Conservative Blogger
Monday, April 2, 2018
White House goes on attack over ex-VA head Shulkin's claim he was fired
The White House is hitting back at former Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin for claiming that he was fired from his job and that he was only informed about it shortly before President Donald Trump tweeted about his replacement.
The Trump administration says he left his job willingly amid a bruising ethics scandal and mounting rebellion within the agency. The semantics of whether Shulkin resigned or was fired could be relevant to Trump's ability to name an acting secretary to temporarily fill his place.
On Sunday, chagrined by Shulkin's public statements blaming his ouster on unfair "political forces" in the Trump administration, the White House circulated a "talking points" memo to some veterans groups in a bid to discredit him.
Shulkin maintains that he never submitted a resignation letter.
"I came to run the Department of Veterans Affairs because I'm committed to veterans," Shulkin said. "And I would not resign because I'm committed to making sure this job was seen through to the very end."
HOWARD KURTZ: VA chief's firing portrayed as chaotic, but Trump had some good reasons
The semantics could be relevant to Trump's ability to name an acting VA secretary to temporarily fill Shulkin's place. Last week, Trump named Defense Department official Robert Wilkie to the acting position, bypassing Shulkin's deputy secretary, Tom Bowman. Bowman has come under criticism for being too moderate to push Trump's agenda.
Under federal law, a president has wide authority to temporarily fill a federal agency job if someone "dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office." There is no mention of a president having that authority if the person is fired. Still, it's unclear if courts would seek to draw a legal distinction between a firing and a forced resignation, if that is indeed what happened to Shulkin.
Shulkin, a former hospital executive, fired back in a New York Times op-ed that called the atmosphere in Washington "toxic, chaotic, disrespectful and subversive." He complained that he had "been falsely accused of things by people who wanted me out of the way ... It should not be this hard to serve your country."
Yes, Russia is a threat -- but America needs to play a shrewder game. Here's what that means
Several weeks ago, former Russian spy Sergei Skripal
and his daughter Yulia were found slumped over a park bench in the
English town of Salisbury. It was determined they were victims of a
nerve agent attack, which left both in critical condition. That nerve
agent is alleged to have been manufactured and possessed illegally by
Russia, and the UK immediately blamed Moscow for the attack.
If Russia were behind the attack, which is highly likely, it is possibly the country’s most significant intrusion into NATO territory since the radiation poisoning of another former Russian spy, Alexander Litvinenko, in 2006. As for potential Russian motives, it is speculated Skripal had been working with the UK’s foreign intelligence service, MI6.
The UK expelled 23 Russian diplomats and spies, and Russia, which denies the attack to the point of concocting conspiracy theories about why the chemical weapon originated in America or the UK, responded in turn by expelling 23 British diplomats and spies.
Meanwhile in America, the Trump administration just sanctioned Russian entities involved in cyber-attacks and “election interference.” And now, in the face of continued Russian intransigence over the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter, America is expelling 60 Russian diplomats and spies, and closing Russia’s Seattle consulate.
Senior Trump administration officials said that all of the Russians expelled were spies working under diplomatic cover, including at the United Nations. The administration believes there is an “unacceptably high” number of Russian intelligence operatives in the U.S. The officials also said that the Seattle consulate was a counter-intelligence concern because of its proximity to a U.S. Navy base.
This diplomatic row only serves to illustrate the trend of significantly deteriorating relations between Russia and the West.
But some hope that this is only the beginning of a more aggressive stance toward Russia. The question remains: Where would such an aggressive stance lead, and what would it accomplish for America?
America should certainly keep a close eye on Russia. Nominally, Russia’s nuclear arsenal is on par with America’s. And because of its massive geography, Russia borders many areas—including Europe and China—where America has troops, or has interests, military or economic.
Because of this, Russia policy needs to be both strategically sound and effective. It should be based on a sober assessment of narrowly defined U.S. interests: our security, prosperity, and our constitutional republic. We should cooperate with Russia where we can and confront them where we must.
Many U.S. politicians seem to forget the big picture, however. Policymakers need to regain sight of America’s interest, rather than pursue reactionary policies to oppose Russia everywhere, as if they’re the former Soviet Union. This requires less “standing up to Putin” than it does managing Russia’s inevitable decline.
Russia has less economic heft than Italy, faces decades of slow growth due to a declining population and a lack of structural reforms, and has an undiversified economy that is totally dependent on exporting fossil fuels.
Having about the same population as Japan, but being the largest country in the world in terms of land-mass, Russia is incredibly insecure. That’s why it spends over 5 percent of its GDP on its military, compared to over 3 percent in America. Russia’s military budget comes in at about $70 billion, where America’s is $700 billion. And that $70 billion amounts to over 25 percent of all the taxes the Kremlin collects from the meager Russian economy.
Yes, Russia can and does act to upset U.S. interests. That makes it a spoiler. But Russia is weak, whereas America is a superpower and global leader. Russia is not a competitor; it fails to stand anywhere near America’s military and diplomatic might. And Russia is light-years away from being a peer-competitor, as China could be, someday, decades from now.
This doesn’t mean Russia isn’t important. Even if Russia is just a spoiler, they are a spoiler with a massive nuclear arsenal. We must respect the fact that this arsenal poses an existential threat to the United States. And a declining power, especially one with as many nukes as Russia has, can be dangerous.
Peace through strength is in order, as is maintaining a tough line toward Putin. But managing Russia’s decline requires allowing Russia enough breathing room to go into the night quietly, and without a bang.
Policymakers must also maintain focus on fostering a resilient American economy, and an open American society where our people can flourish.
If policymakers spend us into oblivion—due to automatic spending on entitlements, as well as defense and non-defense discretionary spending—our national debt will harm our economy. After decades of stagnant real median wages and declining investment and productivity, some would argue that the national debt already does harm our economy. And quite obviously, our economy is the foundation of our national power (and our military power).
As Barry Posen argues, America must play a shrewder game. The long game. We don’t have to do something to win in the end. Closed and authoritarian societies that don’t share American interests grow brittle and ossified, and they eventually break. Confidence in our system, our people, and a laser-focus on our core national interests, will ensure America stays on top.
Willis L Krumholz is a fellow at Defense Priorities. He holds a JD and MBA degree from the University of St. Thomas, and works in the financial services industry.
If Russia were behind the attack, which is highly likely, it is possibly the country’s most significant intrusion into NATO territory since the radiation poisoning of another former Russian spy, Alexander Litvinenko, in 2006. As for potential Russian motives, it is speculated Skripal had been working with the UK’s foreign intelligence service, MI6.
The UK expelled 23 Russian diplomats and spies, and Russia, which denies the attack to the point of concocting conspiracy theories about why the chemical weapon originated in America or the UK, responded in turn by expelling 23 British diplomats and spies.
Meanwhile in America, the Trump administration just sanctioned Russian entities involved in cyber-attacks and “election interference.” And now, in the face of continued Russian intransigence over the poisoning of Skripal and his daughter, America is expelling 60 Russian diplomats and spies, and closing Russia’s Seattle consulate.
Senior Trump administration officials said that all of the Russians expelled were spies working under diplomatic cover, including at the United Nations. The administration believes there is an “unacceptably high” number of Russian intelligence operatives in the U.S. The officials also said that the Seattle consulate was a counter-intelligence concern because of its proximity to a U.S. Navy base.
This diplomatic row only serves to illustrate the trend of significantly deteriorating relations between Russia and the West.
Even if Russia is just a spoiler, they are a spoiler with a massive nuclear arsenal. We must respect the fact that this arsenal poses an existential threat to the United States. And a declining power, especially one with as many nukes as Russia has, can be dangerous.America expelling so-called Russian diplomats is an appropriate response to Russia’s brazen attack on Skripal and his daughter. If Russia abuses its privilege of having operatives on our shores—diplomatic or otherwise—it should face the consequences. And in general, America should want to reduce the number of spies—even those under diplomatic cover—that Russia has on American soil.
But some hope that this is only the beginning of a more aggressive stance toward Russia. The question remains: Where would such an aggressive stance lead, and what would it accomplish for America?
America should certainly keep a close eye on Russia. Nominally, Russia’s nuclear arsenal is on par with America’s. And because of its massive geography, Russia borders many areas—including Europe and China—where America has troops, or has interests, military or economic.
Because of this, Russia policy needs to be both strategically sound and effective. It should be based on a sober assessment of narrowly defined U.S. interests: our security, prosperity, and our constitutional republic. We should cooperate with Russia where we can and confront them where we must.
Many U.S. politicians seem to forget the big picture, however. Policymakers need to regain sight of America’s interest, rather than pursue reactionary policies to oppose Russia everywhere, as if they’re the former Soviet Union. This requires less “standing up to Putin” than it does managing Russia’s inevitable decline.
Russia has less economic heft than Italy, faces decades of slow growth due to a declining population and a lack of structural reforms, and has an undiversified economy that is totally dependent on exporting fossil fuels.
Having about the same population as Japan, but being the largest country in the world in terms of land-mass, Russia is incredibly insecure. That’s why it spends over 5 percent of its GDP on its military, compared to over 3 percent in America. Russia’s military budget comes in at about $70 billion, where America’s is $700 billion. And that $70 billion amounts to over 25 percent of all the taxes the Kremlin collects from the meager Russian economy.
Yes, Russia can and does act to upset U.S. interests. That makes it a spoiler. But Russia is weak, whereas America is a superpower and global leader. Russia is not a competitor; it fails to stand anywhere near America’s military and diplomatic might. And Russia is light-years away from being a peer-competitor, as China could be, someday, decades from now.
This doesn’t mean Russia isn’t important. Even if Russia is just a spoiler, they are a spoiler with a massive nuclear arsenal. We must respect the fact that this arsenal poses an existential threat to the United States. And a declining power, especially one with as many nukes as Russia has, can be dangerous.
Peace through strength is in order, as is maintaining a tough line toward Putin. But managing Russia’s decline requires allowing Russia enough breathing room to go into the night quietly, and without a bang.
Policymakers must also maintain focus on fostering a resilient American economy, and an open American society where our people can flourish.
If policymakers spend us into oblivion—due to automatic spending on entitlements, as well as defense and non-defense discretionary spending—our national debt will harm our economy. After decades of stagnant real median wages and declining investment and productivity, some would argue that the national debt already does harm our economy. And quite obviously, our economy is the foundation of our national power (and our military power).
As Barry Posen argues, America must play a shrewder game. The long game. We don’t have to do something to win in the end. Closed and authoritarian societies that don’t share American interests grow brittle and ossified, and they eventually break. Confidence in our system, our people, and a laser-focus on our core national interests, will ensure America stays on top.
Willis L Krumholz is a fellow at Defense Priorities. He holds a JD and MBA degree from the University of St. Thomas, and works in the financial services industry.
Trump declares 'NO MORE' DACA deal after report of caravan with Central Americans heading to US
President Trump declared on Sunday the deal for the Obama-era DACA program was “NO MORE” and called for "tough" immigration reform after a report stated a caravan carrying more than 1,000 people from Central America is traveling through Mexico and to the United States in hopes of entering the states illegally or by asking for asylum.
Trump, who has vowed to end catch and release, tweeted Sunday morning that Republicans need to take the "nuclear option" when passing tougher immigration laws.
The president had given Congress six months to pass legislation enshrining the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA), which protects about 800,000 young immigrants brought to country illegally as children from deportation.
“Border Patrol Agents are not allowed to properly do their job at the Border because of ridiculous liberal (Democrat) laws like Catch & Release. Getting more dangerous. 'Caravans' coming. Republicans must go to Nuclear Option to pass tough laws NOW. NO MORE DACA DEAL!” the president tweeted.
The caravan the president was likely referring to was first reported by BuzzFeed News on Friday. Organized by Pueblos Sin Fronteras, or People Without Borders, the caravan traveled through Mexico without authorization last week, according to the report. Officials in Mexico have not attempted to stop the migrants, about 80 percent of them from Honduras. The group’s intent is to provide those people a safe way to travel to the U.S.
Trump also threatened to pull out of the free trade agreement with Mexico unless the country did more to stop the flow of illegal immigrants entering the U.S. The U.S., Canada and Mexico are currently renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement at Trump's insistence.
“Mexico is doing very little, if not NOTHING, at stopping people from flowing into Mexico through their Southern Border, and then into the U.S. They laugh at our dumb immigration laws. They must stop the big drug and people flows, or I will stop their cash cow, NAFTA. NEED WALL!” he tweeted.
“These big flows of people are all trying to take advantage of DACA. They want in on the act!” he added.
Trump also spoke about DACA and Mexico before attending Easter services at Episcopal church near his home in Palm Beach, Fla.
"Mexico has got to help us at the border," Trump told reporters as he held his wife, Melania's, hand. "If they're not going to help us at the border, it's a very sad thing between our two countries."
Organizers believe about two-thirds of the people in the caravan are planning to enter the U.S. illegally or by asking for protection, according to BuzzFeed. The caravan does not give the migrants the guarantee they will enter the U.S. and uses any form of transportation necessary to make it to the border. Most of the people are reportedly fleeing poverty and political unrest from their home country.
Judd said border patrol agents do not have the ability to stop the migrants at the border even if they only step one foot on U.S. soil.
“Once they [the migrants] enter the country, even if we [border patrol agents] are standing at the border with our hands out saying, ‘Don’t enter, don’t enter,’ all they have to do is cross one foot into the border and we have to take them into custody,” Judd said. “If they ask for asylum or say I fear to go back to my country, then we have to process them under ‘credible fear’ which allows them to be released into our country.”
It’s unclear when the hundreds of migrants will be arriving at the U.S. border. Some of those who are traveling with the caravan are planning to stay in Mexico.
Google snubbed Easter with no doodle for 18th year in a row, Christians say
For the 18th year in a row, Google has no doodle to celebrate Easter, and Christians are angry on this holy day.
Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars
editor-at-large, tweeted Sunday about Christianity’s most joyful day:
”So Google has a doodle for every obscure ‘woke’ person/event
imaginable, but nothing for Easter? #EasterSunday”
James Woods retweeted it, saying: “They loathe Christians. Plain and simple.”The search giant did find room to celebrate April Fool’s Day — by inserting a “Where’s Waldo?” game into Google Maps.
Many took to Twitter with jokes about Google’s erasure of Easter, which celebrates Christianity’s core belief — that Jesus rose from the dead following crucifixion.
Lots of users sent snarky tweets showing the blank Google homepage of the day ignoring Easter.
In response, Google told Fox News it celebrated Easter in its own way with a tweet noting the holiday.
The last time Google celebrated Easter was April 23, 2000, with two candy eggs for the o’s in Google.
Google celebrates many special occasions with a doodle, such as Valentine’s Day.
Among the holidays the tech giant regularly celebrates with Google Doodles other than Easter Sunday, are Earth Day, Martin Luther King Day, Lunar New Year, Halloween, St. Patrick’s Day, Mother’s Day, Father’s Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas, as The Tennessee Star notes.
Sunday, April 1, 2018
Trump rips California governor for pardoning ex-cons facing deportation
18 hours ago
President Trump took aim at California Gov. Jerry Brown on Saturday for pardoning five ex-convicts facing deportation, asking if residents of the Golden State “really want” such policies for criminal immigrants.
The president referred to Brown as “Moonbeam,” a nickname he was given in the late 1970s during his first time as governor for proposing a California space academy and later adopting a plan to launch and orbit a satellite for emergency communications.
“Governor Jerry 'Moonbeam' Brown pardoned 5 criminal illegal aliens whose crimes include (1) Kidnapping and Robbery (2) Badly beating wife and threatening a crime with intent to terrorize (3) Dealing drugs. Is this really what the great people of California want? @FoxNews,” tweeted Trump.
The president’s remarks follow Brown’s pardon Friday of 56 convicted felons, two of whom were members of families that fled the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia four decades ago.
It was the Democrat governor’s third consecutive pardon round in which he intervened on behalf of immigrants who faced deportation because of criminal conditions.
The pardons don’t automatically stop deportation proceedings, but they eliminate the state convictions on which federal authorities based their deportation decisions on.
"The pardon does provide enormous benefit to immigrants facing deportation," said Anoop Prasad, an immigration staff attorney at Asian Law Caucus.
Trump’s remarks continued a war of words between him and Brown, who has accused the administration of “basically going to war” with California over immigration policy.
Brown last year signed sanctuary legislation limiting state and local cooperation with federal enforcement of immigration laws.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions responded with a Justice Department lawsuit seeking to invalidate three state laws protecting residents living in the country without documentation.
The pardons included Sokha Chhan and Phann Pheach, both of whom face deportation to Cambodia, a country ruled in the 1970s by the genocidal Khmer Rouge. Chhan was convicted of two counts of misdemeanor domestic violence in 2002 and served 364 days in jail.
Pheach was convicted of possessing drugs and obstructing a police officer in 2005 and served six months in jail. His wife said he is in federal custody.
Also pardoned was Daniel Maher, who was convicted in 1995 of kidnapping, robbery and being a felon in possession of a firearm and served five years in prison. Maher is facing deportation to China.
Chhan, Pheach and Maher hold permanent U.S. residency but had exhausted all legal avenues to fight deportation, making Brown's pardons for them their last hope to stay in the U.S., Prasad said.
"This is a life-changing, enormous event," he said.
Also pardoned while facing deportation were Daniel Mena and Francisco Acevedo Alaniz, but their home countries were not immediately known. Mena was convicted in 2003 of possessing illegal drugs. Alaniz served five months in prison for a 1997 auto theft conviction.
Brown on Friday also commuted the sentences of 14 others convicted of crimes.
The governor is a former Jesuit seminarian and traditionally issues pardons close to major Christian holidays. Easter falls on Sunday.
Gun rights activists hand out high-capacity magazines at Vermont rally
Rob Curtis, executive editor of a
firearms magazine, hands out 30-round magazines at a gun rights event
outside the Vermont State House in Montpelier on Saturday.
(AP)
Gun rights activists were handing out high-capacity magazines at a rally outside the Vermont State House on Saturday to protest new legislation that would ban them and increase gun control in the state.
Hundreds of protesters gathered to urge Republican Gov. Phil Scott not to sign a new bill that would ban high-capacity magazines and bump stocks, expand background checks for private gun sales and raise the legal age for gun purchases.
The measure was approved by the State House earlier this week and then again by the Senate on Friday in a 17-13 vote.
Protesters were handed nearly 1,200 high-capacity magazines, which hold 30 rounds of ammunition. A standard-capacity magazine holds around 10 rounds, according to Congressionalsportsmen.org, though this can vary.
OUTCRY FROM GUN ADVOCATES AFTER YOUTUBE BLOCKS VIDEOS ON FIREARMS ASSEMBLY, SALE
If the bill is signed by Scott, those who already own high-capacity magazines will be allowed to keep them.
Scott has indicated that he intends to sign the bill, and though he understands the disappointment of some in Vermont, he has faith that they will “get accustomed to the new normal.”
“I think at the end of the day," he said, "they’ll soon learn that what we have proposed, what’s being passed at this time, doesn’t intrude upon the Second Amendment. It doesn’t take away guns, and I believe that we will get accustomed to the new normal, which is trying to address this underlying violence that we are seeing across the nation.”
The extensive gun legislation package came after the Parkland, Fla., school shooting on Feb. 14, in which 17 people were killed by a young gunman.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
