Most border-state governors back Trump's National Guard plan

Governors of several states have voiced support for President Donald Trump's decision Wednesday to deploy National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border, paving the way for the White House to implement its latest anti-illegal immigration policy.
The Republican governors of Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico -- three states that border Mexico -- backed the president's move, which officials said could lead to troops on the ground as early as Wednesday night.
Arizona "welcomes the deployment of National Guard to the border," Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey tweeted.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said Trump's action "reinforces Texas' longstanding commitment to secure our southern border."
In New Mexico, Gov. Susana Martinez said she appreciates the White House efforts to involve states in the policy-making.
READ TRUMP'S MEMO SENDING NATIONAL GUARD TO THE BORDER

"As Commander of Oregon’s Guard, I’m deeply troubled by Trump’s plan to militarize our border."

Even California Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, who has openly sparred with the White House over his state's pro-illegal immigration policies, signaled that his administration might cooperate.
“This request – as with others we’ve received from the Department of Homeland Security, including those for additional staffing in 2006 and 2010 – will be promptly reviewed to determine how best we can assist our federal partners,” California National Guard spokesman Lt. Col. Tom Keegan said in a statement issued on behalf of Brown’s office. “We look forward to more detail, including funding, duration and end state."
The Trump administration has not released many specifics of its plan, but a lawmaker told the AP that Congress expects approximately 300 to 1,200 troops to be deployed at a cost of at least $60 million.
States farther from the border mostly avoided immediately responding to the issue. North Carolina Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's office did not respond to a request for comment from the News & Observer in Raleigh.
Oregon's governor, also a Democrat, was more direct, promising to defy any request from the White House to send its troops.
STEVE KURTZ: CAN TRUMP LEGALLY SEND TROOPS TO THE BORDER?
"If @realDonaldTrump asks me to deploy Oregon Guard troops to the Mexico border, I’ll say no," Gov. Kate Brown tweeted. "As Commander of Oregon’s Guard, I’m deeply troubled by Trump’s plan to militarize our border."
The Trump administration has not requested any troops from Oregon, Brown noted. Under federal law, the president can override a state governor and effectively conscript National Guard troops into federal service.
But the White House, which has said the nation is at a "point of crisis" due to illegal immigration, has not sent any signals it will take that step, nor are there indications it will need Oregon's help.
WHITE HOUSE CALLS ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT INFLOW 'UNNACCEPTABLE'
While U.S. military forces are barred by law from carrying out domestic law enforcement actions, including some border security duties, they are generally permitted to assist federal agents in various ways.
The Mexican foreign ministry said late Wednesday that U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen promised that the troops "will not carry arms or carry out migration or customs control activities."
That was the general protocol for former President George W. Bush's deployment of National Guard troops to the border from 2006 to 2008, and former President Barack Obama's troop deployment, which began in 2010.

Voter Fraud Cartoons

Texas voter registration policy violates federal law, judge says

Texas' online driver's license registration system violates federal voting rights laws, a judge ruled in an order released Tuesday.  (AP)

Voter registration policies in Texas violate federal law, a U.S. District Court judge ruled in an order unveiled Tuesday, marking another voting-rights legal setback for the state's government.
Under the so-called "Motor Voter" provisions of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, voters who apply for or renew their driver's license must be provided an opportunity to register to vote as well.
But Texans who went online to update their driver's license information ran into roadblocks that in-person applicants did not, according to the Texas Civil Rights Project, which brought the suit against Texas in 2016.
For example, the plaintiffs alleged, users who clicked “I want to register to vote" while updating their driver's license information were directed to a form that they had to print and mail. They also received a notification stating that clicking "yes" did not complete the voter registration process.
WATCH: TUCKER DISCUSSES REPORTED WIDESPREAD VOTER FRAUD IN TEXAS
That allegedly confounded some plaintiffs and led to "widespread confusion," according to the lawsuit. The online process amounted to an illegal stumbling block, given that the in-person process was smoother, the plaintiffs charged.
The plaintiffs specifically alleged that the unequal treatment of in-person voters, as compared to online ones, violated both the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause and federal law.

"For too long, the state of Texas has ignored federal voting rights laws."

“Everybody – all of our plaintiffs and many other people we have spoken to – once they get their driver’s license, they assume that their voter registration information has been updated, too,” Texas Civil Rights Project President Mimi Marziani told NPR. “And then they show up at the polls thinking they are going to be able to cast a ballot and they are not able to."
TEXAS VOTER ID LAW RULED LEGAL -- FOR NOW
U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia said a written opinion explaining the reasoning behind his ruling will be released within 14 days.
Texas does not currently permit online voter registration, according to the Texas Tribune, and may be forced to as a result of the ruling.
“For too long, the state of Texas has ignored federal voting rights laws intended to ensure that all eligible voters have an opportunity to register to vote,” Beth Stevens, voting rights director at the Texas Civil Rights Project, told the Texas Tribune. “We look forward to seeing deep changes in [the Texas Department of Public Safety’s] voter registration practices in the coming months, affecting well over a million Texans every year.”
The ruling is the latest in a string of voting-rights cases involving Texas. The state has spent years fighting to preserve both its voter ID law -- which was among the strictest in the U.S. -- and voting maps that were both passed by GOP-controlled Legislature in 2011.

China announces additional tariffs on $50 billion of U.S. goods

China answered the White House’s tariffs announced on Tuesday with tariffs of its own on U.S. goods.

China will add tariffs covering 106 types of U.S. products. China matched the U.S. with 25% tariffs on products ranging from soybeans, and autos to chemical products.

The value of the tariffs are said to be $50 billion.

The finance ministry said that additional tariffs will be put on products such as whisky, cigars, tobacco as well as lubricants and plastic products.

China’s response is seen as retaliation for tariffs announced by the Trump administration late on Tuesday.

The U.S. is putting 25% tariffs on 1,300 industrial technology, transport and medical products, also representing $50 billion.

The latest move followed China applying duties on $3 billion worth of U.S. fruits, nuts, pork and wine, which were in response to the original U.S. tariffs on aluminum and steel announced by Trump last month.

Trump says the military will secure the southern border until wall can be built

President Trump on Tuesday said that the U.S. will secure the southern border with the military until a wall can be built, calling the move a “big step.”
Trump made the remarks during a meeting with Baltic leaders, where he said he had discussed the matter with Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. A White House official revealed later Tuesday to Fox News that the plan considered by Trump would be a “substantial” mobilization of the National Guard.
“Until we can have a wall and proper security, we’re going to be guarding our border with the military,” he said. “That's a big step, we really haven’t done that before, or certainly not very much before.”
At a news conference later, he confirmed the plan, saying the border is unprotected by “our horrible, horrible and very unsafe laws.”
“We don't have laws, we have catch-and-release,” he said. “You catch and then you immediately release and people come back years later for a court case, except they virtually never come back.”
Trump did not offer specifics, but the move appears to be at least partly motivated by a caravan of over 1,000 Central American migrants heading toward the U.S. border. Buzzfeed, which first reported on the caravan, said that Mexican officials had not yet attempted to stop the flow.
In Tuesday's discussion, Trump and senior officials “also agreed on the need to pressure Congress to urgently pass legislation to close legal loopholes exploited by criminal trafficking, narco-terrorist and smuggling organizations,” White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said. She added that Mattis, Homeland Security Secretary Kirsten Nielsen, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford and Chief of Staff John Kelly were among the other officials present.
Reports of the caravan angered Trump, who has sent out a number of tweets threatening to end the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and to cut foreign aid to countries such as Honduras, from where many of the migrants originate.

“The big Caravan of People from Honduras, now coming across Mexico and heading to our “Weak Laws” Border, had better be stopped before it gets there,” he tweeted Tuesday. “Cash cow NAFTA is in play, as is foreign aid to Honduras and the countries that allow this to happen. Congress MUST ACT NOW!”
At the press conference he said that NAFTA was an “embarrasing” deal and that he had told Mexican officials on Monday: “I hope you're going to tell that caravan not to get up to the border.” He added that he thinks the caravan was being broken up as a result.
The Pentagon was scrambling to come up with a response to Trump's statement on the military guarding the border. But according to a memo obtained by Fox News and discussions with officials, one area where the Pentagon could contribute immediately is the Air Force’s Barry Goldwater live-fire range, which shares a 35-mile border with Mexico in southern Arizona. 
The Defense Department is already offering some support to the border, including U.S. Navy ships patrolling waters to seize drugs as well as missions involving over 100 personnel from U.S. military’s northern command -- including eight planes and a drone -- to help border patrol.
In 2010, President Obama authorized 1,200 National Guard troops to increase security at the border, although Republican lawmakers questioned their role and whether they would in fact be “boots on the ground."

Trump has struggled to secure funding for his central campaign promise of a wall, which the administration and border officials say will cost approximately $20-25 billion. In the omnibus bill signed by Trump last month, $1.6 billion was included for technology and some replacement of existing border fencing -- although it excluded the prototypes Trump recently viewed in California.

Trump briefly considered vetoing the legislation both over its lack of funding for the wall and also the failure to include a fix for the expiring Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that granted protection for illegal immigrants brought to the country as children. He has since floated the idea of getting the Pentagon to fund the wall.
Brandon Judd, President of the National Border Patrol Council, said on Fox News Radio’s “The Todd Starnes Show” that it gives Border Patrol “certainty of apprehension.”
“The criminal smugglers, this is a multibillion dollar industry. They smuggle humans, they smuggle drugs,” he said. “This criminal enterprise, if we arrest the majority of people that cross the border illegally, we put a dent into their criminal enterprise, and if you put a dent into their criminal enterprise, then you can possibly stop them.”

Mueller claims Trump is not criminal target in his investigation, report says

Special counsel Robert Mueller told President Trump's attorneys last month that he does not consider Trump to be a criminal target in his investigation of Russian actions during the 2016 campaign, The Washington Post reported Tuesday night.
The paper, citing "three people familiar with the discussions," reported that Mueller made the comments while negotiating with Trump's attorneys about a potential interview with the president. The Post also reported -- citing "two people with knowledge of the conversations" -- that Mueller reiterated his need to interview Trump to determine whether the president intended to halt the Russia investigation while in office.
According to the Post, Trump has "privately expressed relief" at Mueller's description of his legal status, but some advisers have warned that the special counsel may be baiting the president into letting his guard down for any interview.
Mueller also has said he needs to interview Trump in order to complete a report he will present to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who is overseeing the investigation and who could decide to make Mueller's report public.
The report added that John Dowd resigned from Trump's legal team last month after the president ignored Dowd's advice to decline Mueller's request for an interview.
According to the Post, Trump's other attorneys -- Ty Cobb and Jay Sekulow -- have told the president that refusing to sit down with Mueller would create an awkward situation since the president has repeatedly described the Russian investigation as a "witch hunt."

Mueller Probe Cartoons

Roger Stone's claim he 'dined with' WikiLeaks founder draws Special Counsel Mueller's scrutiny: report

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating an Aug. 2016 email by former Trump adviser and political consultant Roger Stone in which he purportedly claimed to have "dined with" the founder of WikiLeaks, according to a report.
The secretive organization released a trove of hacked communications prior to the 2016 presidential election, including Democratic National Committee emails that damaged then-candidate Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Stone emailed fellow Trump aide Sam Nunberg on Aug. 4 that he “dined with Julian Assange last night,” according to The Wall Street Journal.
The next day, Stone tweeted: “Hillary lies about Russian Involvement in DNC hack -Julian Assange is a hero.”

"The idea that I would meet with Assange undetected is ridiculous on its face."

But Stone insists his emailed comment was nothing more than a flippant attempt to wrap up an unwanted conversation, and that despite his intimations, he has never had ties to WikiLeaks.
“I never dined with Assange,” Stone told The Journal. "There was no such meeting. It’s not what you say, it’s what you do. This was said in jest.”
DONALD TRUMP JR. RELEASES MESSAGES FROM WIKILEAKS FROM BEFORE 2016 ELECTION
Stone also provided The Journal with a screenshot of a booking for someone named "Roger" flying out of Los Angeles on a Delta flight heading to Miami the evening of Aug. 3, and airline confirmed that the screenshot matched a real flight -- but, citing consumer privacy rules, could not state definitively whether Stone was on board.
WikiLeaks has reportedly tweeted that Stone and Assange, who has called the Ecuadoran Embassy in London home since 2012, "never communicated."
Mueller's team reportedly asked about the email during grand jury testimony, and Nunberg told The Washington Post in March that investigators have asked about the email.
The Post has previously reported that two associates of Stone claim he told them he had made contact with Assange, and other outlets have found video apparently showing Stone referencing meetings with Assange.
“I wish him no ill will, but Sam [Nunberg] can manically and persistently call you,” Stone told the Post. “I said, ‘I think I will go to London for the weekend and meet with Julian Assange.’ It was a joke, a throwaway line to get him off the phone. The idea that I would meet with Assange undetected is ridiculous on its face.’ ’’
In February, Stone told Fox News' Laura Ingraham that the media and Democratic operatives were attempting to "re-inflate the deflated Russian collusion delusion" by using underhanded tactics to tie President Trump to the WikiLeaks hacks.

Air Force veteran sues after being pulled from ceremony mid-speech

A retired Air Force sergeant who was forcibly removed two years ago from a military retirement ceremony as he recited a traditional passage honoring the flag filed a lawsuit Monday, claiming he was ousted for mentioning the word "God."
Senior Master Sgt. Oscar Rodriguez was invited to speak at an April 3, 2016 ceremony by an outgoing fellow master sergeant from the 749th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron. Video of the event showed Rodriguez being physically removed by service members at Travis Air Force Base in California as he was delivering a flag-folding speech.
On Monday, two years after the incident, Rodriguez sued the U.S. Air Force, demanding an apology and admission of wrongdoing. In an interview with Fox News, he claimed his First Amendment rights were violated.
"This is about my constitutional right," Rodriguez said of the suit.
"I was removed from the speech because my script mentioned God. Air force officials did not want me to utter those words," he told Fox News. "There was no direct communication between the Air Force and myself to forbid me from making this speech."
The U.S. Air Force declined to comment Monday on pending litigation. In a statement released last year, officials said, "Evidence indicated Mr. Rodriguez was removed by members of the squadron because he attempted to participate in the ceremony even though his participation had been disapproved by the hosting squadron commander... When it became clear that Mr. Rodriguez intended to act inconsistent with the commander's restrictions he was removed by several squadron NCOs (noncommissioned officers). The inquiry found no evidence that the NCOs were motivated to impair Mr. Rodriguez's constitutional rights of freedom of speech or religion."
At the time of the event, a spokeswoman from the reserve told Fox News the confrontation stemmed from "an unplanned participation" at the event.

SMSgt Oscar Rodriguez.

"Rodriguez ignored numerous requests to respect the Air Force prescribed ceremony and unfortunately was forcibly removed," a Travis official said in a statement to Fox News following the incident.
Rodriguez claimed his recitation of an old version of the "Flag Folding Ceremony Air Force Script," which was later scrubbed because of religious references, prompted his ouster. Rodriguez delivered the speech at the request of Master Sgt. Chuck Roberson, who was retiring from the U.S. Air Force after 33 years of service.
"Let us pray that God will reflect with admiration the willingness of one nation in her attempts to rid the world of tyranny, oppression, and misery," part of the flag-folding speech reads. "It is this one nation under God that we call, with honor, the United States of America."
The speech closes with the words, "God bless our flag. God bless our troops. God bless America."
Even though the Air Force revised the script in 2006, Rodriguez claimed it was his right -- and Roberson's right -- to invoke the older version.
Lawyers representing Rodriguez said Monday that the dispute between the veteran and the Air Force was over his plans to recite a speech mentioning God. Rodriguez was known on the base to recite such passages, and Air Force officials tried to prevent him from doing so at the retirement ceremony, his attorneys claimed.
"[The U.S. Air Force] did not have the authority to ban him from the base and they did not have the authority to ban him from participating in the ceremony," said Hiram Sasser, general counsel for First Liberty Institute and one of the lead attorneys in the case. First Liberty identifies itself as a legal team "dedicated exclusively to protecting religious liberty for all Americans."

Rodriguez sued the U.S. Air Force, demanding an apology and admission of wrongdoing.  (FirstLiberty.org)

The complaint -- filed late Monday -- claimed officers at the base exchanged an email shortly after the incident. In that email, an officer -- whose name was redacted -- suggested filing assault charges against the men who removed Rodriguez from the ceremony, the lawsuit stated. Rodriguez's attorney said they believe that email bolsters their case.
According to a U.S. Air Force official, flag folding scripts that are religious in nature can be used for retirement ceremonies. "I can't speak to the specific incident," Ann Stefanek, an Air Force spokeswoman, told Fox News in 2016. "[But] Air Force personnel may use a flag folding ceremony script that is religious for retirement ceremonies."
Stefanek continued, "Since retirement ceremonies are personal in nature, the script preference for a flag folding ceremony is at the discretion of the individual being honored and represents the member's views, not those of the Air Force."
In a statement to Fox News, Roberson confirmed that it was his wish to have Rodriguez recite the speech at his retirement ceremony.
"I wanted the ceremony to reflect the American values I spent my career defending – respect for God, family, and country," Roberson said.
"I couldn’t believe what happened. I still can’t believe it. All I want now is for the Air Force to apologize for ruining this once in a lifetime moment but they refuse to do so," he said.

Trump Justice Department sets up quotas on immigration judges to speed up deportations

Trump administration officials said Monday they will impose quotas on federal immigration judges in an attempt to speed up deportations, Fox News has confirmed.
A Justice Department official speaking to Fox News cited enormous court backlogs. “These performance metrics... are designed to increase productivity and efficiency in the system without compromising due process.”
Meantime, President Trump lamented the sluggishness of the deportation process on Monday night.
“As ridiculous as it sounds, the laws of our country do not easily allow us to send those crossing our Southern Border back where they came from. A whole big wasted procedure must take place. Mexico & Canada have tough immigration laws, whereas ours are an Obama joke. ACT CONGRESS,” Trump tweeted.
The Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review says judges must complete 700 cases a year to earn a satisfactory grade. They currently are completing an average of 678 cases per year, according to the Justice official.
The new request averages to about three per day, and judges with high caseloads can appeal internally to waive the requirement.
Critics claim speed requirements undermine judges’ independence and will cause some cases to be decided too hastily.
The new standards, which take effect Oct. 1, include a host of other measures indicating how much time judges should spend on different types of cases and court motions. The Washington Post was first to report the plan.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who oversees the immigration courts, has called repeatedly for more speed as an increase in deportation arrests has pushed the court backlog above 650,000 cases.
Still, he had held off on numerical quotas until now.