others in the US, including the former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Joe Biden criticized the decision by the Trump administration, while various countries that had been signatories including the UK, France, Italy, Germany, China, and Russia condemned the decision in the strongest terms. Additionally, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini denounced the Trump Administrations actions, saying that such actions on the part of the US government are more proof that the Iranian people can never trust the US. Moreover, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif stated that his country is “taking all necessary steps in preparation for Iran to pursue industrial-scale enrichment without any restrictions, using the results of the latest research and development of Iran’s brave nuclear scientists.”
The withdraw of the US from the JCPOA places both the US, its allies, and the wider Middle East on an uncertain course. It is likely that the renewal of sanctions and international isolation will do little to change the policies of the Iranian government, as the sanctions have bolstered the power of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) by weakening the Iranian private sector. Additionally, it is argued that the sanctions will only serve to strengthen the conservative movement within the country. The strengthening of the conservative movement in Iran will make political reform less likely and result in increased political repression against the Iranian people by the government. Most notably, the demise of the JCPOA makes a joint US/Israeli/Saudi military strike against Iran much more likely. Such a scenario may spark a major international conflict and destabilize the Middle East for generations to come.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politicsthis week:
1. President Donald Trump Alienates American’s Allies at G7 Summit Due to Erratic Behavior, Questionable Comments
In his second G7 conference as President, Donald Trump and his erratic policies decrease certainty in the future role of the US in the eyes of European leaders.
In his second G7 Summit since assuming office, President Donald Trump alienated the closest allies of the US at the annual summit of the group in Canada with his aggressive trade declarations and a surprising suggestion that Russia should be readmitted to the exclusive club of major economic powers. After leaving early, President Trump went on Twitter to blow up the agreement forged at the meeting. Trump exited the Quebec resort on June 9 where the group had gathered, leaving other world leaders whipsawed and uncertain about their future relationship with the US, to head to Singapore for a summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on Tuesday. Trump’s actions added to the anxiety of longtime US allies, who are alarmed to see him lashing out against them while he is advocating for Russian President Vladimir Putin and cozying up to North Korea.
PM Justin Trudeau of Canada acted so meek and mild during our @G7 meetings only to give a news conference after I left saying that, “US Tariffs were kind of insulting” and he “will not be pushed around.” Very dishonest & weak. Our Tariffs are in response to his of 270% on dairy!
Just hours after leaving the summit in Quebec on June 9, President Donald Trump abruptly retracted US support for a joint statement signed by every nation in the group and blasted Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “meek and mild.” Firing off tweets from aboard Air Force One, Trump said he was reversing the US position in response to Trudeau’s comments at a press conference at the end of the summit. Trudeau had pledged to impose tariffs on the US in response to Trump’s recent steel and aluminum tariffs against Canada. “PM Justin Trudeau of Canada acted so meek and mild during our @G7 meetings only to give a news conference after I left saying that, ‘US Tariffs were kind of insulting’ and he ‘will not be pushed around,’” Trump tweeted. “Very dishonest & weak.” At his closing news conference after Trump left the summit early, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau warned that his country would respond to Trump’s trade moves, said the President’s argument that its trade policy threatened US national security was “insulting,” and added, “we will not be pushed around.”
https://youtu.be/qKLU8_jDMaQ
Most political observers feel that the G7 summit ended in abject failure and only served to highlight the ideological and political divisions between Trump and Western allies and fueled fears that the most successful alliance in history is beginning to erode. “What worries me most, however, is the fact that the rules-based international order is being challenged, quite surprisingly not by the usual suspects but by its main architect and guarantor, the US,” said Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, said in Quebec before the spat over the communique. Additionally, German Prime Minister Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron described the G7 summit as a “sobering” and “depressing” experience due to their strong disagreements with Trump on issues ranging from international trade, diplomacy, and environmental policy. Perhaps the results of the G7 summit show that the role of international cooperation and agreements is becoming less and less important in the eyes of powerful countries such as the US.
2. US Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Colorado baker in Same-Sex Wedding Cake Case
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Colorado baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex couple.
In a 7-2 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a cake to celebrate the marriage of a same-sex couple because of religious reasons. The court held that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed hostility toward the baker due to his religious beliefs. The ruling is a win for baker Jack Phillips, who cited his beliefs as a Christian but leaves unsettled the broader constitutional question of the balance between religious liberty and outright discrimination. The case was one of the most anticipated rulings of the term and was considered by some as a follow-up from the court’s Obergefell v. Hodges decision three years ago that made legal same-sex marriage at the national level. That opinion, also written by Kennedy, expressed respect for those with religious objections to gay marriage. Because Justice Clarence Thomas concurred in part, the judgment of the court on the case was 7-2 but the opinion on the rationale was 6-2 in favor of Phillips’s right to refuse service.
Overall the reaction to the ruling has been mixed. Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Kristen Waggoner, who represented Phillips, praised the ruling and stated that “Jack serves all customers; he simply declines to express messages or celebrate events that violate his deeply held beliefs. Creative professionals who serve all people should be free to create art consistent with their convictions without the threat of government punishment.” She further added that the case “will affect a number of cases for years to come in free exercise jurisprudence. That’s how the court’s decisions work,” Waggoner also stated. On the other hand, Rachel B. Tiven, the head of Lambda Legal, called the decision a “limited, fact-specific victory” for religious conservatives. “The Court today has offered dangerous encouragement to those who would deny civil rights to LGBT people and people living with HIV. Religious freedom under our Constitution has always meant the right to believe whatever you wish but not to act on your beliefs in ways that harm others. The Court today alarmingly fails to heed that distinction,” stated Tiven in an interview following the court’s decision.
3. Annual “Quds (Jerusalem) Day” Rallies Held in Iran in Protest of Israeli Policies & the Ideology of Zionism’
The annual Quds Day rallies were held in Iran this week to protest Israeli policies regarding Palestine, as well as US imperialism throughout the world.
Iran held its annual day of protest against Israeli policies and the political ideology of Zionism on June 8, determined to show defiance at a time of mounting pressure from the United States and its regional allies.”The US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel want to put Iran in a corner, but they don’t know that with this action they are threatening their own security,” said parliament speaker Ali Larijani to a crowd of several hundred thousand in Tehran.
An estimated 20 million Iranians took to the streets in the capital and other cities for Quds (Jerusalem) Day, held every year since 1980 to show support for the Palestinian people and opposition to the human rights abuses carried out by the Israeli government ever since its inception 70 years ago. President Hassan Rouhani called for “all” Iranians to turn out for the rallies. Rouhani further stated the demonstrations must send a message “to the usurper Zionist Regime [Israel] that they have not forgotten the Palestinian land and the Holy Quds and the freedom of the Holy Quds is still the holy cause of the Iranian people and all Muslims.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JqB3R9eWds
In addition to Iran, several other Quds Day rallies were held throughout parts of the Middle East as well as in the UK, France, Germany, and Canada. This years’ rallies take on a high level of significance due to factors ranging from the decision by the Trump Administration to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, escalating Israeli human rights abuses against the Palestinian people, and the growing alliance between Saudi Arabia and Israel.
4. President Trump says he is Likely to Support Ending Blanket Federal Ban on Marijuana
President Trump surprised many observers this week with his announcement that he would be in favor of lifting the federal ban on Marijuana usage.
President Donald Trump said he likely will support a congressional effort to end the federal ban on marijuana, a major step that would reshape the pot industry and end the threat of a Justice Department crackdown. Trump’s remarks put him sharply at odds with Attorney General Jeff Sessions on the issue. The bill in question (pushed by a bipartisan coalition) would allow states to go forward with legalization unencumbered by threats of federal prosecution. In contrast, Attorney General Sessions has ramped-up these threats and has also lobbied Congress to reduce current protections for medical marijuana. President Trump made his comments to a group of reporters on June 8 just before he boarded a helicopter on his way to the G-7 summit in Canada. His remarks came the day after the bipartisan group of lawmakers proposed their measure.
One of the lead sponsors is Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO), who is aligned with Trump on some policy issues such as economics, but recently has fought with the administration over the Justice Department’s threats to restart prosecutions in states that have legalized marijuana. “I support Sen. Gardner,” Trump said when asked about the bill. “I know exactly what he’s doing. We’re looking at it. But I probably will end up supporting that, yes.” The legislative proposal, which is also championed by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), would reshape the legal landscape for marijuana if it becomes law. Trump’s support could also have a major impact, providing political cover for Republicans who worry about being tagged as soft on drugs.
Despite the popularity of legalizing marijuana, the proposed bill still faces a difficult road ahead in Congress. A majority of Republican members of Congress, as well as several conservative Democrats such as Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), are opposed to reform in federal drug policy, arguing that marijuana is a dangerous substance that contributes to societal disorder. Additionally, lobbying groups such as the National Narcotic Officers’ Associations‘ cautioned Trump against supporting the bill and instead endorsed Attorney General Session’s efforts to expand the federal War on Drugs.
5. NASA Finds ‘Organic’ Substances Linked to Life On Mars, Potentially Increasing Public Support for Space Program
NASA Finds Ancient Organic Material, possibly linked to life, on the Martian surface.
The US space agency (NASA) says its Mars exploration vehicle has discovered chemical substances necessary for life. Scientists reported that NASA’s Curiosity Rover found large amounts of organic molecules in a thousands-year-old rock in an area called the Gale Crater. The area on Mars is believed to have once contained a large lake. The discovery of organic molecules suggests that ancient conditions on Mars may have supported life. Ashwin Vasavada a scientist working on the Curiosity project stated that the chances of being able to find signs of ancient life (perhaps even remnants of a humanoid civilization that existed millions of years ago) with future missions “just went up.” Additionally, Jennifer Eigenbrode (an astrobiologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center) noted that there is a strong possibility that the organic molecules were, in fact, created by some form of ancient life on the Martian surface.
The impact of these findings is significant because it may result in increased funding for space programs such as NASA, as well as higher levels of support for space exploration efforts by the US. Currently, the total budget for NASA stands at $18.4 billion, less than 0.5% of the federal budget. Additionally, an overwhelming majority of Americans today feel that the federal government spends far too much on space exploration and that the money would be better spent on education, public health, and developing alternative energy sources. The discovery of remnants of an ancient civilization on Mars might create the perception in the eyes of the American people that further space research and exploration is worth it and that the federal government should rethink its priorities to make such efforts a reality.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politicsthis week:
1. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Puts Forward New Trump Administration Policy Towards Iran
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo put forward the Trump Administration’s new Iran policy in a speech at the Heritage Foundation on Tuesday.
In a speech at the Heritage Foundation on May 21, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called for the negotiation of a new agreement with the government of Iran that would go far beyond the single focus of the 2015 agreement and would have the status of a formal treaty. The 2015 settlement concluded under the Obama administration dealt only with the nuclear program and was not a treaty but rather a UN-endorsed executive agreement between the parties. Unless such a treaty can be reached, Pompeo warned that Iran would face tough sanctions that would leave it “battling to keep its economy alive.” Pompeo vowed Trump’s approach would ensure Iran would never develop a nuclear weapon. On the other hand, the US government offered offer Iran a series of dramatic concessions if it agrees to make “major changes.” Under a new agreement, the US. would be willing to lift all sanctions, restore full diplomatic and commercial ties with Iran, and even support the modernization of its economy, according to President Donald Trump.
Secretary of State Pompeo put forward 12 requirements that Iran must take in a potential agreement with the US as per the order of President Donald Trump. Two such conditions would be that Iran would have to allow nuclear inspectors access to all sites throughout the country (despite the fact that such a condition goes against international law and the principles of state sovereignty), and disclose all previous efforts to build a nuclear weapon. Pompeo also demanded that the Iranian government would have to walk away from the core pillars of its foreign policy, including its support for militant groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the Popular Mobilization Forced, as well as its persistent opposition to the ideologies of Zionism and Wahhabism. Iran must also “release all US citizens” missing in Iran or being held on “spurious charges” under a new agreement.
In response, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani described Pompeo’s speech, as well as the Trump Administrations Iran policy as unacceptable and took issue with the fact that the secretary of state previously led the CIA, long demonized in Iran for its role in a 1953 coup. “A guy who had been active in an espionage center for years now wants to make a decision for Iran and other countries from the position of a foreign minister. It is not acceptable under any circumstance,” Rouhani said to a group of university teachers in Tehran. Additionally, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif stated that this new approach to Iran would further isolate the US from its allies in Europe, who have expressed strong support for the 2015 nuclear agreement and claimed that Iran has upheld its end of the bargain.
2. President Donald Trump Flip-Flops on North Korean Summit
President Donald Trump gave mixed signals this week regarding the upcoming US-North Korean Summit, signaling that the Administration is unprepared for diplomacy.
Throughout this week, President Donald Trump gave a number of mixed signals regarding his planned June 12 summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. On May 24, President Donald Trump announced in an open letter to Kim Jong-Un that he would be canceling the planned June 12 summit in Singapore with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, blaming recent statements by Pyongyang. “I believe that this is a tremendous setback for North Korea and, indeed, a setback for the world,” said the president in noontime remarks in the White House Roosevelt Room prior to signing an unrelated bill. The president also warned that the military forces of the United States are “more ready than we have ever been before,” along with allies South Korea and Japan, should North Korea take any “foolish or reckless acts.”
North Korea’s reaction to President Trump’s decision was subdued and conciliatory. The North’s official news agency put out a statement by Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan saying, “We had set in high regards President Trump’s efforts, unprecedented by any other president, to create a historic U.S.-North Korea summit. We tell the United States once more that we are open to resolving problems at any time in any way.” But the statement said Trump’s decision was not in line with the world’s wishes and that Kim made the utmost effort to hold the summit. The North Koreans were a no-show for a preparatory meeting in Singapore last week, part of a trail of broken promises, lack of good faith and poor communication prompting the president’s decision, according to administration officials. “We simply couldn’t get them to pick up the phone,” a White House senior official told reporters during a background briefing Thursday afternoon. The last straw, according to the White House, was an insult of Vice President Mike Pence earlier Thursday in a statement by North Korea’s vice foreign minister, Choe Son Hui. She called Pence a “political dummy” and warned of a nuclear confrontation.
Despite the fact that he canceled the summit, President Donald Trump backtracked on his previous actions later in the week. In a tweet on May 27, the President stated that the summit is back on schedule and that the preparations for the conference are underway. Additionally, Trump further stated that he truly believes that “North Korea has brilliant potential and will be a great economic and financial Nation one day,” a stark contrast to his previous comments decrying the North Korean government and calling for military action against the country. These actions further illustrate the fact that the Trump Administration lacks an effective strategy in the realm of foreign policy and is wholly unprepared in dealing with diplomatic matters.
Our United States team has arrived in North Korea to make arrangements for the Summit between Kim Jong Un and myself. I truly believe North Korea has brilliant potential and will be a great economic and financial Nation one day. Kim Jong Un agrees with me on this. It will happen!
3. Stacey Abrams Pulls off Historic Upset in Georgia Primary To Become the First African-American Female Gubernatorial Nominee in US History
Georgia State Legislator Stacey Abrams made history this week by becoming the first African-American woman ever nominated for governor and has a strong chance to become the first African-American governor of a Southern state in over a century.
Georgia Democrats selected the first African-American woman to be a major party nominee for governor in the United States on May 22, choosing Stacey Abrams, a former State House leader, who will test just how much the state’s traditionally conservative politics are shifting. By handily defeating Stacey Evans, also a former state legislator, Abrams also became Georgia’s first African-American nominee for governor, a prize that has eluded earlier generations of African-American candidates in the state. The general election is sure to draw intense national attention as Georgia voters determine whether an African-American woman can win in the Deep South, a region that has not elected an African-American governor since the early 1870s. In the general election, Stacey Abrams will face either Lieutenant Governor Casey Cagle, or Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, the main Republican candidates vying for the gubernatorial nomination in the July primary run-off election.
Overall, Stacey Abram’s victory in the Georgia Democratic gubernatorial primary represents both the changing voting patterns in much of the American South, as well as the ever-declining popularity of President Donald Trump and his racist and bigoted rhetoric. Ever since the 1990s, Georgia (and a majority of the American South) have overwhelmingly supported the Republican Party due to the conservative stance expressed by Republican Party leaders on issues such as civil rights, abortion, LGBT rights, and gun control. Over the past few years, however, parts of the South have been trending toward the Democratic Party due to changes in generational values, demographic shifts, and economic changes in the region as a whole. Additionally, the bigoted rhetoric and failed policies of the Trump Administration and the Republican have angered even a number of traditionally conservative white voters in parts of the South, thus encouraging them to consider supporting Democratic Party candidates for the first time in nearly a generation.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politicsthis week:
1. US, UK, and France Bomb Syria Over Chemical Weapons Attack
The US and several of its European allies launched airstrikes in Syria in response to allegations of chemical weapons use by the Assad government.
The US and several of its allies launched airstrikes on April 13 against several Syrian military targets in response to a supposed chemical attack near Damascus ordered last week by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that killed nearly 40 people. The UK and France joined the US in the strikes in an action that was meant to show Western resolve in the face of what the Trump Administration called persistent violations of international law by the Assad Regime since the start of the Syrian Civil War in 2011. “These are not the actions of a man, they are crimes of a monster instead,” President Trump said of Assad’s presumed chemical attack in an oval office address.
The operations carried out by the US, UK, and France in Syria were somewhat limited than originally anticipated. The main target in the operation was the Barzah Research and Development Center, a scientific research center located outside of Damascus. The facility was hit with 76 missiles, utterly destroying the facility and setting back the Syrian chemical weapons program back at least several years according to Secretary of Defense James Mattis. The other two targets were part of the Him Shinshar chemical weapons complex, located outside the city of Homs. The strikes completely destroyed the facility and the installations chemical weapons bunker was irreparably damaged. Overall, most military strategists and commentators feel that the operations in Syria were successful and achieved their goals in weakening the Assad Regime.
The international reaction to the US strike in Syria was mixed overall. Several US allies in the Middle East such as Saudi Arabia and Israel applauded the strike and pledged to expand their support for regime change in Syria. On the other hand, Russia, Iran, China, as well as several militia active in the Middle East such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthi Movement forcefully condemned the strikes. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the strikes were a violation of international law and viewed them as a direct threat to Russian interests in the Middle East. Additionally, the Russian government warned of “dire consequences” for the US, sparking fears of an open conflict between the US and Russia.
2. House Speaker Paul Ryan Announced Retirement, Indicating Tough Road for Republican Party in Midterm Elections
House Speaker Paul Ryan announced his retirement this week, signaling a tough battle ahead for the Republicans in the 2018 midterm elections.
On April 11, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) stunned the political world, as well as the Republican Party leadership, by announcing that he will not run for re-election for a tenth term in Congress and will step down as House Speaker after the midterm elections. In delivering the news to the press, Ryan said that among his proudest moments in Congress, the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Trump Tax Cuts”) and the efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”), are the ones that stand out the most. The retirement of Ryan from Congress creates an opening for the Republican Congressional leadership. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) is likely to run for House Republican Leader but is expected to experience a strong challenge from Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), a known supporter of white supremacist activist and Trump supporter David Duke.
Even though Paul Ryan framed his retirement from Congress as a personal decision related to his family, the retirement creates another open House seat for the GOP to defend in a midterm election that is expected to be difficult for the Republican Party. Additionally, Ryan’s retirement serves as a vote of non-confidence for the Republican Party going into the midterm elections. Even though Ryan’s seat was previously considered to be “safe Republican as long as he was running for re-election, the seat is now considered to be one of many likely Democratic pick-ups in the midterm election. Randy Bryce and Cathy Myers are the two Democratic candidates who have announced their interest in the seat, whereas white nationalist activist Paul Nehlen is the most likely Republican nominee for the seat. Most polling shows Randy Bryce leading the Democratic primary and that the general election at this point is his to lose.
3. President Trump promises GOP lawmaker to Protect the Rights of States That Have Already Legalized Marijuana Usage
President Donald Trump announced his approval for efforts to protect the rights of states that have already legalized marijuana, shifting away from his “law-and-order” image.
President Donald Trump has promised to support legislation protecting the marijuana industry in states that have legalized the drug, a move that could lift a threat to the industry made by Attorney General Jeff Sessions back in January. Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO), a strong supporter of efforts at the state level to legalize marijuana, said on April 13 that Trump made the pledge to him in a conversation two days earlier. This action marked the latest flip by President Trump on the issue of marijuana legalization. Trump pledged on the campaign trail to respect the rights of states and localities that legalized marijuana, but hinted as President that he would support expanding the death penalty to cover individuals who both deal marijuana as well as use the substance. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Gardner’s account was accurate and the president supported states’ rights in the matter.
Senator Cory Gardner has been pushing to reverse a decision made by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in January that removed prohibitions that kept federal prosecutors from pursuing cases against people who were following pot laws in states such as Colorado that have legalized the drug. “President Trump has assured me that he will support a federalism-based legislative solution to fix this states’ rights issue once and for all,” Gahttps://twitter.com/RonWyden/status/984903124904284160rdner said in a statement to the press. Additionally, Gardner pledged to introduce bipartisan legislation keeping the federal government from interfering in state marijuana markets.
The reaction to the change in the Trump Administration’s marijuana policy has been met with much public support by even some of the President’s most persistent critics. “We may now be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel,” said Mason Tvert, who spearheaded the 2012 proposal legalizing marijuana in Colorado. “This is one more step toward ending the irrational policy of marijuana prohibition, not only in Colorado but throughout the country.” Additionally, former House Speaker John Boehner announced that he was switching his position on marijuana legalization in response to the change in policy by the Trump Administration and would now lobby on behalf of the legal marijuana industry. On the other hand, several other supporters of legalization were wary given the president’s record of reversing positions and pledges of legislative support. “This cannot be another episode of realDonaldTrump telling somebody whatever they want to hear, only to change directions later on,” wrote Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) in a twitter post.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week: 1. US Expels 60 Russian diplomats in Response to UK nerve agent attack
The Trump Administration ordered the expulsion of 60 Russia diplomats this week, signaling a harder line approach to Russia.
On March 26, President Donald Trump ordered the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats the US identified as intelligence agents and the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle. President Trump took this action after the US joined the United Kingdom in accusing Russia of attempting to murder a Russian dissident and his daughter using a nerve agent on UK soil. The action comes just two weeks after the Trump administration leveled the first sanctions against Russia for its interference in the 2016 US presidential election.”The United States takes this action in conjunction with our NATO allies and partners around the world in response to Russia’s use of a military-grade chemical weapon on the soil of the United Kingdom, the latest in its ongoing pattern of destabilizing activities around the world,” said White House press secretary Sarah Sanders.
British Prime Minister Theresa May called the move “the largest collective expulsion of Russian intelligence officers in history.”We have no disagreement with the Russian people who have achieved so much through their country’s great history. But President Putin’s regime is carrying out acts of aggression against our shared values,” she said. “The United Kingdom will stand shoulder to shoulder with the EU and NATO to face down these threats.” As expected, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov denounced the actions on the part of the US and the UK, arguing that they are in violation of international law and will only worsen the already tense relationship between Russia and the West. As a retaliatory measure, the Russian government ordered the expulsion of 60 US diplomats and ordered the closure of the US Consulate in St. Petersburg for the foreseeable future.
2. Trump Administration Proposes Putting Question on 2020 US Census Asking Individuals Their Citizenship Status
The Trump Administration proposed adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census this week, sparking protest from states such as New York and California.
On March 26, senior officials in the Trump Administration announced that The 2020 census will ask respondents whether they are United States citizens, the Commerce Department announced Monday night, agreeing to a Trump administration request with highly charged political and social implications that many officials feared would result in a substantial undercount. The Justice Department had requested the change in December, arguing that asking participants about their citizenship status in the decennial census would help enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which aims to prevent voting rights violations. “Citizenship questions have also been included on prior decennial censuses,” explained officials. “Between 1820 and 1950, almost every decennial census asked a question on citizenship in some form. Today, surveys of sample populations, such as the Current Population Survey and the ACS, continue to ask a question on citizenship.”
Opponents of the citizenship question have argued in the past that it causes people to shy away from taking the census, and experts believe a drop in numbers could lead to an inaccurate count of the US population. “The inclusion of a question on citizenship threatens to undermine the accuracy of the Census as a whole,” wrote Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA.) and her colleagues in an open letter sent to the Justice Department in January. “Given this administration’s rhetoric and actions relating to immigrants and minority groups, the citizen question request is deeply troubling,” they said. “Such a question would likely depress participation in the 2020 Census from immigrants who fear the government could use the information to target them. It could also decrease response rates from U.S. citizens who live in mixed-status households, and who might fear putting immigrant family members at risk through providing information to the government” said Feinstein and her colleagues in the letter.
In response to the proposed changes, 17 states announced that they would bring suit against the Trump Administration. Led by New York and California, the leadership in the 17 states feel that this proposal would negatively impact the distribution of federal resources to states with large populations of undocumented immigrants and place an unfair advantage to the Republican Party in terms of redistricting efforts after 2020. “The census numbers provide the backbone for planning how our communities can grow and thrive in the coming decade,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement. “California simply has too much to lose for us to allow the Trump Administration to botch this important decennial obligation. What the Trump Administration is requesting is not just alarming, it is an unconstitutional attempt to discourage an accurate census count.”
3. Protests Erupt Gaza in Opposition to the Continued Israeli Occupation of Palestine
Major protests broke out along the Israel-Gaza border this week, resulting in the deaths of 16 and international outcry against Israeli policies.
On March 30, tens of thousands of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip participated in non-violent protests as part of the Great Return March. Palestinian participants soon began walking towards the fence that separates the strip from Israel and were met with live fire from the Israeli military that saw hundreds of people injured and 16 killed.
The protests were held to commemorate Land Day and demonstrate for the rights of Palestinian refugees to be resettled in Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Secretary Avigdor Lieberman responded to the protests by claiming that Hamas, which has controlled Gaza since 2007, had sent women and children to the fence as human shields. Rather than expressing the grievances of Palestinians at large, the protests were to be seen in the context of long-standing tensions between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
The Israeli response drew widespread criticism around the world, with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres calling for an independent inquiry into Friday’s events. Additionally, several countries in the Middle East condemned the response to the protests by the Israeli government. Perhaps the country that most forcefully condemned the actions of Israel was Iran. In a Twitter post on March 31, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif stated that “On the eve of Passover (of all days), which commemorates God liberating Prophet Moses and his people from tyranny, Zionist tyrants murder peaceful Palestinian protesters – whose land they have stolen – as they march to escape their cruel and inhuman apartheid bondage.” On the other hand, the US blocked a UN Resolution denouncing the Israeli response and placed the blame squarely on the part of the Palestinian protestors.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Donald Trump Fires Secretary of State Rex Tillerson
President Donald Trump dismissed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson amid a declining relationship and a disappointing tenure.
On March 13, President Donald Trump announced that he has fired Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and will nominate CIA Director Mike Pompeo to succeed him, replacing his top diplomat ahead of a potential high-stakes meeting between the US President and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Tillerson’s departure follows months of tension between him and Trump. The resignation represents the biggest shakeup of the Trump Cabinet so far and had been expected since last October when reports surfaced about a falling out between Trump and Tillerson. President Trump publicly undercut Secretary Tillerson’s diplomatic initiatives numerous times since he came to office over a year ago. For example, President Trump criticized Tillerson’s positions on Iran, the European Union, NATO, and Russia. Most recently, Trump denounced Tillerson’s most recent comments on Russian aggression towards NATO member-states such the UK, France, and Germany. Secretary Tillerson also appeared to be out of the loop last week when Trump announced he would meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un sometime in May to discuss the countries nuclear program and work to defuse the tensions between both countries.
For Tillerson’s replacement, President Donald Trump named CIA Director Mike Pompeo and moved up Gina Haspel to the post of CIA director. In a Twitter post, Trump stated that “Mike Pompeo, Director of the CIA, will become our new Secretary of State. He will do a fantastic job! Thank you to Rex Tillerson for his service! Gina Haspel will become the new Director of the CIA, and the first woman so chosen. Congratulations to all!” Despite the optimistic tone of President Trump regarding these changes, they point to an Executive Branch in continual flux and crisis.
2. US students Stage Walkouts Protesting Gun Violence & The Failure of the US Government to Enact Meaningful Gun Control Legislation
The debate over gun control took an interesting turn this week with the holding of several protests.
Nearly 10,000 students throughout the US and several other countries walked out of school to demand action on gun violence on March 14 in one of the biggest student protests since the Vietnam War era. Braving harsh weather conditions and threats of discipline in states as varied as New Jersey, Ohio, and Georgia, the students carried signs with messages such as “Am I next?,” denounced the NRA and their opposition to gun control, and expressed remembrance for the 17 people who were killed in the February 14 school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
In addition to the walk-out protests, several protests were staged near the US Capitol building calling on the Trump Administration and Congress to pass strong gun control legislation. The largest group protesting was made up of several hundred students and family members of victims of school shootings. Senator Bernie Sanders (D/I-VT) addressed the crowd, saying that “We are very proud of what you are doing,” the former presidential candidate said. “You, the young people of this country, are leading the nation.” Additionally, Sanders commended the students for “leading the nation in the right direction” and opposing the National Rifle Association (NRA).
3. UK-Russian Diplomatic Row Grows
The already-tense relationship between Russia and the UK decreased even further with the revelation of the poisoning if a Russian dissident on UK soil.
The ongoing diplomatic dispute between the UK and Russia regarding the poisoning of Russian dissident Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia grew in intensity this week. On March 16, UK Foreign Minister Boris Johnson announced that the substance used to poison both Skripal and his daughter was a nerve agent produced in Russia and that the poisoning was ordered on the part of Russian President Vladimir Putin. In response to these allegations, UK Prime Minister Theresa May ordered the expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats from the UK and broke off high-level diplomatic ties with Russia for the first time since 1927. Additionally, the UK government is considering invoking Article V of the NATO treaty, which expressly states that Collective an attack against one member-state is considered as an attack against all member-states. The governments of France, Germany, and the Czech Republic expresses solidarity with the UK and further pledge to step-up efforts to isolate Russia and bring about the removal of the Putin Regime from power.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov denounced the allegations, saying that Russia ceased its chemical weapons program in the early 1970s and that the allegations are another attempt to weaken the Russian state. Additionally, US President Donald Trump expressed skepticism regarding the charges by the UK, stating that it is uncertain that the Russian government ordered the attack.
4. House Republicans Break With Intelligence Community, Clearing President Trump of Wrongdoing in the 2016 Election
The House Republican Judiciary Committee defied the intelligence community by clearing President Donald Trump of any charges of collusion with Russia in the 2016 Election.
On March 12, Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee reached an opposite conclusion from the intelligence community by announcing that Russian President Vladimir Putin was not trying to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election. The Republicans also said they found no evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia and that they are shutting down their yearlong investigation. Trump seized on the news Monday evening, tweeting that “The House Intelligence Committee Has, After a 14-Moth Long Investigation, Found No Evidence of Collusion or Coordination Between the Trump Campaign and Russia” in order to sway the results of the 2016 Presidential Election.
Congressman Mike Conaway (R-TX), stated that the committee had concluded its interviews for the Russia investigation, and the Republican staff had prepared a 150-page draft report that they would give to Democrats to review on Tuesday morning. The committee Republicans said Russians did meddle in the elections to sow chaos, but they disagreed with the intelligence community’s assessment that they sought to help Trump.
Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, slammed the Republican decision to end the investigation. “While the majority members of our committee have indicated for some time that they have been under great pressure to end the investigation, it is nonetheless another tragic milestone for this Congress, and represents yet another capitulation to the executive branch,” Said Schiff. “By ending its oversight role in the only authorized investigation in the House,” Schiff feels that “the Majority has placed the interests of protecting the President over protecting the country, and history will judge its actions harshly.”
Here are the main events that occurred in Politicsthis week:
1. Florida School Shooting Leave 17 Dead, 15 Wounded
A school shooting in a Florida high school on February 14 resulted in the deaths of 17 individuals and renewed public debate over the issue of gun control.
On February 14, a mass shooting occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. 17 people were killed and 15 were wounded, making it one of the deadliest school massacres since Columbine some 19 years earlier. The shooting was carried out by Nikolas Jacob Cruz, a 19-year old high school senior with a known past of threatening his fellow students, posting hate content on his social media accounts, and bragging about killing animals. Additionally, Cruz holds extremist views and advocated the killing of African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Muslim-Americans, and the LGBT community. These abhorrent views made Cruz a target for FBI investigation as early as September of 2016.
Politicians on both sides of the political aisle have condemned the shooting and reached out to the victims. In a Twitter post, President Donald Trump offered his prayers and condolences to the victims and their families, stating that, “no child, teacher or anyone else should ever feel unsafe in an American school.” Additionally, President Trump ordered the flags to be flown at half-staff for the entire US and paid a visit to the victims’ hospital. Florida Governor Rick Scott similarly expressed strong support for the victims and went as far as to claim that FBI Director Christopher Wray should resign in wake of the shooting, noting that the FBI had the ability to intervene to prevent the massacre from happening.
My prayers and condolences to the families of the victims of the terrible Florida shooting. No child, teacher or anyone else should ever feel unsafe in an American school.
The shooting has also renewed public debate over the issue of gun control. For example, student survivors organized the group Never Again MSD to demand legislative action to prevent similar shootings from occurring again and to call out US lawmakers (mostly Republicans, but a few Democrats as well) who have received campaign contributions from the National Rifle Association (NRA). Additionally, The Alliance for Securing Democracy noted that Russian “sock” (fake) accounts used Twitter over the past few days to inflame tensions by posting loaded comments that support or oppose gun control to divide the American people and by claiming that the shooting was a false flag operation which the US government will exploit to expand gun control efforts.
2. 13 Russian Citizens Indicted in Mueller Investigation On Charges Related To Meddling In The 2016 Presidential Elections
The Trump-Russia investigation took an interesting turn this week with the arrest of several Russian nationals on the charges of election meddling.
On February 16, the special counsel probing interference in the last presidential election charged 13 Russian nationals and three Russian groups with violating criminal laws with the intent of meddling “with U.S. elections and political processes.” The 37-page indictment, signed by Robert Mueller, depicts an elaborate scheme in which the Russians accused came to the US with the deliberate intention of undermining the American political and electoral process, including the 2016 presidential election. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said that the Russians charged called their work “information warfare against the United States” with the goal of spreading distrust of candidates and the political system in general. Additionally, many of the accused Russians “communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump campaign” without revealing their association with Russia. The new indictment comes amid a wide-ranging probe by the special counsel into Russian meddling in the US election and is also the first set of charges by Mueller for 2016 presidential election interference.
President Donald Trump was quick to denounce the allegations, claiming that the Russians “started their anti-US campaign in 2014” nearly one full year before the Trump campaign launched and that the “results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong – no collusion!” in a Twitter rant post. Despite the President’s blanket denial and dismissal of the allegations, the recent indictments reveal that Russia’s meddling in the 2016 Election is far from a hoax and underscores the vulnerabilities facing the American political system. Moreover, the recent developments in the case have raised the chances of President Trump’s impeachment to perhaps its highest level yet.
3. Israeli Military Bombs 12 Iranian & Syrian Military Sites, Raising Possibility of War
The Israeli Air Force bombed several Iranian and Syrian-military installations on February 10, threatening to further expand the Syrian Civil War.
On February 10, the Israeli Air Force carried out extensive airstrikes inside Syria, targeting air defense batteries, army bases, and several Iranian military positions.The Israeli military said it launched the large-scale attack after one of its F-16 fighter jets crashed under Syrian anti-aircraft fire. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli military officials described the initial incursion as an Iranian “attack” and said it was Israel’s right and duty to respond. The Israeli army said the Iranian drone did not cross into Israel by accident and was on a mission but declined to give further details or comment on whether the drone was armed.
The US government responded to the attack with their typical support for the Israeli position. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson reaffirmed in a phone call with Netanyahu on Saturday that the US is backing Israel 100% of the time. Additionally, Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Steven Goldstein stated that “Israel has the right to defend itself” using whatever means possible. The Iranian government was quick to criticize the attack. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bahran Qasemi condemned the attack forcefully and said that the Syrian government had the right to defend itself by shooting down the Israeli jet. The Syrian government described the airstrikes as “new Israeli aggression” and stated that any other incursions by Israel would be met with “serious and fierce” retaliation. The Russian government also condemned the strikes, stating that Israel’s actions threatened the Russian military advisors currently stationed in Syria and are, in effect, a violation of all recognized principles of international law. The actions on the part of the Israeli government, as with nearly all other actions that it has taken during the Syrian Civil War, threaten to spark a war in the Middle East that will engulf the major world powers and permanently destabilize the region.
This video by PressTV presents a review of President Donald Trump’s first full year in office. One year has passed since Donald Trump has been elected US President. Since then, the world has seen a US President unlike any other. One that is aggressive, impulsive, uninterested in politics, and egotistical. Despite coming into office with a grand series of promises to change American politics for the better, the case can be made that the policies pursued by the Trump Administration have changed American politics for the worst. Trump has thus far failed to realize any of his campaign promises, fanned the conspiracy flames regarding his relationship with Russia, contradicted and insulted his staff, and made enemies of allies throughout the world. Additionally, President Trump has attacked the governmental institutions he oversees, threatened to use his powers to ruin the lives of his political opponents, waged war against members of his own party, and engaged in race-baiting, sexism, ableism, and religious bigotry when pursuing his destructive agenda.
One such area in which President Donald Trump left his mark during his first year was his immigration executive order banning (mostly Shi’a Muslim) immigrants, travelers, and refugees from seven majority-Muslim countries (Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, and Libya). This action ignited a firestorm of protest and revealed the bigoted, white supremacist agenda underlying the Trump Administration’s policies. President Trump also rattled the nuclear-saber more than any other President in US history with his incitement of North Korea, going as far to threaten the North Korean government with “fire and fury.” Many politicians on both sides of the aisle worry that Trump has misused the moral authority surrounding the office of the Presidency through such statements and actions.
President Donald Trump claimed during his first year in office that he has the unilateral authority to order the Justice Department to open or close investigations into his political opponents. Such rhetoric threatens to set a negative precedent in future Administrations that goes directly against the principles of separation of power spelled out in the US Constitution. President Trump’s outreach to autocratic regimes such as Saudi Arabia and Israel further characterized his first year in office. By backing the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, President Trump has given the green light for Saudi Arabia to escalate its three-year-long intervention in Yemen, which has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people and has encouraged hatred towards Shi’a Muslims throughout the world. Additionally, President Trump’s choice to recognize Jerusalem (“al-Quds” in Arabic) as the capital of Israel has encouraged the Israeli regime to expand its crusade against the Palestinian people.
President Donald Trump also left a negative mark within the realm of international politics and has adopted a firm, neoconservative view regarding the role of the US in the world. President Trump has repeatedly denounced the Iranian nuclear deal, calling it the “worst deal ever negotiated” despite the fact that it was upheld by numerous organizations, most notably the United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Additionally, President Trump has proposed a hardliner stance towards Iran, calling it a “terrorist nation” and calling for US military action to remove the current Iranian government from power. These actions on the part of the President have led to many European leaders such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron to rethink their reliance on US political and diplomatic leadership on the world stage.
In terms of domestic policy, President Donald Trump generally has had an abysmal first year in office. Trump failed to follow through on repealing The Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) despite the fact that his party controls both houses of Congress, and has relied on Executive Orders more often than any other first-year President in US history. The only true legislative achievements of President Trump’s first year in office are his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court and the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Many critics argue that the presence of Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court will move the Judicial branch far to the right and have a profound (and what many view as a negative) impact on decisions such as drug policy, women’s rights, abortion, gay rights, and electoral reform. Additionally, nearly all economic organizations point out that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is a clear giveaway to the wealthiest 1% and only serve to further the widening income gap between the wealthy and the poor.
Here are the main events in Politics that occurred this week
1. President Donald Trump Give First “State of the Union” Address
President Donald Trump delivered his first official State of the Union Address on January 30.
On January 30, President Donald Trump delivered his first State of the Union Address before a packed audience consisting of nearly all members of Congress, the Presidential cabinet, the First Family, members of the press, and several notable guests. In his speech, President Trump attempted to strike an optimistic and conciliatory tone through the use of lines such as “This is our new American moment, There has never been a better time to start living the American dream.”
In his speech, President Trump took credit for the nation’s economy, saying his administration had rolled back regulations, “ended the war on American energy” and “turned the page on decades of unfair trade deals.” He said the $1.5 trillion tax bill he signed brought “tremendous relief for the middle class and small businesses.” Trump called on Congress to adopt his immigration plan, which would offer a citizenship path for nearly two million Dreamers, increase border security, and expedite the construction of a wall along the US-Mexican border. Additionally, the President urged the Democratic Party to join him in approving a $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan, including changes in environmental and other regulations to streamline the approval process for infrastructure projects. “America is a nation of builders, We built the Empire State Building in just one year. Isn’t it a disgrace that it can now take 10 years just to get a permit approved for a simple road?” said Trump in one of the more notable parts of the speech.
The reaction to President Trump’s State of the Union Address has been mixed, with nearly all Republicans approving it and a majority of Democrats disapproving it. In the Democratic Party response to the speech, Congressman Joe Kennedy III of Massachusetts condemned the policies and rhetoric coming from the Trump Administration, stating that “hatred and supremacy” are “proudly marching in our streets,” Russia is “knee-deep in our democracy,” and the Justice Department is “rolling back civil rights by the day.” Additionally, Congressman Kennedy said that the administration “isn’t just targeting the laws that protect us — they are targeting the very idea that we are all worthy of protection.” In addition, many observers pointed out numerous false statements uttered by President Trump throughout the speech, particularly pertaining to economics, foreign policy, immigration, and federal drug policy.
2. US Government Unveils New Nuclear Weapons Strategy
Defense Secretary James Mattis announced major changes to the US nuclear policy in a report issued on February 1.
On February 1, the US Department of Defense announced a new nuclear arms policy that calls for the introduction of two new types of weapons, effectively ending Obama-era efforts to reduce the size and scope of the US nuclear arsenal and minimize the role of nuclear weapons in defense planning. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said in an introductory note to the new policy that the changes reflect a need to “look reality in the eye” and “see the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.” “Over the past decade, while the United States has led the world in these reductions, every one of our potential nuclear adversaries (Russia, China, North Korea, Iran) has been pursuing the exact opposite strategy,” Deputy Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette said at a Pentagon news conference, explaining why the United States is changing course. “These powers are increasing the numbers and types of nuclear weapons in their arsenal.”
The new policy calls for the introduction of “low-yield nukes” on submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Despite being called “low yield,” such weapons could cause roughly as much damage as the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, depending on their size. The introduction of these types of weapons is meant to counter Russia, who possesses several of these types of weapons. Additionally, the new policy outlines plans to develop nuclear submarine-launched cruise missile, which are meant to pressure nuclear-armed countries such as China and North Korea. The report also reconfirmed its commitment to the modernization of the U.S. nuclear force and called for the introduction of new long-range bombers, submarines, and intercontinental ballistic missiles. Estimates by the Congressional Budget Office determined that the plans outlined in the report will cost about $1.2 trillion over a 30-year period.
The reaction to the new US nuclear policy has been overwhelmingly negative thus far. the countries mentioned in the report condemned the plan accusing the US of having a “Cold War” mentality. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif view the plan as a direct threat to Russia and have pledged to intervene on Russia’s behalf if the US launches a strike on Russian territory. Russian President Vladimir Putin similarly condemned the new policy and has pledged to expand Russia’s defensive capabilities as a proportionate response. Additionally, disarmament advocates feel that such a plan will create a renewed nuclear arms race and increase the risk of nuclear war to a level even higher than it was during the peak of the Cold War.
3. House Republican Memo Highlighting Alleged Bias by the FBI in the Trump-Russia Investigation Released
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nines (R-CA) released a highly controversial memo alleging bias in the Trump-Russia investigation on February 1 at the urging of the President.
On February 1, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) released a formerly classified memo that many Republicans claim say shows surveillance abuses in the early stages of the FBI’s investigation the Trump election campaign and Russia. President Donald Trump, who advocated the release of the document over the strong objections of his own Justice Department, declared that the memo shows that a “lot of people should be ashamed of themselves.”
The memo asserts that the FBI relied excessively on anti-Trump research funded by Democrats in seeking a warrant to monitor the communications of a Trump campaign associate and that federal authorities concealed the full details of who was paying for the information. President Trump believes that the document would bring a sense of validity to his claims that the FBI and Justice Department conspired against him. On the other hand, FBI director Chris Wray feels that the four-page document is inaccurate and stripped of critical context. Congressman Adam Schiff, the House Intelligence Committee’s ranking Democrat, said that the document “mischaracterizes highly sensitive classified information” and that “the selective release and politicization of classified information sets a terrible precedent and will do long-term damage to the intelligence community and our law enforcement agencies.” Despite the intense fury surrounding its release, the document seems far less explosive than Republicans had claimed, and far less dangerous to national security than Democrats had asserted.
The disclosure of the document has been all but condemned by the Democratic Party leadership and a growing number of Republicans. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) condemned his own political party to task for releasing the document despite the “grave concerns” of the intelligence community.” “The latest attacks on the FBI and Department of Justice serve no American interests — no party’s, no President’s, only Putin’s,” said McCain. Additionally, many claims that the document will further escalate the intra-governmental conflict between President Trump and his cabinet members and will create a negative precedent that future Presidents may follow when they are threatened politically by the opposing party.
President Trump has now appointed a new cabinet, member Bill Coal of Ann Arbor, Michigan. Bill Coal is a former sex offender who was caught molesting four children in front of the Oakland GOP offices where he was previously attempting to bolster support for a future run for governor. Bill Coal was key for Trump in Michigan, for not only rallying voters for Trump but also encouraging younger voters to erect Republicans. Coal will now head the nation’s federal Child Protection Agency, tasked with protecting over 30 million children from negligence, abuse, and rape. Coal said, “I am fully committed to making sure I lick the problems that affect those kids. To make sure their parents are kept busy with employment and to nail down a hard solution to our nation’s problems.”
Coal has also been known to pay bribes, and an FCC court ruled he was in violation of Code 345 section E-W, preventing corporations from donating money to businesses to donate to political campaigns. The business in question was a candy store that was known for its lollypops and ice cream. Coal paid a fine of $50,000 dollars and has reportedly made no comment since, although our investigative reports have seen his trash full of lollypop wrappers, which mysteriously stopped after becoming head of the agency. Trump has said, “Bill Coal is a man who can get things done and he’s a guy I would trust to take care of my own kids.” Coal was last in Michigan at a farm he owned bragging about how big his cock was days before his term begins, see image below.
He is quoted as saying “I can’t wait to have kids come over and see my cock as part of my job. I am very proud to be an American today and can’t thank the President enough for allowing me to bask in his erect oral victory. Amen.”
Bill Coal and his cock in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
For more fun see…
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Sexual_innuendo
Here are the main events in Politics that occurred this week:
1. Major Protests Break Out in Iran
Anti-government protests in Iran broke out this week in response to issues such as political repression, poor economic conditions, and the lack of promised political reform.
On December 28, a series of protest broke out in several Iranian cities in response to the poor economic situation within the country (which has only gotten worse since the imposition of new sanctions on Iran by the Trump Administration). Despite the initial focus of the protests on solely economic issues, they soon morphed into a wider expression of dissatisfaction with the current status-quo within the country. The demands of the protesters have varied from simply asking for reforms within the current political structure of Iran, to regime change and the reinstallation of the Pahlavi Monarchy into power. Thus far, the Iranian government has had a mixed reaction to the protests. For example, President Hassan Rouhani urged the government to more adequately address the demands of the Iranian citizens, but urged against violence and rage against the system, noting that such actions will only inflame the situation within the country and reduce the chances for any changes to the governmental system. Additionally, the Iranian government has shut down internet access and access to social media sources such as Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook for fear that such venues will increase the spread of the protests.
The international community has had a somewhat mixed reaction to the protests in Iran. Countries such as Israel, Canada, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and the UK have all expressed solidarity with the protestors and cautioned the Iranian government against using excessive force to suppress the protests. Additionally, US President Donald Trump has used the protests as another opportunity to critique the Iranian government and call for the overthrow of the current Iranian government. In a Twitter message on December 30, Trump declared that “Many reports of peaceful protests by Iranian citizens fed up with regime’s corruption & its squandering of the nation’s wealth to fund terrorism abroad. Iranian govt should respect their people’s rights, including the right to express themselves. The world is watching!#IranProtests.” On the other hand, countries such as Russia, France, and China stated that the protests in Iran are solely an internal manner to be dealt with by the Iranian government and that any intervention on behalf of the protesters will only inflame the situation.
2. President Trump Proposes Ambitious Infrastructure Bill
President Trump this week proposed an ambitious infrastructure reform bill meant to help the US regain a competitive advantage when compared to emerging economies throughout the world.
Fresh off of the successful passage of his tax reform bill, President Donald Trump has reportedly turned his eye to infrastructure. The Trump Administration plans to introduce a plan in January to repair and renovate the country’s aging and ailing roads, airports, bridges, and transitions. President Trump has repeatedly pledged to restore America’s infrastructure system on both the campaign trail as well as in office. His past as a famous real estate developer gave credibility to boasts that he would restore the crumbling infrastructure of a country that was literally “falling apart.” Since the 1990s, federal infrastructure spending has declined drastically, reaching a 30-year low in 2015. The decline in federal investment infrastructure has put the US in a distinct disadvantage with emerging countries such as Japan, South Korea, Russia, China, India, and Mexico, thus negatively impacting the global competitiveness of the US.
The Trump Administration’s infrastructure plan calls for at least $200 billion in federal spending on infrastructure projects over the next 10 years, with a goal of attracting at least an additional $800 billion in financing from state and local governments along with private partnerships. Additionally, the proposals include a provision that all projects will include American-produced materials, which many in the administration see as a way to further stimulate the economy and create thousands of new, decent-paying jobs. Overall, the reaction to the Trump Administrations infrastructure has been mixed, with a surprising level of support coming from the Democratic Party. For example, Senator Bernie Sanders has expressed a willingness to work with the Administration on the proposal, as well as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. On the other hand, Republicans such as House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are lukewarm at best towards the plan, claiming that it will lead to a higher federal budget deficit and force Congressional Republicans to table their proposals to increase defense spending and reform the entitlement system. Overall, it seems highly likely that the Trump Administration’s infrastructure bill will pass due to its strong popularity amongst the American people and the need for infrastructure improvements within the country.
3. North Korea’s Kim Jong-un “Open to Dialogue” with South Korea
North Korean President Kim Jong-un expressed a willingness to negotiate with South Korea this week, much to the shock of the international community.
On December 30, North Korean President Kim Jong-un announced that he is “open to dialogue” with South Korea in the New Year, but has warned the US that he has a “nuclear button” on his desk to use if threatened. In a televised New Year’s speech, Kim said improving ties between the North and South is an “urgent issue”. “It’s a grave matter to which the entire Korean nation needs to put its efforts towards resolving,” he further said. South Korea’s presidential office welcomed Kim’s speech, which included a proposal to send North Korean athletes to Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang. South Korean Presidential spokesperson Park Soo-Hyun said that “We welcome that Kim expressed willingness to send a delegation and proposed talks as he acknowledged the need for improvement in inter-Korean ties.”
Despite the countries recent overtures towards negotiations and dialogue, Kim Jong-un announced that his country will continue to focus on “mass producing nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles for operational deployment” in 2018 and beyond. Additionally, Kim Jong-un repeated earlier claims that the entire US is now within range of all of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. Responding to Kim’s comments, US President Donald Trump said “we’ll see, we’ll see” at his New Year’s Eve celebration, held at his Mar-a-Lago residence, in Florida. It can be argued that North Korea’s sudden change in actions can be attributed to two recent developments. The first one being the imposition of a fresh round of sanctions against North Korea by the US Security Council. The second development that may have had an impact of North Korea’s change in behavior is the increased willingness of Russia and China to work with the US to settle the long-standing disputes between both countries. On the other hand, some also argue that North Korea is either hoping to drive a wedge between the US and South Korea over the issue of peace negotiations or is trying to buy some time to improve its nuclear capabilities.
Here Are the main events in Politics that occurred this week:
1. Democrat Doug Jones Wins Alabama Special Election Race
Democratic candidate Doug Jones won a major victory in the Alabama Special Senate Election this week, becoming the first Democrat to represent the state in over 20 years.
In a major upset, Democratic candidate and former federal prosecutor Doug Jones won the Alabama Special Senate Election on December 12 after a campaign that showcased the increasing power of sexual misconduct allegations and the limits of President Donald Trump’s political influence even in states that he still remains popular in. Jones’s victory in a state that has not had a Democratic Senator since 1996 was a dramatic repudiation of both his opponent, Roy Moore, a controversial former state judge twice who is accused of molesting several women between the late 1970s and early 1990s, as well as the policies and proposals of President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress. In his victory speech, Jones stated that the “entire race has been about dignity and respect. This campaign has been about the rule of law. This campaign has been about common courtesy and decency and making sure everyone in this state, regardless of what zip code you live in, is going to get a fair shake.” Additionally, Jones went on to send a message to his colleagues in Washington, urging them to “get things done for the people” by passing the Children’s Health Insurance Program as well as voting against the Trump Administration tax plan.
Despite his overwhelming rejection by the voters of Alabama, Republican candidate Roy Moore has yet to concede, accusing the Democratic Party of vote rigging and has announced that his campaign would be seeking a recount. The election of Doug Jones as Senator from one of the most conservative states in the entire country signals both a wholesale rejection of the policies of the Trump Administration by even his most hardcore and loyal supporters as well as a foreshadowing of the results of the 2018 midterm elections. Additionally, the election of Doug Jones perhaps is a sign that the Democratic Party can regain much of the ground that they lost in the Southern states over the past 50 years by campaigning with a positive and inclusive message, as well as de-emphasizing divisive social issues and instead focusing more on addressing economic issues that negatively impact the working class.
2. US Ready for Direct Talks With North Korea
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson indicated this week that the US is willing to meet with North Korea to discuss its nuclear program without pre-conditions.
On December 12, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced that the US is ready to begin direct talks with North Korea without pre-conditions, backing away from a key demand that Pyongyang must first accept that giving up its nuclear arsenal would be part of any negotiations. While reiterating the long-standing position that the US views the North Korea nuclear program as a major national security threat, Tillerson said the United States was “ready to talk anytime they’re ready to talk”, but there would first have to be a “period of quiet” without any nuclear and missile tests. The new diplomatic overture on the part of the US comes two weeks after North Korea said it successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile that put the entire US mainland within range of a potential nuclear strike.
Overall, the international community has applauded Secretary of State Tillerson’s offer. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said that the Chinese government welcomed all efforts to ease tension and promote dialogue to peacefully resolve the problem of North Korea’s nuclear arms program. The Chinese government hopes the United States and North Korea can meet each other halfway and take meaningful steps on dialogue and contact, Kang told reporters. Additionally, China has expressed a willingness to work with both the US and South Korea to secure North Korean nuclear weapons in the event of a collapse of the government of North Korea. Despite strong support for these new diplomatic efforts by China, Japan has been critical of any engagement with North Korea, arguing that any efforts would play into the hands of the North Korean government and not lead to any constructive policy change. On the contrary, the Japanese government supports increasing the already crippling sanctions in place in North Korea to convince the regime to change its policies (despite the fact that history shows that sanctions have little to no effect in forcing policy change). Overall, it is too soon to tell of the renewed diplomatic efforts between the US and North Korea will lead to any lasting results, but they do represent a positive step forward on the part of the US in solving long-standing disputes peacefully.
3. Iraq Proclaims Victory in the War Against ISIS
The government of Iraq announced that it has defeated ISIS after nearly three years of intense fighting with the violent extremist group.
On December 9, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi announced an end of the war against militant group Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq and said that Iraqi forces had regained full control of the country’s border with Syria. “Our forces are in complete control of the Iraqi-Syrian border and I, therefore, announce the end of the war against Daesh” (Arabic for “ISIS”), Abadi said at a press conference in Baghdad. “Dear Iraqis, your land has been completely liberated, and your towns and villages have been returned to the homeland,” Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi said in a press conference in Baghdad. “The dream of liberation became a reality.” The victory came after the military shifted its focus to rout out militants in the border areas between Iraq and Syria. “Our forces fully control the Iraqi-Syrian border, and thus we can announce the end of the war against Daesh,” Abadi said.
After Abadi’s announcement, the Iraqi government declared Sunday a national holiday to celebrate the victory that was celebrated by the US and several of Iraq’s major allies such as Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah. The US government and President Donald Trump offered its “sincere congratulations to the Iraqi people and to the brave Iraqi Security Forces, many of whom lost their lives heroically fighting ISIS. Additionally, UK Prime Minister Theresa May also congratulated Iraq but warned the threat is far from over. Despite the fact that major combat operations in Iraq have ended, the threat of violent extremist from the remnants of ISIS and other militant groups remains. Additionally, Iraq will continue to face a massive reconstruction effort over the next decade in order to help rebuild itself after nearly four decades of continuous warfare, chaos, and brutal authoritarianism.
Here are the main events that occurred in Politics this week:
1. President Donald Trump Recognizes Jerusalem as the Capitol of Israel
President Donald Trump announced this week that he would be ordering the US to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, much to the ire of the Palestinian people.
On December 6, President Donald Trump followed through on a key campaign promise and announced that the US would recognize the city of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Defying dire warnings, Trump insisted that after repeated failures to form a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine it was past time for a new approach, starting with the decision to recognize Jerusalem as the seat of the Israeli government. He also said the United States would move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, though he set no timetable. In his announcement of this new policy, Trump stated that “We cannot solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past.” Trump’s declaration of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is a powerfully symbolic statement about a city that houses many of the world’s holiest sites. For example, Jerusalem is sacred to both Christians and Muslims, as the city is home to the al-Aqsa Mosque where the Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven to receive his revelation from God, as well as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, where Christians believe Jesus was both crucified and buried.
2. Trump Tax Reform Proposal Passes Senate, Likely to Become Law
President Donald Trump scored a major legislative victory this week with the passage of his tax reform bill.
President Donald Trump’s tax reform proposal passed a major hurdle this week as it cleared the Senate by a 51-49 on December 2. In contrast to prior efforts to reform the US tax code, the Trump tax cut does not lower the top marginal tax rate of 39.6% and instead elevates the bracket to income greater than $1 million per year. The bill also eliminated the 33%, 28%, and 15% tax brackets and instead adds a 12% tax bracket. Additionally, the bill reduces the corporate tax rate by 15% and eliminates both the Alternative Minimum Tax and the Estate Tax (over a 6-year period).
President Trump has praised the tax reform bill as a huge step forward for economic growth and as beneficial for the middle class. Despite President Trump’s rhetoric, most observers are pessimistic regarding the overall effects of the bill. For example, Nobel-Prize winning economist Paul Krugman notes that the bill will do little to spur economic growth in an already strong economy and that it will have the net effect of shifting the tax burden from the wealthy towards the middle class and poor. Additionally, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget notes that the bill will add an additional $1.5 trillion to the national debt over a ten-year period. These allegations only served to contribute to the overall unpopularity of the bill and add to the perception that it is a giveaway to the wealthy donor class that helped to elect President Donald Trump.
3. Two Members of Congress Resign Amid Charges of Sexual Misconduct
Senator Al Franken was one of two members of Congress to resign this week amid charges of sexual misconduct.
The national debate regarding sexual misconduct reached its peak on December 7 with the resignations of Senator Al Franken (D-MN) and Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ), a Tea-Party allied Conservative. Additionally, the House Ethics Committee launched an investigation into the allegations that Congressman Blake Farenthold (R-TX) used taxpayer dollars to pay an $84,000 sexual harassment settlement to a former aide. These events reflect the rapid pace of powerful individuals being held accountable for alleged past sexual misconduct in the weeks after Senate Candidate Roy Moore was accused of molesting three underage girls between the late 1970s and early 1990s.
In an emotional speech from the Senate floor, Franken disputed some of the accusations and suggested he is being held to a different standard than President Trump and Roy Moore. In announcing his resignation, Franks stated that he feared he would not receive a “fair” ethics investigation “before distorted and sensationalized versions of this story would put me, my family, my staff and my noble colleagues in the House of Representatives through a hyperbolized public excoriation.” Both the Republican and Democratic Party have devised different responses to the emergence of such allegations. The Democratic Party leadership appears to be determined to grab the moral high ground in an environment in which they hope sexual harassment becomes a wedge issue in the 2018 midterm elections. On the other hand, Republican Party leaders such as House Speaker Paul Ryan have attempted to deflect much of the blame and attempted to frame the scandals as more situational as opposed to indicative of a wider problem of sexual misconduct and harassment at the highest levels of government.
4. Former Yemen President Killed in Battle With Houthis
Former Yemen President Saleh was killed in battle with the Houthis this week, signaling a new phase in the War in Yemen
Yemen’s ousted President Ali Abdullah Saleh was killed by Houthi rebels near the city of Sanaa on December 4 in a move that is expected to have major implications for the ongoing Yemen Civil War. The death was announced by the Sanaa-based interior ministry, controlled by Saleh’s allies-turned-foes, the Houthis. In a statement read out on a Houthi TV network, the interior ministry announced the “killing” of “Saleh and his supporters.” The statement also mentioned that the killing came about after “he and his men blockaded the roads and killed civilians in a clear collaboration with the enemy countries of the coalition.” The interior ministry also said its forces had “taken over all the positions and strongholds of the treacherous militia in the capital, Sanaa, and the surrounding areas, as well as other provinces in order to impose security.”
The killing of Saleh likely came about in part due to his recent overtures to Saudi Arabia, who is currently leading a sustained military campaign in Yemen meant to destroy the Houthi movement and suppress Yemen’s Shi’a majority. These moves were unacceptable to the Houthi leadership and added to the perception that Saleh was a traitor to their cause of political reform and independence. Additionally, the Death of Saleh represent a fatal blow to the Saudi-led efforts in Yemen and may signal the end of the conflict and the formation of a government led by the Houthis.
Here are the main events in Politics that occurred over the past week:
1. Democrats Sweep Virginia and New Jersey Gubernatorial Elections
Democratic candidates Phil Murphy (pictured) and Ralph Northam won smashing victories in their respective gubernatorial elections this week.
Voters in Virginia and New Jersey gave Democratic gubernatorial candidates large victories on November 8 and sent a clear message of rebuke to President Donald Trump and the Republican Party. In Virginia, Democratic candidate Ralph Northam defeated Republican Ed Gillespie by almost 9% and narrowed Republican control over the House of Delegates. In New Jersey, Democrat Phil Murphy easily defeated Republican Kim Guadagno by a 13% margin to succeed the very unpopular Republican Governor Chris Christie. Additionally, the Democratic Party made huge gains in both the New Jersey State Senate and House of Representatives, earning their largest majorities in both bodies since the 1970s.
The results of these elections show that the American people are beginning to get fed up with the policies of the Trump Administration and the Republican Party. Perhaps these elections are the first signs of an upcoming wave for the Democratic Party in the 2018 midterm elections. These results also underscore the fact that the Republican Party needs to reform its policies in order to become more viable in both state and federal-level elections. It can be argued that if the Republican leadership does not heed these warnings, their status as one of the two major US political parties may, in fact, be numbered.
2. Tensions Between Saudi Arabia and Iran Grow
The long-term rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia reached a boiling point this week.
The lingering tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran took a dangerous turn this week. On November 6, the Saudi government charged that a missile fired at its territory from Yemen was an “act of war” by Iran, in the sharpest escalation in nearly three decades of mounting hostility between the two regional rivals. Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Jubair further stated that “Iran cannot lob missiles at Saudi cities and towns and expect us not to take steps.” The accusations came a day after a wave of arrests that seemed to consolidate the power of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is known for his anti-Iran foreign policy positions, support for Israel and Zionism, and advocacy of Wahhabi Islam.
Countries such as the US, Israel, and the UK came out in full support of the Saudi response, arguing that Saudi Arabia has the right to defend itself from any and all threats. On the other hand, several of Iran’s closest allies such as Russia and China urged the Saudi government to ratchet down its rhetoric and to solve its disputes with Iran through diplomatic means. This incident also underscores the major risks that an Iran-Saudi Arabia War would have on regional stability, the global economy, and the international community. In the event that a war would break out between both countries, it is likely that Iran would emerge as the clear victor due to their much larger and more technologically advanced military, more diverse economy, more stable political system, and widespread support from countries such as Russia and China.
3. Republican Senate Candidate Roy Moore Faces Growing Allegations of Sexual Misconduct With Underage Women
Far-right Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore experienced a high level of controversy this week with the revelation that he may have had inappropriate sexual relations with several underage girls between the late 1970s and early 1990s.
The controversial Senate candidate Roy Moore (R-AL) faced another stumbling block this week with the revelation of sexual misconduct with at least three women under the age of 18 when he was in his early 30s. One of the women was only 14 years old at the time, two years younger than the age of consent in Alabama. While most of these incidents occurred in the late 1970s, one incident occurred as recently as 1991. At the time of the incidents in the 1970s, Moore was an assistant district attorney and active in local Alabama politics. In response to these allegations, many Republicans such as John McCain and Mitt Romney called for Moore to drop out of the race and numerous Republican Senators such as Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell, and Cory Gardner withdrew their support. House Speaker Paul Ryan also called for Moore to abandon his campaign. On the other hand, Alabama Republicans have largely defended Moore and still view him as the lesser evil in the race.
Despite the serious nature of the allegations, Roy Moore has remained defiant and instead doubled down on his far-right message. Moore has declared the allegations as a plot by the Democratic Party to bring down his candidacy and accused those who oppose him as anti-Christian. The long-term effects of the Roy Moore scandal may result in Democratic candidate Doug Jones ultimately winning the seat. A potential victory by Jones would give Alabama is first Democratic Senator in over 20 years and further cut into the Republican Senate majority to the point in which the Democratic Party would have a strong chance of regaining control of that body in the 2018 Midterm elections.
The Republican Party is one of the two main political parties currently active in the United States. Founded by anti-slavery activists, economic modernizers, and liberal Whigs and Democrats in 1854, the Republicans dominated politics nationally and was the majority political party in the Northeast, Midwest, and Great Plains for most of the period between 1854 and 1932. The Republican party has won 24 of the last 40 U.S. presidential elections, and there has been a total of 19 Republican Presidents between 1860 and 2016, the most from any political party.
Liberal Republicans & The Civil War
The Republican Party was founded in Ripon, Wisconsin in 1854 and soon became the main anti-slavery political party within the US.
The Republican Party was officially formed in the small town of Ripon, Wisconsin on March 20, 1854, as a coalition of anti-slavery Whigs and Democrats opposed to the Kansas–Nebraska Act, which opened Kansas Territory and Nebraska Territory to slavery and future admission as slave states, thus repealing the 34-year prohibition on slavery in territories north of the Mason–Dixon line. This change was viewed anti-slavery members of Congress as an aggressive, expansionist maneuver by the slave-owning South. In addition to supporting an anti-slavery platform, the Republican Party followed a platform based on economic modernization, a more open interpretation of the constitution, expanded banking, openness to new immigrants, and giving free western land to farmers as a way to discourage the spread of slavery to the Western territories. Most of the support for the new political party came from New England (particularly Vermont, Maine, and parts of Upstate New York), the Midwest, and certain areas in the Upper South such as Eastern Tennessee, Southeastern Kentucky, and Western Virginia (regions where slavery was non-existent).
The Republican Party almost immediately made a mark on American politics and soon superseded the Whig Party as the chief opposition party. The first Republican Presidential nominee was John Frémont, a former general during the Mexican-American War and a strong opponent of the spread slavery. In the 1856 Presidential Election, Frémont scored 33% of the vote and came very close to defeating Democratic candidate James Buchanan in the Electoral College. The strong performance of the Republican Party was an impressive feat despite the fact that the party lacked a strong organizational structure and was not on the ballot in all states. The Republican Party built upon their successes by winning control of both House of Congress in the 1858 midterm elections.
The election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 and the subsequent start of the Civil War led to the first era of Republican domination of the American political system.
The election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 and the subsequent start of the Civil War opened a new era of Republican dominance at the federal level known as the Third-Party System. President Lincoln proved brilliantly successful in uniting the factions of his party to fight for the Union. Most of the remaining Democrats at first were War Democrats and supportive of the Union war effort until late 1862. When in the Fall of 1862 Lincoln added the abolition of slavery as one of the leading war goals, many War Democrats became “Peace Democrats” and thus became more sympathetic to the cause of the Confederacy. The Republicans condemned the peace-oriented Democrats as disloyal and won enough War Democrats to maintain their Congressional majority in 1862. In 1864, the Republicans formed a coalition with many War Democrats (such as Tennessee military governor Andrew Johnson) as the National Union Party which reelected Lincoln in a landslide.
Nearly all of the state Republican parties accepted the idea of the abolition of slavery except Kentucky. In Congress, the Republicans established legislation to promote rapid modernization, the creation of national banking system, high tariffs, the first income tax, paper money issued without backing (“greenbacks”), a large national debt, homestead laws, federal infrastructure spending (particularly on the railroads and industries), and federal aid for education and agriculture. These legislative efforts added to the perception that the Republican Party was the more liberal of the two main political parties.
Post Civil-War Republicans
After the successful conclusion of the Civil War in 1865, the Republican Party leadership was faced with the challenge of Reconstruction. The Republican Party soon became split between the moderates (who favored a lenient approach to Reconstruction) and the Radical Republicans (who demanded aggressive action against slavery and vengeance toward former Confederates). By 1864, a majority of Republicans in Congress were part of the Radical branch of the party. These tensions reached their boiling point after President Lincoln’s assassination in April of 1865. The Radical Republicans at first welcomed President Andrew Johnson (Lincoln’s second Vice President and a Southern Democrat who supported the Union), believing that he would take a hard line in punishing the South and enforce the rights of former slaves. However, Johnson denounced the Radicals and attempted to ally with moderate Republicans and Democrats. The showdown came in the Congressional elections of 1866, in which the Radicals won a sweeping victory and took full control of Reconstruction, passing laws over President Johnson’s veto. President Johnson was impeached by the House of Representatives in 1868 but was acquitted by the Senate by only one vote.
The Republican Party of the 1870s sought to establish a viable political coalition based on the ideas of racial equality and progressive public policy.
With the election of Ulysses S. Grant in 1868, the Radicals had control of Congress, the party structure, and the army and sought to build a Republican base in the South using the votes of Freedmen, Scalawags, and Carpetbaggers, supported directly by the US army. Republicans all throughout the South formed clubs called Union Leagues that mobilized the voters, discussed policy issues and fought off white supremacist attacks. President Grant strongly supported radical reconstruction programs in the South, the Fourteenth Amendment and equal civil and voting rights for the freedmen. Despite President Grant’s popularity and devotion to the cause of racial and social equality, his tolerance for corruption led to increased factionalism in the Republican Party. The economic depression of 1873 energized the Democrats at the Congressional level. The Democrats won control of the House of Representatives in 1874 and formed “Redeemer” coalitions which recaptured control of each southern state. Reconstruction came to an end when an electoral commission awarded the contested election of 1876 to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes, who promised through the unofficial Compromise of 1877 to withdraw federal troops from the control of the last three southern states (Mississippi, South Carolina, and Louisiana). The South then became known as the Solid South, giving overwhelming majorities of its electoral votes and Congressional seats to the Democrats for the next century.
Economic Conservatism
The Republican Party by and large remained the dominant political party at the Presidential level for the next five decades, with the Democrats only winning the Presidency in 1884, 1892, 1912, and 1916. Starting in the mid-1890s, both of the political parties began to shift on economic policy due to events such as the 1893-1897 economic depression. During the 1896 Presidential Election, the Democrats nominated former Congressman William Jennings Bryan of Nebraska, whereas the Republicans nominated Governor William McKinley of Ohio. In contrast to previous Democratic nominees, Bryan followed a platform aligned with contemporary liberalism. Some of the main components of Bryan’s platform included increased federal aid to farmers and factory workers, opposition to the gold standard, a federal income tax, opposition to the wealthy elite, and economic populism. In contrast, Republican William McKinley took an entirely opposite position, arguing that the application of classically liberal economic policies, the continuation of the gold standard, and protectionism would lead to widespread prosperity. Ultimately, McKinley defeated Bryan by a comfortable margin, but the political shifts from this election would have ramifications moving forward. Even though the Republican Party moved towards the left-wing of the political spectrum once more under the Presidencies of Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft, the conservative branch would win out by 1920 with the nomination and subsequent election of Warren Harding to the Presidency.
A Party in Decline & Flux
Senator Robert Taft of Ohio led the conservative wing of the Republican Party from the late 1930s to the early 1950s and advocated for the party to support fiscally conservative principles.
The initial era of Republican domination at the Presidential level would come to an end with the start of the Great Depression in 1929. President Hoover attempted to alleviate the widespread suffering caused by the Depression, but his strict adherence to Republican principles precluded him from establishing relief directly from the federal government. Additionally, President Hoover became the first Republican President to openly-endorse white supremacy and supported the removal of blacks from state-level Republican parties, which alienated black support for the Republican Party. The Depression cost Hoover the presidency with the 1932 landslide election of Franklin D. Roosevelt and allowed the Democrats to gain a substantial Congressional majority for the first time since the 1850s. The Roosevelt Administration implemented a legislative program known as the “New Deal,” which expanded the role of the federal government in the economy as a way to alleviate the suffering caused by the economic decline and to prevent another economic decline on the scale of the Great Depression from occurring again. Additionally, President Roosevelt sought to gain the support of voter groups that typically voted Republican such as African-Americans, ethnic minorities, and rural farmers. Roosevelt’s efforts were ultimately successful and led to strong victories for the Democratic Party at the ballot box for the next three decades. During this period, the Democratic Party retained control of Congress for every year except 1946 and 1952 and won the Presidency in all elections except 1952 and 1956, when Dwight Eisenhower, a liberal Republican, defeated a fractured Democratic Party.
In response to the New Deal and the policies of the national Democratic Party, the Republicans split into two factions. The first wing was the liberal faction, which favored expanding the New Deal social programs, but felt that such programs would be managed better by Republican administrations. Additionally, the liberal faction of the Republican Party firmly favored civil rights legislation and worked closely with Northern Democrats to push forward positive legislative changes in that arena. The other group was the conservative faction, which advocated a return to laissez-faire economics and fiscal conservatism. Even though the conservative faction of the Republican Party also supported civil rights reforms, they started to form alliances with conservative Southern Democrats in the late 1930s as a way to prevent progressive laws from passing. After the 1938 midterm election, the “Conservative Coalition” formed a majority in Congress and prevented successive Democratic administrations from expanding the New Deal and other associated social programs. It can be argued that the “Conservative Coalition” controlled Congress until 1958, when a large group of liberal Democrats was elected to the Senate and House of Representatives.
The Southern Strategy & The Republican Resurgence
The political parties began to shift again in the 1960s due to policy changes within the Democratic Party. The main split in the Democratic Party came about due to the struggle for civil rights. Since the late 1930s, the Democratic Party experienced a major split between the liberal and moderate factions, which favored civil rights, and the Southern faction, which was steadfast in its opposition to federal civil rights legislation. These tensions came to a head when Lyndon Johnson became President after John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Despite being a Southerner, Johnson had a record in support of civil rights since the mid-1950s and felt that civil rights represented a major political opportunity for the Democratic Party. Over the course of his Presidency, major civil rights legislation was passed in 1964, 1965, and 1968 and the Democrats soon became associated with civil rights reform. In response to these changes, the Republican Party began to appeal to white Southerners opposed to the changes to their way of life. These appeals first became apparent in the 1962 Alabama Senate Election between Democrat Lister Hill and Republican James Martin. Despite being a supporter of segregation, Hill was targeted relentlessly by Martin as a covert supporter of federal civil rights legislation. Ultimately Hill won the race, but by only a 1% margin. The Hill-Martin Senate race served as a prelude to the 1964 Presidential Election, in which Republican Barry Goldwater lost in every region of the country except the Deep South due to his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Modern Republicans look up to President Ronald Reagan (1981-89) as the main political leader to emulate.
The Republican Party began to see a resurgence at the federal level during the late 1960s that continue to this day. As a result of the aforementioned civil rights reform, the ongoing Vietnam War, and the failure of the Democratic Party leadership to reform the party structure, the Republican Party regained control of the Presidency in 1968 and retained control of this office in each election except 1976, 1992, 1996, 2008, and 2012. On the other hand, the Republican Party did not regain control of the Senate until 1980 and the House of Representatives until 1994. The growth of the Republican Party over the past 50 years can be attributed to the implementation of a conservative platform on both economics and foreign policy as well as the rise of the Christian Right political movement in the late 1970s. The modern Republican Party considers President Ronald Reagan (1981-89) as the political leader to look up to, much like how Democrats view Franklin Roosevelt as their political idol. During his Presidency, Reagan implemented neoliberal economic policies, expressed strong support for socially conservative values, increased defense spending and advocated an internationalist foreign policy that some credit with contributing to the end the Cold War.
Contemporary Republican Party
Today, the Republican Party is at its highest level of support since the late 1920s. The Republicans control both House of Congress and have gained total control over historically Democratic areas such as the Appalachian and Ozark regions of the South since 2010 and are increasingly becoming dominant in the industrial Midwest. On the other hand, the Republican Party has lost nearly all of their historic support in the Northeast and West Coast due to their adopting of a socially conservative and xenophobic platform over the past decade.
In the 2016 Presidential Election, Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton with 304 Electoral Votes but lost the popular vote by 3 million. Trump performed strongly in the Midwest, Appalachia, Ozarks, and some states in the Northeast such as Maine, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire. Additionally, Trump performed very poorly in several typically Republican states such as Texas, Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina, and Utah. Perhaps the 2016 Presidential Election signals a new realignment for both political parties. Future elections may see the Republican Party cementing their gains in the Midwest, Appalachia, and Ozarks, and the Democratic Party continuing to grow in support along both coasts of the US and picking up parts of the cosmopolitan Southern states and the Southwest.
Here are the main events in Politics that occurred over the past week:
1. NJ Gubernatorial Elections Heats Up In The Final Stretch
The NJ gubernatorial race entered its final stretch this week with the final debate between both the candidates.
The ongoing gubernatorial race in New Jersey picked up some steam this past week as both the candidates headed into the final stretch of campaigning. The final New Jersey Gubernatorial debate was held on October 18 and witnessed both candidates taking on each other on pressing issues facing the state such as property taxes, increasing spending on public services such as education, the gas tax, and the overall legacy of Governor Chris Christie. Despite having a commanding lead in most polls, Democratic candidate Phil Murphy performed somewhat poorly in the debate, particularly by not answering the questions fielded to him head on and by repeadely dodging the question of what he would do to reduce the burden of property taxes on the states poorest residents. In contrast, Republican candidate Kim Guadagno came across as the more decisive of the two candidates, by directly answering each question posed to her and by clearly stating her position on the issues. On the other hand, the overall tone of Guadagno during the debate was quite negative and created the perception that she would be unwilling to compromise on the issues. Overall, it can be argued that the overall poor performance of both candidates will result in little change in the polls, which have Phil Murphy leading comfortably.
2. Billionaire Democratic Donor Urges Local and State Political Leaders to Support Trump Impeachment Efforts
Tom Steyer, a wealthy Democratic donor and activist has urged political leaders to support articles of impeachment against President Trump.
Prominent Democratic donor and billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer this week called on every governor in the United States to tell their constituents where they stand on the question impeaching President Donald Trump. In a letter to donors, Steyer asked state and local leaders to call on federal representatives to support Trump’s removal from office. Thus far, Congressmen Al Green (D-TX), Brad Sherman (D-CA), and Steve Cohen (D-TN) have all came out in support of efforts to impeach President Trump. In the letter, Steyer said that Politicians at all levels of government must speak out about Trump’s lack of fitness for office, and denounced the president’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. Additionally, Steyer also accused Trump of violating the constitution by trying to delegitimize the ongoing Russia investigation and failing to disclose his business ties to foreign governments. Even though impeachment proceeding against Trump is unlikely because Republicans control both houses of Congress, Steyer feels that efforts to impeach Trump could become a real issued provided that the Democratic Party regains control of both houses of Congress after the 2018 midterm elections.
3. Democrats Increasing Worried About The VA Gubernatorial Race
The national Democratic Party is worried that the Virginia gubernatorial race will ultimately end up in a Republican victory.
Much like the New Jersey gubernatorial race, the Virginia gubernatorial race entered into its final stretch this week and witnessed political heavyweights from both sides campaigning for their respective candidates. President Donald Trump enthusiastically endorsed Republican candidate and former RNC chairman Ed Gillespie and appeared at several rallies with him in the Southwestern part of the state. On the Democratic side, former President Barack Obama and Bill Clinton campaigned with Ralph Northam and urged Virginian voters to turn out in high enough numbers to regain control of the state legislature and allow for unified Democratic control over the state for the first time in nearly a decade. Despite the strong campaigning on both sides and the initial optimism regarding Democratic chances for the race, it appears that Ed Gillespie has a slight edge going into election day despite the fact that Virginia is a solidly Democratic state at the Presidential level. Some of the factors benefiting Gillespie include the typically lower Democratic turnout in off-year elections, the popularity of President Trump amongst rural voters in Southwestern Virginia, and voter dissatisfaction with the Virginia Democratic Party over their failure to come up with a cohesive message to counter the Trumpist shift of the Republican Party.
4. Saudi Arabian Government Pledges To Clamp Down On Extremist Interpretations Of Islam
The government of Saudi Arabia is considered to be the leading sponsor of global terrorism.
In part of an attempt to reform its image as a state sponsorer of terrorism, the government of Saudi Arabia announced on October 18 that it will begin policing and reexamining the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad to make sure followers of Islam do not use twisted and radical interpretations of Islamic traditions to foment violence and terrorism. While lacking specifics on how this policy would be implemented, the Saudi Arabian Culture and Information Ministry said that it would strive to “eliminate fake and extremist texts and any texts that contradict the teachings of Islam and justify the committing of crimes, murders, and terrorist acts.” These teaching come as a surprise to many observers, who note the fact that the government of Saudi Arabia is the worlds leading sponsorer of terrorism and that it uses the ideology of Wahhabism to promote a puritanical and fundamentalist version of Islam that is entirely opposite to the message originally promoted by the Prophet Muhammad. It argued that this change in policy was pushed for in part by the US and Israeli governments, who want to portray Saudi Arabia as a moderate and progressive country in their efforts to sway Arab allies in support of increased sanctions and outright military intervention against Iran, which is Saudi Arabia’s main regional rival.
Here are the main events in Politics that occurred over the past week:
1. President Donald Trump Decertifies The Iran Nuclear Deal
On October 13, President Donald Trump opted to decertify the Iranian nuclear agreement and annoucned his support for the eventual removal of the present Iranian government from power.
On October 13, President Donald Trump announced that he will decertify the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and put forward a new strategy regarding Iran that shifts the focus from the countries nuclear program to other actions the administration says are contributing to the destabilization of the Middle East. President Trump has repeatedly criticized the agreement, which lifted sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program in exchange, dubbing it “the worst deal ever” and as an embarrassment to the US. Decertifying Iran’s compliance under the agreement would set up a 60-day timeframe for Congress to impose new sanctions on Iran, which would effectively remove the US from the deal. President Trump stated that the policy is based on a “clear assessment of Iranian dictatorship, its sponsorship of terrorism and its continuing aggression in the Middle East and all around the world” and has urged allied countries in both Europe and the Middle East to adopt policies meant to further isolate the Iranian government and, ultimately, bring about the collapse of the current Iranian government and allow the Pahlavi family to come back into power in its place.
The reaction to President Donald Trump’s announcement by international leaders has been almost universal condemnation. Whereas countries such as Israel and Saudi Arabia have praised Trump’s actions, other countries such as the UK, Germany, France, Russia, China, and Italy expressed reservations towards the decision. Federica Mogherini, the European Union’s Foreign Policy Chief and one of the lead negotiations of the agreement with Iran, expressed the strongest criticism towards Trump’s decision and pledged to work with the other signatory countries to uphold and strengthen the agreement. Additionally, many observers believe that such actions on the part of President Trump have reignited the chance for an open conflict to break out between Iran and the US and threaten to isolate the US from the rest of the international community.
2. President Donald Trump Signs Healthcare Executive Order
President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday amending several provisions of the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”).
On October 12, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that would amend several provisions of the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”). The executive order consists of three major policy changes. The first two are expanding access to association health plans, in which a group of small employers can band together to buy insurance as a collective for a discount and expand access to short-term health plans from the present three months to one year. The final change is expanding the use of health reimbursement accounts, which allow employers to set aside tax-free money to help cover their employees’ health care costs. Workers will likely be able to tap into the money set aside in such accounts to pay the premiums for plans from the individual market. By implementing these changes, President Trump hopes to broaden the healthcare market and thus lower overall healthcare costs.
The reactions to President Trump’s healthcare executive order have been mixed thus far. Republican Senators such as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz praised the President’s decision and view it as the first step to reforming the nation’s broken healthcare system. On the contrary, many independent observers believe that the executive order would ultimately have unintended consequences. In particular, they feel that these changes will divert healthy people into cheaper plans outside the realm of the ACA’s exchanges, leaving such markets with a less healthy and more expensive customer base, which would cause premiums to instead increase.
3. Criticism Regarding The Federal Response To Hurricane Maria Mounts
Criticism towards the response by the Trump Administration to Hurricane Maria increased this week due to actions on the part of the President.
Criticism towards the overall efforts by the US government to Hurricane Maria grew this week due to the slow response rate and actions on the part of President Donald Trump. Nearly three weeks after the hurricane first hit, more than 80% of Puerto Rico is still without electricity and nearly half of the country is without means of communication. Despite the pressing situation within the territory, federal aid has been painfully slow to come, perhaps due to bureaucratic pressures and strains on the existing federal aid structure. The response to the hurricane by the Trump Administration has been compared by some observers to the response by the Bush Administration to Hurricane Katrina some twelve years earlier.
Instead of instilling a sense of confidence in the minds of the residents of Puerto Rico, several actions by President Donald Trump this week seem to contradict his earlier pledges to help the island recover from this debilitating disaster. On October 12, President Trump threatened to end US aid to Puerto Rico in a Tweet by saying that “We cannot keep FEMA, the Military & the First Responders, who have been amazing (under the most difficult circumstances) in P.R. Forever!” Additionally, President Trump attempted to deflect some of the criticism that his administration received regarding their handling of the disaster by stating that the infrastructure of Puerto Rico was in poor shape prior to the hurricane and stated that the financial crisis facing Puerto Rico was created “largely of their own making.” These actions perhaps indicate an overall unwillingness on the part of the Trump Administration to stand up for the most vulnerable and impacted people within the US.
4. North Korea Renews Threat To Attack Guam In Response To Joint US-South Korea Naval Exercise
The unending tensions between the US and North Korea took another turn this week in response to the US-South Korea military exercise commencing on October 16.
On October 13, North Korean officials on Friday renewed their threat to launch ballistic missiles near Guam in response to the US and South Korea preparing for their joint naval exercise. The drill is scheduled to begin on Monday in waters on both coasts of South Korea. The primary purpose of the exercise, according to the US Navy command in the region, is to check the communications network, partnership, and operational capabilities of both allies in the event of a confrontation breaking out within the region. In contrast, the North Korean government sees the exercise as one of many recent attempts to intimidate and incite the isolated country and as a rehearsal for an eventual invasion of the country. It is unclear if this most recent threat is merely rhetorical bluster on the part of the North Korean government or a threat that they are willing to follow through with.
Here are the main events in Politics that occurred over the past week:
1. President Trump Gives First Speech Before The United Nations
President Donald Trump gave his first speech before the UN General Assembly this week.
On September 19, President Donald Trump gave his first speech before the UN General Assembly at the opening of the 72nd UN Session. In a major break from his campaign rhetoric, Trump’s speech took a more interventionist tone that puts American interests ahead of the wider goals and aims of the international community. Trump’s core message is that the US will continue to play a major role in world affairs but it will do so based on its own interests as opposed to the ideological interests of other members of the international community. In particular, Trump took aim at North Korea and Iran, two countries that he considers to be the main obstacles to total US domination of the international arena. Trump described North Korean President Kim Jong Un as “Rocket Man” and stated that if the isolated and sanctioned country did not give up its nuclear program, the US will have no other options other than destroying North Korea. Additionally, Trump again claimed that Iran is the leading sponsorer of global terrorism and that the Iranian nuclear agreement is “one of the worst and most one-sided” international agreements that the US has ever entered into. Trump also called for a renewed fight against Islamist terrorism and highlighted his well-known opposition to global trade agreements, arguing that they negatively impact American workers and only benefit countries in the developing world.
Overall, President Donald Trump’s first UN speech took a dark and defiant tone that threatened to isolate the US from its allies and also fits the Neoconservative vision of the US serving as the global police force when it serves their own selfish interests. Additionally, there were several notable moments of hypocracy in President Trump’s speech. For example, Trump said nothing about the mediocre human rights records of countries such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt and stated that Saudi Arabia is on the forefront of fighting Islamist terrorism and is one of the most progressive countries in the entire Middle East in terms of human rights. In reality, Saudi Arabia arguably has one of the worst human rights records in the entire world, strongly supports violent radical groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda, and, since 2015, has been directly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Shi’a Muslims in Yemen due to its military operations within the country.
2. US Established First Permanent Military Base in Israel
The US opened up its first permanent military facility in Israel on September 18th.
On September 18, the US announced the opening of the first-ever joint Israeli-US military installation on Israeli soil. The facility is an air defense located in the Negev desert and will be home to 120 US Air Force personnel. Plans for the establishment of the facility began under former President Barack Obama and were extradited at the urging of President Donald Trump. According to Brig. Gen. Tzvika Haimovitch, the head of the IDF’s Air Defense Command, the establishment of the base is historic and “demonstrates the years-old alliance between the United States and the State of Israel.” One can clearly make the case that the establishment of a permanent US base within Israel would do little other than to inflame the already difficult situation within the Middle East and give Israel the incentive to intervene militarily in countries in the region such as Syria, Lebanon, and Iran. Additionally, the presence of a US military installation in Israel furthers the impression that the US directly encourages the heinous human rights abuses that Israel is guilty of committing against the Palestinian people since its establishment as a sovereign nation nearly 70 years ago.
3. Republican Efforts To Repeal “Obamacare” Takes Hit
The Trump Administration’s healtcare reform proposal took a major hit this week with the revelation of the impact of the plan on individual states over a 20-year period.
The efforts by the Republican Party Congressional Leadership and President Donald Trump to repeal “Obamacare” and reform the healthcare system hit another stumbling block this week with the revelation of how the repeal would impact individual states. A study commissioned by Avalere and released on September 18 finds that the new legislation would reduce federal healthcare funding to states by $215 Billion through 2026 and by more than $4 Trillion by 2037. Most of these cuts would affect states that have already expanded Medicaid, and would thus negatively impact both middle and low-income individuals and families. The states that will see the largest cuts in funding under the new plan include Arizona, Alaska, Maine, Ohio, and West Virginia, all states that are represented by Republican senators who have reservations regarding the plan. On the other hand, states such as Texas, Tennessee, Missouri, and Virginia would see increases in federal healthcare funding under the new plan. After 2026, nearly all states see cutbacks in federal funding, with California being impacted the most with an estimated loss of $800 Billion. The fact that the healthcare reform proposal unfairly targets certain states with cuts in funding makes it even less likely that the most recent proposal stands a chance of passing in its present form.
