Liberal states impose new individual mandate ahead of ObamaCare rollback

Last year’s sweeping Republican tax bill killed the federal tax penalty for individuals who refuse to get health insurance as mandated under ObamaCare.
But as that penalty disappears for Americans in January, a growing number of liberal states are moving to enact their own individual mandates requiring residents to purchase health insurance – a last-ditch effort to preserve a critical part of former President Barack Obama’s 2010 health care law.
Since Republicans passed the tax bill in December, New Jersey, Vermont and Washington, D.C., have passed laws enacting an individual mandate, joining Massachusetts, which famously enacted an individual mandate while Mitt Romney was governor in 2006.
Conservatives are railing against the moves.
“Just when you think the move for government control of health care couldn’t get any worse, somehow it manages to,” Christopher Jacobs, a conservative health policy expert, said when the D.C. Council passed its individual mandate requirement in June.
Under Obama’s health care law, the individual mandate required most people to have health insurance meeting specific standards. The law imposed tax penalties for violations.
But under last year’s final tax-reform bill, people no longer face a penalty for noncompliance as of January 2019.
“We eliminated the individual mandate that said that people had to buy government-approved insurance,” Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., told Fox News in a recent interview. “In a sense, it blew a big hole in ObamaCare.”
The idea behind the mandate was to make sure young and healthy customers are buying into the system, to offset the cost of taking on more sick and elderly customers. The looming rollback has triggered warnings of more disruptions to the market.
“The ACA was about standardizing, and now we are going back to more divergence,” Heather Howard of Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs told the Washington Post. “It is much more of a patchwork quilt.”
Earlier this year, New Jersey Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy signed a bill enacting an individual mandate. It goes into effect Jan. 1.
"Protecting the viability of the individual mandate is needed to maintain a foundation for the insurance market and to allow the success of the (Affordable Care Act) to continue,” New Jersey state Sen. Joe Vitale, D-Middlesex, a champion of the bill, said.
Vermont passed legislation enacting an individual mandate in May, though the details are still being worked out and it won’t take effect until 2020.
“We are committed to maintaining Vermont’s low uninsured rate,” a spokesman for Republican Gov. Phil Scott said at the time.
The D.C. Council in June passed its own individual mandate, which would require city residents to have health insurance coverage.
“Establishing an individual mandate here in the city will ensure that people will continue to have insurance,” D.C. Council member Vincent Gray said.
It comes as Democrats are embracing protecting ObamaCare – specifically the requirement to provide coverage to people with pre-existing conditions -- as an issue in the 2018 elections. Democratic leaders are also signaling that they will use it an issue in the upcoming battle over President Trump’s next Supreme Court nominee, though Republicans blame the law for rising premiums.

Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez draws Bronx cheer for misleading campaign bio

Creepy?

 

The Democratic Socialist candidate seeking to represent New York’s 14^th Congressional District is facing backlash over her working class “Bronx girl” campaign narrative.  

As the Journal News reported, the original online bio for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez -- the 28-year-old Bernie Sanders protégé who defeated longtime Democratic incumbent U.S. Rep. Joseph Crowley on June 26 -- seemed to suggest that she commuted to a school in the suburbs from her family's home in the Bronx borough of New York City.

But after critics noted that she and her family left the Bronx when she was 5 years old, the bio was changed to imply that the Bronx was home to her "extended family," the newspaper reported.

Still, no mention was made that her family moved to Yorktown, north of the Bronx, where records indicate Ocasio-Cortez lived with her mother and brother until their home was sold in 2016 for $355,500, according to the report.

Ocasio-Cortez fired back at her critics.

“Your attempt to strip me of my family, my story, my home, and my identity is exemplary of how scared you are of the power of all four of those things,” she tweeted.  

The candidate has built her campaign on a laundry list of socialist ideas such as universal healthcare, a $15 minimum wage, and abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Meanwhile, Ocasio-Cortez’s “Bronx background” is not the first shaky assertion she’s made.

In an interview with the left-wing outlet, the Intercept, Ocasio-Cortez claimed, “ICE is required to fill 34,000 beds with detainees every single night and that number has only been increasing since 2009.”

But according to Politifact, the legislation to which she referred requires only that ICE have 34,000 beds available every day.

 

European leaders 'scared to death' Trump will pull US troops home, ex-defense chief says

European Leaders

European leaders are reportedly nervous that President Donald Trump will make good on his campaign promise to withdraw American troops from the continent if host countries fail to pay their fair share for defense.
Trump has long complained that the U.S. bears too large a financial burden, but has yet to act. While the issue is not expected to come up at the Brussels meeting of NATO next week, uncertainty abounds.
Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told McClatchy that European leaders are “scared to death” and are “increasingly worried [Trump] is going to do things not based on what’s in the best interest … but based solely on his vision of ‘America First.’”

After Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula in 2014, NATO allies agreed to move toward a goal of devoting 2 percent of GDP to defense within a decade.  (Associated Press)

Last month, a G-7 meeting in Canada turned sour when Trump disparaged allies and refused to sign a joint statement. Trump’s upcoming summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland, has exacerbated concerns as well.
Erik Brattberg of the Carnegie Endowment’s Europe program, worried that criticizing Europeans weakens alliances and provides “new opportunities for countries like Russia to take advantage of that.”
Eastern Europe, which sits at Russia’s doorstep, has been particularly eager to keep American troops. Poland, for instance, has put forth a proposal for the U.S. to building permanent military bases.
According to Pew Research Data, more than 60,000 U.S. troops are currently stationed in Europe, including 35,000 in Germany, 12,000 in Italy, 8,500 in Britain, and 3,300 in Spain, with thousands more rotating into other European countries per circumstance.
But despite Trump’s rhetoric, his administration has maintained tactical support for Europe, having sent military equipment, participated in regional exercises, and signed defense agreements with Finland and Sweden. Still, any move to permanently withdraw American troops from Europe would ultimately require congressional authorization.

Conservative Liberal Cartoons

The 'conservative' resistance continues against Trump, the man delivering all the conservative results

If President Trump’s next nominee to the Supreme Court to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy is anything like Justice Neil Gorsuch – the president’s first nominee – America will be getting another great justice.
President Trump is scheduled to announce his nominee Monday. The announcement should solidify conservative support for the president – making the already-marginalized Never Trump faction of the Republican Party irrelevant.
For many conservatives, an important reason they voted for Donald Trump was because they believed he would nominate a solidly conservative justice to the Supreme Court.
Exit polls in that last presidential election showed 1 out of 5 voters cited the Supreme Court as “the most important factor” in deciding their vote – and 57 percent of these voters said they cast their ballots for candidate Trump.
We didn’t have a crystal ball, or any kind of political record to predict what President Trump would do. But we had his word and a list of potential Supreme Court nominees he said he would pick from.
Many of us took a chance that Trump wasn’t selling us down the river – and he didn’t disappoint. As one of his first acts as president, he gave us Neil Gorsuch.
Yet now there are still professed conservatives opposing a Trump presidency, even to the point where they’re openly hoping for Democrats to win control of Congress in the November midterm elections.
The irony is that these self-proclaimed "principled conservatives” can relate more to the far-left liberal crowd with their “resist movement” than to the conservative base they claim to want to protect.
In just over 17 months, President Trump has cut taxes and rolled back regulations. This has led to the lowest unemployment rate for African-Americans since records have been kept, the lowest recorded unemployment rate for Hispanics, and the lowest unemployment rate for women in two decades.
These are the practical results of conservative principles when put into action. Not to mention that President Trump has pulled the U.S. out of the Paris climate accords and out of the Iran nuclear deal.
Let’s also not forget that one year ago North Korea was firing missiles over Japan, testing atomic bombs and threatening the United States. Today, prospects for peace and security along the Pacific Rim are real, because this president – unlike his predecessors in both parties – took a different approach.
Does anyone doubt if any of the other candidates in the pool of Republican presidential contenders had been elected – and had this much success in this short amount of time – these same Never Trumpers would be working for the president rather than against him?
Yet the “conservative” resistance continues against the man delivering all the conservative results, and their whining grows staler by the minute.
With every promise President Trump keeps to conservatives who took a chance on him, the background noise from the GOP Never Trumpers sounds increasingly muffled – as it should, because the Never Trumpers are like ostriches with their heads buried beneath the ground.
The longer the Never Trumpers choose to dig their heels in and refuse to acknowledge that President Trump is making good on everything he said he’d do, the more credibility they lose.
We’ve heard the Trump haters in the GOP say they don’t like him because he’s – take your pick – not conservative enough (which is utter nonsense at this point); not a politician; or not “presidential” enough.
Perhaps these Never Trumpers are plagued with short-term memories, because some previous Republican nominees could hardly be considered conservative or, in some cases, presidential.
President Trump is unconventional, for sure – and that’s exactly why the American people elected him. He is an outside-the-box, entrepreneurial politician who shakes up business as usual –and delivers results.
If President Trump is re-elected, it’s likely he could have a third – and maybe even a fourth – Supreme Court seat to fill. Conservatives saw this in 2016 when they went to the polls, and that’s why many voted based on this issue and didn’t hesitate to cast ballots for Trump. They knew what was at stake.
Following his nomination to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch said: “A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge, stretching for results he prefers, rather than those the law demands.”
This kind of deference to the rule of law and the Constitution is exactly what conservatives were hoping for in a Supreme Court nominee when they voted for President Trump. Conservatives want justices who fairly apply the law and don’t make it up from the bench, and who protect our freedoms.
The Constitution is not a list of suggestions. Justice Gorsuch understands that. As the names that have been floated as potential Supreme Court nominees seem to indicate, President Trump appears to understand that as well.
If those 57 percent “Supreme Court issue” voters had chosen to jump on the Never Trump bandwagon within the GOP, simply because they didn’t like the guy, we’d be looking at a Supreme Court being stacked with judicial activists who’d chip away at our freedom by rewriting the Constitution into whatever suits their political whims.
If the GOP Never Trump crowd truly wants to stand up for conservative principles they should stand with the president. He’s standing with us.
Lauren DeBellis Appell, a freelance writer in Fairfax, Virginia, was deputy press secretary for then-Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., in his successful 2000 re-election campaign, as well as assistant communications director for the Senate Republican Policy Committee (2001-2003).

Liz Peek: Democrats are furious about Trump and the Supreme Court – They have only Obama to blame

Though they won’t admit it, Democrats are suffering continued fallout from the arrogance of the Obama White House. Liberals are furious that President Trump will have the opportunity to appoint another justice to the Supreme Court, thus cementing a conservative majority for the foreseeable future.
Moreover, liberals are upset that the Trump administration may have convinced Justice Anthony Kennedy to recently announce his retirement, viewing that effort as dirty pool. That Kennedy, age 81, is nobody’s fool – and is unlikely to have been manipulated – appears irrelevant.
The real offense, which actually merits outrage from the left, is that President Obama did not convince liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire during the many years that Democrats controlled the Senate.
Ginsburg is 85. She will surely leave the bench in the next few years, opening up the possibility that the Supreme Court will have an even greater conservative cast – one that might indeed persist for a generation.
Why did President Obama not plan for such a possibility, which would at least have guaranteed four liberal votes on the court? The obvious answer is that he never anticipated that the opportunity would pass.

It was President Obama who left his party in this position. His anti-business agenda was unpopular, but was never revisited. Democrats’ losses over the past decade stemmed in large part from a slow-growth economy that never gained momentum.

Even though he received what he called a “shellacking” in the 2010 midterms, and even though the GOP made unprecedented political gains during his tenure, President Obama was always convinced the country was behind him.
 As Mara Liasson wrote for NPR in 2016: “During Obama's eight years in office, the Democrats have lost more House, Senate, state legislative and governors seats than under any other president.” She noted that the Obama legacy includes “one huge failure: a diminished Democratic Party.”
In 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., invoked the so-called “nuclear option,” discarding traditional filibuster protections for the minority party in favor of requiring only a simple majority to approve judicial and executive branch nominees. He carved out an exception for people put forward for the Supreme Court.
The next year – with CNN describing President Obama as an “unpopular president limping through his second term” – Republicans reclaimed control of the Senate. As a result of that achievement, President Obama’s chances of securing a liberal majority on the high court all but disappeared.
In the spring of 2016, Senate Republicans blocked a vote on Judge Merrick Garland, who President Obama nominated to the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The Republicans said the looming election should allow Americans to decide which party’s president could appoint the next Supreme Court justice.
Last year, with partisanship riding high in the Senate, Republicans extended Reid’s majority rule provision to include Supreme Court justices, clearing the path for confirming Judge Neil Gorsuch to become a Supreme Court justice. President Trump’s pick to take Justice Kennedy’s place will have to win a majority of Senate votes, which is no mean task.
Now liberals are anguishing about the potential reversal of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion nationwide.
Three Republican senators – Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Susan Collins of Maine – have indicated they will not vote for a Supreme Court nominee who suggests he or she might not respect the precedent of earlier rulings allowing abortion. Moreover, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona has not shown up in the Senate since last year because he is being treated for brain cancer, and cannot be counted on to be able to cast a vote.
With the GOP having but a two-vote advantage in the Senate, the path is narrow.
Still, there is little question that the court will likely soon move to the right, and there is little Democrats can do about it.
President Trump has said he will announced his Supreme Court pick Monday. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has made it clear he wants to vote on the new nominee this fall.
It was President Obama who left his party in this position. His anti-business agenda was unpopular, but was never revisited. Democrats’ losses over the past decade stemmed in large part from a slow-growth economy that never gained momentum of the sort we have witnessed since the election of President Trump.
Stagnant wages, sluggish job growth and lagging capital investment never prodded President Obama to reach out to the business community or to partner with it in reviving the economy.
The Obama White House could not have imagined President Trump’s plan to lower corporate taxes and ease up on regulations. Even through eight disappointing and costly years of economic underperformance, President Obama seems to have never doubted his policies.
In President Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhode’s book “The World as It Is: a Memoir of the Obama White House,” President Obama asks his aides, after Donald Trump’s election: “What if we were wrong?” It was, as The New York Times noted, a moment of “rare self-doubt.”
President Obama’s destruction of his party has largely been overlooked by Democrats, but his indifference to the future of the Supreme Court is an act of political malpractice impossible to ignore.
Recent Supreme Court rulings have not gone well for Democrats. These include Janus v. AFSCME (the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees), which could undermine the influence of public employee unions that generally support Democrats in elections; the upholding of President Trump’s travel ban on countries that pose a national security risk; and the ruling in favor of a baker who refused to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
These decisions and others hint at the influence of the new conservative Supreme Court, and the damage that will done to the progressive movement.
And the retirement of Justice Ginsburg could be next.
Liz Peek is a former partner of major bracket Wall Street firm Wertheim & Company. A former columnist for the Fiscal Times, she writes for The Hill and contributes frequently to Fox News, the New York Sun and other publications. For more visit LizPeek.com. Follow her on Twitter @LizPeek.

NFL's new anthem policy is 'worse' than old one, Trump says

President Donald Trump speaks during a rally at the Four Seasons Arena at Montana ExpoPark, Thursday, July 5, 2018, in Great Falls, Mont. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)  (Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved)

President Donald Trump is not done with the NFL yet, saying the league’s new national anthem policy is “worse” than the original one.
During a campaign rally in Great Falls, Mont., Trump took aim at the NFL’s new policy again, which was passed in May and requires players to stand for the national anthem if they are out on the field. Last season, the NFL came under fire when some of its players kneeled during the anthem.
“Hey, how about the NFL. Look I don’t want to cause controversy. … I don’t want to cause controversy,” Trump said. “They passed this stupid thing. You don’t have to do this anymore if you don’t respect the flag or if you don’t like the country or whatever it is, just go into the locker room.”
“I think in many respects that’s worse. Isn’t that worse than not standing? You know? I think that’s worse. You know what? It doesn’t play. It doesn’t play. I actually think in many ways it’s worse.”
Trump also apparently isn’t a fan of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, who signed a five-year contract extension in December. According to ESPN, the deal is worth $200 million over the life of the contract — about 40 million annually.
“This commissioner, where does this guy come from, I have no idea,” Trump said. “They’re paying him 40 million dollars a year, and their ratings are down 20 percent.”

Trump claims Maxine Waters' IQ in 'mid-60s,' slams 'fake Pocahontas' Elizabeth Warren in rally to unseat Jon Tester

President Trump held a rally in Montana Thursday night as part of his effort to oust Sen. Jon Tester, one of his most bitter political opponents -- but the president took time to rail against several other big-name critics.
Speaking at the Four Seasons Arena in Great Falls, Trump said "it's time to retire" Tester, a red-state Democrat. He added that Democrats "actually got their ass kicked" in 2016, drawing racuous applause as he proceeded to unload on such varied targets as The New York Times, Rep. Maxine Waters and Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
"Pocahontas, to you I apologize," Trump said. "To the fake Pocahontas, I won't apologize."
He then joked that he would pull out a heritage kit during a hypothetical presidential debate with Warren and slowly toss it at her, "hoping it doesn't hit her and injure her arm, even though it only weighs probably two ounces." Trump said he would offer to donate $1 million to Warren's preferred charity if she took the ancestry test.
Warren has long been accused of falsely claiming she is of Native American heritage to help in securing jobs, including one as a Harvard law professor.

"Pocahontas, to you I apologize. To the fake Pocahontas, I won't apologize."
- President Trump

Trump also took another dig at California Rep. Maxine Waters, whom he called "the new leader" of the Democratic party.
"Democrats want anarchy," Trump said, saying they would allow gangs like MS-13 "run wild" in America. "And they don't know who they're playing with, folks.
"I said it the other day, yes, [Maxine Waters] is a low-IQ individual. Honestly, she's somewhere in the mid-60s, I believe," Trump added.
WATCHDOG SAYS MAXINE WATERS INCITED 'MOB VIOLENCE' AGAINST TRUMP OFFICIALS
Waters' vocal calls for public pushback against Trump officials has riled up her base of supporters, although the Democratic leadership has pushed back against calls to intimidate political opponents.
Tester -- the main target of the rally -- outraged the White House after he released disputed accusations that derailed the nomination of White House physician Ronny Jackson to be Veteran Affairs secretary earlier this year, leading Trump to demand Tester's resignation.
"Jon Tester doesn't share your values," Trump said at Thursday's rally. "He showed his true colors with his shameful, dishonest attacks on a great man -- a friend of mine."
Trump highlighted Tester's opposition to his travel ban and Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.
He then commented on the woman escorted down from the Statue of Liberty yesterday following an anti-ICE protest.
"You saw that clown yesterday on the Statue of Liberty?" Trump asked. "You see the guys that went up there? I wouldn't have done it. I would've said, 'Let's get some nets and wait until she comes down.'"
Trump also touted his progress with North Korea and vowed to get tough with NATO at this week's summit in Brussels, saying members of the alliance aren't paying enough towards their own security and are relying excessively on the U.S.
Trump was in Montana supporting State Auditor Matt Rosendale, who recently won the state's Senate GOP primary and will face off against Tester in November. Polls show that Tester holds about a seven-point lead over Rosendale, even though Trump carried Montana by more than 20 points in 2016.
Before Trump spoke, Rosendale praised Trump for being a "voice for the unborn" and promised to support pro-life causes if elected -- particularly notable comments given expectations that Trump will soon nominate a conservative justice to the Supreme Court.
Tester's seat is one of a handful that Republicans are hoping to flip as they hold onto a narrow majority in the Senate.
WATCH: JUST HOW VULNERABLE IS TESTER IN NOVEMBER?
Donald Trump Jr. kicked off the Tester tongue-lashing early on in the evening, before his father took the stage. He referred to him as "two-faced Tester" and derided his lack of support for the Republican tax overhaul and other key White House policies.
Towards the middle of the wild rally, the president called out critics who say he's a poor communicator.
"They never say I am a great speaker," Trump said, as the crowd began to cheer loudly. "Then why in the hell do so many people come?"

Democratic Party Downhill Cartoons

Trump praises military for keeping US 'safe, strong, proud'

President Donald Trump on Wednesday praised the U.S. military for keeping America "safe, strong, proud, mighty and free" and used the Independence Day holiday to thank them for being willing to put their lives on the line in defense of the nation.
"Two hundred and 42 years ago on July 4, 1776, America's founders adopted the Declaration of independence and changed the course of human history," said Trump, addressing hundreds of military families attending a White House picnic from a balcony overlooking the South Lawn of the White House.
"But our freedom exists only because there are brave Americans willing to give their lives, to defend it and defend our great country," added Trump, who was accompanied by his wife, Melania. "America's liberty has been earned through the blood, sweat and sacrifice of American patriots."
Trump and the first lady later returned to the balcony toward the end of a nationally televised concert from the South Lawn and stayed for the annual fireworks show on the National Mall. Trump pumped both fists several times at the end of the show before he went back inside the White House.
Trump was not expected on Wednesday to interview candidates for the Supreme Court, taking a holiday respite from the intense process. He has spoken with seven candidates, according to the White House, and will announce his choice for a successor to retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy on Monday.
Before greeting guests on the lawn during the picnic, Trump praised service members and their families as "truly unbelievable people."
"Thank you for keeping America safe, strong, proud, mighty and free," he said.
The White House invited some 1,500 military families to the picnic, according to the first lady's office, with 5,500 more invited for the fireworks. Several Cabinet secretaries attended the picnic, including embattled Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt.
Entertainers appearing at the 90-minute concert that was televised by the Hallmark Channel included singer-songwriter Sara Evans, pianist Lola Astanova and former "American Idol" finalists Jonny Brenns and Jax.

Trump slams OPEC on Twitter over gas prices, says cartel is 'doing little to help'

President Trump aimed pointed criticism at the OPEC oil cartel on Twitter Wednesday, saying it was "doing little to help" high gas prices in the U.S.
"If anything, they are driving prices higher as the United States defends many of their members for very little $’s," Trump claimed. "This must be a two way street. REDUCE PRICING NOW!"
Last month, OPEC's 15 member states agreed to to pump one million barrels more crude oil daily, a move that should help contain the recent rise in global energy prices. However, there has been little discernible effect on American gas prices.
According to AAA, the national average gas price Wednesday was $2.86 per gallon, the highest in four years. However, the organization said that was 11 cents cheaper than the average price this past Memorial Day.
Over the weekend, Trump said he had received assurances from King Salman of Saudi Arabia that the kingdom would increase oil production by "maybe up to 2,000,000 barrels." Saudi Arabia acknowledged the call took place, but mentioned no production targets.
The Trump administration has pushed U.S. allies to end all purchases of oil from Iran after the president pulled America out of the 2015 nuclear deal this past May. Prices also have risen with ongoing unrest in Venezuela and fighting in Libya over control of that country's oil infrastructure.
The administration has been counting on Saudi Arabia and the other OPEC members to supply enough oil to offset the lost Iranian exports and prevent oil prices from rising sharply.
On Wednesday, the price of Brent crude oil stood at $78.16 a barrel, while U.S. benchmark crude stood at $74.14 a barrel

President Trump shakes hands with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House in March  (AP)

Saudi Arabia currently produces some 10 million barrels of crude oil a day. Its record is 10.72 million barrels a day. Trump's tweet offered no timeframe for the additional 2 million barrels — whether that meant per day or per month.
However, Saudi Aramco CEO Amin Nasser told journalists in India on Monday that the state oil company has spare capacity of 2 million barrels of oil a day. That was after Saudi Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih said the kingdom would honor the OPEC decision to stick to a 1-million-barrel increase.
"Saudi Arabia obviously can deliver as much as the market would need, but we're going to be respectful of the 1-million-barrel cap — and at the same time be respectful of allocating some of that to countries that deliver it," al-Falih said then.
The administration has threatened close allies such as South Korea with sanctions if they don't cut off Iranian imports by early November. South Korea accounted for 14 percent of Iran's oil exports last year, according to the U.S. Energy Department.
China is the largest importer of Iranian oil with 24 percent, followed by India with 18 percent. Turkey stood at 9 percent and Italy at 7 percent.
The State Department has said it expects the "vast majority" of countries will comply with the U.S. request.

'Their Party Has No Future': Former Democrat Urges Liberals to 'Walk Away' From Democratic Party

The creator of a social media campaign urging liberals to detach themselves from the Democratic Party said that the future of the party is over.
Brandon Straka started the "#WalkAway Campaign," which shares video stories of people who decide to dissociate themselves from liberalism.
According to the movement's Facebook page, it's meant to "encourage and support those on the left to walk away from the divisive tenets."
Straka appeared on The Ingraham Angle Tuesday and said that negative rhetoric spoken by the left and intolerance it has shown has been a big reason as to why he's walked away.

Woman escorted down after scaling Statue of Liberty following anti-ICE protests

A woman was escorted down from the Statue of Liberty on Wednesday after she scaled the bottom part of the national monument in protest of U.S. immigration policy, sparking a nearly four-hour standoff with authorities.
The woman, identified as Therese Okoumou, appeared to be sitting near the feet of Lady Liberty — roughly 25 feet above the monument's observation point. She was apprehended by police Wednesday, hours after she ascended the monument on Independence Day.

At least one person is scaling the Statue of Liberty after an "Abolish ICE" protest resulted in multiple arrests.  (Danny Owens)

Video taken by news helicopters showed two New York Police Department officers, attached to tethers, climb up to the base around 6:15 p.m. — the time of the park's closing — and apprehend the woman.
The park was shut down hours before closing time and was evacuated as a precaution, a National Park Service official told Fox News.

In a tweet, activists with the group Rise and Resist said the person climbing the statue has no affiliation with the earlier protest.  (Danny Owens)

Brian Glacken, a detective with the NYPD Emergency Service Unit, said at a news conference late Wednesday that after receiving a call about the woman just after 3 p.m., officers made their way to the base of the statue, where the woman was located, and had a conversation with her.
"She was basically up there saying about the children in Texas. She just mentioned the kids in Texas," Glacken said, confirming the woman was protesting the Trump administration's "zero tolerance" immigration policy.
The detective said initially the woman "wasn't friendly," but eventually they developed "a rapport with her so she would trust us."
At least 16 ESU personnel were involved in the rescue.
The woman had participated in an earlier protest Wednesday with New York-based activist group Rise and Resist, which organized the demonstration, which resulted in at least six arrests.
The group of roughly 40 demonstrators hung a banner emblazoned with a message about abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty.
The group initially tweeted that the climber had "no connection" to their demonstration, but group member Jay Walker later said she was involved but no one knew she planned to climb the Statue of Liberty.
"We don't know whether she had this planned before she ever got to Liberty Island or whether it was a spur-of-the-moment decision," Walker told The Associated Press. He said regardless, he felt the stunt was good publicity.
But National Park Service spokesman Jerry Willis said he "feel[s] really sorry for those visitors today" who had to leave the statue and Liberty Island or couldn't come because it was evacuated. "People have the right to speak out. I don't think they have the right to co-opt the Statue of Liberty to do it."

The woman who climbed the Statue of Liberty protested alongside New York-based activist group Rise and Resist earlier on Wednesday before scaling the national monument.  (Danny Owens)

The Statue of Liberty was gifted to the U.S. by France in 1886. It became a welcoming symbol for immigrants and refugees coming to the U.S.

July 4th Cartoons

Remember Them.

As you celebrate July Fourth, remember our often forgotten heroes. They paid a terrible price for our freedoms

God Bless America

 By Damon Friedman | Fox News

As you celebrate the Fourth of July, please remember our often forgotten heroes. They paid a terrible price for our freedoms.

Many of them have served in America’s longest war – the War on Terror that began on Sept. 11, 2001 when Islamic terrorists seized four airliners and killed almost 3,000 Americans at the World Trade Center in New York City; at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia; and in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

There is no end in sight to this war. Already, more Americans have served in it than the Vietnam War. Sadly, the war often continues inside, after the warrior returns home.
As an Air Force lieutenant colonel who spent four combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, I know many of these warriors. We’d call them patriots, but they would say that they were just doing their job. They were fulfilling their oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
We’d say that’s a noble thing. They’d say they just wanted to serve because they love their country and wanted to protect their families.
Many of them came back to us as broken, shattered people incapable of enjoying the life they once knew. Their stories are full of pain and heartache. They suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), finding themselves unable to adjust to civilian life, haunted by the things they did and the things they saw.
These veterans may experience enormous grief over the loss of fellow comrades and guilt over decisions they made or actions they took. So many of them also experience a deep sense of hopelessness and loss of purpose. They feel isolated and alone, unable to reconnect to family and friends. Many of their marriages end in divorce.
Besides such clinical issues as hyper-vigilance, sleeplessness or intrusive thoughts, most of these heroes suffer from uncontrolled anger and irritability. Anger is easily triggered by a sight, a smell or a thought.
Some try to drown their pain in alcohol or take it out on others in various forms of abuse, such as domestic violence or road rage. Some, finding themselves at wits’ end, attempt to end their pain by suicide. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), some 20 veterans commit suicide every day – 10 times the number who die in combat.
The VA has implemented numerous programs to address the issues of returning service members. It has made a concerted effort to help our veterans. But much more needs to be done. The solution lies in taking a holistic approach that addresses their physical, emotional and spiritual problems. Failing to address the spiritual component is leaving a gaping hole in the treatment of our warriors.
Fortunately, a number of ministries have stepped forward to do battle for the hearts and minds of our troubled heroes. At SOF Missions, our approach is based on complete surrender to God. When a warrior comes to the place of surrender, he or she realizes the battle can’t be won alone.
The enemy, in whatever form it takes – PTSD, alcoholism or abuse – is just too strong. Some wounds, only God can heal.
Through Him, warriors experience healing and find lasting peace. He is the only one who can take the guilt, anger and bitterness away, and bring a person into a place of hope, peace and lasting rest.

Supreme Court's Janus ruling will end cash cow for liberal activists: experts

The battle over unions collecting money from non-members moved from the Supreme Court to the court of public employee’s opinion.
On the same day the court announced its ruling in the Janus case barring public sector unions from automatically collecting fees from government workers who choose not to join the union, libertarian groups were outside government buildings passing out literature.
“We’re planning an all-of-the above comprehensive educational campaign to reach those public employees and let them know about their Constitutional rights,” said Maxford Nelsen from the Freedom Foundation, a Libertarian think-tank based in Washington State.
Nelsen has been down this road before. The Freedom Foundation won a smaller but similar ruling in state court four years ago. Since then, his group has been trying to spread the word, but the unions have blocked access to personal contact information. Some of the affected state workers still have not been notified.
Greg Devereux, executive director of the Washington Federation of State Employees (WFSE), said his members want their personal information blocked.
SUPREME COURT'S JANUS DECISION COULD HURT UNIONS' POLITICAL MIGHT IN MIDTERMS
“Freedom Foundation cares about one thing, and that’s the power of collective voice of people,” said Devereux, “They don’t like that. That’s why they’re trying to destroy us.”
According to unionstats.com, most of the fallout from the SCOTUS ruling will be in the Northeast and along the West Coast where there are no right-to-work laws. While nationally just one-third of government workers belong to unions, the penetration is much higher in blue coastal states. In New York, 71 percent of public sector employees pay union dues, followed closely by Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maine, California and Washington state.
Organized labor held rallies last week blasting the court ruling and vowing to only get stronger.
“This was one of the dumbest things they could possibly do. It will energize unions in this country and you will see a resurgence,” said Devereux.
Unions are also waging an information campaign selling members on the value of staying in the union and paying those dues and fees. Stephen Baker, who is a state health worker and belongs to WFSE, needs no convincing.
SUPREME COURT RULING IN JANUS UNION CASE SPARKS REACTIONS FROM TRUMP, OTHER LAWMAKERS
“Those people who say they have no voice, the union is the bulwark,” Baker said, “it is the foundation of democracy in this country.”
But Paul Vilja disagrees. He’s a registered nurse working at Western State Hospital and a 29-year member of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). He’s also a lifelong Republican who says the union’s political contributions do not reflect his values.
“I have a voice, and they have to win me back, and they’re welcome to win me back if they’re going to be bipartisan,” Vilja said.
Union leaders contend their political activism is all geared toward getting union workers better pay and job protections. But one party gets the lions share. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, in the 2016 election cycle, public sector unions spent $64.6 million on campaigns. Ninety percent went to Democrats.
The Freedom Foundation said that cash cow for liberal activists is now over.
“Allowing unions that ability to compel people to pay them gives them an undue influence, an inflated voice, if you will,” Nelsen said, “because you’re taking these people along for the ride that don’t support the union’s agenda.”

Judge tosses suit alleging Trump campaign conspired with Russians in hack: report

U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle

A federal judge on Tuesday tossed a lawsuit claiming that the Trump campaign and former adviser Roger Stone colluded with WikiLeaks and the Russian government to publish hacked Democratic National Committee emails during the presidential election.
U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle said in a ruling that the allegations of conspiracy were insubstantial to proceed in a court, Politico reported.
"The Trump Campaign’s efforts to elect President Trump in D.C. are not suit-related contacts for those efforts did not involve acts taken in furtherance of the conspiracies to disseminate emails that harmed plaintiffs," wrote the Clinton-appointed judge. "Campaign meetings, canvassing voters, and other regular business activities of a political campaign do not constitute activities related to the conspiracies alleged in the complaint.”
She noted that her ruling is based on the technicalities of the lawsuit and doesn’t take a position on whether the Trump campaign and its officials actually conspired with the Russians during the election.
"It bears emphasizing that this Court’s ruling is not based on a finding that there was no collusion between defendants and Russia during the 2016 presidential election," Huvelle wrote. "This is the wrong forum for plaintiffs’ lawsuit. The Court takes no position on the merits of plaintiffs’ claims."
The lawsuit was brought by two DNC donors, Roy Cockrum and Eric Schoenberg, and former DNC staffer Scott Comer, who alleged that the publication of the emails violated their privacy and that the Trump campaign and Stone engaged in an illicit activity, according to Politico.
The DNC itself wasn’t part of the suit, though it had brought a separate lawsuit back in April, accusing top Trump campaign officials, including Trump's son Donald Jr. and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner of colluding with the Russians.
Stone’s role in WikiLeaks activities raised concerns after the revelations that he reportedly exchanged messages with both WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 – a social media account that U.S. intelligence agencies believe was part of the “Russian military intelligence” effort to spread the hacked emails, The Daily Beast reported.
Despite the setback, the group that filed the lawsuit, Protect Democracy, said it will refile the case elsewhere.
"While we are disappointed in and respectfully disagree with today’s decision from the District Court to dismiss this case on the grounds that it does not belong in Washington, D.C., this case is far from over," Protect Democracy's Ian Bassin said in a statement to Politico. "It is clear that the Court recognizes that there is sufficient evidence to suggest a conspiracy between the Trump Campaign and the Kremlin, but believes this case belongs in a different court. What today’s decision indicates is that the merits of this case will proceed somewhere,” he added.

Dershowitz unloads on NY socialist Dem, Martha's Vineyard liberals

Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz said Tuesday he won’t let radicals like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders steal the spirit of the Democratic Party and doubled-down on his attack on fellow liberals who “shunned” him at Martha's Vineyard.
“I won’t let the Democrats steal my party from me. I want to regain the center,” Dershowitz told WABC Radio’s “Curtis and Cosby” show, noting that he will remain a Democrat as “as long as there’s some chance the Democratic Party can return to normalcy.”
“I want to make sure that the radical Left, the woman who got elected in the Bronx and Queens to Congress on the Democratic ticket, that they and Sanders and others don’t represent the Democratic Party,” he continued, referring to socialist Ocasio-Cortez who pulled off a shock victory last week against incumbent Democratic Rep. Joseph Crowley.
“I want a fight within the Democratic Party to restore it to the days when it was a great centrist party, when it united people rather than divided people,” he added.

"I want a fight within the Democratic Party to restore it to the days when it was a great centrist party, when it united people rather than divided people."
- Alan Dershowitz

ALAN DERSHOWITZ SLAMS MARTHA’S VINEYARD LIBERALS FOR ‘SHUNNING’ HIM OVER TRUMP DEFENSE
Dershowitz, a frequent guest on Fox News, also weighed in on the controversy surrounding his recent claims that he was ostracized at Martha’s Vineyard by his fellow liberals over his defense of constitutional rights of President Donald Trump.
“The idea that some of these people aren’t talking to me is not a punishment, it’s a great reward. I am so pleased,” he said during the interview. “It’s a red badge of courage for me that there are some people who prefer to shut down debate and not talk to me.”
“These are people who have asked me for help over the years, who have asked me for support when their kid gets busted on a marijuana charge, or on possession of alcohol, I’m the first one they call,” he added. “But as soon as I defend the rights of Donald Trump or anybody else they disagree with, I’m am a pariah.”

“These are people who have asked me for help over the years, who have asked me for support when their kid gets busted on a marijuana charge, or on possession of alcohol, I’m the first one they call."
- Alan Dershowitz on Martha's Vineyard liberals

Dershowitz wrote in The Hill that he is a liberal Democrat who voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election and contributing “handsomely” to her campaign. But he said his principled defense of civil liberties that could benefit Trump was too much to swallow for his social circle.
“So they are shunning me and trying to ban me from their social life on Martha’s Vineyard,” he wrote.