Trump says 'no reason' for costly US-South Korea war games, relationship with Kim Jong Un is 'very good'

President Trump on Wednesday tweeted that there was “no reason” for joint military exercises between the U.S. and South Korea, dubbing them costly while describing his relationship with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un as “very good” and “warm.”
However, he signaled that he could restart them if he wanted to, promising that they would “be far bigger than ever before.”
The president tweeted a White House statement, in which he said he believed the rogue regime was experiencing “tremendous pressure from China” amid “trade disputes” with the U.S. Simultaneously, North Korea was acquiring “considerable aid” from China, which “is not helpful,” Trump continued.
“Nonetheless, the President believes that his relationship with Kim Jong Un is a very good and warm one, and there is no reason at this time to be spending large amounts of money on joint U.S.-South Korea war games,” Trump tweeted. “Besides, the President can instantly start the joint exercises again with South Korea, and Japan, if he so chooses. If he does, they will be far bigger than ever before.”
The statement went on to insist that any issues between the U.S. and China would be taken care of by Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, who have a “very strong” relationship.
Earlier Wednesday, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis issued a statement that three military exercises were suspended “in order to provide space for our diplomats to negotiate the verifiable, irreversible and complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.”
"Our military posture has not changed since the conclusion of the Singapore summit and no decisions have been made about suspending any future exercises," he continued, adding that the alliance between the U.S. and South Korea was "ironclad."
Following his June meeting with Kim Trump promised to end the war games with South Korea.
Earlier this week, Trump said he’d asked Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to cancel a planned trip to North Korea, citing insufficient “progress” towards denuclearization, while also faulting China.
“I have asked Secretary of State Mike Pompeo not to go to North Korea, at this time, because I feel we are not making sufficient progress with respect to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” Trump tweeted. “Additionally, because of our much stronger trading stance with China, I do not believe they are helping with the process of denuclearization as they once were (despite the UN Sanctions which are in place).”

Democratic Primary Cartoons

Donna Shalala, ex-Clinton Cabinet member, wins Dem primary to replace Ros-Lehtinen

Donna Shalala, right, will face Maria Elvira Salazar for the right to represent Florida's 27th Congressional District in November.  (Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.)

Donna Shalala, a former secretary of health and human services under President Bill Clinton, was projected to win the Democratic primary for a Florida U.S. House seat seen as key to both parties' chances of taking control of Congress.
The 77-year-old Shalala, a former president of the University of Miami, defeated four other candidates to win the nomination for Florida's 27th District. She received 32 percent of the vote, while her closest challenger, state Rep. David Richardson, received 28 percent of the vote.
On the Republican side, longtime Spanish-language TV journalist Maria Elvira Salazar defeated eight other GOP candidates -- including former Miami-Dade County Commissioner Bruno Barreiro and former Doral city council member Bettina Rodriguez Aguilera, who briefly seized the spotlight with her claim that she was abducted by aliens as a child.
Rodriguez Aguilera's profile was raised even further last week when the Miami Herald newspaper endorsed her in the primary, praising her "boots-on-the-ground ideas and experience" while admitting she was "an unusual candidate."
Shalala and Salazar are competing to succeed retiring Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who has represented the district since 2013.
The seat is widely viewed as one of the best chances for a Democratic pickup this November. Voters there backed Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump by 20 percentage points in the 2016 presidential election.
Shalala, making her first run for elected office, has said she is confident Democrats will flip the seat no matter which Republican is nominated, citing voters opposed to President Trump.
"There's no question about it. In all their experience, Trump is their worst nightmare," she said.

Menendez, in fight for political life, loses backing of fellow NJ Democrat

U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat who survived a corruption trial last year, was snubbed this week by a fellow Democrat in his state, raising questions about whether the two-term senator will be able to keep his seat despite heavy campaign spending.
James Fozman, a city councilman in the Jersey Shore township of Brick, has instead endorsed Menendez's Republican opponent, former U.S. Marine Bob Hugin.
“I’m endorsing [Hugin] to restore the honesty and integrity to the office,” Fozman told Brick Shorebeat. “We strongly believe in protecting our environment on issues like solar and wind, and opposing offshore drilling.”
Fozman told the outlet that he considered leaving the party over its continued support for Menendez, who wasn’t able to get the support of nearly 4 in 10 of the state's Democrats.
Those state Democrats went on to support an unknown challenger in the primary who spent no money against Menendez.
But while Fozman's opposition to Menendez may not decide the election, it raises larger questions about whether the senator, who eluded a corruption conviction thanks to a hung jury in November, is capable of retaining his seat.
Hugin has cut Menendez's lead to a mere 6 points in a Quinnipiac University poll released last week. Back in March, when the race began, Hugin trailed by 17 points and it appeared as if Menendez was on his way to an easy victory.
Hugin attacked Menendez over the weekend, saying that if he hadn't decided to run, Menendez would likely have been re-elected without facing any real opposition.
“My wife and I were just offended that Bob Menendez was going to be reelected without any real opposition. He’s had 35 years of being involved in corruption,” Hugin said during an interview with New York's WNYM-AM radio, according to the Hill.
Democrats took notice of Menendez’s struggling campaign, pouring in $117,000 for ads in recent weeks.
The spending spree by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) was mocked by Chris Hansen, the National Republican Senatorial Committee executive director.
“The DSCC is starting to spend in conjunction with @BobMenendezNJ in a race he is very much in danger of losing. This will no doubt trigger a dozen more Beto think pieces,” Hansen tweeted.
Hansen was referring to Democrats’ hopes to turn Texas blue and replace Sen. Ted Cruz with Rep. Beto O’Rourke, the rising star of the moderate Democratic Party who’s been receiving especially favorable media coverage, all while their candidates are struggling in already solid-blue states.
“With the DSCC and outside groups having to spend big in expensive states like New Jersey and Florida, it’s no surprise red state Dems are acting like it’s the Hunger Games for Chuck’s money,” NRSC communications director Katie Martin told the Washington Free Beacon.
“Every dime and second spent trying to defend a corrupt politician like Bob Menendez in New Jersey means resources aren’t going to states President Trump carried by double digits,” she added.

Why CNN is standing by a Michael Cohen story that his lawyer calls false

Lanny Davis, who has been engaged in high-stakes crisis management and political lawyering for decades, says he made a mistake.
CNN, which relied on Davis at least in part for a story he now says is false, won't say it made a mistake.
And the contretemps contains a revealing look at the sausage-making of investigative reporting and the sometimes murky dance between reporters and their unnamed sources.
Davis, who I've found to be a straight shooter over a quarter century dating back to the Clinton scandals, told me in a telephone interview yesterday that he had made an error and regrets it.
"I should not be talking to reporters on background about something I'm not certain about," Davis told me, describing his interactions with CNN reporters. "The combination of big stakes and a big mistake is a bad moment for me. If I had a redo in life, I wouldn't have said anything about the subject."
After initially saying nothing, here is the sum total of CNN's comment: "We stand by our story, and are confident in our reporting of it." A CNN report yesterday said that Davis kept changing his story in his dealings with the network.

Here's the backstory: CNN dropped a bombshell last month by reporting that Davis' client, Michael Cohen, had information that Donald Trump knew in advance of the 2016 Trump Tower meeting between his son, his son-in-law, campaign chairman and a Russian lawyer. "Cohen is willing to make that assertion to special counsel Robert Mueller," according to "the sources," CNN said.
The president has repeatedly denied any advance knowledge of the meeting.
The story, whose bylines included Carl Bernstein and Jim Sciutto, was picked up by the broadcast networks and many other major media organizations.
But now Davis has outed himself as an anonymous source for CNN, and says Cohen has no such information about advance knowledge by the president.
In my interview, Davis said he told CNN reporters that he couldn't confirm the Trump Tower allegation but encouraged them to check it out. He now believes they may have interpreted this as giving them a green light.
"When I work for a client, whether it's the White House or anybody else, and there's something that might be true but I'm not sure, I have to not expect reporters to get it right," Davis told me. He said he should have been more explicit in telling the CNN journalists not to pursue an unsubstantiated story.
Davis added that he did not intentionally mislead CNN's Anderson Cooper in saying he wasn't a source for the network. He meant that he wasn't a confirming source on the Trump Tower allegation over and says he should have been more clear.
Implicit in CNN standing by the story is that the network has other sources for the Trump Tower allegation. But how could others have information about what Cohen believes when the president's former lawyer is essentially saying, through Davis, that he has no such information?
Cohen, of course, pleaded guilty last week to bank fraud, tax evasion and campaign finance violations related to hush money payments to two women making accusations against Trump.
The president, of course, has boasted about Davis' admission on Twitter.
The Washington Post handled its dealings with Davis very differently. The Post had also dealt with him as an unnamed source.
As the paper recounts, the day after the CNN story, "The Post reported that Cohen had told associates that he witnessed an exchange in which Trump Jr. told his father about an upcoming gathering in which he expected to get information about Clinton. The Post did not report that Trump Jr. told his father that the information was coming from Russians.
"The information in the Post story, which was attributed to one person familiar with discussions among Cohen's friends, came from Davis, who is now acknowledging his role on the record."
And that’s the thing. CNN doesn’t have to protect Davis, who has come clean about his role in the matter.
When the White House makes a mistake or clings to an unsubstantiated charge, news organizations hammer top officials about it. Shouldn't a network have the same obligation to explain itself when an explosive story is denied by one of its own sources?
Davis says he has learned a valuable lesson, and is "pulling back" on other claims he has made. The Washington lawyer told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow there were indications that Trump knew in advance of the hacking of Democratic emails.
He said that was his belief but that he had no hard evidence to back it up.
Lanny Davis has owned up to his mistake. We'll have to see what lessons are drawn by other players in this melodrama.
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.

Soros-backed Gillum to square off against Trump-backed DeSantis in key Florida test

Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., who secured Florida’s GOP gubernatorial nomination on Tuesday, wasted little time before depicting his new Democratic rival as a candidate who wants to make “Florida Venezuela.”
DeSantis, who was backed by President Trump, appeared on the “Ingraham Angle” following his win, and denounced his competitor, Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum, as “the most liberal candidate that the Democratic Party has ever nominated in the state of Florida by a country mile in a governor’s race.”
Gillum’s unexpected win was seen as a huge win for the newly emerging progressive wing of the democratic party, and Tuesday's outcomes immediately transformed the nation’s largest swing state into one of the key gubernatorial campaigns in the country.

I’m trying to make Florida even better, he wants to make Florida Venezuela.
- U.S. Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla.

The mayor received an endorsement from Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and was congratulated by newcomer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The Miami Herald reported that he also benefited from “a financial boost from billionaires Tom Steyer and George Soros.”
DeSantis will test Trump’s grip on a crucial state he won in 2016.

Andrew Gillum addresses his supporters after winning the Democrat primary for governor on Tuesday, Aug. 28, 2018, in Tallahassee, Fla.  (AP Photo/Steve Cannon)

The two will compete to replace outgoing Florida Gov. Rick Scott.
“(Gillum) wants to abolish ICE; he wants a billion-dollar tax increase; he wants a single payer health care system in Florida, which would bankrupt the state. I’m trying to make Florida even better. He wants to make Florida Venezuela,” DeSantis said, adding that Gillum’s tenure as mayor has been “absolutely disastrous.”
The Herald reported that DeSantis is a member of the Freedom Caucus who wants a border wall.
During the campaign, Gillum often said he was the only candidate that wasn’t a millionaire or billionaire, and spent the least of his Democratic rivals.
After winning the Democratic nomination, Gillum thanked supporters who embraced “our plan for a state that makes room for all of us, not just the well-heeled and the well-connected, but all of us.”
DeSantis, a former Navy lawyer and Harvard-educated Iraq War veteran, entered the race in January and has since made frequent appearances on Fox News. DeSantis, won Tuesday’s GOP gubernatorial primary, beating state Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam.
Blaise Ingoglia, the chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, told The Herald that he welcomes the challenge, saying, “progressive-slash-socialist candidates just don’t perform well in general elections.”

NAFTA Cartoons

Kavanaugh's confirmation climb: Partisan opposition to court picks intensifies under Trump

Once upon a time, Supreme Court nominees stood a good chance of garnering broad bipartisan support.
Those days are gone.
As Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, prepares for hearings on Capitol Hill, he can expect a far more polarized and partisan confirmation process than even the grueling nomination fights of recent administrations.
Dating back to Gerald Ford’s presidency, most Supreme Court nominees – even when facing ardent opposition – eventually won some bipartisan support during a final confirmation vote.
Kavanaugh, if confirmed, is facing the possibility of an airtight party-line vote. This, after Justice Neil Gorsuch won confirmation on a relatively narrow 54-45 vote.
To be sure, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell shares responsibility for setting the intensely partisan tone over court nominees, by refusing to consider then-President Barack Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland in 2016.
But the Trump era has witnessed perhaps the most consistently polarized judicial confirmation process for Supreme Court nominees in modern times.

Supreme Court confirmation votes since 1975

Neil Gorsuch -- 54-45
Merrick Garland -- NA
Elena Kagan -- 63-37
Sonia Sotomayor -- 68-31
Samuel Alito -- 58-42
Harriet Miers -- NA
John Roberts -- 78-22
Stephen Breyer -- 87-9
Ruth Bader Ginsburg -- 96-3
Clarence Thomas -- 52-48
David Souter -- 90-9
Anthony Kennedy -- 97-0
Robert Bork -- 42-58
Antonin Scalia -- 98-0
William Rehnquist -- 65-33
Sandra Day O'Connor -- 99-0
John Paul Stevens -- 98-0

Before Kavanaugh was even announced, some Democratic senators made clear they would not consider voting for him.
“He’s a deeply, deeply conservative justice, way out of the mainstream,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on the Senate floor after it was made official.
Conservatives have pushed back, suggesting Democrats are against anyone Trump nominates. To make that point, they pounced on a mistake by the Women’s March, an organization that sent out a press release slamming Trump’s nominee as “extremist” but forgot to replace the placeholder “XX” in the text with Kavanaugh’s name.
“This was in some cases quite literally a fill-in-the-blank opposition,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a floor speech. “They wrote statements of opposition only to fill in the name later.”
But uncompromising opposition to high court nominees may be the new norm under the Trump administration.
Trump’s first pick for the court, Gorsuch, won just three votes from Democrats last year.
It hasn’t always been this way: Under Ford, John Paul Stevens was confirmed 98-0. Under then-President Ronald Reagan, Sandra Day O’Connor was confirmed 99-0; William Rehnquist was confirmed 65-33; Antonin Scalia was confirmed 98-0 and Anthony Kennedy was confirmed 97-0.
Under then-President George H.W. Bush, David Souter was confirmed 90-9. Under Bill Clinton, Stephen Breyer was confirmed 87-9, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg was confirmed 96-3.
PENCE 'VERY ENCOURAGED' BY REACTION ON CAPITOL HILL TO KAVANAUGH
Under George W. Bush, John Roberts was confirmed 78-22 and Samuel Alito was confirmed on a tighter 58-42. Under President Barack Obama, Elena Kagan was confirmed 63-37 and Sonia Sotomayor was confirmed 68-31.
Of course, during that time period, there were a few high-profile examples of polarizing picks who faced ardent opposition, including those barely confirmed or who never made it out of the confirmation process.
Aside from Garland, Robert Bork’s nomination was famously rejected by the Senate in 1987. Clarence Thomas squeaked by in 1991 by in a 52-48 vote.
Harriet Miers withdrew her 2005 nomination amid questions about her qualifications.
Alex Pappas is a politics reporter at FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter at @AlexPappas.

Trump says he's 'terminating' NAFTA, announces new trade agreement with Mexico

President Trump on Monday said he plans to terminate the existing North American Free Trade Agreement, as he announced a new tentative agreement between the United States and Mexico that he described as "one of the largest trade deals ever made."
"I'll be terminating the existing deal and going into this deal," the president said in the Oval Office, calling it a "big day for trade."
But the president said Monday “we’ll see” if Canada can still be part of the trade pact, leaving open the possibility of separate agreements.
"We are starting negotiations with Canada pretty much immediately," Trump said.
Trump, sitting at the Resolute Desk, put Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto on his speaker phone as the press watched in the Oval Office. The Mexican president, speaking through a translator, congratulated the negotiators on both sides and expressed hope the United States and Canada would come to an agreement. 
Later, the White House said Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau congratulated Trump. "The leaders discussed US - Canada trade and agreed to continue productive conversations," White House officials said.
Earlier in the day, Trump said he wanted to get rid of the name “NAFTA” because it has bad connotations. He said he planned to call the deal the "United States-Mexico Trade Agreement" instead.
The United States Trade Representative called the U.S.-Mexico deal a “preliminary agreement in principle, subject to finalization and implementation.”
“They used to call it NAFTA, we are going to call it the United States-Mexico Trade Agreement, and we will get rid of the name NAFTA,” Trump said. “It has a bad connotation because the United States was hurt very badly by NAFTA.”
Trump on Monday called it "one of the largest trade deals ever made." The U.S. and Mexico have been working to resolve key differences on issues ranging from automobiles to energy.
According to a fact sheet from the United States Trade Representative, the agreement includes new rules of origin to incentivize manufacturers to source goods and materials in North America – including requiring 75 percent of auto content be made in the United States and Mexico.
Officials in Canada, though, on Monday still expressed optimism over a deal.
“Canada is encouraged by the continued optimism shown by our negotiating partners,” a spokesman for Canada's minister of foreign affair, Chrystia Freeland, said Monday. “Progress between Mexico and the United States is a necessary requirement for any renewed NAFTA agreement.”
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump often railed against the trade pact as “the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere.”
Trump and Peña Nieto have been working for the past five weeks to iron out their bilateral differences so Canada can rejoin the talks to update NAFTA. The U.S. and Mexico wanted to finalize an agreement this month so that it can be signed ahead of Mexican President-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s inauguration in December.
One of the biggest issues on the negotiating table deals with car manufacturing jobs, as the Trump administration pushes for a deal that would boost factory employment in the U.S.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Mexican Secretary of Economy Idelfonso Guajardo were seen walked together Monday into the White House without talking to reporters. The delegation also included Jesus Seade, a World Trade Organization veteran tapped by Lopez Obrador as his future chief trade negotiator.
The U.S. on Thursday agreed to keep the 2.5 percent tariff currently applied under World Trade Organization rules if the cars are made at factories that already exist, which leaves open the possibility that automobiles that are built at new plants could face tariffs of 20 percent to 25 percent.
Trump has also signaled that he is open to negotiating trade deals with Mexico and Canada separately, while both countries have said they want to keep the three-nation trade deal that dates back to 1994.
Earlier in August, Trump threatened Canada with auto tariffs if the U.S. and Canada can't forge a deal.
"Canada must wait," Trump tweeted. "Their Tariffs and Trade Barriers are far too high. Will tax cars if we can't make a deal!"
Canada responded with a statement Friday night, saying: "Our focus is unchanged. We'll keep standing up for Canadian interests as we work toward a modernized trilateral NAFTA agreement."
Adam Austen, a spokesman for Canada's foreign minister, added: "We're glad Mexico and the U.S. continue to work out their bilateral issues. It's the only way we'll get to a deal."

California lawmakers approve tougher restrictions on firearms possession, report says

California Gov. Jerry Brown will reportedly consider three bills intended to add restrictions on gun ownership in his state.  (AP)

Lawmakers in California on Monday sent three bills to Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk that call for stricter restrictions on firearms in a state that has one of the toughest gun laws in the country.
The bill was sent to Brown’s desk one day after a gunman opened fire at a gaming event in Florida, killing two before turning the gun on himself.
The Los Angeles Times reported that the bills call for a lifetime ban for those convicted of domestic violence along with those ordered by a court to a psychiatric hold twice in one year.
State lawmakers have also called for Californians interested in obtaining a concealed weapon permit to undergo eight hours of instruction and pass a live-fire test before being granted the permit, the report said.
Most Republicans opposed the concealed-carry measure, warning that there is no limit on the amount of training a county can demand for the permit under the proposed law.
The state is known to have tight gun laws. Those convicted of domestic violence in the state currently face a 10-year probation, the report said. The state also currently enforces a five-year ban for those ordered by a court into a psychiatric holds, the report said.
“If you want to have a loaded gun in public, you need to show that you know what you are doing,” Todd Gloria, a Democratic assemblyman, told The Times.