OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 9:58 AM PT — Tuesday, August 20, 2019
Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar recently held a press
conference to address ties with an anti-Semitic group as well as recent
travel restrictions imposed on the two lawmakers.
On Monday, the congresswomen discussed Miftah, the anti-Israel group
that promised to sponsor Tlaib’s trip. Miftah reportedly has a long
history of anti-Israel and pro-terrorist sentiments similar to those
held by Tlaib and company.
“All I can do as my city’s granddaughter, as the granddaughter of a
woman who lives in occupied territories, is to elevate her voice by
exposing the truth the only way I know how, as my Detroit Public Schools
teacher taught me, by humanizing the pain of oppression congresswoman,”
stated Tlaib.
The so-called “truth” she touts, however, seems to align with
rhetoric of the organization, which has downplayed suicide bombings of
Israeli citizens and has described the actions of terrorists as
“sacrificing their lives for the cause.”
Rep.
Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., right, consoles and Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.,
as Tlaib talked about Israel’s refusal to allow them to visit the
country during a news conference Monday, Aug. 19, 2019 at the State
Capitol in St. Paul, Minn. (AP Photo/Jim Mone)
Tlaib claims she did not chose the organization to sponsor her trip,
and that Miftah has sponsored trips made by five other Congress members.
Omar and Tlaib argued the scrutiny over the organization are
distractions that have nothing to do with their agenda. During the press
conference, Omar seemed to instigate anti-Israel sentiments by
questioning the lifesaving aid Israel receives from the U.S.
Tlaib and Omar were barred from visiting Israel due to their public
support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanction movement, who’s
objective is to eliminate Israel as a nation. The Israeli government
defended their decision to block the members of Congress by pointing to
pro-terrorist activist group Miftah sponsoring the trip. Tlaib was later
allowed to visit her grandmother on the West Bank, but rejected the
invitation.
Joe
Biden's claim that he was a civils rights leader could be the biggest
problem for the Democratic presidential candidate, says Alana Goodman,
investigative political reporter at the Washington Examiner.
They say if you can remember the 1960s, you probably weren’t there.
Well, Joe Biden
missed by about a decade Tuesday evening when he mentioned two
significant events of the 1960s: the assassinations of Dr. Martin Luther
King Jr. and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy.
The gaffe came during a speech in Iowa, while the 76-year-old Biden was comparing the years of his young adulthood to the current day.
“Just
like in my generation, when I got out of school, when Bobby Kennedy and
Dr. King had been assassinated in the ’70s, the late ’70s when I got
engaged … ,” Biden recalled.
But King and Kennedy were murdered in 1968, about two months apart.
It was just the latest in a series of slip-ups for the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential frontrunner.
Last
Friday at a fundraiser in his home state of Delaware, Biden confused
Burlington, Iowa, and Burlington, Vt., while trying to remember where he
had given a campaign speech. The towns are about 1,100 miles apart.
Earlier
this month, Biden said “poor kids” are just as smart as “white kids,”
and last weekend he mistakenly said he met with survivors of the
February 2018 Parkland, Fla., school shooting while vice president --
even though he had left office more than a year before the attack.
He has also confused former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher for Theresa May twice since May.
Biden’s press secretary told CNN the focus on Biden's blunders is a “press narrative, not a voter narrative." Fox News' Brie Stimson contributed to this story.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., found himself apologizing Tuesday after a top campaign aide retweeted a message about "mental health issues" in the family of Rep. Joe Kennedy, a potenial challenger for Markey's Senate seat.
The
retweet -- which Markey termed "unacceptable" -- came just three weeks
after Kennedy's young cousin, Saoirse Kennedy Hill, 22, died of
an apparent drug overdose.
The Markey aide, Paul Tencher,
retweeted a post by attorney James S. Henry, who asserted that Markey
"is a great Senator," while Kennedy "should focus on his family's
considerable mental health issues" -- seeming to reference the cousin's
death.
After Markey learned of the retweet, he issued the following statement:
"To
show such insensitivity for those experiencing mental health issues is
extremely offensive to me. This action by a member of my campaign is
unacceptable,” Markey said, according to the Washington Examiner. “It
in no way reflects my commitment to the issue of mental health treatment
and the eradication of stigma that so many families suffer. I deeply
apologize to Congressman Kennedy and his entire family.”
"To
show such insensitivity for those experiencing mental health issues is
extremely offensive to me. ... I deeply apologize to Congressman Kennedy
and his entire family.” — Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass.
Markey added that he had spoken with the congressman directly about the matter.
The
38-year-old Kennedy -- a grandson of Robert F. Kennedy -- is
considering a primary challenge in 2020 against the 73-year-old Markey,
the New York Times
reported Saturday. The paper cited an unnamed Democratic official who
said Kennedy would decide on a candidacy in the coming weeks.
Kennedy previously stated he planned to seek a fifth term in the House, representing Massachusetts’ 4th Congressional District, Boston.com reported.
Saoirse
Kennedy Hill died Aug. 1 at the Kennedy compound in Hyannis Port,
Mass. In 2016, she wrote a column in the Deerfield Scroll, a student-run
newspaper, discussing her quiet mental health struggles. Her
grandfather was the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy.
On
Sunday, Tencher apologized for disseminating tweet amid backlash. The
tweet’s author, attorney Henry, deleted the original message, the Washington Examiner reported.
"I
absolutely take it back. It was a mistake. My apologies," Tencher said
on Twitter. "That tweet was despicable and abhorrent. This person should
be banned from twitter." Fox News' Alex Pappas contributed to this report.
State Auditor Elaine Howle discusses the audit her office released
that found the California State University system did not disclose $1.5
billion in discretionary reserves while it raised tuition and cut
employees' pay, during a joint legislative committee hearing in
Sacramento, Calif., Monday, Aug. 12, 2019. (Associated Press)
California county fair employees squandered hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars on unofficial travel, extravagant meals and alcohol, an audit report shows.
The
State Auditor’s Office released a report titled "Gross Mismanagement
Led to the Misuse of State Resources and Multiple Violations of State
Laws” that details how employees of a district agricultural association,
funded by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, wasted the state funds.
The wasteful district agricultural association wasn’t named in the report in an effort to protect whistleblowers, the Sacramento Bee reported.
“We
can’t provide the specific district agricultural association because
doing so, would essentially disclose the identity of some of individuals
we discuss,” spokeswoman Margarita Fernandez told the outlet.
There are 54 district agricultural associations in
California that organize fairs and other events, all of which are
overseen by the state Department of Food and Agriculture. The
associations used to be supported by the state general fund, though that
ended in 2011, yet the associations have continued to use state’s
equipment and other resources.
“We found that the association’s
chief executive officer and maintenance supervisor grossly mismanaged
state resources and neglected their duties to ensure that employees
comply with state laws governing supervision and time and attendance
reporting,” California State Auditor Elaine Howle wrote in the report.
“Examples
of the improper acts we found include employees taking home state
property and misusing state resources, drinking alcohol on state
grounds, a lack of critical internal controls to prevent inappropriate
and excessive travel-related purchases, unnecessary charges for interest
and late fees, and a waste of state funds.”
“Examples
of the improper acts we found include employees taking home state
property and misusing state resources, drinking alcohol on state
grounds, a lack of critical internal controls to prevent inappropriate
and excessive travel-related purchases, unnecessary charges for interest
and late fees, and a waste of state funds.” — Audit report
The
audit found that between 2016 and 2018 there were over $318,000 in
financial discrepancies, including more than $132,000 worth of credit
card purchases without receipts, over $30,000 for excessive and
unauthorized travel expenses, about $2,000 in “wasteful tips that far
exceeded the maximum allowable reimbursement rate,” and more than $1,200
in “inappropriate purchases of alcohol.”
The employees were
especially keen to use credit cards to pay for lavish dinners, with one
receipt showing the association paying $400 for five butcher’s cuts,
$125 for a lobster surf dinner, $95 for a lobster tail, and more than
$600 in alcohol, including one $96 bottle of wine, the newspaper
reported.
The unnamed association also allowed several association
maintenance employees to work side jobs during their regular shift work
– all while collecting pay from the association.
The
report also found that the maintenance supervisor routinely used a
state-owned vehicle to commute from home to work, and for personal
business. When asked about it, the supervisor said that he took the
truck home “at most two times a week” to pick up work materials.
The
association defended itself by claiming that a 2011 staff reduction
left the workplace and employees “stretched” and resulted in inadequate
training for the remaining staffers.
The Justice Department submitted a legal brief to the Supreme Court Monday that stated President Trump acted lawfully when he decided to end the Obama-era immigration program known as DACA in September of 2017, according to a new report.
The
Department of Homeland Security, “correctly, and at a minimum
reasonably, concluded that DACA is unlawful,” Justice Department lawyers
wrote in a brief submitted to the Supreme Court late Monday.
The
Supreme Court will begin to hear arguments in November. A ruling is
expected in the presidential election year, putting the high court at
the center of one of the most politically charged issues of debates. A
decision in favor of Trump would allow for the president to deport more
than one million young adults residing in the U.S. under DACA
protection, the New York Times reported.
Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, was created under an executive order in
2012. The program gives some illegal immigrants -- known as "Dreamers"
-- who were brought to the United States as children-- the opportunity
to receive a renewable two-year reprieve from deportation and become
eligible for a work permit.
In 2017, the Trump administration
announced its plan to phase out the program, but federal courts have
ruled that the phase-out could not apply retroactively and that the
program should be restarted.
The White House fought back on those
decisions, saying the president has broad authority over immigration
enforcement policy. Federal appeals courts around the country have
rejected efforts by the federal government to move ahead with phasing
out the Obama-era program.
DACA proponents have also argued that
Trump’s planned termination of the program violates federal law
requiring adequate notice-and-comment periods before certain federal
rules are changed, as well as other constitutional equal protection and
due process guarantees.
A decision from the Supreme Court to end
DACA could galvanize young Americans to ensure Trump does not see
another four years in the White House, the Times report
stated. On the other hand, if the Court chooses to continue the
Obama-era program, conservatives could argue Trump needs another four
years to fulfill his campaign promises on immigration. Fox News’ Shannon Bream and Bill Mears contributed to this report.
The Trump administration issued new policy guidance on
Monday tightening the rules for awarding discretionary work permits to
immigrants who have been temporarily allowed into the United States
for "urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit" under
the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The move came a week after the White House issued a long-awaited rule strengthening the ability of federal officials to deny green cards to immigrants deemed likely to rely on government aid.
Section 212(d)(5)(A) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act affords the Department of Homeland
Security the discretion to decide when to afford aliens entry under "extraordinary" circumstances,
such as to visit a dying relative or obtain life-saving medical
treatment. The one-time entry is a privilege, not a right — and the
administration's guidance made clear that officials were wary it was
being abused.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
said the new guidance emphasizes "the use of discretion when determining
whether to grant employment authorization for foreign nationals paroled
into the United States in keeping with existing policies."
Migrants return to Mexico using the Puerta Mexico bridge that
crosses the Rio Grande river in Matamoros, Mexico, July 31, 2019, on the
border with Brownsville, Texas. (AP Photo/Emilio Espejel)
The bulletin also "provides a list of positive and
negative factors that an officer may consider when balancing the
totality of the circumstances and determining whether an applicant
warrants a favorable exercise of discretion," according to USCIS.
“USCIS
has determined that it is necessary to issue this guidance at this time
because there is a national emergency at the U.S. southern border where
foreign nationals are entering the U.S. illegally," the agency said in a
statement.
The White House has touted its tough immigration
policies as the cause for a recent decline in immigrant detentions at
the border. The number of migrants encountered by U.S. authorities at
the border with Mexico dropped below 100,000 for the first time in five
months amid increased collaboration by Mexico and Guatemala to crack
down on the flow of humanity, according to government data released
earlier this month.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
encountered 82,049 people in July, down 21 percent from June when there
were 104,344 people and down 43 percent from May. The number of families
and minors crossing the border also dropped.
Although seasonal declines are common, U.S. officials said the drop was far greater than last year's in the same timeframe.
To avoid punishing tariffs threatened by the Trump administration, Mexico agreed in June to dramatically expand its
border enforcement efforts. The country has employed a variety of tools
— including a giant X-ray and Mexican National Guard troops — to
uphold its end of the bargain and catch hundreds of migrants.
The U.S. has also escalated its domestic enforcement efforts. An operation carried out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement earlier this month resulted in the detention of 680 illegal immigrants. Agents targeted a food processing plant in Mississippi and swarmed the facility with federal search warrants in hand.
"The
execution of federal search warrants today was simply about enforcing
the rule of law in our state and throughout our great country," U.S.
Attorney Mike Hurst said in a statement at the time.
"I commend
these federal agents, our state and local law enforcement partners, and
our federal prosecutors for their professionalism and dedication to
ensure that those who violate our laws are held accountable."
2020 presidential hopeful Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., called the move a part of a "campaign of terror."
Acting
Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan emphasized last week that,
despite the successes, the situation remains an emergency.
“The
situation is improving by every available metric, but, and I want to be
very clear about this, we remain at and beyond crisis levels,” McAleenan
said. Fox News' Matt Leach and Nick Givas contributed to this report.
Liberal CNN
commentator Angela Rye had a fiery exchange with a
Republican strategist during a panel discussion Monday night, telling
him that "white men who think like you" are the "greatest terrorist threat in this country."
The conversation began when GOP campaign veteran Patrick Griffin argued that President Trump should "play the lottery" since Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., brought new attention to their relationship with Isreal.
However, Rye appeared to take offense after Griffin claimed that the "Squad" has "hijacked" the Democratic Party from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
“It’s
so interesting that you use the term — the only two Muslim women in
Congress, the term you chose to use, sir, is ‘hijacking,'” Rye said.
"It
has nothing to do with whether they're Muslim or not," Griffin
responded. "Nothing to do with that... They've hijacked from their own
principles."
“That’s a real interesting word choice, and you
understand why,” Rye talked over the panelist. “You can talk over me all
you want to but the bottom line is the greatest terrorist threat in
this country is white men, white men who think like you. That is the
greatest terrorist threat in this country.”
Griffin dismissed her remarks as "silly rhetoric."
"No,
it's not!" Rye shot back. "You know what's silly? The fact that you're
on here knowing how dangerous times are right now defending this
nonsense."
Fox News' Laura Ingraham took on members of the Democratic Party for what she said was "rooting against America" and disparaging supporters of President Trump, and said the left is largely "furious" they may lose the 2020 election to the New York Republican.
"Rooting
against America, referring to millions of voters as 'deplorables' or
'racists' or bigot-coddlers is not the language of a confident
optimistic party," she said Monday on "The Ingraham Angle."
"It is the language of people who are furious that they could lose another presidential election," she said.
Ingraham said Democrats were hoping former Special Counsel Robert Mueller would be a key figure in their attempts to damage the president, as the Russia investigation concluded.
"Trump's
reckoning -- they were confident -- would be delivered by the highly
respected prosecutor Bob Mueller. In other words, the 2020 election
would be a 'gimme' for any Democrat," she said.
More recently, Democrats have lodged racism claims against the president, she said.
"The
crestfallen Dems decided to go all-in on the race issue. "The Angle"
told you this would happen. Using bogus charges of racism, the left has a
goal of blunting any momentum the president may have with minority
voters in 2020."
"The president condemned white nationalists in Charlottesville and El Paso," she added. However, she pointed to three 2020 Democratic hopefuls who have invoked the race issue.
When a CNN anchor asked former Rep. Beto O'Rourke, D-Texas, whether the president is a "white nationalist," the ex-lawmaker answered in the affirmative.
In another interview, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee declared it is "time to get white nationalism out of the White House."
In Ingraham's third example, South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg was asked whether it is a "racist act" to vote for Trump in 2020.
The 37-year-old responded that "at best, it means looking the other way on racism."
Summing
up the clips, Ingraham said some of the commentaries from the left
shows Trump supporters are becoming occasional subjects of ridicule.
"The
new Democratic playbook requires the relentless demonization of
American history, including the founders, and now the American people
themselves -- at least the ones who support Trump."
Migrants return to Mexico using the Puerta Mexico bridge that
crosses the Rio Grande river in Matamoros, Mexico, July 31, 2019, on the
border with Brownsville, Texas. (AP Photo/Emilio Espejel)
CNN’s Scott Jennings once again took liberals to the cleaners on the Abrego Garcia case, the ‘Maryland man...
