One
consequence of New York City's Saturday night blackout: It shined a
bright spotlight on the tensions between two prominent Democrats, the
city's mayor and the state's governor. As more than 70,000
customers -- plus countless tourists and other visitors -- dealt with
the loss of electricity attributed to a transformer fire, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo blasted New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, who was in Iowa campaigning for president when the massive blackout hit Manhattan. “I
can count the number of times I leave the state basically on my
fingers,” Cuomo told CNN, responding to a question about the importance
of the mayor being in New York during an emergency. "Mayors
are important. And situations like this come up, you know. And you have
to be on-site,” he said. "I think it’s important to be in a place where
you can always respond. But look, everybody makes their own political
judgment and I’m not going to second-guess anyone either. I do my job
the way I think I should do my job and I leave it to others to do the
same."
"Mayors are important. And situations like this come up, you know. And you have to be on-site." — New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo
Although both are Democrats, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio,
left and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo have had a strained relationship.
De Blasio was at a campaign stop in Waterloo, Iowa,
when an equipment failure at a transformer substation shut off power for
tens of thousands of people in his city. The mayor first told CNN he was mulling whether to return to New York, but later decided he would, according to the Washington Examiner. He plans to fly back to the city Sunday morning, a spokesperson said. Late Saturday, the mayor issued several Twitter messages, indicating he was monitoring the situation back home. "With
the power back on, I’ve directed City agencies to investigate this
evening’s blackout," he wrote. "They’ll work with ConEd to get to the
bottom of what happened tonight and prevent another widespread outage
like this." Meanwhile, the
governor was in New York City, speaking to reporters just before
midnight. He confirmed that power had been restored to all affected
customers. “This could have been much worse,” Cuomo added,
commending emergency responders. “When things are at their worst New
Yorkers are at their best.” The governor said he would be working
with utility company Con Edison to make sure a blackout of Saturday’s
magnitude doesn’t happen again.
OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 8:57 AM PT – Friday, July 12, 2019
President Trump announced Labor Secretary Alex Acosta will be
stepping down, following the heat he received this week over the decades
old Jeffrey Epstein plea deal. Acosta joined the president as he spoke to reporters outside the
White House Friday. President Trump offered praise for the embattled
official, and said the Labor Department’s number two official — Patrick
Pizzella — will take over as acting secretary. Acosta also blasted the media over its coverage connecting Epstein to
the Labor Department before saying he would step aside for the greater
good of the administration.
Labor
Secretary Alex Acosta, right, accompanied President Donald Trump, left,
speaks to members of the media on the South Lawn of the White House in
Washington, Friday, July 12, 2019, before Trump boards Marine One for a
short trip to Andrews Air Force Base, Md. and then on to Wisconsin. (AP
Photo/Andrew Harnik)
“I do not think it is right and fair for this administration’s Labor
Department to have Epstein as the focus rather than the incredible
economy that we have today and, so I called the president this morning
and I told him that I thought the right thing was to step aside,” he
stated. “You know, cabinet positions are temporary trusts — it would be
selfish for me to stay in this position and continue talking about a
case that’s 12 years old rather than about the amazing economy we have
right now.” This comes after Acosta defended his 2008 non-prosecution agreement
with Epstein lawyers when he was a U.S. attorney in Southern Florida.
The agreement kept alleged sex-trafficking victims in the dark about the
so-called “sweetheart deal.”
….Alex was a great Secretary of Labor and his
service is truly appreciated. He will be replaced on an acting basis by
Pat Pizzella, the current Deputy Secretary.
Vice President Mike Pence blasted CNN
late Friday night for what he described as the network's "dishonest"
coverage of his trip to a migrant detention center near the U.S.-Mexico border.
Pence, along with reporters and a group of GOP lawmakers, flew to McAllen, Texas,
where he participated in a roundtable discussion with Border Patrol
agents and toured a detention center. The vice president spoke with
several migrant children and asked about their treatment at the facility
with the help of a translator.
CNN's primetime coverage, however, featured only visuals of a large group of adult male migrants
behind a fence attempting to engage with reporters. During CNN's
"Anderson Cooper 360" program, the network played Pence's interview with
CNN senior White House correspondent Pamela Brown on a split screen,
showing only footage of the adult migrants and none of the footage of
Pence visiting with children.
Later,
CNN's Chris Cuomo criticized Pence's interview remarks and accused him
of providing "spin" on the facility conditions. "Cuomo Prime Time" also
made no reference to Pence's visit with the children.
The vice president apparently took notice, as evidenced by Twitter posts.
"CNN
is so dishonest. Today we took reporters to a detention facility on the
border for families and children and all told us they were being
treated well," Pence began. "The crisis at our southern border is not a
'manufactured crisis,' it is real and is overwhelming our system. To
show this, we also visited an overcrowded facility for adult men, many
of whom have been arrested multiple times. These men were in a temporary
holding area because Democrats in Congress have refused to fund
additional bed space."
He continued: "Rather than broadcast the
full story, showing the compassionate care the American people are
providing to vulnerable families, tonight CNN only played video of men
in the temporary facility and didn’t play any footage of the family
facility at all... ignoring the excellent care being provided to
families and children. Our great @CBP agents deserve better and the
American people deserve the whole story from CNN!"
"Our great @CBP agents deserve better and the American people deserve the whole story from CNN!" — Vice President Mike Pence
CNN did not immediately respond to Pence's comments.
Several CNN anchors -- including Cooper, Cuomo, Don Lemon and Wolf Blitzer -- previously rejected President Trump's warning earlier this year that there was a crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border.
"You
can build a physical barrier. But why say it's a cure-all to keep back
this demonized group of people, like this marauding horde that doesn't
exist. [Trump] created all of this. It's all bogus," Cuomo said Jan. 11.
"Let's
talk about his imaginary Latin-American migrant conspiracy," Lemon said
April 24. "This is part of a long history of him making things up about
the caravan and the border crisis."
"President Trump will speak
tonight from the Oval Office, trying to sell his border wall to a
doubtful nation, as his administration uses falsehoods and misstatements
to build the case for what it calls a crisis on the border," Blitzer
said Jan. 8.
"Now, it's not our job to advocate for or against a
given policy," Cooper said Jan. 8. "It's our job to call out the
dishonest pursuit of it. So, as we wait for the president to speak about
what he calls the crisis on the border, we're starting with the crisis
of credibility he's created for himself." Fox News media reporter Brian Flood contributed to this report.
The official House Democrats Twitter account took a shot at the chief of staff of U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Friday night, responding belatedly, but strongly, to a comment he made weeks ago, directed at U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, D-Kansas. "Who
is this guy and why is he explicitly singling out a Native American
woman of color?" the Democratic Caucus posted, in a comment directed at
Saikat Chakrabarti, who works for Ocasio-Cortez. The comment also seemed to be a dig at Ocasio-Cortez herself, following her recent comments accusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of targeting progressive Democrats based on race. "Her
name is Congresswoman Davids, not Sharice," the House Democrats added.
"She is a phenomenal new member who flipped a red seat blue. Keep Her
Name Out Of Your Mouth." Pelosi said Thursday
she recently addressed -- “at the request of my members” -- an
“offensive tweet that came out of one of the member's offices” that
compared centrist Democrats to segregationists. That tweet was authored
and then deleted by Chakrabarti. Ocasio-Cortez has since accused Pelosi of being “disrespectful” to several “newly elected women of color.” The
House Democrats' tweet included a screenshot of Chakrabarti's response
to someone on Twitter saying that while Davids is not racist her votes
are "enabling a racist system." "I think the point still stands. I
don't think people have to be personally racist to enable a racist
system. And the same could even be said of the Southern Democrats. I
don't believe Sharice is a racist person, but her votes are showing her
to enable a racist system," Chakrabarti tweeted on June 27, the night of
the second Democratic presidential debate in Miami. Chakrabarti
responded to the House Democrats' Twitter handle Friday night, asking
why they did not point out that he was responding to someone else who
brought up Davids. "Why did you leave that out?" he asked. "I've
known Rep. Davids for a long time, consider her a friend, and
encouraged her to run for Congress back in the fall of 2016. I'm glad
she did," Chakrabarti tweeted. "Everything I tweeted 2 weeks ago
was to call out the terrible border funding bill that 90+ Dems opposed.
It gave Trump a blank check to continue caging people in horrendous
conditions. Our Democracy is literally falling apart. I'm not interested
in substance-less Twitter spats," Chakrabarti said in a follow-up
tweet. Fox News' Alex Pappas contributed to this report.
Authorities in Colorado restored an American flag to
its place Friday evening after protesters demonstrating outside a U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility pulled down the
star-spangled banner and flew the flag of Mexico in its place. The
protesters also removed a “Blue Lives Matter” flag, honoring law
enforcement, spray-painted it with the words “Abolish ICE,” then raised
the flag upside-down, on a pole next to the Mexican flag, according to
local media. Hundreds of protesters had gathered in Aurora, Colo., outside the federal facility that holds illegal immigrants, to protest ICE raids scheduled to begin Sunday in Denver and other major U.S. cities, FOX 31 Denver reported. Aurora
police Chief Nick Metz said the majority of protesters remained
peaceful and some even thanked officers for their evening efforts. The
protest, part of a network of #LightsForLiberty events, also dubbed the
“March to Close Concentration Camps,” called for detention centers at
the U.S.-Mexico border to be closed and for all immigrants being held in
those locations to be granted entry to the U.S., according to the
event’s Facebook page. Beginning Sunday, ICE agents will reportedly work to round up thousands of illegal immigrants across the U.S. President
Trump delayed the operation by two weeks to allow Dems to propose a
bipartisan solution to the humanitarian crisis at the border. Speaking
to Fox News during his visit to the border Friday, Vice President Mike
Pence said the upcoming ICE raids will not be done at random and will be
focused on “removing those deported by courts.” Besides Denver,
the raids were expected to take place in Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago,
Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York and San Francisco. Raids scheduled
for New Orleans may be delayed due to Tropical Storm Barry, KCNC reported.
Other #LightsForLiberty protests took place across the U.S. Friday,
including in San Ysidro, Calif.; Portland, Ore.; and New York City. Fox News’ Alex Pappas contributed to this report.
OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 1:57 PM PT – Thursday, July 11, 2019
President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
recently discussed the heightened threat posed by Iran. The two leaders
spoke on the phone Thursday to address the latest developments in the
Middle East as well as regional security challenges. The president said the Ayatollah regime may face a new round of
sanctions in response to its ongoing support for Islamic terror groups.
This comes as Netanyahu said he would greatly appreciate an increased
pressure on Iran as it has recently vowed to destroy Israel, yet again.
I spoke with US President Donald Trump. We
discussed regional developments and security issues. Foremost among them
was Iran. I thanked President Trump for his intention to increase
sanctions against Iran.
President
Donald Trump arrives to speak at the “Presidential Social Media Summit”
in
the East Room of the White House, Thursday, July 11, 2019, in
Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
Meanwhile, Ayatollah regime officials are threatening to end America’s presence in the Middle East.
“The number one power of the world,
the biggest power in international politics, the U.S. couldn’t write
down one line against Iran. America’s role in world politics has ended.
America feels that it has been defeated in the campaign theater of
Middle East.”
— Mohammad Javad Zarif, Foreign Minister – Iran
President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu also vowed to boost
bilateral security cooperation to curb Iran’s efforts to export the
Islamic Revolution across the Middle East.
FILE - In this May 29, 2019, file photo, special counsel
Robert Mueller speaks at the Department of Justice Wednesday, in
Washington, about the Russia investigation. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster,
File)
Three omnipresent factors dominate everything on Capitol Hill. They’re known as “the three P’s.” Politics, policy and procedure. Politicians
may quibble as to whether the politics are right about an issue. Are
members politically in step with their districts or states on a topic?
Maybe so. Maybe not. They don’t have to be. And, if a lawmaker strays
too far afield from his or her voters, they often pay the price. Lawmakers
wrestle constantly about policy. This is the right approach for
defense. No, this is the right policy for defense. No, you’re both
wrong. Pols may be at odds over how to handle issues at the border,
immigration, health care or even the debt ceiling. Their disposition may
be right or flawed. But it doesn’t matter. Lawmakers don’t have to be
right on the policies they support or reject. And then there is procedure. The
politics can be off-kilter. The policy can be iffy. But the procedure
cannot be out of alignment. Congressional rules are the Congressional
rules. The Constitution is the Constitution. House and Senate precedent
is House and Senate precedent. The only one of the three P’s which must
be on target is the procedure. This
brings us to next Wednesday’s hearings with Special Counsel Robert
Mueller before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. The
committees are still negotiating with Mueller’s team about the structure
of the hearing. First of all, Mueller was only willing to come under a
subpoena. So, the House issued a subpoena. Now, Mueller’s agreed to only
submit to two hours of questioning apiece for both panels. But two
hours may not be sufficient. There is a time problem. House Rule
XI, Clause 2(J) says that “each committee shall apply the five-minute
rule during the questioning of witnesses in a hearing until such time as
each member of the committee who so desires has had an opportunity to
question in each witness.” In other words, everyone is required to get five minutes to pose questions. The
Judiciary Committee is comprised of 41 members: 24 Democrats and 17
Republicans. If the committee abides by the House rule, that’s 205
minutes of Q&A alone. Three hours and 25 minutes. And things on
Capitol Hill always consume much more time than expected. Things
are a little better for the Intelligence Committee. That panel has 22
members: 13 Democrats and nine Republicans. That would entail 110
minutes or an hour and 50 minutes. Still, there’s not much wiggle room. Consider
this: There are almost always opening statements by the chair, ranking
minority member and the witness. Housekeeping consumes a few minutes. At
a hearing of this magnitude, there’s a high possibility for disruptions
from the audience and “parliamentary inquiries” from members about how
the panel is proceeding. Those issues could start to devour the
allocations pretty fast. On the first day of confirmation hearings
for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh last September, senators
wrangled for one hour and 17 minutes over procedure, documents, dilatory
tactics and endured various crowd disruptions before Senate Judiciary
Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) could finally read more than 12
words of his opening statement. All of that was even a couple of weeks
before anyone heard anything about Kavanaugh’s accuser Christine Blasey
Ford. So what happens if lawmakers don’t get to engage Mueller in questions? Unclear. But the procedure would be off. No one is quite sure where this is going. House
Judiciary Committee Democrats held a lengthy, closed-door session about
the structure of the hearing on Wednesday night. Most lawmakers emerged
with few answers. Nearly all replied that things were “in flux.”
Reporters staking out the conclave even asked if “in flux” was a unified
talking point Democrats agreed to. They denied it. “These are ongoing discussions,” said Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA) as he headed down a corridor to avoid reporters. “Is this going to be settled tonight?” asked yours truly. “It’s ongoing discussions,” replied Correa. “It may not be settled until the day of the hearing.” Rep.
Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL) is a freshman member of the Judiciary
Committee. She’d likely be one of the last members to question Mueller,
due to her lack of seniority. Reporters asked if she’d be allowed to
question Mueller. “We are talking on the format. We haven’t
decided yet,” replied Mucarsel-Powell. “We’re still negotiating with
Mueller’s team on the timing and how much time we’re going to have.” Rep.
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) is one of the most outspoken members on the
Democratic side of the aisle. She rarely shies away from a reporter’s
question in the hall or a TV camera. But not Wednesday night. Jackson
Lee headed straight for the elevator. “We are preparing for a full
hearing with Mr. Mueller,” said Jackson Lee matter-of-factly as she
slid into an elevator, the door closing on cue. And it’s not just Democrats who are perturbed. “I’m
really irritated,” said Judiciary Committee member Rep. Debbie Lesko
(R-AZ), who just joined the House 14 months ago. “I don’t even get to
question him? This is just plain wrong. I’ve been elected just like
anybody elsewhere and for the leadership in the committee to decide that
only certain members and certain members even on (the Democratic side)
of the aisle – that’s just plain wrong.” Rep. Martha Roby (R-AL)
tried to engage Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) on the
issue during a meeting of the panel Thursday morning. “Could you
lay out for us what exactly, with respect to the Muller hearing next
week, what exactly you agreed to and why you agreed to it?” asked Roby. Nadler finally responded after a pregnant and awkward pause. “I’m not going to comment on that at this hearing. It is beyond the scope of this hearing,” replied Nadler. The
consternation for this hearing anyway, exacerbated by the time
constraints. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said she wouldn’t infuse
herself into the debate in an effort to preserve the institution’s rules
or to broker an agreement. “I wish we had more time. But I’m glad
we have the time we have,” said Pelosi. “On distribution of timing in
committees, I’ll leave that up to the chairmen.” So, Mueller is
coming next Wednesday. The politics of having Mueller come could be
right or wrong. The policy stances of Democrats and Republicans on the
Russia probe could be right or wrong. And
if they only stick to two hours for each committee – thwarting many
members from asking questions under House rules, the procedure is wrong.
It was obvious from the outset that the media didn’t think much of Donald Trump’s social media summit. Before
yesterday’s White House event got under way, a New York Times news
story declared: “The guest list has alarmed critics who fear it is
bringing together people who disseminate threats, hate speech and actual
fake news, and who sometimes have their messages elevated with the
velocity of a presidential tweet.” That was mild compared to the
Times’ savvy tech columnist, Kevin Roose, who scoffed at the red-carpet
treatment for “right-wing trolls,” calling the guests “a motley grab bag
of pro-Trump influencers (who) have taken to Twitter to brag about
their invitations.” But the president, in his morning tweets,
didn’t exactly convey that this was some fair-and-balanced look at the
problems of Big Tech. He said the purpose is to examine “the
tremendous dishonesty, bias, discrimination and suppression practiced by
certain companies. We will not let them get away with it much longer.” He added: “The Fake News Media will also be there, but for a limited period.” It’s
rather odd, to say the least, to hold a summit and not allow reporters
in to draw attention to the issue at hand. The White House later decided
to grant access to the press pool, but never released a guest list. So
the event was shrouded in a bit of mystery. So
you have the establishment press saying that POTUS is catering to
purveyors of fake news, and Trump saying he’s limiting the ability of
fake news to cover the summit. The grand fake-off sort of crystallizes
the complete lack of trust on both sides. The president offered what he viewed as high praise, telling his guests that “the crap you think of is unbelievable.” Trump
complained that he was getting less engagement on his tweets, which he
found suspicious. “I used to watch it like a rocket ship when I put out a
beauty,” he said. “Remember I said somebody was spying on me? That was
like a rocket.” (That was his 2017 tweet that Barack Obama had
wiretapped him, for which there remains no evidence.) A prominent
attendee was Sebastian Gorka, a White House official until he was pushed
out. When Trump moved the show to the Rose Garden, where he talked
about the census and citizenship, Gorka walked past the press pool and
got into a high-decibel exchange with liberal CNN contributor Brian
Karem, with Gorka calling him a “punk.” Several of the guests began chanting “Gorka!” The
theatrics belie some serious issues. It’s not that Twitter, Facebook
and Google—which weren’t invited--don’t deserve a ton of criticism. The
companies all lean left. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter’s Jack
Dorsey have acknowledged this is a problem. They apply their so-called
standards inconsistently, in a number of instances against
conservatives, and sometimes have had to apologize for that. And they’ve
done a lousy job of policing hate speech, disinformation and Russian
propaganda, fueling calls for government regulation. Still, the
White House invited some controversial characters, as the press was all
too happy to point out. They include James O’Keefe, whose conservative
outfit does surreptitious taping to embarrass liberals, and who once
pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in a case involving Mary Landrieu for
entering a building under false pretenses. They include Ali
Alexander, who recently tweeted that Kamala Harris had falsely implied
that she was descended from “American Black Slaves.” The biracial
senator has been quite open about her parents being from Jamaica and
India. And they include a Trump supporter using the screen name
Carpe Donktum, who tweeted an obviously doctored video of Joe Biden’s
shoulders being massaged by a second Biden at a time the former veep was
being accused of inappropriately touching women. There’s
an important debate raging in the country about the Silicon Valley
giants, once among America’s most admired companies, and whether they
are biased and allowed their platforms to become a toxic cesspool. The
White House session may have scored some points, but mainly from one
side.
Although both are Democrats, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio,
left and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo have had a strained relationship.
