MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell apologizes for unverified Trump-Russia report: 'We are retracting the story'

MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell kicked off his show Wednesday night by apologizing for running an unverified report that directly tied President Trump's finances to Russia, which he retracted.
"Last night on this show, I discussed information that wasn't ready for reporting," O'Donnell said. "I repeated statements a single source told me about the president's finances and loan documents with Deutsche Bank saying 'if true'-- as I discussed the information-- was simply not good enough. I did not go through the rigorous verification and standards process here at MSNBC before repeating what I heard from my source. Had it gone through that process, I would not have been permitted to report it. I should not have said it on-air or post it on Twitter. I was wrong to do so."
He went on to acknowledge the letter he and NBCUniversal received by Trump's legal counsel demanding a retraction and an apology for the "aforementioned false and defamatory" reporting and threatened to take legal action.
"This afternoon, attorneys for the president sent us a letter asserting the story is false. They also demanded a retraction. Tonight, we are retracting the story," O'Donnell continued. "We don't know whether the information is inaccurate. The fact is we do know it wasn't ready for broadcast and for that I apologize."
On Tuesday night, O’Donnell and fellow far-left MSNBC host Rachel Maddow discussed how Trump was “able to obtain loans when no one else would loan him any money” when he tossed out the unverified speculation.
“I may have some information, in this next hour, which would add a great deal to their understanding of that, if true, and I’ll be discussing it here,” O’Donnell said. "I stress ‘if true,’ because this is a single source who has told me that Deutsche Bank obtained tax returns… this single source close to Deutsche Bank has told me that Donald Trump’s loan documents there show that he has co-signers. That’s how he was able to obtain those loans and that the co-signers are Russian oligarchs."
A stunned Maddow leaned back in her chair and responded, “What? Really?”
O’Donnell added “that would explain every kind word Donald Trump has ever said about Russia and Vladimir Putin” if his information is accurate.
The "Last Word" host and MSNBC were widely panned by critics for running the story, calling it "grossly irresponsible." The White House blasted the report, pointing to "left-wing outlets" that have "weaponized the media.
“This is one of the reasons that a majority of Americans have lost trust in the media. Instead of applying ethics and standards to their reporting, journalists and left-wing outlets have weaponized the media, using it to attack and harass people with little to no regard for the truth,” White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham told Fox News.
O'Donnell took to Twitter earlier in the day and walked back the report, referring to it as an "error in judgment."
Fox News' Brian Flood contributed to this report.

Cartoons

President Trump nominates Eugene Scalia to Labor Secretary

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 3:20 PM PST – Tue. August 27, 2019

Longtime Labor Attorney Eugene Scalia is officially nominated to take over the role of White House labor secretary.

Eugene Scalia in 2012. Mr. Scalia, who was a top Labor Department lawyer in the George W. Bush administration, is a partner in the Washington office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.CreditCreditStephen Voss

President Trump made the decision Tuesday, tapping the son of late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Back in July, the president first voiced his intent to nominate Scalia to the position. The decision came in the wake of the resignation of Alexander Acosta, amid scrutiny over his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein plea deal in 2007.
Scalia was the top legal officer at the department, and a special assistant to Attorney General Barr during the George W. Bush administration.
Scalia will have his confirmation hearing when the Senate reconvenes after summer recess.

Barr books holiday party at Trump hotel, stoking ethics concerns ( he's using his own money)

At least he's not booking it in Mexico like the Democrats do!

Attorney General Bill Barr has booked a 200-person holiday party, complete with a four-hour open bar and buffet, at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., for Dec. 8 -- and though he's using his own money, the move is raising ethics concerns among some observers.
The Barr "Family Holiday Party" is expected to generate roughly $30,000 in revenue for the hotel, at a rate of some $135 per person plus $4,500 to rent the hotel's Presidential Ballroom, according to The Washington Post. The Post first reported on the arrangement on Tuesday.
Fox News later confirmed the details of Barr's contract with the Trump D.C. hotel. The shindig is not an official Justice Department event.
A DOJ official told Fox News that Barr initially booked the party at The Willard nearby, but the hotel later backed out because it had double-booked.
An administration source separately told The Post that the nearby Mayflower hotel was likewise unavailable.

The Trump International Hotel is slated to host the attorney general's holiday party on Dec. 8. (Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post via Getty Images, File)

"Career ethics officials were consulted and they determined that ethics rules did not prohibit him from hosting his annual party at the Trump hotel," the DOJ official told The Post.
Liz Hempowicz, the director of public policy at the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight, said in an interview with the paper that the contract was bothersome, if not technically a violation of ethics rules.
"It creates the appearance that high-level political appointees or allies of the president may feel like they need to spend money at the president’s businesses as a show of loyalty, and that is something that makes me deeply uncomfortable and should make taxpayers deeply uncomfortable," Hempowicz said.
Barr has become a target for congressional Democrats, many of whom have said he sought to play down former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's conclusions from a long-running probe of Russian election meddling and hasn't provided other records. House Democrats also voted to hold Barr in criminal contempt this past July for allegedly stonewalling their efforts to investigate why the Trump administration sought to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.
Republicans have pointed out that Barr has released virtually all of Mueller's report, save for some legally mandated redactions, and have slammed the census probe as "political theater" given the ongoing negotiations between Democrats and the DOJ over the document productions.
News of Barr's impending holiday bash came as Democrats' legal challenges against Trump's business interests have hit a major snag. Last week, a federal court judge ruled that Trump could challenge congressional Democrats' Emoluments Clause lawsuit against him immediately, saying the litigation raised the "unsettled" constitutional question of whether politicians had standing to sue a sitting president for running businesses catering to international clients.

The entrance to the Trump International Hotel in Washington. (AP, File)

Judge Emmet Sullivan, whom President Bill Clinton appointed, ruled this summer that the 200 congressional Democrats did have the legal standing to sue Trump. But the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back to Sullivan and instructed him to reconsider the unprecedented separation-of-powers implications of the case.
On further review, Sullivan, whom then-President Ronald Reagan had appointed to his first judgeship, rejected the Democrats' request to pursue discovery, including financial documents, from dozens of Trump's businesses.
Democrats also requested an immediate injunction barring Trump from making money on his international businesses, even as they acknowledged that the Trump Organization has already established a “voluntary procedure by which [it] identifies and donates to the U.S. Treasury profits from foreign government patronage at its hotels and similar businesses."
Instead, Sullivan allowed Trump the rare opportunity to pursue a so-called interlocutory, or mid-case, appeal, given the "substantial ground for difference of opinion" on whether the Democrats could sue the president on Emoluments Clause grounds.
A federal appeals court, earlier this year, dismissed a similar Emoluments Clause lawsuit filed against Trump by the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia.
"I got sued on a thing called emoluments. Emoluments. You ever hear of the word? Nobody ever heard of it before," Trump said at an event in Pennsylvania earlier this month.
"What it is, is presidential harassment, because this thing is costing me a fortune, and I love it," Trump went on. "I love it because I’m making the lives of other people much, much better."
Fox News' Jake Gibson contributed to this report.

Here’s why the House and Senate engage in a parliamentary dance during lengthy respites

The United States Senate is the only institution in the world which would wait two hours and 17 minutes to do something which lasts 32 seconds.
The Senate was supposed to meet in a brief “pro forma” session at 10 Tuesday morning. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) was scheduled to be the only senator present, perfunctorily gaveling the Senate to order and then gaveling out a few minutes later.
But Rubio was delayed. Only Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough and a few other Senate staffers milled about the chamber for the ensuing swatch of time, waiting dutifully for Florida’s senior senator to arrive.
Rubio finally materialized at 12:17 pm. He took his seat on the dais, received brief instructions from MacDonough and then clasped the hourglass-shaped ivory gavel. Rubio rapped the gavel once on the dais.
“The Senate will come to order and the clerk will read a communication to the Senate,” said Rubio.
A Senate clerk then announced that the Senate had in fact designated Rubio “under Rule I, Paragraph 3” to preside over the Senate Tuesday in his capacity as “a senator from the state of Florida.”
The clerk’s boilerplate proclamation about Rubio took more time than anything Rubio said.
“So under the previous order, the Senate stands adjourned until 5 pm on Friday, August 30th, 2019,” said Rubio.
The Florida Republican thumped the gavel again and the Senate concluded its day – two hours, 16 minutes and 28 seconds later than everyone thought Tuesday.
The House has been on the “August recess” since late July. The Senate started its recess a few days later earlier this month. Neither body is slated to return to a bona fide session until September 9. Yet, at least one lawmaker of the majority party has shown up at three-day intervals to perform this quick “gavel in, gavel out” exercise, which consumes about a half a minute in the Senate and only three or four minutes in the House.
There’s a reason why the House and Senate engage in this parliamentary dance during lengthy respites like August, in the spring, Thanksgiving, Christmas and around other holidays.
Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the House and Senate to meet every three days unless they have “Consent of the other” to not get together. If the House and Senate don’t want to convene every three days, both must approve what’s called an “adjournment resolution.” If the House and Senate okay the adjournment resolution, that’s it. Congress could be gone for weeks at a time without anyone showing up to hit the gavel.
It’s de rigueur these days for the House and Senate to eschew an adjournment resolution. Here’s why: Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the “Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate.” In other words, if the House and Senate were truly out of session for a prolonged period of time, President Trump could bypass the Senate’s confirmation process on everything from judges to cabinet officials to ambassadors. Those figures would then take office without the Senate’s “advice and consent.”
Democrats control the House now. So, as a defensive move, House Democrats won’t let the Senate adjourn for more than three days and refuses to approve an adjournment resolution. House Republicans took the same approach with President Obama when the GOP was in the majority some years ago.
That compels the House and Senate to huddle in these abridged meetings. After all, “pro forma” is Latin for “a matter of form.” The sessions look like regular get-togethers of the House and Senate. But they’re really not.
That said, it’s not unheard of for the House or Senate to actually conduct some legislative business during what at one point was designed to be a pro forma session. Such was the case earlier this year when the House attempted on three separate occasions to approve a disaster aid bill with just a skeleton staff on hand. The Senate had already passed the plan. The House just needed to sync up. But Reps. Chip Roy (R-TX), Thomas Massie (R-KY) and John Rose (R-TN) surfaced on different days to singularly block the efforts.
Marco Rubio isn’t the only lawmaker to find themselves running behind to preside. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) showed up 18 minutes late to do the honors for 34 seconds during an August 2017 pro forma confab. Paul was stuck in traffic. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) also had trouble getting to Washington for a pro forma session in 2016 following the Republican convention. Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) stood in for Lee.
Former Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) never made it to a 2008 pro forma session. The Senate allowed then-Secretary of the Senate Nancy Erickson to preside without a senator present. Fox is told that was an error. Such a figure like the Secretary of Senate might be permitted to preside, provided the Vice President or the President Pro Tempore of the Senate aren’t available. Vice President Pence is President of the Senate. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is the President Pro Tempore, the most senior member of the majority party.
Pro forma sessions sometimes give lawmakers a chance to score some press on important issues of the day.
There was wonder on Capitol Hill if House Democrats may try to do something around the House’s first pro forma session scheduled this month after the massacres in El Paso and Dayton. Rep. John Sarbanes (D-MD) was the lone Democrat to preside over the conclave. Sarbanes went through the standard patter of the pro forma session but made no mention of the shootings. Sarbanes did not address a small contingent of reporters afterward in the hall. Yet that night, the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) sent around a press release from the Congressman’s office. The statement proclaimed “Sarbanes Leads Call for Gun Safety Reform.” The release went on to say that “After Presiding Over the U.S. House of Representatives as Speaker Pro Tempore, Congressman Sarbanes Urged Majority Leader McConnell to Pass Bipartisan Gun Safety Measures.”
But, the Sarbanes statement was as “pro forma” as the session earlier in the day. The Congressman made no reference to the shootings from the dais and never spoke to reporters afterward.
So the pro forma sessions will continue. Just not this August and September – but likely into the future. And, they usually happen on time.

Trump mocks NYT's Bret Stephens: My resort doesn't have 'bedbugs,' but he's 'loaded up with them!'

President Trump slammed New York Times columnist Bret Stephens on Tuesday night, suggesting he's "loaded up" with bedbugs — not his properties.
After the president floated the idea of hosting next year's G-7 summit at his Doral resort outside of Miami, Fla., a report resurfaced that this resort had settled a lawsuit in 2017 after a New Jersey man named Eric Linder alleged he woke up one morning at Trump's property with bites all over his body.
Trump denied of having any bedbugs at his resort Tuesday morning, blaming "Radical Left Democrats" for spreading "nasty rumors."
However, the president took the opportunity on Tuesday night to repeat his denial about the alleged bedbug problem and hit one of his outspoken critics from the Times.
"A made up Radical Left Story about Doral bedbugs, but Bret Stephens is loaded up with them!" Trump tweeted. "Been calling me wrong for years, along with the few remaining Never Trumpers - All Losers!"
The op-ed columnist had been widely mocked after he responded to a Twitter user who jokingly referred to him as a bed bug in reaction to reports of a pest infestation at the Times newsroom.
"The bedbugs are a metaphor. The bedbugs are Bret Stephens," George Washington University associate professor Dave Karpf quipped.
This tweet apparently angered Stephens enough for him to email both Karpf and the GWU provost, which Karpf shared on Twitter Monday night.
"Someone just pointed out a tweet you wrote about me, calling me a 'bedbug,'" Stephens began the email. "I'm often amazed about the things supposedly decent people are prepared to say about other people – people they've never met – on Twitter. I think you've set a new standard."
The Times columnist went on to invite Karpf to his home, meet his wife and children, and then "call me 'bedbug' to my face."
"That would take some genuine courage and intellectual integrity on your part," Stephens told the college professor. "I promise to be courteous no matter what you have to say. Maybe it will make you feel better about yourself."
Stephens has since deactivated his Twitter account.

San Francisco Cartoons

G7 leaders agree on $20M wildfire aid package for Amazon countries

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 1:35 PM PT — Monday, August 26, 2019

A deal struck by international leaders at the G7 summit to develop a $20 million Amazon fund is met with lackluster support from Brazil. Shortly after French President Emmanuel Macron outlined the plan Monday, his Brazilian counterpart accused him of treating the country like a “colony.”
President Jair Bolsonaro, who’s been locked in a public dispute with Macron, said any joint plan about the region’s future should be made by the countries directly affected in order to protect their “sovereignty and natural wealth.”
“Do you think someone helps someone else to not be poor without something in return?” questioned the Brazilian leader. “Why do they have their eye on the Amazon, what do they want there?”
While Bolsonaro did not immediately clarify if he would cooperate with the plan, his environmental minister said the funding is “welcome.” A large amount of that money will go toward firefighting planes and military support on the ground.

French President Emmanuel Macron, right, and Chile’s President Sebastian Pinera attend a joint press conference that focused on climate during the G7 summit Monday, Aug. 26, 2019 in Biarritz. G-7 countries have agreed to an immediate $20 million fund to help Amazon countries fight wildfires. (AP Photo/Francois Mori, Pool)

“We think that we have to protect these real lungs of our world (the Amazon rainforest), and that’s why I’m very happy that we have been able to reach an agreement and go in support of those countries immediately,” stated Chilean President Sebastian Pinera.
While President Trump was unable to make the meeting in person due to a scheduling issue, Macron said the U.S. is completely on board with the Amazon deal.
“We had a discussion with President Trump, a long and very positive one, about the situation in the Amazon,” said Macron. “He shares the objectives that we are following and that have been reflected in this G7 summit initiative, so that is the first point.”
The second part of the agreement calls for a long-term plan for reforestation that would replenish biodiversity in areas destroyed by the fires. If the framework proves successful, the leaders expressed interest in applying it to Africa’s rainforests, which are also under threat from fires.

Firefighters work to put out fires in the Vila Nova Samuel region, along the road to the National Forest of Jacunda, near to the city of Porto Velho, Rondonia state, part of Brazil’s Amazon, Sunday, Aug. 25, 2019. Leaders of the Group of Seven nations said Sunday they were preparing to help Brazil fight the fires burning across the Amazon rainforest and repair the damage even as tens of thousands of soldiers were being deployed to fight the blazes that have caused global alarm. (AP Photo/Eraldo Peres)

Cal Thomas: San Francisco has a new definition of political insanity – (You won't believe this one)

In the summer of 2019, Fox News embarked on an ambitious project to chronicle the toll progressive policies has had on the homeless crisis in four west coast cities: Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Portland, Ore. In each city, we saw a lack of safety, sanitation, and civility. Residents, the homeless and advocates say they've lost faith in their elected officials' ability to solve the issue. Most of the cities have thrown hundreds of millions of dollars at the problem only to watch it get worse. This is what we saw in San Francisco.

San Francisco, a city described in song for its natural beauty, is descending into an abyss of homelessness, the use of sidewalks as toilets and a place you might not want to visit, much less live.
The latest, but surely not the last demonstration of insanity, is San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors' adoption of new “person first” language guidelines meant to “change the public’s perception of criminals.” The words “convicted felon,” “offender,” “convict,” “addict” and “juvenile delinquent” are out. These individuals will henceforth be referred to as a “justice-involved person.” Someone previously called a “criminal” will now be referred to as “a returning resident,” or “a formerly incarcerated person.”
Supervisor Matt Haney told the San Francisco Chronicle the intent is to keep people from being “forever labeled for the worst things that they have done. We want them, ultimately to become contributing citizens, and referring to them as felons is like a scarlet letter that they can never get away from.”
A noble objective, to be sure, but language has — or used to have — a purpose beyond interpersonal communication. Like so much else today, language has now been appropriated to advance political agendas.
The encroachment of euphemisms on common sense is everywhere. Illegal immigrants have become “undocumented workers.” Babies in the womb lose their humanity when they are labeled “fetuses.”
Euphemisms are most used to hide a more accurate description of behavior or status in order to avoid conflict, or not injure someone who might be offended or hurt. It fails to communicate anything meaningful, while claiming to do so. George Orwell called it “Newspeak,” or “doublespeak.”
Too often, euphemisms are used to make bad behavior appear good, or at least tolerable, and to allow one to avoid responsibility and accountability. They are interpreted according to one’s personal wishes. As Humpty Dumpty told Alice in the Lewis Carroll classic: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”
The English language once conveyed meaning. Properly written and spoken, it suggested one was educated and capable of conversing in polite company. Today, it is often used to cover up true intentions. Consider how often “racism” is misapplied.
The proper use of language can also be redemptive. That used to be a major goal, along with punishment, of penitentiaries — the word being derived from “penitent,” suggesting the possibility of changing one’s life after admitting wrongdoing and repenting so as not to repeat bad behavior. Is anything “bad” today, or has that also become subjective?
In our muddled language and culture, one dare not suggest anyone has done anything wrong lest negative labels be attached to them. Such labels are unevenly applied. The political left often retains them to attack the right, but should the right seek to use words that accurately describe the conduct or status of another they are condemned as old-fashioned, rigid, judgmental, or worse.
“Wardrobe malfunction,” has been a recent favorite, a euphemism for showing off what were once considered “private” body parts.
If you are unemployed, you are “between jobs” or a “consultant.” “Underserved community” means the politicians aren’t getting all the money they want. A corollary: you are no longer poor, you are “economically disadvantaged.” The list is endless.
Instead of applying euphemisms, San Francisco should be seeing to the homeless ("previously housed individuals"?) and the filthy streets that now require maps so people can avoid stepping in human waste.
Tony Bennett may have left his heart in San Francisco, but the city seems to have lost its mind there too.

'Rude and cranky' Bernie Sanders loses San Francisco restaurant owner's vote: report

The owner of a San Francisco restaurant famous for hosting politicians claimed Sen. Bernie Sanders lost his vote in the 2020 presidential election after the Vermont Democrat was “rude and cranky” to his servers, a report said.
John Konstin, who owns the 111-year-old John’s Grill, told Politico many Democrats dined at his bistro while the Democratic National Committee was in town for a three-day event over the weekend.  Sanders arrived for dinner with about 15 members of his campaign team and was not nice to any of the staff and didn’t want to shake hands or have his picture taken, he added.
“It was all very nice, except for cranky Bernie,” Konstin told Politico. "I think he was just hungry and didn't want to be a politician. He lost my vote."
Sanders’ campaign did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News. Lee Housekeeper, the media contact for John's Grill, told SFGATE.com that it’s uncharacteristic for Konstin to speak ill of his restaurant patrons.
"Bernie had to be in a terrible mood," Housekeeper said. "Anyone in the public eye needs to understand when it's time to order room service."
Konstin told Politico that staff waiting on other Democrats, including one large party with the Secretary of State of California Alex Padilla, Lieutenant Governor of California Eleni Kounalakis, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, had a more pleasant experience. He described Pelosi as “pure class.”
John's Grill opened its doors in 1908 and was famously featured in Dashiell Hammett's 1930 noir film "The Maltese Falcon," SFGATE.com reported. The restaurant is popular among politicos and has pictures of politicians who’ve visited the establishment hanging on its wooden walls.
Thirteen presidential candidates attended the DNC meeting in San Francisco over the weekend. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., dined out with her staff at San Francisco’s Ayala restaurant in the Union Square Hotel when she visited the city in June, SFGate.com reported.
"She was absolutely wonderful and came into our kitchen," Ayala General Manager Alexandra Loulias told the website. "So complimentary of our staff. She took individual photos with everyone. Just the nicest lady."