McConnell promises vote on ending shutdown by 1 a.m. Monday

Day One of a government shutdown, filled with increasingly angry finger pointing from both Democrats and Republicans, appeared to produce little Saturday in terms of a potential solution for the impasse on how to fund the government.

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell insisted that a vote to break a Democratic filibuster on a short-term spending bill to reopen the government would happen by 1 a.m. Monday.

"I asked for consent to move up a vote on this bipartisan solution and end this craziness. The Democrats objected," McConnell said late Saturday, Roll Call reported. "That won't work forever. If they continue to object, we cannot proceed to a cloture vote until 1 a.m. Monday.
"But I assure you," McConnell added, "we will have the vote at 1 a.m. Monday, unless there is a desire to have it sooner."
After ending talks Saturday, the Senate planned to reconvene at 1 p.m. Sunday, Roll Call reported.
The shutdown kicked in late Friday into Saturday after Senate Democrats blocked a 28-day resolution to keep the government open. The bill would have funded the government, and included a six-year extension of funding for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). But Democrats rejected it, as it did not include a legislative fix for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
That Obama-era program, which offered protection for illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, was repealed by President Donald Trump in September, with a March deadline for Congress to come up with a fix. While separate bipartisan immigration talks had been underway, Democrats demanded a DACA fix as part of the continuing resolution (CR) -- requiring Republicans to try in vain to cobble together the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
The subsequent 50-49 vote broke largely along party lines, with five Republicans voting no, and five Democrats voting yes.
On Saturday, although both the House and the Senate were in session, both sides seemed more focused on pushing their respective narratives about who was to blame for the crisis.
When McConnell, R-Ky, addressed lawmakers Saturday evening, he urged his Democratic counterpart, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, to withdraw his filibuster so that members could pass the short-term spending bill and reopen the government.
McConnell said the shutdown was not a crisis, but rather a “manufactured crisis” by the Senate Democrats.

Democrats are holding our Military hostage over their desire to have unchecked illegal immigration. Can’t let that happen!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 20, 2018

Through Day One, Democrats pointed fingers at Republicans, arguing that they could not blame Democrats for the shutdown at a time when the GOP has control of the House, the Senate and the White House.
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., took aim at Trump, saying he had earned an F for "failure in leadership." She said Republicans are "so incompetent and negligent that they couldn't get it together to keep the government open."
“Happy anniversary, Mr. President,” Pelosi said. “You wanted a shutdown. The shutdown is all yours.”
Schumer said on the Senate floor that in a White House meeting Friday, he offered Trump funding for a border wall with Mexico in exchange for a DACA fix. He claimed that Trump seemed open to a deal but that the president made further demands hours later that Schumer said were "off the table."
“Republican leadership can't get its tumultuous president on board with anything,” Schumer said. “The breakdown of compromise is poisoning this Congress and it all comes down to President Trump.”
Republicans, for their part, blasted Democrats for what they saw as holding the government “hostage” over illegal immigration. White House Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short accused Democrats of having a “2-year-old temper tantrum.”
Trump accused the Democrats of “holding our Military hostage” over their desire for “unchecked illegal immigration.”
What's more, the White House pushed back against Schumer's account of the Trump meeting. Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said at a briefing that Schumer had in fact offered only $1.8 billion in funding for the wall, far short of the roughly $20 billion Trump wanted. Mulvaney said Schumer still told Trump that he was giving him everything he wanted.
“Does it even become profitable to work with someone like that?” Mulvaney asked reporters.
A sign of the bitterness of the blame game came from the White House comments line, where a voicemail blamed Democrats for users being unable to use the line.
“Thank you for calling the White House, unfortunately, we cannot answer your call today because congressional Democrats are withholding government funding, including funding for our troops and other national security priorities, hostage to an unrelated immigration debate. Due to this obstruction, our government is shut down,” the voicemail said.
As evening rolled around, there seemed to be little sign of a break. Fox News was told that a Senate Democratic caucus meeting resulted in a caucus more unified and locked in, with Democrats only willing to support a CR that would fund the government for a few days.
On the Republican side, Fox News was told that there was a good chance McConnell would try a vote on a CR that would fund the government to Feb. 8 -- less time than the initial 28-day CR.
The White House also buckled in, saying it would not negotiate on DACA until the government was funded.
“The White House position remains the same, that we will not negotiate the status of 690,000 unlawful immigrants while hundreds of millions of taxpaying Americans, including hundreds of thousands of our troops in uniform and border agents protecting our country, are held hostage by Senate Democrats,” Short said.

Government Shutdown Cartoons

A look back at every government shutdown in U.S. history

The government has shut down a total of 18 times since Congress introduced the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act, which established the federal budget process in 1976. Half of those shutdowns occurred over a weekend.
"I call them 'fake shutdowns,'" Marc Goldwein, senior policy director of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget – a bipartisan, nonprofit organization that educates the public on fiscal policy issues – told Fox News. “Most shutdowns occur over the course of a weekend. We’re talking days or weeks – not months.”
But there has been a handful of lengthy government shutdowns in the history of the U.S. According to data from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), six shutdowns in the past four decades lasted more than 10 days.
However, Goldwein says, only three of those shutdowns are significant.
Two occurred during the Clinton administration in the winter of 1995 to 1996 when former President Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress were at odds and shut the government down for a total of 26 days, Goldwein said.
The third occurred during the Obama administration in 2013. A stalemate between the House and Senate led to a 16-day hiatus.
Here’s a look back at every government shutdown in the history of the U.S.

President Gerald Ford

When: Thursday, Sept. 30 to Monday, Oct. 10, 1976
Duration: 10 days
The first partial shutdown occurred under Gerald Ford’s presidency when Ford vetoed a $56 billion spending bill for the Departments of Labor and Health, Education and Welfare, according to a 1976 report from The New York Times.
This was the year the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act became law, allowing Congress to take an extension, known as a continuing resolution (CR).

President Jimmy Carter

When: Friday, Sept. 30 to Thursday, Oct. 13, 1977
Duration: 12 days
When: Monday, Oct. 31 to Wednesday, Nov. 9, 1977
Duration: 8 days
When: Wednesday, Nov. 30 to Friday, Dec. 9, 1977
Duration: 8 days
There were three shutdowns, referred to as the "abortion shutdowns," in the late 1970s under the presidency of Jimmy Carter. The Democratic party may have dominated both the House and the Senate, but they couldn't get Republicans on board when it came to using Medicaid to pay for abortions.
When: Saturday, Sept. 30 to Wednesday, Oct. 18, 1978
Duration: 17 days
In 1978, Carter vetoed a $37 billion defense authorization bill, which included a $2 billion nuclear-powered Nimitz-class aircraft carrier -- equipment he didn't consider essential to national security, The Washington Post reported. This led to the second largest shutdown in the history of the nation.
When: Sunday, Sept. 30 to Friday, Oct. 12, 1979
Duration: 11 days
Another funding gap took place a year later when the House and Senate disagreed over raising pay by 5.5 percent for members of Congress and senior civil servants, The Washington Post reported. And there was yet again another debate over abortion funding.

President Ronald Reagan

When: Friday, Nov. 20 to Monday, Nov. 23, 1981
Duration: 2 days
President Ronald Reagan vetoed a spending bill because it didn't make enough cuts.
When: Thursday, Sept. 30 to Saturday, Oct. 2, 1982
Duration: 1 day
The government shut down for one day when Congress failed to pass the spending bill on time.
When: Friday, Dec. 17 to Tuesday, Dec., 21, 1982
Duration: 3 days
Both the House and Senate wanted to increase public works spending in order to create more jobs -- a move Reagan opposed. The House also opposed MX missile funding, which, The Washington Post noted, was a "major defense priority" of Reagan's.
When: Thursday, Nov. 10 to Monday, Nov. 14, 1983
Duration: 3 days
Reagan argued over the Democratic-controlled House's proposed foreign aid and spending cuts and their plea for an increase in funding for education. At the same time, Reagan was pushing for more funding for the MX missile.
Eventually, both parties reached an agreement.
When: Sunday, Sept. 30 to Wednesday, Oct. 3, 1984
Duration: 2 days
In short, Reagan agreed to the House's proposed crime-fighting package, but he opposed their water projects package.
"Reagan offered to forgo his crime bill in exchange for junking the water package...but a deal wasn't reached in time to avoid a brief shutdown," The Washington Post reported.
When: Wednesday, Oct. 3 to Friday, Oct. 5, 1984
Duration: 1 day
Lawmakers reportedly needed another day to discuss the spending bill.
When: Thursday, Oct. 16 to Saturday, Oct. 18, 1986
Duration: 1 day
The Democratic-controlled House was once again in disagreement with Reagan and the Republican-controlled Senate. This time, over a welfare package deal.
When: Friday, Dec. 18 to Sunday, Dec. 20, 1987
Duration: 1 day
Reagan and Democrats couldn't agree on funding for Nicaraguan "Contra" militants. Democrats also pushed to reinstate the "Fairness Doctrine," which required licensed broadcasters to give equal air time for people with competing political points of view.

President George H.W. Bush

When: Friday, Oct. 5 to Tuesday, Oct. 9, 1990
Duration: 3 days
Only one shutdown took place during George H.W. Bush’s presidency. It occurred in October 1990 after Bush vetoed a stopgap spending bill, The New York Times reported at the time.
But the timing was right. The shutdown happened over Columbus Day weekend and most federal workers were already off for the holiday.

President Bill Clinton

When: Monday, Nov. 13 to Sunday, Nov. 19, 1995
Duration: 5 days
President Bill Clinton vetoed a continuing resolution in November 1995 over Medicare premium increases.
"The government is partially shutting down because Congress has failed to pass the straightforward legislation necessary to keep the government running without imposing sharp hikes in Medicare premiums and deep cuts in education and the environment," Clinton said during an address on Nov. 14, 1995.
When: Friday, Dec. 15, 1995, to Saturday, Jan. 6, 1996
Duration: 21 days
It's the longest shutdown in U.S. history: 21 days.
The government shut down after Clinton vetoed the spending bill proposed by the Republican-controlled Congress.
After a long 22 days, the president and Congress agreed to a seven year budget plan, which included "modest spending cuts and tax increases," according to research by the Regional Oral History Office at the University of California, Berkeley.

President Barack Obama

When: Monday, Sept. 30 to Thursday, Oct. 17, 2013
Duration: 16 days
Seventeen years later, the government shut down once again. Lawmakers couldn't seem to come to an agreement on the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, in 2013.
The House passed several versions of the bill to fund the government. But each time, the Senate sent it back.
“This is an unnecessary blow to America,” Harry Reid, the Senate democratic leader at the time, said of the shutdown.
John Boehner, the House speaker during the shutdown, said Republicans were fighting to keep the government open, but the Senate "continued to reject our offers.”

Trump administration to revoke Obama-era policy for abortion providers

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced Friday that it would revoke an Obama-era “legal guidance” that discouraged states from defunding organizations, such as Planned Parenthood, that provide abortion services.  

According to officials who spoke with Reuters, HHS will implement new regulations aimed at protecting health care workers’ civil rights based on religious and conscience objections.

HHS said the changes were necessary after years of the federal government forcing health care workers to provide services like abortion, euthanasia, and sterilization.
The Obama-era guidance restricted states’ ability “to take certain actions against family-planning providers that offer abortions,” according to a statement by HHS.
Medicaid is funded by both state and federal taxes. But under federal law, Medicaid is prohibited from funding abortion services. Abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood receive funding for abortions from other sources.
Critics derided the HHS measure as the Trump administration’s latest effort to dismantle President Barack Obama’s legacy.
Friday's HHS announcement coincided with the 45th annual "March for Life." The event is held every year by pro-life protesters on the anniversary of the 1973 Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion across the country.

Do Democrats really care about Dreamers? No, they will do anything to score political points

Democrats are threatening to shut down the federal government, refusing to pass a spending bill unless it contains a path to legal status for the so-called “Dreamers” protected under President Obama’s DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program.

Are the Democrats really concerned with the status of these young people brought to the U.S. illegally as children, or with reforming our broken immigration system? No. They are trying to score political points.

Let’s review:
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., recently went to a closed-door meeting at the White House to push his immigration plan. He was so genuinely intent on getting a bipartisan deal done to save the Dreamers that he torpedoed the entire undertaking by running to the microphones and claiming President Trump’s made a “racist” comment about “s---hole” countries.
Does that make any sense? No, it does not.
Durbin knew full well when he made his accusation that President Trump used such vulgar language that a media firestorm would be unleashed. He was betting that if the talks broke down, and Congress failed to resolve the Dreamer issue, President Trump would be blamed.
That, to Durbin and his Democratic colleagues – Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California – is much, much more important than actually lifting the cloud of uncertainty that hovers over the heads of the so-called Dreamers.
Here is the reality: Democrats are scared to death that a Republican Congress and a Republican president may actually effect some reform of our flawed immigration system. They have pursued the Hispanic community vigorously for many years, seeking to solidify their support within the country’s fastest growing demographic.
Part of the Democratic strategy has been to demonize the GOP as racist and anti-immigrant. Trump’s candidacy and his careless comments about Mexicans greased the skids.
In their eagerness to curry favor with Hispanics, Democrats have increasingly abandoned their earlier professed support for secure borders. Though they continue to pay lip service to protecting against illegal immigration, many have opposed the use of E-verify and other approaches that might reduce the allure of entering the U.S. without authorization.
The Democrats have also encouraged the spread of sanctuary cities, where local governments limit their cooperation with federal officials on the enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. And they just hate Trump’s proposed wall along our southern border.
Now many Democrats are insisting they will not vote for a spending bill needed to keep government operating beyond Friday night unless it includes a lopsided DACA fix proposed by Senators Durbin and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., which allows Dreamers a path to legal status but skimps on border enforcement.
Though nearly everyone supports protecting Dreamers against deportation, Republicans and the White House want to couple that with enhanced border security, to make sure that what some are calling “amnesty” does not result in great numbers of new people flooding in without permission. 
Democrats are taking a risk. Most Americans are compassionate and welcoming to immigrants, recognizing the invaluable contributions of those who have come to the U.S. from other nations legally.
But, at the same time, most Americans favor border enforcement. Hillary Clinton found that out the hard way, when WikiLeaks exposed her making this comment in 2013: "My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, sometime in the future.…”
Those remarks gave candidate Trump the ammunition he needed to paint his opponent as weak on protecting our borders; it didn’t help that the lines came from a paid speech Clinton made to a Brazilian bank.
Polling has shown that 65 percent of Americans favor coupling legal status for the Dreamers with tougher immigration enforcement. Some 79 percent of those surveyed think employers should have to verify the legal status of their workers, for instance. Democrats balking at such a compromise are on the wrong side of this issue.
Many in the liberal media argue that the GOP will be blamed for any spending impasse that forces a government shutdown, since Republicans have a majority in both houses of Congress and occupy the White House. But Americans understand that passing a budget requires 60 votes in the Senate, which Republicans do not have. Republicans will need at least 10 Democratic votes.
Democrats are in a pickle. They can anger the nation by blocking a proposed spending resolution that lacks a DACA fix but that would fund our military and provide a six-year extension of the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program. Or they can infuriate Hispanics by keeping the federal lights on and working to resolve the Dreamer problem as part of a broader immigration package.
Latinos do not look to Republicans to fix this problem; they expect Democrats to do so. It isn’t the office of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that has attracted a protest demonstration by immigration activists – it is Chuck Schumer’s.
Everyone wants changes to our immigration system, including the White House. And nearly everyone wants to protect the Dreamers. There’s lots of room to negotiate, and President Trump has signaled support for a compromise.
But a compromise – a win – on immigration would be another nightmare for Democrats. The optics of President Trump hosting a signing ceremony in the White House to celebrate passage of an immigration bill, which has eluded the past several presidents, would be unimaginably valuable for Republicans as we approach the November elections.
A new immigration law would be almost as valuable for Republicans as the millions of workers getting bonuses and wage hikes because of the GOP tax bill that President Trump signed into law.
A few more wins and Democrats are going to have a hard time persuading voters that President Trump and a Republican Congress aren’t indeed Making America Great Again.

Democrats Schumer, Pelosi quick to blame Trump after Senate fails to avert shutdown

After a midnight deadline came and went Friday night in a bid to avert a government shutdown, Democrats in Washington were quick to assign blame.

“There’s no one more to blame for the position we find ourselves than President Trump," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on the Senate floor early Saturday. "Instead of bringing us all together, he’s pulled us apart.”

Throughout his speech, Schumer used the phrase “Trump Shutdown” -- an apparent reaction to the Republicans' insistence during the week that any shutdown should be labeled a "Schumer Shutdown."
Tom Perez, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, also saw responsibility lying with the president -- but also with other Republican leaders.
“What a massive failure of leadership. Donald Trump, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and Republican lawmakers pulled out all the stops to give a massive tax break to their wealthy donors, but now that it’s time to take care of the rest of America they can’t get their act together," Perez said in a statement.
"The American people clearly want Congress to take care of veterans, combat the opioid crisis, ensure children have long-term access to health care, and protect Dreamers. Instead, Republican leaders have pushed our government into a needless shutdown. This is Trump’s Republican Party: chaotic, destructive and driven by greed. Voters won’t forget who the GOP truly cares about on Election Day.”
In her response, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi quoted President Trump as having said that "our country needs a good shutdown."
"There is no such thing as a good shutdown of government," Pelosi responded. "Republicans’ total inability to govern is once again threatening our economy, weakening communities, and dangerously depriving the military of the certainty they need to keep our nation safe.
“I am proud of House and Senate Democrats’ unity in insisting on a budget that supports our military and the domestic investments that keep our nation strong, and that honors our values by protecting the DREAMers.
“I hope that we can now conduct bipartisan negotiations where we find our common ground to honor our responsibility to meet the needs of the American people.”
U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J. -- who earlier in the week took criticism for his questioning of Homeland Security Secretary Kristjen Nielsen during a Senate hearing -- tweeted that Republicans had "failed" the American people.
"(A)nd now the American people will suffer," Booker concluded.
Republicans control the Senate 51-49. The GOP needed 60 votes to pass a temporary spending plan late Friday to avert a shutdown, but the tally was 50-49. Five Democrats voted in favor of the measure. Five Republicans voted against it.
The Senate adjourned early Saturday, with plans to resume negotiations later in the day in hopes of reaching a spending agreement and ending the shutdown.

Dems deserve blame for 'Schumer Shutdown,' GOP leaders say

Republican leaders blamed their Democratic counterparts after the Senate failed to pass a spending bill by midnight Friday to avert a government shutdown.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the GOP needed 60 votes to pass a measure that would have kept the government running until mid-February, but not enough Democrats went along with the plan. The tally was 50-49, with five Democrats voting in favor of the measure and five Republicans voting against it.

“Most of the stuff we agree on. One reason we ended up here, the shoehorning of illegal immigration into this debate,” McConnell said after the vote failed, adding that the Senate would resume talks later Saturday to prevent a prolonged shutdown.
At the center of the soured negotiations was the Obama-era DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program, which has protected some young immigrants from deportation.
After the Senate adjourned for the evening, McConnell underscored that the shutdown was “avoidable,” while calling the Democrats' decision to filibuster “irresponsible.”
On Twitter, McConnell, R-Ky., singled out Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., claiming he “doesn’t even have an immigration bill.”
“The facts before us are simple. Right now, the Democratic leader has no compromise immigration bill on the table. No bill exists,” McConnell tweeted. Why do Americans need to suffer from a government shutdown when he doesn’t even have an immigration bill?”

"Right now, the Democratic leader has no compromise immigration bill on the table. No bill exists. Why do Americans need to suffer from a government shutdown when he doesn’t even have an immigration bill?”

On Friday, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders had labeled the potential disruption of government services a “Schumer Shutdown,” in a statement Friday, faulting Democrats for behaving like “obstructionist losers” who put “politics above our national security, military families, vulnerable children, and our country’s ability to serve all Americans.”
Vice President Mike Pence echoed those sentiments in a Tweet late Friday night.
"Rather than solve problems, Democratic leadership preferred a shutdown that has dangerous consequences for our national defense. Their action tonight – or lack thereof – is unconscionable," Pence said.
Tweeting before the vote, President Donald Trump suggested Democrats wanted a shutdown in an effort to “diminish the great success of the Tax Cuts,” with a pessimistic undertone that doubted a deal could be reached in time.
House Speaker Paul Ryan called the Democrats' decision to block a four-week stopgap extension “reckless.”
“Senate Democrats have let down our troops, our children, and all Americans. All of this is just unnecessary. It is reckless. Senate Democrats have brought us to a shutdown,” Ryan said in a statement posted to Twitter.
However, during his closing remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer said no one deserves the blame more than Trump. Schumer claimed that Democrats were willing to compromise with the White House on a U.S.-Mexico border wall in exchange for DACA protection policies.
The spin from both sides was intended to aid the prospects of candidates facing re-election in 2018.
For now, the military, health inspectors and law enforcement were all scheduled to work without pay, while the brunt of the shutdown won’t be felt until Monday as hundreds of thousands of federal employees are set to be furloughed if a deal isn't reached over the weekend.
The Senate planned to reconvene Saturday afternoon, in hopes of reaching a bipartisan agreement to prevent of prolonged shutdown. McConnell has filed a procedure to introduce another short-term spending bill that would fund the government through Feb. 8, but the earliest the Senate could hold a vote would be Monday.
If the Senate bill passes, it would then return to the House for a reconciliation vote.

Border Wall Cartoons

Grade school's anti-border wall posters describe police as predators

At first glance, the posters displayed inside classrooms at El Camino del Rio/River Road Elementary School seemed innocuous.

"Immigrants Welcome," the posters read.

Click here for a free subscription to Todd's weekly newsletter - a must-read for Conservatives!
But there was more. There was a drawing that included wire cutters and a barbed-wire fence. And there was more writing:
"The border is not a wall - it's a system of control. It doesn't protect people; it pits them against each other. It doesn't foster togetherness; it breeds resentment. It doesn't keep out predators; it gives them badges and guns," the posters read. "The border does not divide one world from another. There is only one world, and the border is tearing it apart."
Eugene, Ore. radio station KLCC reports there was also a website address on the posters -- directing readers to a pro-anarchist website called, "Crimethinc.com.
Crimethinc describes itself as a "rebel alliance" and an "international network of aspiring revolutionaries extending from Kansas to Kuala Lumpur."
The organization is a "secret society pledged to the propagation of crimethink."
So why would teachers at an elementary school expose children to a self-proclaimed "international network of aspiring revolutionaries?"
Continue reading at ToddStarnes.com.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary. His latest book is “The Deplorables’ Guide to Making America Great Again.” Follow him on Twitter @ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

Trump DOJ asks Supreme Court to overturn DACA ruling

The Department of Justice on Thursday formally asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a lower court’s ruling to block, in part, the Trump administration’s decision to phase out the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals program.
The unusual step bypasses the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which would have been the normal move to overturn U.S. District Judge William Alsup’s ruling.
Last week, the San Francisco-based judge ordered the Trump administration to renew parts of DACA and start accepting renewal applications from those already part of the program while related lawsuits make their way through the legal system. However, Alsup did not demand that new applications be accepted.
On Tuesday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Alsup’s ruling “defies both law and common sense” and said the department’s Supreme Court request would happen by week's end.
DACA, which impacts roughly 700,000 people dubbed “Dreamers,” had been set to expire March 5 after Sessions announced in September the Trump administration was rescinding the Obama-era program.

House panel releases Glenn Simpson testimony transcript

The co-founder of the opposition research firm Fusion GPS told the House Intelligence Committee this past November that "people were arrested or died mysteriously" after the existence of the now-infamous "Trump-Russia dossier" was made public.

However, Glenn Simpson did not say whether those affected actually contributed information to the unverified dossier, which was compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele and which BuzzFeed published in January of last year.

"I do believe there was a bit of an old-fashioned purge," Simpson told the committee, before adding, " to my knowledge, it wasn't anyone that helped us. I think it was more likely people who were taking the opportunity to settle scores or were falsely accused ... and/or were sources of the U.S. Intelligence Community, not us."
'SOMEBODY'S ALREADY BEEN KILLED' BECAUSE OF TRUMP DOSSIER, FUSION GPS REP REVEALED
In August, Simpson's attorney told the Senate Judiciary Committee that "somebody's already been killed" as a result of the dossier's publication, but did not identify who the person was.
The Committee voted unanimously Thursday to released the transcript of Simpson's six-hour Nov. 14 appearance before the committee, one of three congressional panels investigating Russian actions during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

CLICK TO READ THE FULL TRANSCRIPT
Simpson told the committee that he and Steele began shopping the dossier to media outlets in late October of 2016, after then-FBI Director James Comey announced that the Bureau was re-opening the investigation into Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's private email server. He said he was "angry" that Comey, in Simpson's view, had "violated the sort of one of the more sacrosanct policies, which is not announcing law enforcement activity in the closing days of an election."

"We decided that if James Comey wasn't going to tell people about this investigation ... we would only be fair if the world knew that both candidates were under FBI investigation," Simpson said.
However, Simpson denied that Fusion GPS leaked the dossier to BuzzFeed and told the committee he was "not happy" when it was published.
"I was very upset," he said. "I thought it was a very dangerous thing and that someone had violated my confidences."

In his testimony, Simpson described how Fusion GPS was retained by Perkins Coie, a law firm representing the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign, in the summer of 2016. He said the committee was paid a "flat fee" of $50,000 per month, plus expenses to research Trump on the Democrats' behalf.
"I'd say, in general, we were the architects of the research and we made most of the decisions about what to look for and where to look," he said.
Simpson also detailed facts Fusion GPS claimed to have uncovered about the president while the firm was contracted by the conservative Washington Free Beacon to do research on then-candidate Trump and other GOP contenders for the White House.
CONSERVATIVE WEBSITE FUNDED INITIAL FUSION GPS TRUMP OPPOSITION EFFORT
"Various [Russian] criminals were buying [Trump] properties," said Simpson, identifying one by the underworld name Taiwanchik. "I think he was running a -- his associates were living in Trump Tower, ·and he was running a high-stakes gambling ring out of Trump Tower, while he himself was a fugitive for having rigged the skating competition at the [2002] Salt Lake Olympics and a bunch of other sporting events."
"When Mr. Trump went to the Miss Universe pageant [in Moscow] in 2013," Simpson added, "Taiwanchik was there in the VIP section with Mr. Trump and lots of other Kremlin biggies."
The dossier made headlines for its salacious claims about Trump's sexual proclivities, but Simpson denied that the firm had wanted to investigate Trump's sex life, saying he "just didn't think it was a useful subject to investigate."

However, he added that the existence of such claims "is a big deal for Chris Steele ... This is something he has dealt with his entire adult life.
"So I can't tell you he wasn't looking·for that, because it was probably something that was among the things that he would have asked someone to check," Simpson said.
The committee's top Democrat, California Rep. Adam Schiff, said in a statement that Simpson had made "serious allegations that the Trump Organization may have engaged in money laundering with Russian nationals ..."
"Mr. Simpson ... testified that if the Trump Organization did engage in money laundering with the Russians, it would be with the knowledge or approval of the Kremlin and constitute powerful leverage over the President of the United States," Schiff added.
At one point during the committee interview, Simpson was asked the central question at the heart of the congressional investigations and that of special counsel Robert Mueller -- whether the Trump campaign had coordinated with Russia to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

Simpson did not say yes or no, but said the patterns of behavior that emerged from the investigation raise questions.

"I think that the evidence that has developed over the last year, since President Trump took office, is that there is a well-established pattern of surreptitious contacts that occurred last year that supports the broad allegation of some sort of an undisclosed political or financial relationship between the Trump Organization and people in Russia," Simpson said.

In Chile, pope met by protests, threats, burned churches

SANTIAGO, Chile –  As he does during every papal visit, Pope Francis produced plenty of surprises in Chile: He married a couple during a flight, stopped his motorcade to help a fallen police officer and wept with victims of sex abuse by priests.
But the pope also faced protests and a level of hostility unheard of in modern times for a papal visit. Anti-pope protests had to be broken up with tear gas, attackers burned at least 11 Roman Catholic Churches and pamphlets were found threatening Francis that the "next bomb would be in your cassock."
"This kind of violence during a papal visit is absolutely unprecedented. And Chile is historically a very solidly Catholic nation," said Andrew Chesnut, the Catholic Studies chair at Virginia Commonwealth University.
It remains to be seen whether the friction in Chile was a fluke or a harbinger of what to expect in future papal trips.
The neighboring country of Peru, where Francis went Thursday, isn't taking any chances. Authorities have banned demonstrations because they "impact the image of the country," police spokeswoman Veronica Marquez said.
Papal visits sometimes attract demonstrations. In 2010, thousands in London protested the visit of Pope Benedict XVI, condemning his stance on condoms, women's rights and homosexuality, among other things. But the ferocity and firebombing of churches in Chile went beyond anything in modern memory.
"These violent acts may be a first in the history of the 'traveling papacy,'" said Massimo Faggioli, a theology professor at Villanova University in Philadelphia. "It is striking also because Latin America is supposed to be friendly territory for Francis" — the first pope from the region.
Chile has changed radically, from its economy to politics, in less than a generation. Those changes, combined with a pedophile priest scandal and what many argue was a bungled response by the church, has accelerated a move away from Catholicism. Last year, 45 percent of Chileans identified as Catholic, a sharp drop in just a decade from the mid-60s, according to Latinobarometro's annual poll.
One of the pope's sharply contested decisions — to appoint a Chilean bishop with close ties to the country's most notorious pedophile priest — soured many on the visit before it even began.
A few days before Francis arrived, a group angry about the cost of the papal visit briefly occupied the Nunciature in Santiago where the pope would sleep.
The same day, several churches were burned. Over the next couple of days during the pope's visit, several more churches were torched, along with three helicopters.
It was unclear who was behind the arson attacks. Outside some of the churches, pamphlets were found supporting the cause of indigenous Mapuche. Pamphlets outside one threatened the pope.
The Mapuche, Chile's largest indigenous group, are fighting for a return of ancestral lands, recognition of their language and an end to discrimination.
Much of Francis' trip was dedicated to the conflict. During his homily Wednesday in the heart of Mapuche territory, he took both the Mapuche and Chilean officials to task, calling for a halt to violence and for government engagement that goes beyond just "elegant" agreements.
The burning of churches is a tactic frequently employed by radical Mapuche groups: Nearly two dozen have been firebombed the last two years. That 11 were then attacked in just a few days is a possible sign that these groups saw the visit as an opportunity to bring more attention to their cause.
"The burning of churches is an expression of the disgruntlement" that many Mapuche feel for the Catholic Church, said German Silva, a political analyst at the Universidad Mayor in Santiago.
During Chile's 1973-1990 dictatorship, several bishops spoke out in defense of human rights and worked closely with indigenous populations. Today's bishops are much less visible, arguably less hands-on with the poor and in general the church has nowhere near the same moral authority.
Other groups protested the pope himself. While Francis celebrated Mass on Tuesday at a large park in Santiago, riot police shot tear gas and arrested dozens of protesters as they tried to march on the service.
Protesters included members of the country's LGBT community, socialists and people angry at the church's reaction to the sex abuse scandal that many Chileans don't feel has been resolved.
"There will be no peace for an accomplice who helps and protects a rapist," read one sign.
"Burn, Daddy!" read another.
Hours before Francis left Chile, he made comments that all but overshadowed his entire visit, and certainly would have added to the protests if they had come sooner. When asked why he defended Bishop Juan Barros, the former protege of the pedophile priest, Francis said there was no proof Barros knew about the abuse and called those accusations against him slanderous.
"After saying those things, if he came back here his reception would be even worse," said Erivano Luna, a computer technician in Santiago.

China secretly bought North Korean coal as US watched from above: report

The Glory Hope 1 is shown in a satellite picture, where it reportedly took on illicit North Korean coal.  (U.S. photo submitted to the United Nations)

At least six cargo ships linked to China furtively violated U.N. sanctions by taking on North Korean coal late last year, potentially providing a significant boost to the rogue regime's coffers, the U.S. alleges.

The U.N. Security Council in August hit North Korea with sanctions that were projected to cut nearly $1 billion from its annual exports revenue of roughly $3 billion, banning exports of coal, iron ore, and other products.

The move, which China ultimately endorsed, came after the isolated country fired two intercontinental ballistic missiles that raised international tensions.
But the six vessels, which the U.S. tracked by satellite and formally reported to the U.N. as sanctions violators in December, defied the sanctions by bringing North Korean coal to Vietnam, Russia, or other ships in mid-sea transfers, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing U.S. officials.
The paper found that the six ships are either managed or owned by Chinese companies or firms registered in Hong Kong. The U.S. also sought to have four other ships that have no apparent connections to China labeled as sanctions violators.
One of the Chinese-linked cargo ships, the Glory Hope 1, began violating the sanctions just days after they were passed in August, U.S. officials said, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The Chinese-owned ship flew a Panamanian flag and turned off its automatic identifying transmitter as it headed into a North Korean port on Aug. 7, the Journal reported.

The Chinese-owned ship Kai Xiang was photographed appearing to load North Korean coal.  (U.S. photo)

Meanwhile, the U.S. was watching from above, using spy satellites to observe the ship that officials estimate could hold up to $1.5M worth of black-market coal.
The Glory Hope 1 loitered for an extended period at a Chinese port after arriving from North Korea, U.S. officials told the U.N.
U.S. officials suspect the unusual maneuver was a ruse to make it appear that the crew was taking on Chinese cargo, according to the Wall Street Journal.
All U.N. members would have to ban the Glory Hope 1 and the other five ships from their ports in order to formally designate them as sanctions violators.
China’s foreign ministry told the Journal that it fully complies with U.N. resolutions. Several of the ship-owners and managers linked to the ships have reportedly been questioned by Chinese authorities.
U.S. National security advisor H.R. McMaster last month threatened harsh consequences for ships that continue to defy the sanctions.
“A company whose ships would engage in that activity ought to be on notice that that might be the last delivery of anything they do for a long time, anywhere,” McMaster said.

CNN Jim Acosta Cartoons

Dr. Manny Alvarez: FDA makes incredible progress under Trump administration, approving new life-saving drugs

Without great fanfare and out of the glare of the media spotlight, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is making enormous progress under the Trump administration in approving new medications to help us live healthier and longer.

In fact, the FDA today is operating more efficiently and effectively than it has in the past 20 years. This is good news for us all, because undoubtedly some of us will benefit from the new drugs being approved more rapidly than before.

Among its many duties, the FDA regulates medical innovation and the creation of new therapies in the biotech sector. Remarkably, the agency increased the number of new drugs it allowed on the market by 20 percent in 2017 – an unprecedented increase.
Take, for example, Roche’s new multiple sclerosis drug Ocrevus. Multiple sclerosis is a chronic, inflammatory autoimmune disease that disturbs communication between the brain and the rest of the body, affecting 2.5 million Americans. The approval of Ocrevus in March provided great hope for those suffering from the most debilitating forms of the disease.

As a practicing doctor for over 30 years, I have witnessed firsthand the speed and intensity with which other countries – especially in Europe – were outpacing the United States when it came to making often life-saving drugs available to patients.

We’ve also seen an influx of cancer immunotherapy drugs to stimulate the body’s own immune system to attack cancer cells. These drugs are used in place of classic chemotherapy and radiation cocktails that can have unwanted and lasting side effects. Many of the world’s leading cancer doctors consider immunotherapy to be the future of cancer treatment, and there is a lot of research now to backup those theories.
As a practicing doctor for over 30 years, I have witnessed firsthand the speed and intensity with which other countries – especially in Europe – were outpacing the United States when it came to making often life-saving drugs available to patients. Plagued by a lack of leadership and an embedded bureaucracy that did not allow for expedited reviews, the FDA has for decades been lagging.
That’s why I think President Trump’s appointment of Scott Gottlieb as commissioner of the FDA was quite brilliant, paving the way for progress.
Under Gottlieb, we are beginning to see an increase in competition that is expected to drive down drug prices, just as President Trump promised on the campaign trail. In addition, this new approach is creating incentives for researchers in the private sector to bring new therapies and improved therapies to the market.
And that’s something we can all get behind.
Dr. Manny Alvarez serves as Fox News Channel's senior managing health editor. He also serves as chairman of the department of obstetrics/gynecology and reproductive science at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey. For more information on Dr. Manny's work, visit AskDrManny.com.

CNN star Jim Acosta should be kicked out of the White House press corps

CNN, the most profane name in news, sank to a new low after an ugly Oval Office encounter involving President Trump and the networks’ senior White House correspondent.

Jim (Little Jimmy) Acosta badgered the president with a series of racially-charged questions during a photo-op with the president of Kazakhstan.

“Did you say that you want more people to come in from Norway? Did you say that you wanted more people from Norway? Is that true Mr. President?” Acosta hysterically shouted.
“I want them to come in from everywhere… everywhere. Thank you very much everybody,” Trump responded as Acosta continued hollering.

Little Jimmy brought great shame upon himself and his network. And he embarrassed our president and the nation. He owes President Trump and the president of Kazakhstan an apology for his disrespectful behavior.

“Just Caucasian or white countries, sir? Or do you want people to come in from other parts of the world… people of color,” Acosta shouted.
Trump then pointed directly at Acosta and simply said, “Out!”
CNN is known for hiring journalists and broadcasters lacking in social graces. In recent days, the network has allowed reporters to use the word “s---hole” uncensored on-air.
The Media Research Center reports that CNN anchors and guests uttered the profanity at least 195 times in one day.
Little Jimmy is not exactly a fair and impartial White House correspondent. He recently told Anderson “Giggles” Cooper that “deep down this president may just be a racist.”
Honestly, I’m surprised President Trump did not grab Little Jimmy by the ear and personally toss him out of the Oval Office.
Little Jimmy brought great shame upon himself and his network. And he embarrassed our president and the nation. He owes President Trump and the president of Kazakhstan an apology for his disrespectful behavior.
Beyond that – the White House Correspondents Association should sanction Little Jimmy by either revoking his press credentials or at the very least issue a public censure.
Just because you happen to be a professional journalist gives you no right to be a loud-mouthed jerk.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary. His latest book is “The Deplorables’ Guide to Making America Great Again.” Follow him on Twitter @ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.