'Cal 3' backer urges court to dismiss lawsuit opposing California break-up plan

The sponsor of the "Cal 3" initiative to split California into three states asked the state's Supreme Court on Friday to dismiss a lawsuit calling for the proposal to be pulled from the November ballot.
Tim Draper, a venture capitalist who spent more than $1.7 million supporting the initiative, told the court in a letter that there’s not enough time to properly consider the legal challenge to his effort.

Venture capitalist Tim Draper is the sponsor of the "Cal 3" initiative.  (Fox Business)

He said he wasn't properly served with the lawsuit, giving him less time to respond.
"I have been given just a day or two to respond to a complex, multi-faceted attack on my Constitutional right to initiative," Draper wrote. "This Court's long history of jealously guarding the exercise of initiative power should not be cavalierly disregarded now, especially on such a truncated timetable."
OPPONENTS OF PROPOSED CALIFORNIA BREAKUP SUE TO PULL IT OFF BALLOT 
The Planning and Conservation League, an environmental group, filed the lawsuit Monday, arguing that Draper's plan exceeds the scope of an initiative because it would drastically alter California's government and constitutional framework.
“The dislocation and the disruption that would be caused by something as great as this just can’t be understated,” said Carlyle Hall, a lawyer working on the lawsuit. “This will not make things better.”

“The dislocation and the disruption that would be caused by something as great as this just can’t be understated. This will not make things better.”
- Carlyle Hall, lawyer, Planning and Conservation League

The initiative could harm the environment if California’s strong environmental protections are scrapped and replaced with something weaker, which could happen if the state were split, Hall said.
Draper argued the "Cal 3" measure doesn't go beyond what can be accomplished in an initiative. If passed by voters, it would be only the first step toward dividing the state, he said.
The Cal 3 initiative would break the state into Northern California, California and Southern California.
Passing at the ballot box is just the first hurdle.
The measure then directs the governor to ask the U.S. Congress for the ultimate approval — likely a tall order.
If Congress were to give a green light, it would then be up the state's Legislature to determine exactly how the split would happen, including how the state's debts would be divided.
Each of the three states would determine their own governance structure.
Supporters of dividing California argue the nation's most populous state has become ungovernable because of its size, wealth disparities and geographic diversity.
CALIFORNIA 'THREE STATES' PLAN OK'D FOR NOVEMBER BALLOT
Meanwhile, Michael Salerno, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings, described the proposal as having profound ramifications if approved.
“It would not surprise me if the court took this off the ballot,” he said.
Although California as it exists today is heavily Democratic, the newly proposed Southern California might not be. Democrats have only a slim registration advantage over Republicans in that region.

Rosenstein target of impeachment filing being prepared by House conservatives: report

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is the target of an impeachment effort being undertaken by conservatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, according to a report.
U.S. Reps. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, both members of the House Freedom Caucus, are said to be leading the effort and could submit an impeachment filing in the next few days, Politico reported Friday.
Rosenstein has been clashing with some House Republicans for months over requests for Department of Justice documents, the Washington Examiner reported. The deputy AG oversees Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into possible collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.
On Thursday, the New York Times reported that the White House ordered that more members of Congress receive access to classified information about an FBI informant linked to the Russia probe, despite objections from U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials.
It was Rosenstein who named Mueller to lead the Trump-Russia probe after Rosenstein’s boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, recused himself from the investigation because of Sessions’ own role in the Trump campaign.
Politico’s story on the possible impeachment filing against Rosenstein came on the same day that Rosenstein announced Mueller’s 12 indictments against Russian military intelligence officials on charges linked to the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Speculation that President Donald Trump might fire Rosenstein increased in April, after FBI agents conducted raids at the office and home of Michael Cohen, the president’s former personal attorney, the Hill reported.

Europe Immigration Cartoons

Trump says immigration into Europe has 'changed the fabric' of the continent

President Donald Trump on Thursday criticized Europe’s immigration policy, claiming it has “changed the fabric” of the continent in a negative way.
“I think you are losing your culture. Look around. You go through certain areas that didn’t exist 10 or 15 years ago,” the president said in an interview with the Sun.
“I think what has happened to Europe is a shame,” he added. “Allowing the immigration to take place in Europe is a shame.”
TRUMP SLAMS MAY OVER ‘VERY UNFORTUNATE’ BREXIT PLAN, SAYS ‘IT WILL PROBABLY KILL’ US TRADE DEAL
Trump pointed toward his own Scottish and German roots, saying “I have a great love for the countries of Europe,” but noting that immigration has taken a toll.
“I think it changed the fabric of Europe and, unless you act very quickly, it’s never going to be what it was and I don’t mean that in a positive way,” Trump said. “So I think allowing millions and millions of people to come into Europe is very, very sad.”

"I think it changed the fabric of Europe and, unless you act very quickly, it’s never going to be what it was and I don’t mean that in a positive way."
- President Donald Trump

The Trump administration has taken a hardline view on immigration, touting its war on sanctuary cities that provide cover for illegal immigrants in the country and has ramped up the efforts to enforce existing immigration laws to secure the U.S. -Mexico border.
The White House recently won a court battle at the Supreme Court allowing to bar citizens from several mostly Muslim countries from entering the U.S.
Trump told the newspaper that most British people actually support his stance on immigration. “I think they like me in the U.K.,” he said. “I think they agree with me on immigration.”

Neckties may be next to face a ban in California, if mayor's proposal gains traction

Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris proposed this week to ban neckties from the workplace, citing a health study that suggested the fashion accessory restricts blood flow to the brain.  (City of Lancaster)

California has long been a place where the government has tried to influence the quality of life by enacting a ban on this, or a mandatory adoption of that.
Now a mayor in Southern California says he wants to ban neckties from the workplace, claiming the fashion accessory restricts blood flow to the brain.
R. Rex Parris, mayor of Lancaster, said he conceived the idea after reading a science blog that claimed neckties restrict 7.5 percent of blood to the brain, the Los Angeles Times reported.
“I spend a lot of hours every week on an elliptical or a bike just to increase blood flow to my brain, and it turns out every morning when I put on a tie I’m diminishing it,” Parris said.
The mayor’s proposal comes as the necktie’s presence in corporate America is waning. In 2015 a New York City Human Rights Commission said compelling men to wear ties is akin to demanding that women wear skirts because of their gender.
“I don’t think it’s appropriate in America today to make anyone do something that is now known to be detrimental to your health. Especially if it’s based on gender,” Parris said.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate in America today to make anyone do something that is now known to be detrimental to your health. Especially if it’s based on gender.”
- R. Rex Parris, mayor of Lancaster, Calif.

But a ban on dress codes, especially for private businesses, would likely run into legal problems. Michael Colantuono, a municipal lawyer, said the move would be unprecedented.
Parris ran the idea by the city attorney at a City Council meeting Tuesday, the Orange County Register reported. In order to approve the measure the city would be required to prove ties are detrimental to public health.
“I’m aware I’m going out on a ledge, but I live my life on ledges,” Parris said. “We’re interested in going in a positive direction until we’re stopped.”
But Parris, an established litigator for more than 30 years, said he hasn’t stopped wearing ties completely just yet.

Kavanaugh's baseball debts: Why the nominee's opponents are striking out

Stormy Daniels has been arrested, but I digress.
The Peter Strzok hearing degenerated into a circus, but never mind.
President Trump claimed that NATO allies have agreed to boost defense spending, only to be contradicted by France's president and called a liar by MSNBC anchors. But put that to the side.
The really big story is that Brett Kavanaugh loves baseball.
Loves it so much, in fact, that he blew a whole bunch of money on Washington Nationals tickets and went into debt.
When I first heard that The Washington Post had reported this, I figured it was a few paragraphs in the middle of a profile piece. But no, it's the lead.
The Supreme Court nominee "incurred tens of thousands of dollars of credit card debt buying baseball tickets over the past decade and at times reported liabilities that could have exceeded the value of his cash accounts and investment assets," the paper said.
White House spokesman Raj Shah said explained that Kavanaugh "built up the debt by buying Washington Nationals season tickets and tickets for playoff games for himself and a 'handful' of friends," plus home improvements. He ran up debts in 2016 between $60,000 and $200,000 on three credit cards and a loan. Shah said some of the debts were also for home improvements.
But the debts were either completely or almost completely paid off last year, as "Kavanaugh's friends reimbursed him for their share of the baseball tickets," according to Shah.
Big deal, right?
Now the paper reported this as a straightforward review of his financial disclosure forms without touting it as some kind of scandal. Still, it's drawing plenty of ridicule online.
For one thing, it makes Kavanaugh seem more like an average American who was living a bit beyond his means. And he's a big baseball fan. Which you have to be to have season tickets to the Nats, who keep choking late in the season.
For another, if Kavanaugh had joined a big law firm, he could afford all the Nationals, Redskins, Wizards and Capitals tickets he wants. But he's been in public service for the last two decades and living on a judge's salary for the last 12 years.
The Atlantic asks how Kavanaugh paid off the debts so quickly, and that seems like a fair question—though the answer may be far from nefarious.

So by and large, the story feels a big whiff.
A better piece in the same paper, in my view, leads off with Kavanaugh regularly having a beer and burger at a joint called the Chevy Chase Lounge, but never telling the bartender what he does for a living. One neighbor, a Democrat, says they talked about "baseball and Springsteen," not politics.
Kavanaugh's wife is a village manager within Chevy Chase, a job that pays $66,000, who also doesn't mention what her husband does. At Georgetown Prep he listed himself as treasurer of the "Keg City Club—100 Kegs or Bust." He coaches girls' basketball at the local Catholic school, Blessed Sacrament, and even attends other coaches' basketball games.

This down-to-earth portrait is a sharp contrast to the ridiculous NARAL comment attacking him as "some frat boy named Brett."
The media are filled with stories about Kavanaugh's past writings and rulings on abortion, presidential power, impeachment, health care and other issues. But something has struck me in the past 48 hours.
Having lived through various firestorms over nomination battles—from Robert Bork to John Tower, from Clarence Thomas to Harriet Miers—this doesn't feel like it is rising to that level.
There is emotional intensity, to be sure, given the enormous stakes and the virtual certainty that Kavanaugh's confirmation would significantly shift the high court to the right.
But I've seen the Kavanaugh story slip down the lineup on many MSNBC opinion shows, and that seems to me to reflect a grudging recognition that he is extremely likely to be confirmed. There will be plenty of sound and fury, but given the supportive comments of Susan Collins and Joe Manchin, the Republicans look like they'll get to 50 votes.
If the opposition is down to stories about baseball debt, they're going to strike out.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author "Media Madness: Donald Trump, The Press and the War Over the Truth." Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

Giuliani slams Strzok for refusing to admit different versions of Trump dossier

Rudy Giuliani on Thursday slammed the “totally phony” Russia probe after anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok refused to identify the individuals who apparently handed the bureau three different copies of the salacious Trump dossier.
“Isn't that called collusion or conspiracy to gin up a totally inappropriate, totally illegally wire based on national security? And doesn't it taint the entire Russian probe?” Giuliani told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham on “The Ingraham Angle.”
“That’s a disgrace, [Special Counsel Robert] Mueller should be ashamed of himself. Those Democrats trying to protect that liar, Strzok, should be ashamed of themselves. And every FBI agent I know wants to see this guy drummed out of the bureau,” he said.

“That’s a disgrace, [Special Counsel Robert] Mueller should be ashamed of himself. Those Democrats trying to protect that liar, Strzok, should be ashamed of themselves. And every FBI agent I know wants to see this guy drummed out of the bureau."
- Rudy Giuliani

Giuliani said the dossier led to fake news and the “national intelligence wiretap” of the Trump campaign officials.
“So how much of it is infecting the investigation today? We may never know, which is why I think the investigation is totally phony,” he added.
The inquiry into the dossier occurred during a fiery exchange earlier between Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Strzok, who appeared before a joint House committee about his role in the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Jordan pressed Strzok about an email he sent to his colleagues, including FBI lawyer Lisa Page with whom he had an extramarital affair, indicating that he has seen different versions of the infamous Trump dossier from three different sources.
Jordan said he had the email the he sent to Page and several others with the subject: “BuzzFeed is about to accomplish the dossier.”
“It says this, ‘Comparing now the set is only identical to what (Sen. John) McCain had, parentheses, it has differences from what was given to us by (Mother Jones’ David) Corn and (Fusion GPS founder Glenn) Simpson.’ Did you write all that?” Jordan asked.
Strzok refused to answer and declined to confirm whether there were three copies of the dossier the FBI had its hands on, saying he can’t answer under the directive of the bureau.
McCain’s copy was identical to the copy that Buzzfeed gave the bureau, Jordan said, citing the email.
Jordan went on to press Strzok on whether he interacted with the Fusion GPS, noting that Simpson said last year in his testimony that nobody from his company was in contact with the FBI.
Strzok spoke for himself as said he never interacted with Simpson or Corn. “Sir, I can tell you I never had contact with Fusion, with Mr. Simpson, with Mr. Corn.”

Liberal Hollywood Cartoons

George Lopez uses water bottle to pretend to urinate on Trump's star in Hollywood

Trash

Comedian George Lopez was recently seen in a TMZ video emptying a small water bottle onto President Donald Trump’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, acting as though he was urinating.
It was unclear when the footage was taken, but the celebrity website posted the video Wednesday.
Late last year, the comedian was booed off stage at a juvenile diabetes event in Denver over an anti-Donald Trump routine that fell flat with the crowd, the New York Post reported.
The event -- where tables were sold from $5,000 to $100,000 -- appeared to be a disaster.
An attendee commented on a YouTube video that “George was asked nicely to stop making Trump jokes by a man in the front row who just donated $250K.” But “George doesn’t, continues. Gets booed.”
In the latest video, Lopez appeared to be in front of a small group of people in the new video and the person filming appeared to laugh. When Lopez ran out of water, he said, "Alright, let's go."
Los Angeles police in 2016 arrested a man who pleaded no contest to destroying Trump’s star with a sledgehammer and pickax about a week after Trump was elected.
James Otis eventually told reporters, “Upon reflection after my arrest, I had said I was proud and felt very good about destroying Mr. Trump’s star. However, now I realize I was wrong, that I shouldn’t have done it.”
He agreed to pay $4,400 and perform 20 days of community labor, CBS News reported.

For Trump it looks like a bad time to arrive in Britain -- Actually, it's ideal. Here's why

FILE -- January 27, 2017: U.S. President Donald Trump greets British Prime MinisterTheresa May as she arrives at the White House.  (REUTERS/Carlos Barria)

President Donald Trump will have to learn some new names in London. Earlier this week, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and David Davis, who led Britain’s arrangements for exiting the EU, resigned out of dissatisfaction with the government’s plans for Brexit.
On the surface, this looks like a bad time for Trump to arrive. Actually, it’s ideal.
The resignations happened because much of the British government — including Prime Minister Theresa May — treat Brexit as a problem to be managed, not an opportunity to be exploited. Most Tory activists want to leave the EU, as does a narrow majority of Conservative Members of Parliament (MP).
The Conservative Party is formally committed to leaving, and the fact that Britain will be exiting is enshrined in law. But May and her fellow Remainers want what’s known as a Kit-Kat Brexit — a coating of Brexit hiding a wafer of Remain.
Johnson and Davis resigned because the government’s effort to decide what it wants out of Brexit — known as the Chequers Plan--wouldn’t actually take the U.K. all the way out of the EU.
The Plan calls on Britain and the EU to develop a “common rule book” for goods. In practice, this would give the EU a veto over Britain’s ability to negotiate free trade deals with other nations, including the U.S. Nor would it give the U.K. much in other areas that it cares about.
Moreover, there’s no reason to believe the EU would agree to the Chequers Plans. The EU has consistently argued that Britain can’t have full access to the EU’s Common Market in goods unless it accepts the free movement of people — in other words, uncontrolled immigration.
And since the Chequers Plan is only Britain’s starting proposal, it will certainly be watered down even further as Britain negotiates with the EU.
The dissatisfaction in the Conservative Party isn’t limited to Johnson and Davis. The Chequers Plan is widely regarded as a betrayal of the Brexit Referendum, of the Party’s commitment to leaving, and of the promises that May herself has made.
In normal times, this might lead a Conservative MP to challenge May’s leadership. And that might indeed happen. But right now, almost no one wants an election. The British people are tired of them. The Conservative Party isn’t ready. It would enter the election divided, and that rarely leads to smashing victories. In short, May is powerful precisely because she is weak: If Conservative MPs got rid of her, many of them might lose their jobs in the resulting election.
None of this will be settled soon. It’s hard to see how the Chequers Plan can survive in its current form. Moves are already afoot in the Commons against it. And it’s hard to see how even a government as spineless as the one led by Theresa May could accept the EU’s likely demand that Britain keep its borders open.
And if it does, the Conservative Party — and indeed Labour — will face with another political rebellion, similar to the one that created the now nearly-defunct U.K. Independence Party (UKIP).
The U.S. can play an important role in this crisis, though not a decisive one. Donald Trump is not popular in Britain. (Expect to read about major protests in London on Friday.) And Trump and May do not enjoy a close personal friendship.
But Trump does bring something worthwhile: a strong commitment to negotiating a free trade area with Britain as soon as possible. Of course, the U.K. will want to do deals with many countries, but the U.S. matters more than anyone else.
May has already admitted that the Chequers Plan creates “a challenge for us in relation to the United States and standards”—a polite way of admitting that the U.K. cannot hope to do a deal with the U.S. based on mutual recognition of standards if it is committed to agreeing on standards with the EU.
As the U.S. Ambassador to the U.K., Woody Johnson, has said, the Chequers Plan has left a US-UK trade deal “totally up in the air.”
Trump’s to-do list in Britain is both short and important. After congratulating Britain on spending 2 percent — or close to 2 percent — of its GDP on defense, he should tell May that he will move heaven and earth to conclude a free trade agreement with Britain by the time it formally exits the EU, at the end of March 2019 — but that he can do this only if Britain isn’t bound by an EU rulebook.
That is a plain statement of fact. It is also what the Australians — among others — have already told the British. Whether this will be enough to encourage the British government to drop its defensive attitude to Brexit is impossible to know. But Trump needs to say this as clearly, as convincingly, as repeatedly, and as publicly as he possibly can.
The alternative is simple: Britain remains de facto in the EU; it is drawn into promoting the EU’s regulatory agenda; the Conservative Party loses the next election to Jeremy Corbyn’s far-left Labour Party, and Trump enters 2020 having done nothing in trade except impose tariffs on all and sundry.
Trump may not be able to avert this. The May government may be bent on throwing away its opportunities, no matter what he says. Or May’s own opponents may bring her down. But if Trump does not try, the best opportunity to rescue the situation, and Trump’s own legacy on trade, will be lost.