China Steel Cartoons

Trump tariffs bring hope, plans for jobs, to struggling small towns across US -- though broader effects remain uncertain

Jason Fernandez, United Steelworkers member

The steel and aluminum tariffs that President Donald Trump formally authorized Thursday have already brought some hope -- and plans for hundreds of jobs -- to economically distressed small towns across the U.S.

The good news comes as critics and trade groups sound the alarm about the tariffs' potentially negative long-term economic effects, including the possibility of a trade war, net job losses, and higher prices for goods across the globe.

TRUMP AUTHORIZES TARIFFS, EXEMPTS CANADA AND MEXICO -- FOR NOW
Citing the prospect of fairer trade conditions, Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel announced this week that it would restart a steelmaking blast furnace next month in the small Illinois town of Granite City, the Chicago Tribune reported.
The move is reportedly expected to bring about 500 employees back to work, just two years after the company idled the plant and laid off thousands of workers.
“Our Granite City Works facility and employees, as well as the surrounding community, have suffered too long from the unending waves of unfairly traded steel products that have flooded U.S. markets,” U.S. Steel President and CEO David B. Burritt said in a statement.
In Kentucky, Century Aluminum announced that the tariffs would allow the company to hire up to 300 workers for its Hancock County smelter, WKYU in Bowling Green reported.
CALIFORNIA STEEL MAKERS SAY TRUMP'S TARIFFS WILL HURT THEM
But despite the positive news in some towns, critics say the tariffs may have negative economic consequences when they take effect in 15 days.

For many distressed cities and Towns in the U.S., President Trump's tariff plan offered some much-needed hope after years of decline.  (Associated Press)

“The threat of the tariff has increased prices already," Jim Russell, director of Utah's Division of Facilities and Construction Management, who predicts the cost of construction projects, told the Salt Lake Tribune, "and we’re trying to get our arms around what that impact will be and how we can try to mitigate it — if we even can, and I’m not sure we can.
“It’s kind of a waiting game at this time to see what we can do, because we’re not in a position to procure the steel at this point.”
In a report Monday, the pro-trade non-partisan group the Trade Partnership predicted a net loss of nearly 150,000 jobs as a result of the tariffs.

A Donald Trump supporter waves an American flag at a Trump campaign rally in Bethpage, N.Y., April 6, 2016.  (Associated Press)

The consulting group said job growth in the steel and aluminum industries will be dwarfed by job losses resulting from the increased costs of working with those resources.
But in Granite City, population 29,000, the dire predictions did not seem to dampen residents' measured enthusiasm.
“The feeling I think is more gleeful,” Jason Fernandez, a member of United Steelworkers Local 1899, told KMOV in St. Louis.

"The feeling I think is more gleeful."

“It’s going to be a wait and see just a little bit longer," Fernandez added. “But there’s a lot more encouragement coming out of the decision today than there was yesterday.”
A real estate agent and lifelong Granite City resident told the paper her feelings were less mixed.
"We’re ecstatic,” Tina Besserman told the Tribune.

Cal Thomas: Trump boldly wades into cutting federal government down to size -- will it work?

President Donald Trump gestures as he walks as he leaves the White House, Friday, Feb. 16, 2018, in Washington.  

Of all the promises candidate Donald Trump made during the 2016 presidential campaign, none will be more difficult to fulfill than cutting the size and cost of the federal government. That’s because Congress, which must decide whether to keep a federal agency, has the final word in such matters and spending – especially spending in one’s home state or district – is what keeps so many of them in office. Who doubts that self-preservation is the primary objective of most members of Congress?

Ronald Reagan made similar promises about reducing the size of the bloated federal government, but was unable to fulfill them because of congressional intransigence. Perhaps his most notable failure was attempting to eliminate the Department of Education, an unnecessary Cabinet-level agency created by Jimmy Carter, reportedly as the fulfillment of a campaign promise to the National Education Association (NEA), the largest labor union in the United States, which backed him in the 1976 and 1980 elections. This pithy statement by Reagan got to the heart of the issue: “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!”

President Trump has asked every federal agency to submit a reorganization plan to the White House. Some programs, like the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Biological Survey Unit (BSU), are decades old. The BSU was established in 1885, and among its tasks is the preservation of the whooping crane. Last I checked those birds seemed to be doing OK, but why is this, along with so many other things, a responsibility of the federal government?
Reorganization of these outmoded and unnecessary programs and agencies should not be the goal. Elimination should be the goal. Unless they are killed off, the risk of their return is likely.
What’s needed is a strategy that shames Congress, which sometimes seems beyond shame, for misspending the people’s money. What will help in that shaming is for the president to establish an independent commission made up of retired Republicans, Democrats and average citizens. This commission would conduct a top-to-bottom audit of the federal government and present its findings to Congress, while simultaneously releasing them to the public, which would then apply pressure on Congress to adopt them.

Congressional budget-cutters spared the $440,000 spent annually to have attendants push buttons on the fully automated Capitol Hill elevators used by representatives and senators.

The commission would be modeled after the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) of the ’80s, which eliminated military bases that were no longer needed for the defense of the country. Some members of Congress complained about BRAC, but in the end they could not justify maintaining the bases.
The president might want to start with some of these ridiculous programs recently highlighted by Thomas A. Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, a private, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization whose mission it is “to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement in government.”
“Without authorization,” notes Schatz, “the feds spent $19.6 million annually on the International Fund for Ireland. Sounds like a noble cause, but the money went for projects like pony-trekking centers and golf videos.
“Congressional budget-cutters spared the $440,000 spent annually to have attendants push buttons on the fully automated Capitol Hill elevators used by representatives and senators.
“Last year, the National Endowment for the Humanities spent $4.2 million to conduct a nebulous ‘National Conversation on Pluralism and Identity.’ Obviously, talk radio wasn’t considered good enough.
“The Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency channeled some $11 million to psychics who might provide special insights about various foreign threats. This was the disappointing ‘Stargate’ program.”
The list goes on and on. Go to cagw.org, read all about it and remember it’s our money paying for these boondoggles (definition: “a project funded by the federal government out of political favoritism that is of no real value to the community or the nation”) that helps keep our free-spending career politicians in office where they get benefits the rest of us can only dream about.
Yes, entitlements are the main drivers of debt and they, too, need reform. But starting with programs most people would find outrageous and worthy of elimination is a good way to build confidence and make the tackling of entitlements more palatable.

Tammy Bruce: California chaos -- Unchallenged liberalism leaves homelessness, drug abuse, garbage in its wake

Liberal policy failure is all around us and destroys lives every day. In California, the destruction of society and individual lives has become so overwhelming, the state’s liberal overseers now spend their time covering up where they can and normalizing the chaos as much as possible.
Since 2013, when now-liberal icon Eric Garcetti was elected mayor of Los Angeles, and the nation had just re-elected Barack Obama as president, Los Angeles’ homeless population skyrocketed 46 percent. During the Obama years, where unchallenged liberalism was pushed and accepted (wrongly) as the new normal, we saw the leftist economic menace rage through the entire nation, destroying businesses and the full-time jobs that went with them.
In California, the destruction is particularly acute. As the social structure in major cities continues to break down, the state focuses on banning plastic straws, whether to release from prison a mass murderer from the Manson family, while cheering at becoming as sanctuary state.
Just this week, the Los Angeles Times issued an editorial titled, “Los Angeles homeless crisis is a national disgrace.” Actually, it’s not — it’s a California disgrace. The editorial exemplifies the refusal of liberals to not just admit their responsibility to social destruction, but an inability to even relate to reality.
The Times editorial board chided, in part, “Today, a greater and greater proportion of people living on the streets are there because of bad luck or a series of mistakes, or because the economy forgot them — they lost a job or were evicted or fled an abusive marriage just as the housing market was growing increasingly unforgiving.”
They refer to the “economy” as though it’s a mean thing with a life of its own, and simply “forgot” people. There’s no need to consider the actual people in charge of policy and the economy. That lost job, or domestic strife, a mean housing market are all pointed at, as though they were all dropped on earth by Martians.
The other factor is, of course, the social justice issue: “All the great social issues of American society play out in homelessness — inequality, racial injustice, poverty, violence, sexism. …” Never mentioned: idiotic and incompetent liberal leadership that destroys business and jobs; regulations, waste, fraud and abuse that leave human beings on the street because the theory of socialism is all that matters.
Fox News reported that 25 percent of the nation’s half million homeless live in California, the largest of any state. Why is California in such trouble? Todd Spitzer of the Orange County (California) Board of Supervisors “blames the problem on two issues: legislation signed by Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown over the past several years that has eroded the penalties for drug use, possession and petty crimes to where police often don’t bother making arrests; and the change in a law so that treatment is no longer forced for drug abuse or mental health issues.”
For liberals, social chaos is their friend. They need it to prey on the emotions of others, while then using it as an argument for more government control of our lives.
As if living in those conditions is just another life choice, the ACLU tried to stop Mr. Spitzer’s effort to clean up a homeless camp of 700 people living along a riverbed next to Angels’ Stadium. He prevailed, but so dangerous was the environment, it took hazmat crews to clear out the encampment.
“Trash trucks and contractors in hazmat gear have descended on the camp and so far removed 250 tons of trash, 1,100 pounds of human waste and 5,000 hypodermic needles,” the report said.
The left has a history of working hard to hide their failure, malevolence and destruction of society. Years ago, this column brought to you the effort by San Francisco to move their homeless to an island. Now the story is about how the city spends $30 million trying to clean city streets of hypodermic needles and human feces.
“[An] Investigation reveals a dangerous mix of drug needles, garbage, and feces throughout downtown San Francisco,” reported NBC Bay Area. Their “Investigative Unit photographed nearly a dozen hypodermic needles scattered across one block, a group of preschool students happened to walk by on their way to an afternoon field trip to city hall. ‘We see poop, we see pee, we see needles, and we see trash,’ said teacher Adelita Orellana. ‘Sometimes they ask what is it, and that’s a conversation that’s a little difficult to have with a 2-year old, but we just let them know that those things are full of germs, that they are dangerous, and they should never be touched.”
Congratulations, Democrats!
As Democratic leadership tries to normalize their degradation of society, others have had to adapt. One person created the “Human Wasteland” map that, according to the Daily Caller, “charts all of the locations for human excrement ‘incidents’ reported to the San Francisco police during a given month. The interactive map shows precise locations of the incidents by marking them with poop emojis.”
Having used needles and human waste on your sidewalks isn’t just a disgusting inconvenience, it’s a deadly biological hazard and an indicator of the breakdown of civil society. So the next time a Democrat tells you they know best, laugh and let them know your family deserves better than poo maps, hazmat homeless camps, and little girls having to avoid drug needles on the sidewalk.
This column originally appeared in The Washington Times.
Tammy Bruce is a radio talk-show host, New York Times best-selling author and Fox News political contributor.

GOP lawmakers: Trump's 'strong stand' on North Korea 'starting to work'

President Donald Trump's planned meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un was met with cheers from many Republican lawmakers -- but some skepticism from others.  

South Korea's national security director Chung Eui-yong said the two world leaders agreed to meet by May. Trump tweeted: “Great progress being made but sanctions will remain until an agreement is reached. Meeting being planned!”

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., praised the president’s efforts to denuclearize North Korea, saying that it “gives us the best hope” to “peacefully” resolve escalating tensions.
While Graham acknowledged North Korea’s past as being “all talk and no action,” he warned Kim directly that “the worst possible thing you can do is meet with President Trump in person and try to play him.”
He added, “If you do that, it will be the end of you – and your regime.”
U.S. Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also said the invitation showed that sanctions on North Korea were “starting to work.”
U.S. Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also praised the sanctions implemented by Congress, saying that they “are having a real effect.”
However, some members of the committee remained skeptical.
U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., said the “price of admission” for Trump and Kim meeting must be “complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.”
U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., also said that the invitation was the “beginning of a long diplomatic process” and that Trump needed to avoid “unscripted” remarks that could derail it.
Evan S. Medeiros, a former adviser in the Obama administration, warned that Kim “played” South Korean President Moon Jae-in and “is now playing Trump.”
Medeiros added, “Kim will never give up his nukes.”
The White House confirmed the Trump accepted the invitation but did not reveal and details surrounding when or where a meeting might happen.

Robert Mueller Cartoons

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Why Trump remains smack in the middle of Mueller's legal crosshairs

Late Monday afternoon, we were treated to a series of bizarre interviews on nearly every major cable television channel except Fox when a colorful character named Sam Nunberg, a former personal and political aide to Donald Trump, took to the airwaves to denounce a grand jury subpoena he received compelling the production of documents and live testimony.

The grand jury is one of two summoned by special counsel Robert Mueller in his investigation of whether President Trump or his colleagues engaged in any criminal activity prior to or during the presidential campaign, or during his presidency.

At several points in the rambling and seemingly alcohol-infused rant, Nunberg insisted he would not comply with the subpoena, and he challenged Mueller to force him to do so, proclaiming at least three times, “Let him arrest me!” I can tell you from my years on the bench in New Jersey, this is not a good gauntlet to lay down; and it is one often addressed swiftly. Be careful what you ask for.
Here is the backstory:
Nunberg is a 36-year-old New York lawyer who has been involved in conservative politics since his teenage years. He was hired by Trump in 2011 for the purpose of burnishing Trump’s image as a political conservative. Like most people hired by Trump before his presidential candidacy, Nunberg signed a contract that provided for liquidated damages of $10 million should he publicly reveal any private matters he learned about Trump during his employment.
Trump did fire Nunberg in 2014 because of an unflattering op-ed that he believed Nunberg’s odd behavior had induced and sued Nunberg for $10 million. Nunberg counterclaimed that Trump was using corporate funds from the Trump Organization to fund his then-nascent presidential campaign, a potential felony. Soon, the litigation was dropped and Nunberg was rehired. And in 2015, he was fired again, in a very public and humiliating way by candidate Trump himself.
Last month, Nunberg agreed to be interviewed by Mueller’s prosecutors and FBI agents. After the five-hour interview, he told friends and media folks that he discerned from the questions that Mueller has “something bad” on Trump. Nunberg thought his involvement with the special prosecutor was over when he received a grand jury subpoena and then reacted in a most unlawyerly fashion.
For a few reasons, this is not good news for the president.
First, whatever Nunberg told the prosecutors and FBI agents who interviewed him last month, they revealed it to one of their grand juries; and they asked and received from the grand jury a subpoena compelling Nunberg to recount to the grand jury what he said in his interview. This is the same interview from which he claimed he learned that Mueller & Co. have “something bad” on Trump. The president’s lawyers would surely like to see whatever Mueller’s prosecutors told the grand jury Nunberg told them. So would we all.
Second, during his rants on Monday, he opined that the president is an “idiot” who no one hates “more than me,” and that Mueller had offered him immunity in return for his testimony. Immunity? That is the highest and best gift a prosecutor can give a witness or target. If done in accordance with the rules, it bars all prosecution of the immunized person no matter what he admits to in testimony, unless he lies under oath. If Mueller did offer Nunberg immunity, it can only mean that Mueller desperately needs Nunberg’s testimony against the president to be recounted to one of his grand juries, and that Nunberg has some criminal exposure.
At the end of his day of rage, Nunberg had a change of heart. I suspect it was induced by a compassionate on-camera plea to Nunberg by my Fox colleague Charles Gasparino, a friend of Nunberg who told him to talk to his lawyers and his doctors soon. After six hours of wild on-air gyrations and threats, Nunberg agreed to testify, Gasparino says.
Nunberg’s doctors must have calmed him down, and his lawyers must have reminded him that the remedy for the persistent willful failure to comply with a grand jury subpoena is incarceration. That would mean incarceration for the life of the grand jury, which now seems as though it will be sitting well into 2019. His lawyers no doubt also reminded him that it is insane to taunt an alligator before crossing the stream. The FBI does not like being provoked.
While all this was going on, the same grand jury subpoenaed all emails between or among Trump’s inner circle of 10 persons -- including the president himself. Given the roles each has played in Trump’s recent life, it is clear that the president remains in Mueller’s legal crosshairs.
There are actually three sets of legal crosshairs, so to speak. One seeks to determine whether the Trump campaign received “anything of value” from any foreign national or foreign government, and whether Trump personally approved of it -- a felony. Another inquiry seeks to determine whether the president himself attempted to obstruct the work of the Mueller grand juries by firing then-FBI Director James Comey for a corrupt reason, one that is self-serving and lacking a bona fide governmental purpose -- also a felony.
The third inquiry seeks to examine whether Trump misused or misrepresented corporate funds or bank loans in his pre-presidential life -- another felony. On this last point, he has already been accused by Nunberg; and the grand jury no doubt will hear about it.
It has often been argued that out of the mouths of babes and drunks comes the truth, as both lack a filter and any moral fear. Is Nunberg dumb like a fox? Did he impeach himself? Would you believe Sam Nunberg?
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.

United Steelworkers president: Trump tariffs needed to preserve America’s steel and aluminum industries

A great wailing and gnashing of teeth arose across the land last week after the Trump administration announced its plan to place tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. Some conservatives cried that the tariffs – 25 percent on steel and 10 percent on aluminum – would incite an international trade war.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., claimed the moderately sized tariffs on two metals would reverse the economic boon that he believes the tax breaks his party gave to corporations and the rich are sure to create. The good times would be over. Kaput!

This drama comes from a politician who proposed a border adjustment tax on all imports, not just two metals. That tax that would have cost American consumers $1 trillion.
This hyperbole comes from conservatives who deliberately blind themselves to the devastation Chinese trade cheating has caused the American steel and aluminum industries.
This hysteria comes from corporations that use steel and aluminum and are apparently just fine with Chinese trade violations completely killing off American producers, leaving our country without domestic suppliers of metals essential for national defense.
The tariff proposal wasn’t sudden or out of the blue. It came after President Trump announced last April that the U.S. Department of Commerce would evaluate whether the damage done to the American steel and aluminum industries by bad trade endangered national security. The Commerce Department told President Trump in December that it did.
The Commerce Department recommended remediation through tariffs, import limits or both. The department estimates the cost of the tariffs to the U.S. economy at $9 billion, or a fraction of 1 percent of the nation’s total gross domestic product – and a fraction of the cost of Speaker Ryan’s border adjustment tax.
The beverage industry went crazy anyway. Coors, for example, claimed the tariffs would cost jobs across the beer industry and “American consumers will suffer.”
Here’s what Coors calls suffering: a penny price hike. There is about three cents worth of aluminum in a beer can. A 10 percent tariff on aluminum could increase the price of an entire six-pack of Coors by not quite two cents. Little more than a penny.
Frankly, an extra penny or two doesn’t sound like real suffering. It’s not clear just how many football fans would forego the six-pack for Sunday’s game because of that extra penny. It’s not clear just how many beer industry jobs will really be lost because of one extra cent per six-pack.
The additional cost to a new car, which contains much more steel and aluminum, would be more significant. A senior economist at Cox Automotive estimated it at $200.
But that’s only if American aluminum and steel companies raise their prices by 10 and 25 percent.
American steel and aluminum manufacturers are not subject to the tariffs, so they don’t have to raise their prices. But they may need to increase their prices because excessive production of aluminum and steel in China has severely depressed prices worldwide.
China is massively overproducing the metals at massively subsidized mills. The Chinese government owns some mills and provides supports for the industries in the form of loans that don’t have to be repaid, low-cost or free raw materials and underpriced utilities. It then dumps its excess aluminum and steel on the world market at prices below production costs.
The Chinese action forces down the price of the metals to the point where mills in free market nations like the United States go bankrupt. It is a trade war perpetrated by China on the rest of the world.
China’s practices violate international trade rules. The United States, in conjunction with European allies and others, has repeatedly over the past decade negotiated with China to stop defying the rules it agreed to abide by when it gained entrance to the World Trade Organization.  China repeatedly has said it would follow the rules. And then it doesn’t.
China’s actions have has killed American mills, thrown tens of thousands out of work and devastated mill towns. Steel employment in the United States has declined 35 percent since 2000, with 14,500 workers losing their jobs just between January of 2015 and June of 2016. The plummet in aluminum employment was even steeper, with 58 percent of jobs lost in just the three years between 2013 and 2016.
In 2000, 105 companies produced raw steel at 144 U.S. locations. Now 38 companies forge at 93 locations. There’s only one company left in the United States that produces the Navy armor plate used to build the Virginia Class submarines.
Over the past six years, six aluminum smelters closed permanently. Just five remain, with only two operating at full capacity. And only one of those produces the high-purity aluminum required for defense aerospace needs.
To see real suffering, Coors might take a look at unemployed aluminum and steel workers and their crumbling communities. Coors should note that both U.S. Steel and Century Aluminum have said the tariffs will enable them to reopen closed mills and rehire a total of 700 workers.
Unlike Coors, conservative TV commentators and Speaker Ryan, most Americans are willing to pay the extra penny per six-pack to ensure their country has the domestic aluminum smelting and steel forging ability that is crucial to our national security.

Dem 'cannabis candidate' accused of abusing women, overstating 'Iraq veteran' claim

A Democrat seeking a U.S. House seat in Illinois – who attracted attention for a campaign ad showing him smoking pot – now faces accusations that he has abused women and misleadingly described himself as an “Iraq veteran" and "former FBI agent."

Benjamin Thomas Wolf, who is running in the Democratic primary against incumbent U.S. Rep. Mike Quigley, came under fire after an ex-girlfriend alleged he acted abusively and intentionally revealed her name and home address on social media, a practice called “doxing.”

“He actually hit me, threw me to the ground, put his foot on my chest. He was really angry. He grabbed my face,” Katarina Coates, who interned for Wolf’s campaign, told Politico.

"He actually hit me, threw me to the ground, put his foot on my chest. He was really angry. He grabbed my face."

She added: “I thought it was normal. I cannot explain the logic. It seemed like he cared about me when he did that. After that time he stood on my chest, he went and took me for chocolate cake. I kind of associated it with his caring.
"There were times I would ask him, 'Do you ever regret hitting me?' He would say: 'No, but I'm relieved when you put your head down so I don't have to do it again.'"
DEM CANDIDATE WHO SMOKED POT IN CAMPAIGN AD SAYS HE’LL ‘DEFINITELY’ GET HIGH IF HE WINS
The woman said she did not report Wolf to police, but reached out to officials at both DePaul University, where she was studying, and Roosevelt University, where Wolf claims to be an adjunct professor.
Coates said that after she contacted DePaul campus security regarding Wolf in April 2017, a security officer told her Wolf was banned from campus.
“Ben is not allowed in campus. He does know that as I told him that personally,” Michael Dohm, deputy director of public safety at DePaul, told the woman via email, Politico reported.
But the ban was not prompted by Coates’ allegations. Instead, it reportedly was imposed after a DePaul professor named Jason Hill heard another student's accusation about an encounter with Wolf.
Hill told Politico that Wolf later sent him a number of threatening messages. “He wrote a lot of nasty letters to me encouraging me to kill myself. He said: ‘You should just commit suicide,’” Hill said.
Another ex-girlfriend, Kari Fitzgerald, also made accusations against Wolf, saying that although he was not violent toward her, he showed “abusive, escalating behavior.”
Wolf told Politico he denies the accusations of abuse. However, the Democrat also faces scrutiny over alleged claims of being an “Iraq veteran” and “former FBI agent.”
The candidate has reportedly never been a member of the armed forces, but says on his website that he has been a diplomat in the Foreign Service under the State Department during the Iraq war. One tweet from him reportedly read: "Wolf served multiple terms in Africa and Iraq. Wolf for Congress."
The candidate contends that one does not have to be in the military to call oneself a veteran.

"People in the military get upset when I say I served in Iraq. The military doesn't have a patent on the word 'served.'"

- Benjamin Thomas Wolf, Democrat running for a U.S. House seat in Illinois

“People in the military get upset when I say I served in Iraq. The military doesn't have a patent on the word 'served,’” he told Politico.
In a news release last week, Wolf’s campaign also identified him as a “former FBI agent,” despite contrary claims by the agency.
A spokesperson for the FBI told the Chicago Tribune that the candidate worked at the agency as “a non-special agent professional support employee” rather than an agent.
Wolf confirmed to the outlet that he failed the FBI’s agent test but denied he ever identifies himself as such, adding that there is a small difference between his role at the agency and that of actual FBI agents.

Sessions blasts ‘radical’ move by California to block ICE raids, says move akin to ‘open borders’

Jeff Sessions, the U.S. attorney general, on Wednesday told Fox News that California is “not entitled” to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and vowed that the federal government will not allow the Golden State to flout immigration laws.

Sessions called the state’s actions “radical," and reminded other sanctuary city states that “federal law determines immigration policy,” not states.

He told Shannon Bream, the host of “Fox News @ Night,” he is not happy with comments by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who on Wednesday slammed the ICE raids in the state last week as "unjust and cruel."

"Why do we have ICE officers? Are they just going to sit in their offices and do nothing?"

Federal immigration agents arrested more than 150 people in California in the days after Oakland's mayor gave early warning of the raids over the weekend late last month.
Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf warned residents that "credible sources" had told her a sweep was imminent, calling it her "duty and moral obligation" to warn families.
California lawmakers from Gov. Jerry Brown down to local mayors have resisted a Trump administration immigration crackdown that they contend is arbitrarily hauling in otherwise law-abiding people and splitting up families that include U.S.-born children.
“We wanted a healthy and good relationship with [California], but federal law determines immigration policy," he said. "The state of California is not entitled to block that activity. Somebody needs to stand up and say no, you’ve gone too far, you cannot do this, this is not reasonable.  It’s radical, really.”
The attorney general said California's position essentially amounted to adopting "open borders." He denied that the federal government wants to commandeer state authorities.
"People have tried to spin this as somehow we're demanding that state and local officials go out and do the work of the federal government," Sessions said. "We just cannot allow them to obstruct or block" federal officers, he said.
"We cannot accept this," he reiterated.
PELOSI SLAMS 'UNJUST AND CRUEL' ICE RAID
Sessions said there is "nothing wrong" with ICE raids.
"Why do we have ICE officers?" Sessions asked. "Are they just going to sit in their offices and do nothing?"
Sessions also spoke to the recent calls for a second Special Counsel, saying he has “a responsibility to ensure the integrity of the FISA process” and that he will “consider their request.
 “I have great respect for Mr. Gowdy and Chairman Goodlatte, and we're going to consider seriously their recommendations.”          
Sessions also cooled off rumors about tension between the president and himself, saying that he “believes in the policies he’s advancing.”
“I think President Trump moves the ball.  He can get things done that I’m not sure any other person in America could get done,” he said.