Judge Andrew Napolitano: Why Trump remains smack in the middle of Mueller's legal crosshairs

Late Monday afternoon, we were treated to a series of bizarre interviews on nearly every major cable television channel except Fox when a colorful character named Sam Nunberg, a former personal and political aide to Donald Trump, took to the airwaves to denounce a grand jury subpoena he received compelling the production of documents and live testimony.

The grand jury is one of two summoned by special counsel Robert Mueller in his investigation of whether President Trump or his colleagues engaged in any criminal activity prior to or during the presidential campaign, or during his presidency.

At several points in the rambling and seemingly alcohol-infused rant, Nunberg insisted he would not comply with the subpoena, and he challenged Mueller to force him to do so, proclaiming at least three times, “Let him arrest me!” I can tell you from my years on the bench in New Jersey, this is not a good gauntlet to lay down; and it is one often addressed swiftly. Be careful what you ask for.
Here is the backstory:
Nunberg is a 36-year-old New York lawyer who has been involved in conservative politics since his teenage years. He was hired by Trump in 2011 for the purpose of burnishing Trump’s image as a political conservative. Like most people hired by Trump before his presidential candidacy, Nunberg signed a contract that provided for liquidated damages of $10 million should he publicly reveal any private matters he learned about Trump during his employment.
Trump did fire Nunberg in 2014 because of an unflattering op-ed that he believed Nunberg’s odd behavior had induced and sued Nunberg for $10 million. Nunberg counterclaimed that Trump was using corporate funds from the Trump Organization to fund his then-nascent presidential campaign, a potential felony. Soon, the litigation was dropped and Nunberg was rehired. And in 2015, he was fired again, in a very public and humiliating way by candidate Trump himself.
Last month, Nunberg agreed to be interviewed by Mueller’s prosecutors and FBI agents. After the five-hour interview, he told friends and media folks that he discerned from the questions that Mueller has “something bad” on Trump. Nunberg thought his involvement with the special prosecutor was over when he received a grand jury subpoena and then reacted in a most unlawyerly fashion.
For a few reasons, this is not good news for the president.
First, whatever Nunberg told the prosecutors and FBI agents who interviewed him last month, they revealed it to one of their grand juries; and they asked and received from the grand jury a subpoena compelling Nunberg to recount to the grand jury what he said in his interview. This is the same interview from which he claimed he learned that Mueller & Co. have “something bad” on Trump. The president’s lawyers would surely like to see whatever Mueller’s prosecutors told the grand jury Nunberg told them. So would we all.
Second, during his rants on Monday, he opined that the president is an “idiot” who no one hates “more than me,” and that Mueller had offered him immunity in return for his testimony. Immunity? That is the highest and best gift a prosecutor can give a witness or target. If done in accordance with the rules, it bars all prosecution of the immunized person no matter what he admits to in testimony, unless he lies under oath. If Mueller did offer Nunberg immunity, it can only mean that Mueller desperately needs Nunberg’s testimony against the president to be recounted to one of his grand juries, and that Nunberg has some criminal exposure.
At the end of his day of rage, Nunberg had a change of heart. I suspect it was induced by a compassionate on-camera plea to Nunberg by my Fox colleague Charles Gasparino, a friend of Nunberg who told him to talk to his lawyers and his doctors soon. After six hours of wild on-air gyrations and threats, Nunberg agreed to testify, Gasparino says.
Nunberg’s doctors must have calmed him down, and his lawyers must have reminded him that the remedy for the persistent willful failure to comply with a grand jury subpoena is incarceration. That would mean incarceration for the life of the grand jury, which now seems as though it will be sitting well into 2019. His lawyers no doubt also reminded him that it is insane to taunt an alligator before crossing the stream. The FBI does not like being provoked.
While all this was going on, the same grand jury subpoenaed all emails between or among Trump’s inner circle of 10 persons -- including the president himself. Given the roles each has played in Trump’s recent life, it is clear that the president remains in Mueller’s legal crosshairs.
There are actually three sets of legal crosshairs, so to speak. One seeks to determine whether the Trump campaign received “anything of value” from any foreign national or foreign government, and whether Trump personally approved of it -- a felony. Another inquiry seeks to determine whether the president himself attempted to obstruct the work of the Mueller grand juries by firing then-FBI Director James Comey for a corrupt reason, one that is self-serving and lacking a bona fide governmental purpose -- also a felony.
The third inquiry seeks to examine whether Trump misused or misrepresented corporate funds or bank loans in his pre-presidential life -- another felony. On this last point, he has already been accused by Nunberg; and the grand jury no doubt will hear about it.
It has often been argued that out of the mouths of babes and drunks comes the truth, as both lack a filter and any moral fear. Is Nunberg dumb like a fox? Did he impeach himself? Would you believe Sam Nunberg?
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.

United Steelworkers president: Trump tariffs needed to preserve America’s steel and aluminum industries

A great wailing and gnashing of teeth arose across the land last week after the Trump administration announced its plan to place tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. Some conservatives cried that the tariffs – 25 percent on steel and 10 percent on aluminum – would incite an international trade war.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., claimed the moderately sized tariffs on two metals would reverse the economic boon that he believes the tax breaks his party gave to corporations and the rich are sure to create. The good times would be over. Kaput!

This drama comes from a politician who proposed a border adjustment tax on all imports, not just two metals. That tax that would have cost American consumers $1 trillion.
This hyperbole comes from conservatives who deliberately blind themselves to the devastation Chinese trade cheating has caused the American steel and aluminum industries.
This hysteria comes from corporations that use steel and aluminum and are apparently just fine with Chinese trade violations completely killing off American producers, leaving our country without domestic suppliers of metals essential for national defense.
The tariff proposal wasn’t sudden or out of the blue. It came after President Trump announced last April that the U.S. Department of Commerce would evaluate whether the damage done to the American steel and aluminum industries by bad trade endangered national security. The Commerce Department told President Trump in December that it did.
The Commerce Department recommended remediation through tariffs, import limits or both. The department estimates the cost of the tariffs to the U.S. economy at $9 billion, or a fraction of 1 percent of the nation’s total gross domestic product – and a fraction of the cost of Speaker Ryan’s border adjustment tax.
The beverage industry went crazy anyway. Coors, for example, claimed the tariffs would cost jobs across the beer industry and “American consumers will suffer.”
Here’s what Coors calls suffering: a penny price hike. There is about three cents worth of aluminum in a beer can. A 10 percent tariff on aluminum could increase the price of an entire six-pack of Coors by not quite two cents. Little more than a penny.
Frankly, an extra penny or two doesn’t sound like real suffering. It’s not clear just how many football fans would forego the six-pack for Sunday’s game because of that extra penny. It’s not clear just how many beer industry jobs will really be lost because of one extra cent per six-pack.
The additional cost to a new car, which contains much more steel and aluminum, would be more significant. A senior economist at Cox Automotive estimated it at $200.
But that’s only if American aluminum and steel companies raise their prices by 10 and 25 percent.
American steel and aluminum manufacturers are not subject to the tariffs, so they don’t have to raise their prices. But they may need to increase their prices because excessive production of aluminum and steel in China has severely depressed prices worldwide.
China is massively overproducing the metals at massively subsidized mills. The Chinese government owns some mills and provides supports for the industries in the form of loans that don’t have to be repaid, low-cost or free raw materials and underpriced utilities. It then dumps its excess aluminum and steel on the world market at prices below production costs.
The Chinese action forces down the price of the metals to the point where mills in free market nations like the United States go bankrupt. It is a trade war perpetrated by China on the rest of the world.
China’s practices violate international trade rules. The United States, in conjunction with European allies and others, has repeatedly over the past decade negotiated with China to stop defying the rules it agreed to abide by when it gained entrance to the World Trade Organization.  China repeatedly has said it would follow the rules. And then it doesn’t.
China’s actions have has killed American mills, thrown tens of thousands out of work and devastated mill towns. Steel employment in the United States has declined 35 percent since 2000, with 14,500 workers losing their jobs just between January of 2015 and June of 2016. The plummet in aluminum employment was even steeper, with 58 percent of jobs lost in just the three years between 2013 and 2016.
In 2000, 105 companies produced raw steel at 144 U.S. locations. Now 38 companies forge at 93 locations. There’s only one company left in the United States that produces the Navy armor plate used to build the Virginia Class submarines.
Over the past six years, six aluminum smelters closed permanently. Just five remain, with only two operating at full capacity. And only one of those produces the high-purity aluminum required for defense aerospace needs.
To see real suffering, Coors might take a look at unemployed aluminum and steel workers and their crumbling communities. Coors should note that both U.S. Steel and Century Aluminum have said the tariffs will enable them to reopen closed mills and rehire a total of 700 workers.
Unlike Coors, conservative TV commentators and Speaker Ryan, most Americans are willing to pay the extra penny per six-pack to ensure their country has the domestic aluminum smelting and steel forging ability that is crucial to our national security.

Dem 'cannabis candidate' accused of abusing women, overstating 'Iraq veteran' claim

A Democrat seeking a U.S. House seat in Illinois – who attracted attention for a campaign ad showing him smoking pot – now faces accusations that he has abused women and misleadingly described himself as an “Iraq veteran" and "former FBI agent."

Benjamin Thomas Wolf, who is running in the Democratic primary against incumbent U.S. Rep. Mike Quigley, came under fire after an ex-girlfriend alleged he acted abusively and intentionally revealed her name and home address on social media, a practice called “doxing.”

“He actually hit me, threw me to the ground, put his foot on my chest. He was really angry. He grabbed my face,” Katarina Coates, who interned for Wolf’s campaign, told Politico.

"He actually hit me, threw me to the ground, put his foot on my chest. He was really angry. He grabbed my face."

She added: “I thought it was normal. I cannot explain the logic. It seemed like he cared about me when he did that. After that time he stood on my chest, he went and took me for chocolate cake. I kind of associated it with his caring.
"There were times I would ask him, 'Do you ever regret hitting me?' He would say: 'No, but I'm relieved when you put your head down so I don't have to do it again.'"
DEM CANDIDATE WHO SMOKED POT IN CAMPAIGN AD SAYS HE’LL ‘DEFINITELY’ GET HIGH IF HE WINS
The woman said she did not report Wolf to police, but reached out to officials at both DePaul University, where she was studying, and Roosevelt University, where Wolf claims to be an adjunct professor.
Coates said that after she contacted DePaul campus security regarding Wolf in April 2017, a security officer told her Wolf was banned from campus.
“Ben is not allowed in campus. He does know that as I told him that personally,” Michael Dohm, deputy director of public safety at DePaul, told the woman via email, Politico reported.
But the ban was not prompted by Coates’ allegations. Instead, it reportedly was imposed after a DePaul professor named Jason Hill heard another student's accusation about an encounter with Wolf.
Hill told Politico that Wolf later sent him a number of threatening messages. “He wrote a lot of nasty letters to me encouraging me to kill myself. He said: ‘You should just commit suicide,’” Hill said.
Another ex-girlfriend, Kari Fitzgerald, also made accusations against Wolf, saying that although he was not violent toward her, he showed “abusive, escalating behavior.”
Wolf told Politico he denies the accusations of abuse. However, the Democrat also faces scrutiny over alleged claims of being an “Iraq veteran” and “former FBI agent.”
The candidate has reportedly never been a member of the armed forces, but says on his website that he has been a diplomat in the Foreign Service under the State Department during the Iraq war. One tweet from him reportedly read: "Wolf served multiple terms in Africa and Iraq. Wolf for Congress."
The candidate contends that one does not have to be in the military to call oneself a veteran.

"People in the military get upset when I say I served in Iraq. The military doesn't have a patent on the word 'served.'"

- Benjamin Thomas Wolf, Democrat running for a U.S. House seat in Illinois

“People in the military get upset when I say I served in Iraq. The military doesn't have a patent on the word 'served,’” he told Politico.
In a news release last week, Wolf’s campaign also identified him as a “former FBI agent,” despite contrary claims by the agency.
A spokesperson for the FBI told the Chicago Tribune that the candidate worked at the agency as “a non-special agent professional support employee” rather than an agent.
Wolf confirmed to the outlet that he failed the FBI’s agent test but denied he ever identifies himself as such, adding that there is a small difference between his role at the agency and that of actual FBI agents.

Sessions blasts ‘radical’ move by California to block ICE raids, says move akin to ‘open borders’

Jeff Sessions, the U.S. attorney general, on Wednesday told Fox News that California is “not entitled” to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and vowed that the federal government will not allow the Golden State to flout immigration laws.

Sessions called the state’s actions “radical," and reminded other sanctuary city states that “federal law determines immigration policy,” not states.

He told Shannon Bream, the host of “Fox News @ Night,” he is not happy with comments by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who on Wednesday slammed the ICE raids in the state last week as "unjust and cruel."

"Why do we have ICE officers? Are they just going to sit in their offices and do nothing?"

Federal immigration agents arrested more than 150 people in California in the days after Oakland's mayor gave early warning of the raids over the weekend late last month.
Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf warned residents that "credible sources" had told her a sweep was imminent, calling it her "duty and moral obligation" to warn families.
California lawmakers from Gov. Jerry Brown down to local mayors have resisted a Trump administration immigration crackdown that they contend is arbitrarily hauling in otherwise law-abiding people and splitting up families that include U.S.-born children.
“We wanted a healthy and good relationship with [California], but federal law determines immigration policy," he said. "The state of California is not entitled to block that activity. Somebody needs to stand up and say no, you’ve gone too far, you cannot do this, this is not reasonable.  It’s radical, really.”
The attorney general said California's position essentially amounted to adopting "open borders." He denied that the federal government wants to commandeer state authorities.
"People have tried to spin this as somehow we're demanding that state and local officials go out and do the work of the federal government," Sessions said. "We just cannot allow them to obstruct or block" federal officers, he said.
"We cannot accept this," he reiterated.
PELOSI SLAMS 'UNJUST AND CRUEL' ICE RAID
Sessions said there is "nothing wrong" with ICE raids.
"Why do we have ICE officers?" Sessions asked. "Are they just going to sit in their offices and do nothing?"
Sessions also spoke to the recent calls for a second Special Counsel, saying he has “a responsibility to ensure the integrity of the FISA process” and that he will “consider their request.
 “I have great respect for Mr. Gowdy and Chairman Goodlatte, and we're going to consider seriously their recommendations.”          
Sessions also cooled off rumors about tension between the president and himself, saying that he “believes in the policies he’s advancing.”
“I think President Trump moves the ball.  He can get things done that I’m not sure any other person in America could get done,” he said.

Hollywood Politician Cartoons

Bernie Sanders' stepdaughter loses bid for mayor of Burlington, Vermont

Carina Driscoll, stepdaughter of Sen. Bernie Sanders, lost her bid for mayor of Burlington, Vermont.  (AP)

The stepdaughter of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont has lost her bid to become mayor of Vermont’s largest city, the same city where her stepfather launched his political career.

Carina Driscoll, a former state legislator, lost Tuesday’s election for Burlington mayor to the incumbent, Miro Weinberger. This will be Weinberger’s third three-year term as mayor.   

Driscoll, who ran as an independent, claimed on the campaign trail that Weinberger, a Democrat, catered private investors instead of advocating for the voters.
However, Driscoll’s campaign was surrounded by controversy early on.
She was slammed for payments her business received from a college her mother used to run.
According to a report, Driscoll’s Vermont Woodworking School received $500,000 from Burlington College between 2009 and 2012. Her mother, Jane O’Meara Sanders, was president of the college from 2004-2011.
Driscoll was endorsed by Vermont’s Progressive Party.

'Sex and the City' star considers run against New York's Cuomo

Actress Cynthia Nixon arrives at the 31st Independent Spirit Awards in Santa Monica, Calif., Feb. 27, 2016.  (Reuters)

Cynthia Nixon, who played Miranda Hobbes on HBO's “Sex and the City,” is reportedly considering challenging New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in his bid for re-election this year.

Cuomo, a Democrat, is still popular, but is viewed as vulnerable because of his his frayed relationship with New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and because of the city's constant transit issues.

The New York Times reported Tuesday that Cuomo brushed off the possible challenge from Nixon in September's Democratic primary, saying, "You can’t let these things bother you. Otherwise you won’t last long."

"You can’t let these things bother you. Otherwise you won’t last long."

Nixon, an education activist, has been openly critical of Cuomo. The paper reported that she once said the Cuomo was “shortchanging the children of New York.”
Nixon told NBC's “Today” show in August that there were “a lot of people who would like me to run.”
NY1 reported that Nixon has started to build a campaign staff, which includes two people who worked on de Blasio’s first mayoral campaign.
“Many concerned New Yorkers have been encouraging Cynthia to run for office, and as she has said previously, she will continue to explore it,” Rebecca Capellan, Nixon’s publicist, told the Times in a statement. “If and when such a decision is made, Cynthia will be sure to make her plans public.”
Cuomo has already announced he will seek a third term in November and is a potential 2020 presidential candidate. Nixon would be the state’s first female and openly gay governor, the Times reported.
A recent poll suggests a growing dissatisfaction with Cuomo among liberals. The Siena College poll released last month found 53 percent of voters view Cuomo favorably, while 40 percent said they don't. That compares to 62-30 percent in January's Siena poll.
Arthur Schwartz, an organizer for the New York Progressive Action Network, told the Democrat and Chronicle of Rochester that he hopes someone comes forward to challenge Cuomo.

Cynthia Nixon, second from right, starred on "Sex and the City" from 1998 to 2004.

He said, "We’re hoping that either Stephanie or Cynthia Nixon run, but neither one has indicated to us that they are near a decision."
Schwartz was referring to former Syracuse Mayor Stephanie Miner. 

Gary Cohn, WH chief economic adviser, announces resignation hours after signaling he won't back tariffs

White House national economic council director Gary Cohn will resign from his post, the White House confirmed Tuesday, in yet another high-profile departure from the Trump administration in recent weeks.

Cohn, who served as President Trump’s chief economic adviser since the beginning of the administration, opposed Trump's planned tariffs on imports of steel and aluminum, first announced last week, and reportedly tried getting the president to change course. Hours before his resignation was announced, Trump set a “line in the sand” asking Cohn if he would support the tariffs -- and Cohn did not answer, a White House official and an outside adviser to the president told Fox News.

Cohn had been discussing with the president his transition out of the White House for several weeks.
“It has been an honor to serve my country and enact pro-growth economic policies to benefit the American people, in particular the passage of historic tax reform,” Cohn said in a statement to Fox News. “I am grateful to the President for giving me this opportunity and wish him and the Administration great success in the future.”
White House officials told Fox News that Cohn's departure date is to be determined, but it's expected to be a few weeks from now. Trump tweeted Tuesday night: “Will be making a decision soon on the appointment of new Chief Economic Advisor. Many people wanting the job - will choose wisely!”
Trump's questioning of Cohn earlier Tuesday was reported first by Bloomberg.

Cohn opposed Trump's planned tariffs on imports of steel and aluminum, first announced last week.  (REUTERS/Andrew Kelly, File)

Cohn’s policy portfolio included tax and retirement, infrastructure, the financial system, energy and environment, healthcare, agriculture, global economics, international trade and development, and technology, telecommunications and cybersecurity.
Cohn helped to advance the president’s deregulatory agenda, and to organize his participation in the World Economic Forum in January 2018.
“Gary has been my chief economic advisor and did a superb job in driving our agenda, helping to deliver historic tax cuts and reforms and unleashing the American economy once again,” Trump said in a statement. “He is a rare talent, and I thank him for his dedicated service to the American people.
White House Chief of Staff John Kelly said Cohn served his country with “great distinction” and dedicated his “skill and leadership to grow the U.S. economy” and “pass historic tax reform.”
“I will miss having him as a partner in the White House, but he departs having made a real impact in the lives of the American people,” Kelly said in a statement Tuesday.
Over the summer, Cohn reportedly drafted a resignation letter, following the president's response to the violence in Charlottesville, Va.
Cohn’s White House departure comes just one week after White House Communications Director Hope Hicks resigned from her post, after serving for several months.
Tuesday afternoon, the president pushed back against news reports of a dysfunctional West Wing, saying that "everybody wants to work in the White House."
"I like conflict," Trump said in a joint press conference with Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Lofven, noting that the West Wing has "tremendous energy" and that the White House is a "great place to be working."
TRUMP ON TURBULENCE IN THE WEST WING: 'I LIKE CONFLICT' 
"Many, many people want every single job," Trump said, adding that "there will be people that change," but said, "Believe me, everybody wants to work in the White House. They want a piece of the Oval Office, they want a piece of the West Wing."
The Trump administration has seen plenty of turnover in its first 14 months. Last month, Hicks stepped down; a senior communications official who worked closely with Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, Josh Raffel left his post. Earlier in February, White House staff secretary Rob Porter, and White House speechwriter David Sorenson, left the administration after domestic abuse allegations.

Trump DOJ sues California over 'interference' with immigration enforcement

The Trump Justice Department filed a lawsuit Tuesday night against California, saying three recently-passed state laws were deliberately interfering with federal immigration policies.

It marked the latest legal and political confrontation with the nation's most populous state, which the federal government says has repeatedly stood in the way of its plans to step up enforcement actions in the workplace and against criminal aliens.

"The Department of Justice and the Trump Administration are going to fight these unjust, unfair, and unconstitutional policies," Attorney General Jeff Sessions was expected to tell California law enforcement officers on Wednesday. "We are fighting to make your jobs safer and to help you reduce crime in America."
The state's Democratic governor, Jerry Brown, fired back: “At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America. Jeff, these political stunts may be the norm in Washington, but they don’t work here. SAD!!!”
Federal officials are seeking an injunction to immediately block enforcement of the three California laws, each enacted within the past year.
One of those laws offers additional worker protections against federal immigration enforcement actions. Senior Justice Department officials have said it's prevented companies from voluntarily cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.
Employers are mandated under the law to demand ICE agents present a warrant or subpoena before entering certain areas of the premises, or when accessing some employee records.
Some companies have complained they've felt torn between trying to comply with seemingly contradictory state and federal statutes, since penalties for non-compliance can be steep from both entities.
Another state law dubbed known by critics as the "sanctuary state" bill protects immigrants without legal residency by limiting state and municipal cooperation with the feds, including what information can be shared about illegal-immigrant inmates.
A third law gives state officials the power to monitor and inspect immigrant detention facilities either run directly by, or contracted through, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The Justice Department has said it's confident the Constitution's Supremacy Clause gives it broad authority to supersede state laws that it says interfere with its immigration enforcement obligations.
Still, state officials in the past have cited the 10th Amendment’s guarantee of states not being compelled to enforce federal laws.
“We’ve seen this B-rated movie before. So we’re not totally surprised,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in response to the new lawsuit. 
The Justice Department is also reviewing Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf's decision to warn of an immigration sweep in advance, which ICE said allowed hundreds of immigrants to escape detention. “Oakland is a city of immigrants. We will continue to exercise our legal right to exist as a sanctuary city. We will continue to inform all residents about their Constitutional rights, and we will continue to support California’s sanctuary status,” the Democratic mayor responded.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WITH SEX, ROBBERY CONVICTIONS AMONG THOSE WHO EVADED CAPTURE AFTER OAKLAND MAYOR'S WARNING
An estimated 2.5 million immigrants are believed to be in California illegally. In the most recent figures, ICE has reported about 16 percent of its enforcement apprehensions take place in that state.
The latest legal action by the Trump administration is part of an aggressive push to enforce existing immigration laws, with Sessions in previous remarks citing a porous U.S. border with Mexico, and the threat of criminal activity by immigrant gangs.
Federal officials repeatedly have cited the case of Kate Steinle, shot to death by an illegal alien and seven-time felon in San Francisco, one of 35 communities in the state declaring itself a "sanctuary city."
The Justice Department in January threatened California and other states with subpoenas and a loss of grant money for repeatedly failing to respond to requests for immigration compliance under a federal law known as Section 1373.
Federal officials would not say whether other states were at risk of similar lawsuits over their alleged non-compliance with immigration laws.
A coordinated ICE enforcement action last month on businesses in the Los Angeles area netted 212 people arrested for violating federal immigration laws, 88 percent of whom were convicted criminals, officials said.

Liberal Cartoons

Netanyahu gets VIP treatment from Trump after years of frosty relations with Obama

President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu greeted one another warmly Monday at the White House, touting U.S.-Israeli relations as “the best” they have ever been, in a sharp departure from the famously strained relations the Jewish State’s leader had with former President Barack Obama.

Trump hosted Netanyahu in the Oval Office in what was their first meeting since the U.S. announced its commitment to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

“We have the best relationship right now with Israel that we’ve ever had."

“We have the best relationship right now with Israel that we’ve ever had,” Trump said.
During President Obama's two terms, he and Netanyahu had a tense relationship characterized by stiff body language and terse remarks when they met before the press. Obama's White House even sent out a press photo of the then-commander-in-chief on the Oval Office phone with Netanyahu in September, 2013, with his feet on the desk in what some saw as an intentional show of disrespect.
The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz fumed over the image.
“The president is seen with his legs up on the table, his face stern and his fist clenched, as though he were dictating to Netanyahu,” Ha'aretz wrote. “As an enthusiast of Muslim culture, Obama surely knows there is no greater insult in the Middle East than pointing the soles of one’s shoes at another person. Indeed, photos of other presidential phone calls depict Obama leaning on his desk, with his feet on the floor.”
Trump and Netanyahu’s friendship is a major shift from the chilly relations between the Israeli prime minister and Obama – who was even accused of helping to fund opposition to oust Netanyahu during his re-election bid in 2015.
The relationship was further strained during the Obama administration’s decision to move forward with the Iran nuclear deal. Netanyahu and Obama also were at odds towards the end of the Obama administration—when the U.S. allowed for the passage of a resolution condemning Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank.
On Monday, Trump noted his intent to attend the opening of the embassy at the newly-recognized capital in mid-May. “Israel is very special to me—special country, special people, and I look forward to being there.”
“What better to make peace between Israel and the Palestinians,” Trump said, noting the embassy move gives “a real opportunity for peace.” “We’ll see how it works out. The Palestinians are wanting to come back to the table. Very badly.”
Trump added: “If they don’t, you don’t have peace. And that’s a possibility also.”
Netanyahu praised Trump's “leadership and friendship,” noting that “under your leadership, [U.S.-Israeli relations] have never been stronger.”
Neither addressed the swirling corruption scandal engulfing Netanyahu's administration, or the ongoing Russia probe that has hindered Trump's time in the White House.

The White House in 2013 sent out a photo of then-President Obama on the Oval Office phone with Netanyahu with his feet on the desk.  (White House)

“President Trump underscored his goal of countering Iran's malign influence. The President also emphasized his commitment to achieving a lasting peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians,” the White House said.

Cal Thomas: Trump boldly wades into cutting federal government down to size -- will it work?

President Donald Trump gestures as he walks as he leaves the White House, Friday, Feb. 16, 2018, in Washington. 

Of all the promises candidate Donald Trump made during the 2016 presidential campaign, none will be more difficult to fulfill than cutting the size and cost of the federal government. That’s because Congress, which must decide whether to keep a federal agency, has the final word in such matters and spending – especially spending in one’s home state or district – is what keeps so many of them in office. Who doubts that self-preservation is the primary objective of most members of Congress?

Ronald Reagan made similar promises about reducing the size of the bloated federal government, but was unable to fulfill them because of congressional intransigence. Perhaps his most notable failure was attempting to eliminate the Department of Education, an unnecessary Cabinet-level agency created by Jimmy Carter, reportedly as the fulfillment of a campaign promise to the National Education Association (NEA), the largest labor union in the United States, which backed him in the 1976 and 1980 elections. This pithy statement by Reagan got to the heart of the issue: “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!”

President Trump has asked every federal agency to submit a reorganization plan to the White House. Some programs, like the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Biological Survey Unit (BSU), are decades old. The BSU was established in 1885, and among its tasks is the preservation of the whooping crane. Last I checked those birds seemed to be doing OK, but why is this, along with so many other things, a responsibility of the federal government?
Reorganization of these outmoded and unnecessary programs and agencies should not be the goal. Elimination should be the goal. Unless they are killed off, the risk of their return is likely.
What’s needed is a strategy that shames Congress, which sometimes seems beyond shame, for misspending the people’s money. What will help in that shaming is for the president to establish an independent commission made up of retired Republicans, Democrats and average citizens. This commission would conduct a top-to-bottom audit of the federal government and present its findings to Congress, while simultaneously releasing them to the public, which would then apply pressure on Congress to adopt them.

Congressional budget-cutters spared the $440,000 spent annually to have attendants push buttons on the fully automated Capitol Hill elevators used by representatives and senators.

The commission would be modeled after the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) of the ’80s, which eliminated military bases that were no longer needed for the defense of the country. Some members of Congress complained about BRAC, but in the end they could not justify maintaining the bases.
The president might want to start with some of these ridiculous programs recently highlighted by Thomas A. Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, a private, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization whose mission it is “to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement in government.”
“Without authorization,” notes Schatz, “the feds spent $19.6 million annually on the International Fund for Ireland. Sounds like a noble cause, but the money went for projects like pony-trekking centers and golf videos.
“Congressional budget-cutters spared the $440,000 spent annually to have attendants push buttons on the fully automated Capitol Hill elevators used by representatives and senators.
“Last year, the National Endowment for the Humanities spent $4.2 million to conduct a nebulous ‘National Conversation on Pluralism and Identity.’ Obviously, talk radio wasn’t considered good enough.
“The Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency channeled some $11 million to psychics who might provide special insights about various foreign threats. This was the disappointing ‘Stargate’ program.”
The list goes on and on. Go to cagw.org, read all about it and remember it’s our money paying for these boondoggles (definition: “a project funded by the federal government out of political favoritism that is of no real value to the community or the nation”) that helps keep our free-spending career politicians in office where they get benefits the rest of us can only dream about.
Yes, entitlements are the main drivers of debt and they, too, need reform. But starting with programs most people would find outrageous and worthy of elimination is a good way to build confidence and make the tackling of entitlements more palatable.

Cal Thomas is America's most widely syndicated op-ed columnist. His latest book is "What Works: Common Sense Solutions for a Stronger America". Readers may email Cal Thomas at tcaeditors@tribune.com.

Trump: Obama DOJ launched 'unprecedented' probe to 'discredit' him 'so Crooked H would win'

President Trump on Monday accused the Department of Justice and FBI under former President Barack Obama of launching an investigation into his campaign in an effort to “discredit” him and help Democrat Hillary Clinton win the presidency, calling those efforts “unprecedented” and “bigger than Watergate.”

“Why did the Obama Administration start an investigation into the Trump Campaign (with zero proof of wrongdoing) long before the Election in November?” Trump asked. “Wanted to discredit so Crooked H would win.”

Trump tweeted: “Unprecedented. Bigger than Watergate! Plus, Obama did NOTHING about Russian meddling.”
Special Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating ties between the Trump campaign and the Russians during the 2016 election. Trump has repeatedly said there is “no collusion” and has accused top officials at the Justice Department of being politically biased against him.
It’s since been revealed that during the campaign, the FBI began probing Trump campaign aides, including Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.
According to the recently released memo from House Intelligence Committee Republicans, the Justice Department and the FBI “sought and received” a probable cause order authorizing “electronic surveillance” of Page, a former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser.
The memo asserts the infamous, anti-Trump dossier was critical in obtaining the Page warrant.
The FBI also began investigating Trump campaign adviser Papadopoulos’ relationships with Russians in 2016. Papadopoulos in October pleaded guilty to making false statements to FBI agents about his contacts with people close to the Russian government, but has not been charged with anything else.
The court filings say the 30-year-old Papadopoulos was not truthful during a FBI interview just days after the president’s inauguration in January 2017 about his relationship with an “overseas professor” who had “substantial connections to Russian government officials.”
The professor, according to prosecutors, told Papadopoulos the Russians had “dirt” on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.”
TRUMP QUESTIONS WHY SESSIONS ISN’T PROBING ‘DEM CRIMES’ AMID RUSSIA INVESTIGATION
Frustrated over the investigation, the president also been dinging his own attorney general, Jeff Sessions, recently asking on Twitter why the Democrats in the Obama administration aren’t being investigated as part of the probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.
“Question: If all of the Russian meddling took place during the Obama Administration, right up to January 20th, why aren’t they the subject of the investigation?” Trump tweeted.
Trump added: “Why didn’t Obama do something about the meddling? Why aren’t Dem crimes under investigation? Ask Jeff Sessions!”

F-35 aboard Navy ship in Pacific as US touts new era of ‘up-gunned’ air-sea capability

A F-35B aircraft landed on the amphibious assault ship USS Wasp for the first time in the Indo-Pacific for the first time on Monday.  (Reuters)

An F-35B Lighting II—which has been called a ‘beastly airplane—landed Sunday on an amphibious assault ship at an undisclosed location in the Pacific, an event the Navy touted as a new era of “up-gunned” air-sea capability, Stars and Stripes reported.

The F-35B was assigned to the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit based in Okinawa, Japan, and will provide support to Navy-Marine Corps expeditionary operations and help strengthen alliances in the region, the Navy Times reported citing a press release.

It is unclear how many F-35s were deployed and it comes amid continued tension in the area. The North Korean nuclear situation remains unstable and China continues work to extend into the South China Sea.
“Pairing F-35B Lightning IIs with the Wasp represents one of the most significant leaps in war-fighting capability for the Navy-Marine Corps team in our lifetime,” Rear Adm. Brad Cooper, commander, Expeditionary Strike Group 7, said in a statement.
The Wasp is on a routine patrol in the Indo-Pacific where it will be joined by two destroyers to assist on operations and training, the paper reported.
The aircraft can conduct strikes inland, support Marines ashore and provide air defense for the Expeditionary Strike Group.
The F-35 lightning II is the world's first fifth-generation fighter jet. It has extraordinary stealth capabilities that will allow the aircraft to fly deep into enemy airspace without detection. The F-35s harness a massive Pratt and Whitney engine to deliver astonishing fighter speeds of approximately 1,200 mph.
One test pilot said it is a “beastly airplane.”
The F-35 has had its share of setbacks, but the AP once described its maneuvers: The stealth jet has “a maneuverability so catlike it can turn corners so sharp that it seems to carve squares in the sky.”

Oscar awards Cartoons

Michael Goodwin: Media continue to ignore Trump's presidential leadership

A popular line among Washington reporters is that covering the Trump White House is like trying to drink water from a gushing fire hose. The volume overwhelms the effort.
Recent days illustrate the point and underscore the even greater difficulty of assessing the impact of Donald Trump’s presidency. So much is happening so fast that it’s impossible to make sense of what it all means for America.
Last week featured the president leading a televised discussion with bipartisan members of Congress on gun legislation, his market-rattling announcement on tariffs and reports about whether Trump will agree to an interview with special counsel Robert Mueller. Those and other big-ticket items were mashed up with tweetstorms and breathless reports about who on his team is up, who’s down and who’s out.
For people outside Washington, the task of separating the wheat from the chaff is made more difficult by extreme media bias. Virtually everything Trump says and does is presented through the darkest possible lens almost everywhere.
Consider how he was accused of being too bellicose in reacting to North Korean threats to bomb the United States, then accused by some of the same people of not being bellicose enough after Vladimir Putin’s boasts about Russia’s nukes.
Then there’s CNN, which invited Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein to compare recent events to Richard Nixon’s final days. Nothing subtle there.

Trump continues to take the ship of state into uncharted waters and that alone explains much of the hair-on-fire reaction.

From networks to newspapers, rumor and speculation are dressed up as authoritative by citing “sources close to the president.” This is compelling only if you forget how many times anonymous sources were wrong.
Of course, the fever pitch is alive on both sides of the street, with many Trump supporters still believing, as one said recently, that “he can do no wrong.”
The love vs. hate for Trump reminds me of a cynic’s view of the law of averages: If one foot is in ice water and the other is in scalding water, your feet are, on average, comfortable!
None of this is to suggest there is nothing unique about Donald Trump’s presidency. On the contrary, almost everything about it is unique.
That’s precisely why it is so difficult to be certain about the meaning of so many events. He continues to take the ship of state into uncharted waters and that alone explains much of the hair-on-fire reaction.
For example, Trump three times put on a public master class in presidential leadership. He did it with members of both parties on immigration several weeks ago, then at a meeting with governors and last week with members of Congress on gun control. The president is supremely comfortable in front of the camera and those sessions allow him to talk over the heads of the Washington media and directly to people in their living rooms and offices, much as he did during the campaign.
In all three cases, Trump showed himself knowledgeable and flexible as he tried to find common ground on vexing subjects. Many ardent Democrats especially were wowed by his eagerness to accuse fellow Republicans of being afraid of the NRA.
I believe Trump was wrong on that point, and that most GOP supporters of gun rights believe the Second Amendment means what it says, and that they are representing their constituents.
Still, there is no denying that Trump broke with his party’s recent record by showing a willingness to meet Dems more than half way on gun and immigration issues.
His CEO style at those events reflects one of the initial hopes for a Trump presidency — that he could break the logjams in Washington because he is not of Washington, and is not beholden to anybody’s orthodoxy.
Yet it remains to be seen whether the approach will yield results. Can Trump bring along enough Republicans, or will he further divide the GOP?
And do Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi really want to make deals on guns and immigration, or would they rather keep moving the goal posts because they want to claim in the midterms that Trump can’t govern?
All things considered, then, here is my current guide to those who want to see Trump succeed but are perplexed by events: Keep your eye on the big picture and begin each day with optimism because betting against him has been a loser.
While no president in modern history has faced such media assaults and entrenched opposition, including from some in the FBI, Trump has work horse stamina and warrior determination to succeed.
His policies are mostly the right ones and his tax changes and regulatory reforms will spur growth and create opportunities for millions of Americans.
I also believe Democrats are more divided and in a deeper hole than they want to admit. Pelosi’s absurd characterization of tax cuts and bonuses for working families as “crumbs” will not be forgotten by voters and could help the GOP hold the House.
Yet I’m not without concern.
Trump’s habit of shooting himself in the foot — why does he diminish himself by attacking Alec Baldwin? — provokes the worry that some voters who like his policies will get tired of the personal pettiness and give up on him.
I also worry that feuds with some Republicans could lead to policy defeats. And I fear that Trump’s habit of beating on his aides in public — even when he’s right, as he is about Attorney General Jeff Sessions — could cost him the services of John Kelly, his chief of staff.
While Kelly has not been mistake-free, he is the team’s MVP because he provides a stable foundation on which Trump and his administration can depend.
My conclusion: Unless Mueller produces clear evidence of wrongdoing, Trump’s policies will produce enough progress that he will finish this term strongly and have a good chance of winning again in 2020.

Federal court rules World War I memorial cross must be torn down

Bladensburg World War I Veterans Memorial, Bladensburg, Md.  (First Liberty Institute.)

Back in 1925, the American Legion erected a memorial in Bladensburg, Md., to honor the memory of 49 men who perished during World War I.

The 40-foot tall memorial became known as the "Peace Cross." 

Click here for a free subscription to Todd’s newsletter: a must-read for Conservatives
In 2014, the American Humanist Association -- a group that believes in "being good without a god" -- filed a lawsuit alleging the cross-shaped memorial is unconstitutional and demanding it be demolished, altered, or removed.
They alleged the cross carries "an inherently religious message and creates the unmistakable appearance of honoring only Christian servicemen."

"Today's decision sets dangerous precedent by completely ignoring history, and it threatens removal and destruction of veterans memorials across America."

On Wednesday, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and ruled the historic memorial must be torn down -- all because the Bladensburg Memorial is in the shape of a cross.
The Fourth Circuit said the memorial excessively entangles the government in religion because the cross is the “core symbol of Christianity” and “breaches” the wall separating church and state.
Writing separately, Chief Judge Gregory wrote, “This Memorial stands in witness to the VALOR, ENDURANCE, COURAGE, and DEVOTION of the forty-nine residents of Prince George’s County, Maryland ‘who lost their lives in the Great War for the liberty of the world.’  I cannot agree that a monument so conceived and dedicated and that bears such witness violates the letter or spirit of the very Constitution these heroes died to defend.”
The American Legion could appeal directly to the Supreme Court.
"Today's decision sets dangerous precedent by completely ignoring history, and it threatens removal and destruction of veterans memorials across America," First Liberty Institute attorney Hiram Sasser said.
First Liberty Institute and the Jones Day law firm are representing the American Legion in their fight.
“This memorial has stood in honor of local veterans for almost 100 years and is lawful under the First Amendment,” Jones Day attorney Michael Carvin said. “To remove it would be a tremendous dishonor to the local men who gave their lives during The Great War.”
I warned Americans in my new book, “The Deplorables’ Guide to Making America Great Again,” that the war against religious liberty and traditional American values is far from over.
A militant group of atheists, agnostics and free-thinkers want to eradicate Christianity in the public marketplace. The only way to stop this evil scourge is for people of faith to stand together and fight back in the courts.
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.