Sunday, April 30, 2017
ASEAN gives Beijing a pass on South China Sea dispute, cites ‘improving cooperation’
Southeast Asian countries took a softer stance on South China Sea disputes during a weekend summit, according to a statement issued on Sunday, which went easy on China by avoiding tacit references to its building and arming of its manmade islands.
A chairman’s statement of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) was released about 12 hours after the summit ended, and dropped references to “land reclamation and militarization” included in the text issued at last year’s meeting, and in an earlier, unpublished version seen by Reuters on Saturday.
The outcome follows what two ASEAN diplomats on Saturday said were efforts by Chinese foreign ministry and embassy officials to pressure ASEAN chair the Philippines to keep Beijing’s contentious activities in the strategic waterway off ASEAN’s official agenda.
It also indicates four ASEAN members who the diplomats said had wanted a firmer position had agreed to the statement’s more conciliatory tone.
China is not a member of the 10-member bloc and did not attend the summit but is extremely sensitive about the content of its statements. It has often been accused of trying to influence the drafts to muzzle what it sees as dissent and challenges to its sweeping sovereignty claim.
China’s embassy in Manila could not be reached and its foreign ministry did not respond to request for comment on Saturday.
The statement also noted “the improving cooperation between ASEAN and China”, and did not include references to “tensions” or “escalation of activities” seen in earlier drafts and in last year’s text. It noted, without elaborating, some leaders’ concerns about “recent developments” in the strategic, resource-rich waterway
A Philippine diplomat said it was an open secret that China tries to lean on ASEAN members to protect its interests, but that was not the reason for the unusual delay in issuing the statement.
“There are one or two member countries which lobbied for some changes in some text in the statement, but not related to the South China Sea,” the source said.
Beijing has reacted angrily to individual members expressing their concern about its rapid reclamation of reefs in the Spratlys and its installation of missile systems on them.
Another ASEAN diplomat said the statement was a genuine representation of the atmosphere of the Manila meetings.
“We respected the Philippines’ views and cooperated,” the diplomat said. “It clearly reflected how the issue was discussed.”
POINTLESS TO PRESSURE
The softened statement comes as the current ASEAN chairman, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, seeks to bury the hatchet with China after years of wrangling over its maritime assertiveness. After lobbying from Duterte, China agreed to let Filipinos back to the rich fishing ground of the Scarborough Shoal following a four-year blockade.
The no-nonsense leader set the tone for the meeting on Thursday when he said it was pointless discussing China’s maritime activities, because no one dared to pressure Beijing anyway.
As a sign of Duterte’s friendship with Beijing, three Chinese navy vessels on Sunday made a rare visit to the Philippines. Duterte will inspect a guided-missile destroyer in his hometown of Davao on Monday.
Duterte’s foreign policy strategy is a stunning reversal of that of the previous administration, which had close ties with the United States and was seen by China as a nuisance.
That Philippines government in 2013 challenged Beijing by lodging a case with the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2013.
Two weeks into Duterte’s presidency last year, the Hague court ruled in favor of the Philippines, angering China. But Duterte has made it clear he would not press Beijing to comply anytime soon, and is more interested in doing business than sparring.
The final chairman’s statement issued made no mention to the arbitration case. However, it did include in a section separate to the South China Sea chapter the need to show “full respect for legal and diplomatic processes” in resolving disputes.
Underlining Beijing’s sensitivity about the arbitration award, the two diplomatic sources on Saturday said Chinese embassy officials had lobbied behind the scenes for that sentence to be dropped, and considered it a veiled reference to the ruling.
One diplomat indicated that ongoing moves between China and ASEAN to draft a framework for negotiating a maritime code of conduct may have been a factor in agreeing the softened statement.
All sides want to complete the framework this year, although there is some scepticism that China’s would agree to a set of rules that could impact its geostrategic interests.
Toned-down White House press dinner carries on without Trump
The White House press corps gathered on Saturday for its annual black-tie dinner, a toned-down affair this year after Donald Trump snubbed the event, becoming the first incumbent U.S. president to bow out in 36 years.
Without Trump, who scheduled a rally instead to mark his 100th day in office, the usually celebrity-filled soiree hosted by the White House Correspondents’ Association took a more sober turn, even as it pulled in top journalists and Washington insiders.
Most of Trump’s administration also skipped the event in solidarity with the president, who has repeatedly accused the press of mistreatment. The president used his campaign-style gathering to again lambaste the media.
“I could not possibly be more thrilled than to be more than 100 miles away,” he told a crowd in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, calling out The New York Times, CNN and MSNBC by name.
In Washington, WHCA President Jeff Mason defended press freedom even as he acknowledged this year’s dinner had a different feel, saying attempts to undermine the media was dangerous for democracy.
“We are not fake news, we are not failing news organizations and we are not the enemy of the American people,” said Mason, a Reuters correspondent.
Instead of the typical roasts – presidents of both parties have delivered their own zingers for years – the event returned to its traditional roots of recognizing reporters’ work and handing out student scholarships as famed journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein presented awards.
“That’s not Donald Trump’s style,” NBC News’ Andrea Mitchell told MSNBC, referring to the self-deprecating jokes presidents in the past have made despite tensions with the press.
Instead, the humor fell to headline comedian Hasan Minhaj.
“Welcome to the series finale of the White House correspondents’ dinner,” Minhaj, who plays a correspondent on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show” program, told the crowd.
He also joked about Trump, despite organizers’ wishes, saying he did so to honor U.S. constitutional protection of free speech: “Only in America can a first-generation, Indian-American Muslim kid get on this stage and make fun of the president.”
In a video message, actor Alec Baldwin, who has raised Trump’s ire playing him on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” program also encouraged attendees.
Few other celebrities graced the red carpet, although some well-known Washingtonians, such as former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Republican Representative Darrell Issa of California, appeared.
Trump attended in 2011, when then-President Barack Obama made jokes at the expense of the New York real estate developer and reality television show host.
In an interview with Reuters this week, Trump said he decided against attending as president because he felt he had been treated unfairly by the media, adding: “I would come next year, absolutely.”
In Pennsylvania, Trump told supporters the media dinner would be boring but was noncommittal on whether he would go in 2018 or hold another rally.
Late night television show host Samantha Bee also hosted a competing event – “Not the White House Correspondents’ Dinner” – that she said would honor journalists, rather than skewer Trump.
South Korea says U.S. reaffirms it will pay THAAD costs; joint drills wrap up
South Korea said the United States had reaffirmed it would shoulder the cost of deploying the THAAD anti-missile system, days after President Donald Trump said Seoul should pay for the $1-billion battery designed to defend against North Korea.
In a telephone call on Sunday, Trump’s national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, reassured his South Korean counterpart, Kim Kwan-jin, that the U.S. alliance with South Korea was its top priority in the Asia-Pacific region, the South’s presidential office said.
The conversation followed another North Korean missile test-launch on Saturday which Washington and Seoul said was unsuccessful, but which drew widespread international condemnation.
Trump, asked about his message to North Korea after the latest missile test, told reporters: “You’ll soon find out”, but did not elaborate on what the U.S. response would be.
Trump’s comments in an interview with Reuters on Thursday that he wanted Seoul to pay for the THAAD deployment perplexed South Koreans and raised questions about his commitment to the two countries’ alliance.
South Korean officials responded that the cost was for Washington to bear, under the bilateral agreement.
“National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster explained that the recent statements by President Trump were made in a general context, in line with the U.S. public expectations on defense cost burden-sharing with allies,” South Korea’s Blue House said in a statement, adding that McMaster requested the call.
Major elements of the advanced Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system were moved into the planned site in Seonjgu, in the south of the country, this week.
The deployment has drawn protests from China, which says the powerful radar which can penetrate its territory will undermine regional security, and from local residents worried they will be a target for North Korean missiles.
About 300 residents rallied on Sunday as two U.S. Army lorries tried to enter the THAAD deployment site. Video provided by villagers showed protesters blocking the road with a car and chanting slogans such as “Don’t lie to us! Go back to your country!”
Police said they had sent about 800 officers to the site and two residents were injured during clashes with them.
South Korea and the United States say the sole purpose of THAAD is to guard against North Korean missiles.
The United States is seeking more help from China, the North’s major ally, to rein in Pyongyang’s nuclear and missile development. Trump, in the Reuters interview, praised Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping as a “good man”.
TENSIONS HIGH
The North has been conducting missile and nuclear weapons related activities at an unprecedented rate and is believed to have made progress in developing intermediate-range and submarine-launched missiles.
Tension on the Korean peninsula has been high for weeks over fears the North may conduct a long-range missile test, or its sixth nuclear test, around the time of the April 15 anniversary of its state founder’s birth.
In excerpts of an interview with CBS News released on Saturday, Trump said the United States and China would “not be happy” with a nuclear test but gave no other details.
Trump discussed the threat posed by North Korea in a telephone call with Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte, the White House said.
In an address to a summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations on Saturday, Duterte urged the United States to show restraint after North Korea’s latest missile test and to avoid playing into the hands of leader Kim Jong Un, who “wants to end the world”.
Two-month long U.S.-South Korean joint military drills were due to conclude on Sunday, U.S. and South Korean officials said.
The exercise, called Foal Eagle, was repeatedly denounced by North Korea, which saw it as a rehearsal for war.
In a further show of force, the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier group arrived in waters near the Korean peninsula and began exercises with the South Korean navy late on Saturday. The South Korean navy declined to say when the exercises would be completed.
The dispatch of the Carl Vinson was a “reckless action of the war maniacs aimed at an extremely dangerous nuclear war,” the Rodong Sinmun, the official newspaper of North Korea’s ruling Workers’ Party, said in a commentary on Saturday.
The carrier group has just completed drills with the Japanese navy.
Japanese Defence Minister Tomomi Inada, in an apparent show of solidarity with Washington, has ordered the Izumo, Japan’s biggest warship, to protect a U.S. navy ship that might be going to help supply the USS Carl Vinson, the Asahi newspaper said.
Trump celebrates first 100 days as president, blasts media
U.S. President Donald Trump hit the road on Saturday to celebrate his first 100 days in the White House with cheering supporters at a campaign-style rally, touting his initial achievements and lashing out at critics.
Trump told a Pennsylvania crowd he was just getting started on meeting his campaign promises. He repeatedly attacked an “incompetent, dishonest” media, saying they were not telling the truth about his administration’s accomplishments.
“My administration has been delivering every single day for the great citizens of our country,” Trump said in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. “We are keeping one promise after another, and frankly the people are really happy about it.”
The rally occurred on the same day as a climate march at which thousands of protesters surrounded the White House, and it also coincided with the annual black-tie White House press dinner in Washington.
Trump and his staff chose to skip the press dinner because of what he said was unfair treatment by the press. Trump said he was thrilled to be away from the “Washington swamp”.
“A large group of Hollywood actors and Washington media are consoling each other in a hotel ballroom in our nation’s capital right now,” Trump said to loud boos from the crowd. “If the media’s job is to be honest and to tell the truth, the media deserves a very, very big fat failing grade.”
Trump listed what he said were some of his key early accomplishments, including the successful confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court of Justice Neil Gorsuch and clearing away many regulations on the environment and business.
He also listed his approval of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, killing a pending Asian trade pact, and enhanced security measures that have led to a sharp decline in illegal border crossings at the southern border.
“The world is getting the message: if you try to illegally enter the United States, you will be caught, detained, deported or put in prison,” Trump said.
He shrugged off his failure to score major legislative victories on his core campaign promises, such as repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act and construction of a Mexican border wall. Trump’s ban on visitors from some Muslim nations was blocked in court.
He blamed Democrats for the legislative failures so far and said all of his promises would be kept eventually.
“We’ll build the wall, people, don’t even worry about it,” he said.
Some supporters in the crowd said they were willing to give Trump more time.
“I voted for him and I’ll give him a year. That’s enough time to whip Congress into shape and get some deals done,” said Michael Casciaro, 54, a civilian contractor for the military.
Trump said he reversed course on promises to name China a currency manipulator because he wanted its help in trying to rein in North Korea’s nuclear and missile development. Trump has said all options are on the table if Pyongyang persists in its nuclear development.
In an excerpt of an interview with “Face the Nation” of CBS, set to air on Sunday and Monday and conducted during the trip to Pennsylvania, Trump said he would “not be happy” if North Korea conducted a nuclear test. Asked if that would mean military action, Trump said “I don’t know, I mean we’ll see.”
Reveling in the cheers in Harrisburg, Trump made reference again to his upset victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton in the crucial swing state of Pennsylvania, which he said “carried us to a big, beautiful win on Nov. 8.”
Trump left Washington as another in a series of protests against his administration was winding up. Thousands of marchers made their way through Washington’s streets during the People’s Climate March, a protest against Trump’s moves to roll back environmental regulations.
Asked by reporters accompanying him to Pennsylvania what he had to say to the climate change protesters, Trump said: “Enjoy the day, enjoy the weather.”
After the rally, the White House said the president had signed two trade-related executive orders, one for top U.S. officials to review all U.S. trade pacts for potential abuses and another setting up an office in the White House to advise him on trade-related issues.
Saturday, April 29, 2017
House Freedom Caucus Member Pledges Support For Health Care
Members of the House Freedom Caucus this week have agreed to support a health care plan, after opposing the American Health Care Act (AHCA) proposed by Speaker Paul Ryan and supported by the President. Although the date for a vote on a revised health care package to replace Obamacare is uncertain, it could be brought to the House floor in the next couple weeks. Georgia Congressman Jody Hice is a Freedom Caucus Member who now supports the new version of the health care bill.
“The key issue is to drive down premium costs, which the previous bill –four weeks ago–did not do. And so with what we have now, I’ve come on board because of the changes that have been made which drastically impact premium costs,” explains Hice who represents Georgia’s Tenth District, which extends eastward from the Atlanta suburbs.
“The previous bill had some good things…employer mandate…individual mandate. That’s good, but it left untouched insurance company mandates. So, an insurance company did not have the ability to offer a variety of plans. They had to stick with the Gold, Premium, that type of thing. It was not free market-based. And there’s no way to drive down the cost of premiums if the government is dictating what the plan has to be. The MacArthur Amendment helped in that regard,” says Hice.
Hice noted that some Members are still undecided, but he appeared optimistic about the bill’s chances for approval.
Turning the subject of President Trump’s First 100 Days, Hice offered high praise for the nascent Administration.
“I rate him doing an outstanding job. Again, at the end of the day, no President is ultimately going to be defined by a hundred days. He’ll be defined by the duration of his presidency. But within the First Hundred Days, we’ve got what…eleven Congressional Review Acts–by far the most in the history of our nation, which reviews have done away with multiple regulations from the previous administration.
“And the most in any other administration had been one. So those have gone through the House, through the Senate and signed by the President. We have a new Supreme Court Justice. We have Executive Orders ranging from Keystone to Waters of the US. We have our military presence in the world, seen from Syria and other things that America is back on the front line. We have our immigration declining seventy percent the first Hundred Days…and I give him an A+,” says Hice.
No vote on healthcare bill this week in U.S. House
U.S. House leaders have decided against holding a vote on a reworked healthcare system overhaul this week after failing to find the necessary support, congressional aides said on Thursday.
White House officials had urged a floor vote on the legislation before President Donald Trump’s 100th day in office on Saturday, hoping to follow through on a campaign promise to repeal and replace the 2010 Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
Advocates had hoped to raise enough support for the measure after a group of hard-line Republican conservatives endorsed an amended version on Wednesday.
But by Thursday evening Republican leaders still had not collected enough votes from moderate Republicans whose backing was also needed for passage in the House, given united Democratic opposition.
“We won’t vote this week,” said one House Republican aide, who asked not to be named. Next week was not ruled out, another indicated. “We’ll call a vote when we have the votes.”
Representative Pete Sessions, a senior House Republican, also left the door open to a vote next week.
Possibly referring to Trump, Sessions said that a lot of people had tried to rush the legislation to the floor, but House Republican leaders want to “allow the time to do it right.
“I said it will find its time and I am satisfied we are moving at a pace, keeping people engaged,” he said at a late night session of the House Rules Committee he chairs.
The Republican healthcare bill would replace Obamacare’s income-based tax credit with an age-based credit, roll back an expansion of the Medicaid government health insurance program for the poor and repeal most Obamacare taxes.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had estimated 24 million fewer people would have insurance than under the original version.
House leaders brought the bill to the floor last month after Trump demanded a vote, but yanked it after a rebellion by Republican moderates and the party’s most conservative lawmakers, in a major setback for Trump.
An amendment drafted by Representative Tom MacArthur won over conservatives in the hardline Freedom Caucus this week, reviving some hopes that the bill could still pass.
The amendment would allow states to seek waivers from some provisions. Among these are one mandating that insurers charge those with pre-existing conditions the same as healthy consumers, and that insurers cover so-called essential health benefits, such as maternity care.
But a number of centrist Republicans still opposed the measure.
“Protections for those with pre-existing conditions without contingency, and affordable access to coverage for every American, remain my priorities for advancing healthcare reform, and this bill does not satisfy those benchmarks for me,” Representative Ryan Costello of Pennsylvania said in a statement posted on social network Twitter on Thursday.
Some outside groups like the American Medical Association weighed in against the legislation, saying it would cost millions their health care coverage. The bill’s future is further clouded in the Senate.
Russia’s Lavrov says ready to cooperate with U.S. on Syria: agencies
MOSCOW (Reuters) – Moscow is ready to cooperate with the United States on settling the Syrian crisis, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Saturday, Russian news agencies reported.
Russian authorities reiterate periodically that they stand ready to renew cooperation with Washington on Syria and, more globally, on fighting terrorism.
Relations between the two countries, however, are seen reaching another low after U.S. fired missiles at Syria to punish Moscow’s ally for its suspected use of poison gas earlier in April. Russia condemned the U.S. action.
Lavrov’s deputy Mikhail Bogdanov also said on Saturday that Russian authorities hope that Syrian armed opposition will take part in Syria peace talks in Kazakhstan’s Astana on May 3-4, Interfax reported.
EPA says website undergoing makeover to match Trump, Pruitt views
The website of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA.gov, is getting a makeover to reflect the views of President Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, the agency said on Friday.
“As EPA renews its commitment to human health and clean air, land and water, our website needs to reflect the views of the leadership of the agency,” it said in a statement.
Trump, a climate change doubter, campaigned on a pledge to boost the U.S. oil and gas drilling and coal mining industries by slashing regulation. He also promised to pull Washington out of a global pact to fight climate change.
The first page to be updated is one that reflects Trump’s executive order on energy independence, which calls for a review of the Clean Power Plan put into place by his predecessor, President Barack Obama, the statement said.
“Language associated with the Clean Power Plan, written by the last administration, is out of date,” it said. “Similarly, content related to climate and regulation is also being reviewed.”
The Clean Power Plan aimed to sharply reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electrical power generation over 25 years, focusing on reductions from coal-burning power plants and increasing the use of renewable energy and energy conservation.
“We want to eliminate confusion by removing outdated language first and making room to discuss how we’re protecting the environment and human health by partnering with states and working within the law,” J.P. Freire, associate administrator for public affairs at the agency, said in the statement.
The website changes will comply with agency ethics and legal guidance, including proper archiving, so a snapshot of the Obama administration’s website would remain available from the main page, the statement said.
In January, EPA sources told Reuters that administration officials had asked the agency to take down the climate change page on its website, and that EPA staff had pushed back in an effort to convince the administration to preserve it. [L1N1FF00N]
The page includes links to scientific research, emissions data from industrial plants and a multi-agency report that describes trends related to the causes and effects of climate change.
Pruitt led 14 lawsuits against the agency when he was Oklahoma’s attorney general. Last month he said he was not convinced that carbon dioxide from human activity is the main driver of climate change, a position widely embraced by scientists.
Friday, April 28, 2017
Exclusive: ‘If there’s a shutdown, there’s a shutdown,’ Trump says
President Donald Trump downplayed the severity of a potential government shutdown on Thursday, just two days shy of a deadline for Congress to reach a spending deal to avert temporary layoffs of federal workers.
“We’ll see what happens. If there’s a shutdown, there’s a shutdown,” Trump told Reuters in an interview, adding that Democrats would be to blame if the federal government was left unfunded.
Congress has until 12:01 a.m. ET on Saturday to pass a bill to fund the government or face a shutdown, which would temporarily lay off hundreds of thousands of federal workers.
Republicans introduced a bill on Wednesday to fund government operations at current levels for one more week, giving them time to finish negotiations with Democrats on the plan for the rest of the fiscal year ending Sept. 30.
Trump said a shutdown would be a “very negative thing” but that his administration was prepared if it was necessary.
In a wide-ranging interview, he defended the one-page tax plan he unveiled on Wednesday from criticism that it would increase the U.S. deficit, saying better trade deals and economic growth would offset the costs.
“We will do trade deals that are going to make up for a tremendous amount of the deficit. We are going to be doing trade deals that are going to be much better trade deals,” Trump said.
Trump also said it would be unfair to offer a debt bailout to Puerto Rico, a U.S. territory, because it was unfair to people in U.S. states.
As part of the budget negotiations, Democrats have called for financial support to prop up Puerto Rico’s Medicaid program covering health insurance for the poor, but many Republicans are opposed to the idea.
“I don’t think that’s fair to the people of Iowa, and I don’t think it’s fair to the people of Wisconsin and Ohio and North Carolina and Pennsylvania that we should be bailing out Puerto Rico for billions and billions of dollars,” Trump said. ” No I don’t think that’s fair.”
Exclusive: Trump says ‘major, major’ conflict with North Korea possible, but seeks diplomacy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday a major conflict with North Korea is possible in the standoff over its nuclear and missile programs, but he would prefer a diplomatic outcome to the dispute.
“There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely,” Trump told Reuters in an Oval Office interview ahead of his 100th day in office on Saturday.
Nonetheless, Trump said he wanted to peacefully resolve a crisis that has bedeviled multiple U.S. presidents, a path that he and his administration are emphasizing by preparing a variety of new economic sanctions while not taking the military option off the table.
“We’d love to solve things diplomatically but it’s very difficult,” he said.
In other highlights of the 42-minute interview, Trump was cool to speaking again with Taiwan’s president after an earlier telephone call with her angered China.
He also said he wants South Korea to pay the cost of the U.S. THAAD anti-missile defense system, which he estimated at $1 billion, and intends to renegotiate or terminate a U.S. free trade pact with South Korea because of a deep trade deficit with Seoul.
Asked when he would announce his intention to renegotiate the pact, Trump said: “Very soon. I’m announcing it now.”
Trump also said he was considering adding stops to Israel and Saudi Arabia to a Europe trip next month, emphasizing that he wanted to see an Israeli-Palestinian peace. He complained that Saudi Arabia was not paying its fair share for U.S. defense.
Asked about the fight against Islamic State, Trump said the militant group had to be defeated.
“I have to say, there is an end. And it has to be humiliation,” he said, when asked about what the endgame was for defeating Islamist violent extremism.
XI ‘TRYING VERY HARD’
Trump said North Korea was his biggest global challenge. He lavished praise on Chinese President Xi Jinping for Chinese assistance in trying to rein in Pyongyang. The two leaders met in Florida earlier this month.
“I believe he is trying very hard. He certainly doesn’t want to see turmoil and death. He doesn’t want to see it. He is a good man. He is a very good man and I got to know him very well.
“With that being said, he loves China and he loves the people of China. I know he would like to be able to do something, perhaps it’s possible that he can’t,” Trump said.
Trump spoke just a day after he and his top national security advisers briefed U.S. lawmakers on the North Korean threat and one day before Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will press the United Nations Security Council on sanctions to further isolate Pyongyang over its nuclear and missile programs.
The Trump administration on Wednesday declared North Korea “an urgent national security threat and top foreign policy priority.” It said it was focusing on economic and diplomatic pressure, including Chinese cooperation in containing its defiant neighbor and ally, and remained open to negotiations.
U.S. officials said military strikes remained an option but played down the prospect, though the administration has sent an aircraft carrier and a nuclear-powered submarine to the region in a show of force.
Any direct U.S. military action would run the risk of massive North Korean retaliation and huge casualties in Japan and South Korea and among U.S. forces in both countries.
‘I HOPE HE’S RATIONAL’
Trump, asked if he considered North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to be rational, said he was operating from the assumption that he is rational. He noted that Kim had taken over his country at an early age.
“He’s 27 years old. His father dies, took over a regime. So say what you want but that is not easy, especially at that age.
“I’m not giving him credit or not giving him credit, I’m just saying that’s a very hard thing to do. As to whether or not he’s rational, I have no opinion on it. I hope he’s rational,” he said.
Trump, sipping a Coke delivered by an aide after the president ordered it by pressing a button on his desk, rebuffed an overture from Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen, who told Reuters a direct phone call with Trump could take place again after their first conversation in early December angered Beijing.
China considers neighboring Taiwan to be a renegade province.
“My problem is that I have established a very good personal relationship with President Xi,” said Trump. “I really feel that he is doing everything in his power to help us with a big situation. So I wouldn’t want to be causing difficulty right now for him.
“So I would certainly want to speak to him first.”
Trump also said he hoped to avoid a potential government shutdown amid a dispute between congressional Republicans and Democrats over a spending deal with a Saturday deadline looming.
But he said if a shutdown takes place, it will be the Democrats’ fault for trying to add money to the legislation to “bail out Puerto Rico” and other items.
He also defended the one-page tax plan he unveiled on Wednesday from criticism that it would increase the U.S. deficit, saying better trade deals and economic growth would offset the costs.
“We will do trade deals that are going to make up for a tremendous amount of the deficit. We are going to be doing trade deals that are going to be much better trade deals,” Trump said.
(Editing by Ross Colvin)
No vote on healthcare bill this week in U.S. House
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. House leaders have decided against holding a vote on a reworked healthcare system overhaul this week after failing to find the necessary support, congressional aides said on Thursday.
White House officials had urged a floor vote on the legislation before President Donald Trump’s 100th day in office on Saturday, hoping to follow through on a campaign promise to repeal and replace the 2010 Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
Advocates had hoped to raise enough support for the measure after a group of hard-line Republican conservatives endorsed an amended version on Wednesday.
But by Thursday evening Republican leaders still had not collected enough votes from moderate Republicans whose backing was also needed for passage in the House, given united Democratic opposition.
“We won’t vote this week,” said one House Republican aide, who asked not to be named. Next week was not ruled out, another indicated. “We’ll call a vote when we have the votes.”
Representative Pete Sessions, a senior House Republican, also left the door open to a vote next week.
Possibly referring to Trump, Sessions said that a lot of people had tried to rush the legislation to the floor, but House Republican leaders want to “allow the time to do it right.
“I said it will find its time and I am satisfied we are moving at a pace, keeping people engaged,” he said at a late night session of the House Rules Committee he chairs.
The Republican healthcare bill would replace Obamacare’s income-based tax credit with an age-based credit, roll back an expansion of the Medicaid government health insurance program for the poor and repeal most Obamacare taxes.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had estimated 24 million fewer people would have insurance than under the original version.
House leaders brought the bill to the floor last month after Trump demanded a vote, but yanked it after a rebellion by Republican moderates and the party’s most conservative lawmakers, in a major setback for Trump.
An amendment drafted by Representative Tom MacArthur won over conservatives in the hardline Freedom Caucus this week, reviving some hopes that the bill could still pass.
The amendment would allow states to seek waivers from some provisions. Among these are one mandating that insurers charge those with pre-existing conditions the same as healthy consumers, and that insurers cover so-called essential health benefits, such as maternity care.
But a number of centrist Republicans still opposed the measure.
“Protections for those with pre-existing conditions without contingency, and affordable access to coverage for every American, remain my priorities for advancing healthcare reform, and this bill does not satisfy those benchmarks for me,” Representative Ryan Costello of Pennsylvania said in a statement posted on social network Twitter on Thursday.
Some outside groups like the American Medical Association weighed in against the legislation, saying it would cost millions their health care coverage. The bill’s future is further clouded in the Senate.
Congress readies votes Friday on bill to avert government shutdown
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Congress is set to debate legislation that would extend until May 5 the deadline for a deal on federal spending through September and head off a feared government shutdown at midnight on Friday.
The House Rules Committee, in a late-night meeting, voted 8-2 to send the legislation to the full House of Representatives for debate and votes on passage on Friday, just hours before expiry of a deadline for funding many federal agencies.
If the measure passes the House, as expected, the Senate would be prepared to promptly take up the bill, in the hope of also passing it and sending it to President Donald Trump to be signed into law.
The measure would give Republican and Democratic lawmakers an additional week to work out differences on about $1 trillion in funding for the government through Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year.
Without the extension or a longer-term funding bill, federal agencies will run out of money by midnight Friday, likely triggering abrupt layoffs of hundreds of thousands of federal government workers until funding resumes.
The last government shutdown, in 2013, lasted for 17 days, and many lawmakers were nervous about the prospect of another.
“I’m confident we will be able to pass a short-term extension” of funding for programs for the fiscal year that began nearly seven months ago, House Speaker Paul Ryan told reporters early on Thursday.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi warned that the purpose of the stopgap measure was to tie up loose ends of a deal to provide around $1 trillion in money for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 and not for “kicking the can down the road to have this same back-and-forth” over funding disputes.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen expressed optimism in a statement that a final funding package will be completed soon.
In the midst of the delicate negotiations, Trump took to social network Twitter to blast Democrats.
“As families prepare for summer vacations in our National Parks – Democrats threaten to close them and shut down the government. Terrible!” Trump tweeted in a series of tweets.
Negotiators were racing against the clock to resolve remaining disputes in the massive spending bill amid talks that have already handed Democrats at least two major victories, despite Republican control of Congress.
Trump, a Republican, gave in to Democratic demands that the spending bill not include money to start building the wall he wants to erect on the U.S.-Mexico border. His administration also agreed to continue funding for a major component of Obamacare, formally known as the Affordable Care Act, despite vows to end the program.
It remained unclear whether Republicans would prevail in their effort to sharply hike defense spending without similar increases for other domestic programs. Trump has proposed a $30-billion spending boost for the Pentagon for the rest of this fiscal year.
Such funding disputes could resurface later in spending bills for the next fiscal year.
Disagreements remaining to be ironed out include funding to make a healthcare program for coal miners permanent and to plug a gap in Puerto Rico’s Medicaid program, the government health insurance program for the poor.
Thursday, April 27, 2017
The American Civil Liberties Union on Wednesday tweeted out support for free speech after Ann Coulter cancelled her speech at the University of California, Berkley, over security concerns.
The ACLU said in a Twitter post that “the heckler’s veto of Coulter’s Berkeley speech is a loss for the 1st Amendment. We must protect speech on campus. Even when hateful.”
In an email to The Associated Press, the conservative pundit wrote "Berkeley canceled" when asked to confirm her planned appearance on the campus Thursday. She added, however, "I have my flights, so I thought I might stroll around the graveyard of the First Amendment."
Coulter was invited by the campus Republicans to speak at Berkeley. UC Berkeley officials say they are bracing for possible violence on campus whether the conservative pundit comes to speak or not.
University officials say they are preparing for possible violence on campus whether Coulter comes to speak or not.
The conservative pundit had hinted she might cancel her planned appearance Thursday amid growing concerns of violence. She told Florida-based radio station 850 WFTL on Wednesday, "I still wanted to do it but I'm running out of options here."
Campus spokesman Dan Mogulof said UC Berkeley officials had not heard directly from Coulter on Wednesday. But he said even if she cancels, some groups that support or oppose her could still turn out on campus.
He said police were taking necessary steps to protect the campus but he declined to elaborate.
Trump agrees to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada, Mexico leaders
President Trump and the leaders of Mexico and Canada agreed Wednesday to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the White House said Wednesday night.
"it is my privilege to bring NAFTA up to date through renegotiation," Trump said in a statement. "It is an honor to deal with both [Mexican] President [Enrique] Peña Nieto and [Canadian] Prime Minister [Justin] Trudeau, and I believe that the end result will make all three countries stronger and better."
The White House added that Trump "agreed not to terminate NAFTA at this time" and that all three leaders ""agreed to proceed swiftly, according to their required internal procedures, to enable the renegotiation" of the trade deal to "the benefit of all three countries."
Trump repeatedly railed against the two-decade-old trade agreement on the campaign trail, describing it repeatedly as a "disaster."
Earlier Wednesday, sources told Fox News that the White House had drafted a notification signaling the United States' intention to withdraw from NAFTA. The document would have given the leaders of Canada and Mexico six months' notice of the administration's decision to exit from the agreement.
On Monday, the administration announced it would slap hefty tariffs on softwood lumber being imported from Canada. Trump has also been railing against changes in Canadian milk product pricing that he says are hurting the American dairy industry.
Trump told The Associated Press in an interview last week that he plans to either renegotiate or terminate NAFTA, which he and other critics blame for wiping out U.S. manufacturing jobs because it allowed companies to move factories to Mexico to take advantage of low-wage labor.
"I am very upset with NAFTA. I think NAFTA has been a catastrophic trade deal for the United States, trading agreement for the United States. It hurts us with Canada, and it hurts us with Mexico," he said.
The Trump administration last month submitted a vague set of guidelines to Congress for renegotiating NAFTA, disappointing those who were expecting Trump to demand a major overhaul.
In an eight-page draft letter to Congress, acting U.S. Trade Representative Stephen Vaughn wrote that the administration intended to start talking with Mexico and Canada about making changes to the pact, which took effect in 1994.
The letter spelled out few details and stuck with broad principles. But it appeared to keep much of the existing agreement in place, including private tribunals that allow companies to challenge national laws on the grounds that they inhibit trade — a provision that critics say allows companies to get around environmental and labor laws.
Reports Wednesday of the possible move drew objections from some in Congress, including Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
"Withdrawing from #NAFTA would be a disaster for #Arizona jobs & economy," he tweeted. "@POTUS shouldn't abandon this vital trade agreement."
Sen. Ted Cruz: 'It's only fitting' cartel money be used for border wall
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz told Fox News' "Tucker Carlson Tonight" that "there's a justice" to his proposal that money seized from drug cartel capos be used to pay for President Trump's promised border wall.
"These drug cartels are the ones crossing the border with impunity, smuggling drugs, smuggling narcotics, engaged in human trafficking," the Republican told host Tucker Carlson. "They’re the ones violating our laws and it’s only fitting that their ill-gotten gains fund securing the border."
Federal prosecutors are looking to seize $14 billion in drug profits from the Sinaloa Cartel leader, who is facing trial in the U.S. on a multitude of federal charges.
"Now, it so happens, coincidentally, that the estimated cost of the wall is between $14-20 billion," Cruz said. "So, the legislation I filed yesterday was very simple."
On Monday, Cruz introduced the Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order (EL CHAPO) Act.
"It said any proceeds that are forfeited from El Chapo and from other drugs lords shall be spent building the wall and securing the border," said Cruz, who also praised the Trump administration for their willingness to enforce immigration laws.
"I visited with about 150 Border Patrol agents [in January]," Cruz said. "The relief these men and women had at the election results, it was palpable ... And I asked the agents, ‘What’s changed?’ And they said, ‘The only thing that’s changed is the cartels understand now we have an administration that will enforce the law.’ That matters."
Insulting Ivanka: Why the media are turning on the First Daughter
Why is there suddenly so much media hostility toward Ivanka Trump?
Her visit to Germany has unleashed a wave of insults and snarkiness that seems wildly out of proportion to what actually happened on the trip.
The short answer, of course, is that she is a target of animosity that is really aimed at her father.
But it goes deeper than that. Some pundits seem to blame her for not transforming the president’s policies, despite the fact that he’s the one who got elected. Even more strangely, some blame her for not speaking out against her dad.
During the campaign, when I happened to chat with her a few times, Ivanka was getting pretty good press. And why not? She is a poised and accomplished entrepreneur who handles herself with grace.
I get that it’s strange for Ivanka Trump to be a top White House aide, and that some people can’t accept that. She originally just wanted to be an informal adviser. But with critics raising conflict questions about her business, Ivanka decided to relinquish that role and take an office in the White House, working with her husband, Jared Kushner, whose role in the administration keeps expanding. (Neither is drawing a salary.)
I understand that her detractors say Ivanka owes her business opportunities, and now her political opportunity, to her dad. Fine. The president knew he would face nepotism charges when he made the appointments. And she had to know she was putting herself in the line of fire when she took an official title.
But compare this to the situation faced by every first lady—and it’s an apt analogy because Ivanka’s high profile is partially due to Melania’s low-key role as she remains, for now, in New York.
Each first lady gets a government staff and an international platform, simply by virtue of the fact that her husband won high office. And every first lady is widely admired, although there has been criticism of some (especially Hillary Clinton, who later sought the top job) for wading too deeply into policy.
So is a first daughter really that different from a first lady?
When Ivanka, noting that the president has employed thousands of women, drew some boos on the Berlin stage with Angela Merkel and Christine Lagarde, that opened the floodgates.
Asked by NBC’s Hallie Jackson how she feels about being called an “accomplice” to her father, Ivanka said she didn’t like the word. “I think one of the things I value about my father as first a businessman and now as a leader of the country, is that he creates ideas and he likes to hear from people with divergent viewpoints. And that’s not always true in politics.”
Still, we’re seeing headlines like this one in the liberal Huffington Post: “Trump’s White House Family Affair Looks A Lot Like The Most Corrupt Nations In The World.”
CNN commentator and former Ted Cruz aide Amanda Carpenter said that “when I see Ivanka taking on this role, I really see her becoming like Hillary Clinton in the worst ways. She’s sort of becoming increasingly unlikable. She’s trying to get these jobs she’s not qualified for based on family connections.”
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews compared the Trumps to “the Romanovs,” saying the president envisions a royal family and “it is un-American. It is untraditional. It’s somewhat weird.”
Matthews wrote a book about JFK, who of course named his brother attorney general. Times have changed, but it’s not like Ivanka is running a major department. When Joe Scarborough brought up Bobby Kennedy and Mika Brzezinski asked whether he was comparing RFK to Ivanka, he accused her of being “snotty” and taking a “cheap shot.”
The Guardian ran a snarky column saying that “Trump invoked her own impressive achievements as an example of her father’s commitment to equality. ..Trump is, indeed, a wonderful example of what women can achieve with just perseverance, tenacity and millions of inherited dollars.”
Some of this is so personal that it’s obviously not really about Ivanka.
She is clearly more moderate than her father and has been an advocate for women’s rights, family leave and child care. Yet her detractors had unrealistic expectations about her role and insist on holding her accountable for his past “Access Hollywood”-type comments about women.
Maybe a truly feminist approach would be to judge Ivanka Trump on what she actually does in the White House, not on their distaste for her dad.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.
Her visit to Germany has unleashed a wave of insults and snarkiness that seems wildly out of proportion to what actually happened on the trip.
The short answer, of course, is that she is a target of animosity that is really aimed at her father.
But it goes deeper than that. Some pundits seem to blame her for not transforming the president’s policies, despite the fact that he’s the one who got elected. Even more strangely, some blame her for not speaking out against her dad.
During the campaign, when I happened to chat with her a few times, Ivanka was getting pretty good press. And why not? She is a poised and accomplished entrepreneur who handles herself with grace.
I get that it’s strange for Ivanka Trump to be a top White House aide, and that some people can’t accept that. She originally just wanted to be an informal adviser. But with critics raising conflict questions about her business, Ivanka decided to relinquish that role and take an office in the White House, working with her husband, Jared Kushner, whose role in the administration keeps expanding. (Neither is drawing a salary.)
I understand that her detractors say Ivanka owes her business opportunities, and now her political opportunity, to her dad. Fine. The president knew he would face nepotism charges when he made the appointments. And she had to know she was putting herself in the line of fire when she took an official title.
But compare this to the situation faced by every first lady—and it’s an apt analogy because Ivanka’s high profile is partially due to Melania’s low-key role as she remains, for now, in New York.
Each first lady gets a government staff and an international platform, simply by virtue of the fact that her husband won high office. And every first lady is widely admired, although there has been criticism of some (especially Hillary Clinton, who later sought the top job) for wading too deeply into policy.
So is a first daughter really that different from a first lady?
When Ivanka, noting that the president has employed thousands of women, drew some boos on the Berlin stage with Angela Merkel and Christine Lagarde, that opened the floodgates.
Asked by NBC’s Hallie Jackson how she feels about being called an “accomplice” to her father, Ivanka said she didn’t like the word. “I think one of the things I value about my father as first a businessman and now as a leader of the country, is that he creates ideas and he likes to hear from people with divergent viewpoints. And that’s not always true in politics.”
Still, we’re seeing headlines like this one in the liberal Huffington Post: “Trump’s White House Family Affair Looks A Lot Like The Most Corrupt Nations In The World.”
CNN commentator and former Ted Cruz aide Amanda Carpenter said that “when I see Ivanka taking on this role, I really see her becoming like Hillary Clinton in the worst ways. She’s sort of becoming increasingly unlikable. She’s trying to get these jobs she’s not qualified for based on family connections.”
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews compared the Trumps to “the Romanovs,” saying the president envisions a royal family and “it is un-American. It is untraditional. It’s somewhat weird.”
Matthews wrote a book about JFK, who of course named his brother attorney general. Times have changed, but it’s not like Ivanka is running a major department. When Joe Scarborough brought up Bobby Kennedy and Mika Brzezinski asked whether he was comparing RFK to Ivanka, he accused her of being “snotty” and taking a “cheap shot.”
The Guardian ran a snarky column saying that “Trump invoked her own impressive achievements as an example of her father’s commitment to equality. ..Trump is, indeed, a wonderful example of what women can achieve with just perseverance, tenacity and millions of inherited dollars.”
Some of this is so personal that it’s obviously not really about Ivanka.
She is clearly more moderate than her father and has been an advocate for women’s rights, family leave and child care. Yet her detractors had unrealistic expectations about her role and insist on holding her accountable for his past “Access Hollywood”-type comments about women.
Maybe a truly feminist approach would be to judge Ivanka Trump on what she actually does in the White House, not on their distaste for her dad.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
Miffed over border wall talk, top Mexican official floats American entry fee
A top Mexican official on Tuesday said that Mexico may consider charging a fee for Americans entering the country in what could be seen as a retaliation to President Trump's call for a border wall.
Foreign Secretary Luis Videgaray, in a meeting with Mexico's top legislators, called Trump's plan an "unfriendly, hostile" act, and called on his colleagues to consider the entry fee.
"We could explore — not necessarily a visa, that could impede a lot of people from coming to Mexico — but we could perhaps (have) a fee associated with entry,” Videgaray said. “This is something that I'm sure will be part of our discussion, and I believe we can find points of agreement."
Videgaray went on to say that Mexico would not pay a cent towards the wall. He said if talks between the U.S. and Mexico fail to satisfy both countries, the Mexican government would consider reducing security cooperation.
"If the negotiation on other themes — immigration, the border, trade — isn't satisfactory to Mexico's interests, we will have to review our existing cooperation," Videgaray said. "This would be especially in the security areas ... and that involves the national immigration agency, the federal police and of course, the armed forces."
Trump has asked congress to include a down payment on the wall in the spending bill but because of scrutiny from both sides, the President announced Monday that he’d be willing to wait until September to revisit the issue of funding; however, his stance on Mexico’s role in paying for the wall hasn’t changed.
Judge William Orrick III: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
1
Judge William Orrick was appointed to his current position by President Barack Obama.
At the time of the appointment, Orrick was working at the law firm Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass LLP. He has previously served as deputy assistant attorney general for the Civil Division of the United States Department of Justice.
Obama nominated Orrick in June 2012, but Orrick was not approved until February 2013. This was mainly a party line vote, though Republican Jeff Flake broke with his party to vote to confirm Orrick.
2
When Barack Obama was running for president, Judge William Orrick reportedly helped raise money for him and donated some of his own money as well.
According to Public Citizen, a consumer rights advocacy group, Orrick donated approximately $30,000 to committees supporting Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign for president. In addition, he helped raise $200,000 in contributions to the Obama campaign.
This had not been Orrick’s first time raising money for a Democratic politician. During the 2004 election, he helped raise funds for John Kerry, according to Public Citizen.
3
In 2010, Arizona passed a controversial immigration law known as SB 1070.
This was a strict immigration bill which required that police officers attempt to determine a person’s immigration status when they are stopped for unrelated reasons if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person may be undocumented. It also barred state and local officials from restricting the enforcement of federal immigration laws.
The Department of Justice ultimately filed a lawsuit against the state of Arizona because of this bill. Orrick, who worked at the Justice Department at the time, was involved in coordinating the Obama administration’s argument against SB 1070, according to the Washington Examiner.
Orrick himself said during his Senate confirmation process, “Regarding Arizona, I attended meetings where the impact of SB 1070 on the operations of DHS and law enforcement was discussed [and] where the preemption analysis of the lawyers working on this issue was discussed.”
4
In 2015, Judge William Orrick issued a temporary restraining order against a pro-life group that had been releasing undercover videos about Planned Parenthood.
At the time, The Center for Medical Progress had been putting out highly-edited videos that they claimed showed Planned Parenthood had been illegally selling fetal tissue. Orrick issued a restraining order, saying that he reached this decision due to concerns over the safety of the leaders of the National Abortion Federation.
“NAF would be likely to suffer irreparable injury, absent an ex parte temporary restraining order, in the form of harassment, intimidation, violence, invasion of privacy, and injury to reputation, and the requested relief is in the public interest,” Orrick said at the time, according to CNN.
The National Abortion Federation said in their restraining order request that the videos had been illegally recorded.
At the time that this decision was reached, conservative website The Federalist found that Orrick’s wife, Caroline Farrow Orrick, is pro-choice.
5
During his Senate confirmation process, Judge William Orrick promised to never let his political views influence the way he rules on cases.
“My varied legal background is evidence that I will treat all litigants fairly and with respect, and that I will not let my personal views interfere with the administration of justice,” he said. “… I have great respect for every type of client I have represented. I have never let my political beliefs affect my legal judgment, and believe that politics have no place in the courtroom.”
Orrick went on to say that district judges must “bind themselves tightly” to precedent.
When asked what his policy on immigration-related cases would be, Orrick said he would recuse himself “from any case that was pending in OIL [Office of Immigration Litigation] while I was Deputy Assistant Attorney General and from any other case as required by the Code of Conduct for United States Judge as well as other relevant Canons and statutory provisions.”
Judge William Orrick was appointed to his current position by President Barack Obama.
At the time of the appointment, Orrick was working at the law firm Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass LLP. He has previously served as deputy assistant attorney general for the Civil Division of the United States Department of Justice.
Obama nominated Orrick in June 2012, but Orrick was not approved until February 2013. This was mainly a party line vote, though Republican Jeff Flake broke with his party to vote to confirm Orrick.
2
When Barack Obama was running for president, Judge William Orrick reportedly helped raise money for him and donated some of his own money as well.
According to Public Citizen, a consumer rights advocacy group, Orrick donated approximately $30,000 to committees supporting Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign for president. In addition, he helped raise $200,000 in contributions to the Obama campaign.
This had not been Orrick’s first time raising money for a Democratic politician. During the 2004 election, he helped raise funds for John Kerry, according to Public Citizen.
3
In 2010, Arizona passed a controversial immigration law known as SB 1070.
This was a strict immigration bill which required that police officers attempt to determine a person’s immigration status when they are stopped for unrelated reasons if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person may be undocumented. It also barred state and local officials from restricting the enforcement of federal immigration laws.
The Department of Justice ultimately filed a lawsuit against the state of Arizona because of this bill. Orrick, who worked at the Justice Department at the time, was involved in coordinating the Obama administration’s argument against SB 1070, according to the Washington Examiner.
Orrick himself said during his Senate confirmation process, “Regarding Arizona, I attended meetings where the impact of SB 1070 on the operations of DHS and law enforcement was discussed [and] where the preemption analysis of the lawyers working on this issue was discussed.”
4
In 2015, Judge William Orrick issued a temporary restraining order against a pro-life group that had been releasing undercover videos about Planned Parenthood.
At the time, The Center for Medical Progress had been putting out highly-edited videos that they claimed showed Planned Parenthood had been illegally selling fetal tissue. Orrick issued a restraining order, saying that he reached this decision due to concerns over the safety of the leaders of the National Abortion Federation.
“NAF would be likely to suffer irreparable injury, absent an ex parte temporary restraining order, in the form of harassment, intimidation, violence, invasion of privacy, and injury to reputation, and the requested relief is in the public interest,” Orrick said at the time, according to CNN.
The National Abortion Federation said in their restraining order request that the videos had been illegally recorded.
At the time that this decision was reached, conservative website The Federalist found that Orrick’s wife, Caroline Farrow Orrick, is pro-choice.
5
During his Senate confirmation process, Judge William Orrick promised to never let his political views influence the way he rules on cases.
“My varied legal background is evidence that I will treat all litigants fairly and with respect, and that I will not let my personal views interfere with the administration of justice,” he said. “… I have great respect for every type of client I have represented. I have never let my political beliefs affect my legal judgment, and believe that politics have no place in the courtroom.”
Orrick went on to say that district judges must “bind themselves tightly” to precedent.
When asked what his policy on immigration-related cases would be, Orrick said he would recuse himself “from any case that was pending in OIL [Office of Immigration Litigation] while I was Deputy Assistant Attorney General and from any other case as required by the Code of Conduct for United States Judge as well as other relevant Canons and statutory provisions.”
Judge Who Blocked Trump Sanctuary City Order Bundled $200K for Obama
Federal Judge William Orrick III, who on Tuesday blocked President Trump's order to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities, reportedly bundled hundreds of thousands of dollars for President Barack Obama.
Orrick, of the Northern District of California, issued an injunction against the Trump administration after the city of San Francisco and county of Santa Clara sued over the president's plan to withhold federal funds from municipalities that harbor illegal immigrants.
As FoxNews.com reported:
The ruling from U.S. District Judge William Orrick III in San Francisco said that Trump's order targeted broad categories of federal funding for sanctuary governments, and that plaintiffs challenging the order were likely to succeed in proving it unconstitutional.
The decision will block the measure for now, while the federal lawsuit works its way through the courts.
The news comes on the heels of the Department of Justice threatening on Friday to cut off funding to eight so-called “sanctuary cities,” unless they were able to provide proof to the federal government that they weren’t looking the other way when it came to undocumented immigrants.
The same judge issued a restraining order in 2015 against the advocacy group responsible for undercover videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood employees plotting to sell baby organs.
At the time, The Federalist found that Orrick raised at least $200,000 for Obama and donated more than $30,000 to groups supporting him.
California judge blocks Trump order on sanctuary city money
A California judge on Tuesday blocked President Trump’s executive order that sought to withhold federal funds from so-called “sanctuary cities.”
The ruling from U.S. District Judge William Orrick III in San Francisco said that Trump's order targeted broad categories of federal funding for sanctuary governments, and that plaintiffs challenging the order were likely to succeed in proving it unconstitutional.
The decision will block the measure for now, while the federal lawsuit works its way through the courts.
READ THE DECISION
The news comes on the heels of the Department of Justice threatening on Friday to cut off funding to eight so-called “sanctuary cities,” unless they were able to provide proof to the federal government that they weren’t looking the other way when it came to undocumented immigrants.
San Francisco and Santa Clara County argued that the administration warning threatened billions of dollars in funding for each of them, making it difficult to plan budgets.
"It's not like it's just some small amount of money," John Keker, an attorney for Santa Clara County, told Orrick at the April 14 hearing.
Chad Readler, acting assistant attorney general, said the county and San Francisco were interpreting the executive order too broadly. The funding cutoff applies to three Justice Department and Homeland Security Department grants that require complying with a federal law that local governments not block officials from providing people's immigration status, he said.
The order would affect less than $1 million in funding for Santa Clara County and possibly no money for San Francisco, Readler said.
Readler argued the Trump administration was using a “bully pulpit” to "encourage communities and states to comply with the law.”
In his ruling, Orrick sided with San Francisco and Santa Clara, saying the order "by its plain language, attempts to reach all federal grants, not merely the three mentioned at the hearing."
"The rest of the order is broader still, addressing all federal funding," Orrick said. "And if there was doubt about the scope of the order, the president and attorney general have erased it with their public comments."
He said: "Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the president disapproves."
The judge clarified that the injunction “does not impact the Government’s ability to use lawful means to enforce existing conditions of federal grants … nor does it restrict the Secretary from developing regulations or preparing guidance on designating a jurisdiction as a 'sanctuary jurisdiction.'”
The Trump administration says sanctuary cities allow dangerous criminals back on the street and that the order is needed to keep the country safe. San Francisco and other sanctuary cities say turning local police into immigration officers erodes trust that's needed to get people to report crime.
The order also has led to lawsuits by Seattle; two Massachusetts cities, Lawrence and Chelsea; and a third San Francisco Bay Area government, the city of Richmond. The San Francisco and Santa Clara County suits were the first to get a hearing before a judge.
San Francisco and the county argued in court documents that the president did not have the authority to set conditions on the allocation of federal funds and could not force local officials to enforce federal immigration law.
They also said Trump's order applied to local governments that didn't detain immigrants for possible deportation in response to federal requests, not just those that refused to provide people's immigration status.
The Department of Justice responded that the city and county's lawsuits were premature because decisions about withholding funds and what local governments qualified as sanctuary cities had yet to be made.
The sanctuary city order was among a flurry of immigration measures Trump has signed since taking office in January, including a ban on travelers from several Muslim-majority countries.
A federal appeals court blocked the original travel ban. The administration then revised it, but the new version also is stalled in court.
Monday, April 24, 2017
New Orleans begins to take down prominent Confederate monuments (Nazi did it)
Do like the Nazi did in world war 2, if you don't like what's in a book burn it! |
Workers were to begin removing the first memorial, one that commemorates whites who tried to topple a biracial post-Civil War government in New Orleans, overnight in an attempt to avoid disruption from supporters who want the monuments to stay, some of whom city officials said have made death threats.
Three other statues to Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and P.G.T. Beauregard and Confederate States of America President Jefferson Davis will be removed in later days now that legal challenges have been overcome.
"There's a better way to use the property these monuments are on and a way that better reflects who we are," New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu said in an interview Sunday with The Associated Press.
Nationally, the debate over Confederate symbols has become heated since nine parishioners were killed at a black church in South Carolina in June 2015. South Carolina removed the Confederate flag from its statehouse grounds in the weeks after, and several Southern cities have since considered removing monuments. The University of Mississippi took down its state flag because it includes the Confederate emblem.
New Orleans is a majority African-American city although the number of black residents has fallen since 2005's Hurricane Katrina drove many people from the city.
The majority black City Council in 2015 voted 6-1 to approve plans to take the statues down, but legal battles over their fate have prevented the removal until now, said Landrieu, who proposed the monuments' removal and rode to victory twice with overwhelming support from the city's black residents.
People who want the Confederate memorials removed say they are offensive artifacts honoring the region's slave-owning past. But others call the monuments part of the city's history and say they should be protected historic structures.
Since officials announced the removals, contractors hired by the city have faced death threats and intimidation in this deep South city where passions about the Civil War still run deep.
Landrieu refused to say who the city would be using to remove the statues because of the intimidation attempts. And the removal will begin at night to ensure police can secure the sites to protect workers, and to ease the burden on traffic for people who live and work in the city, Landrieu said.
"All of what we will do in the next days will be designed to make sure that we protect everybody, that the workers are safe, the folks around the monuments are safe and that nobody gets hurt," Landrieu said.
Landrieu said the memorials don't represent his city as it approaches its 300th anniversary next year. The mayor said the city would remove the monuments, store them and preserve them until an "appropriate" place to display them is determined.
"The monuments are an aberration," he said. "They're actually a denial of our history and they were done in a time when people who still controlled the Confederacy were in charge of this city and it only represents a four-year period in our 1000-year march to where we are today."
The first memorial to come down will be the Liberty Monument, an 1891 obelisk honoring the Crescent City White League.
Landrieu has called the Liberty Monument "the most offensive of the four" and said it was erected to "revere white supremacy."
"If there was ever a statue that needed to be taken down, it's that one," he said.
The Crescent City White League attempted to overthrow a biracial Reconstruction government in New Orleans after the Civil War. That attempt failed, but white supremacist Democrats later took control of the state.
An inscription added in 1932 said the Yankees withdrew federal troops and "recognized white supremacy in the South" after the group challenged Louisiana's biracial government after the Civil War. In 1993, these words were covered by a granite slab with a new inscription, saying the obelisk honors "Americans on both sides" who died and that the conflict "should teach us lessons for the future."
The Liberty Monument had been the target of a previous lawsuit after the city removed it from a location on the main downtown thoroughfare of Canal Street during a federally-financed paving project in 1989. The city didn't put the monument back up until it was sued, and moved the monument to an obscure spot on a side street near the entrance to a parking garage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...