Calif. demands more federal dollars for high-speed rail, refuses to pay back grants

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 1:10 PM PT — Wednesday, March 6, 2019

California is refusing to repay the federal grants it took for its failed high speed rail project, and is demanding more federal dollars to complete what critics are now calling “a train to nowhere.”
The head of California’s high speed rail authority — Brian Kelly — sent two letters to the Federal Railroad Administration this week. In the letters he denied the state violated its federal contract, which gave California $3.5 billion to build high-speed rail from San Francisco to Los Angeles.
Under the terms of the contract, California is required to repay the money if it does not complete the project by a certain deadline.
Earlier this year, Governor Gavin Newsom slammed the brakes on the project due to cost overruns. He also cut the route by more than half.
“The current project as planned would cost too much and respectfully take too long, and there’s been too little oversight and not enough transparency,” stated the California lawmaker.
Kelly said since the governor is not totally abandoning the project, the state is not in violation of its agreement. He blasted the Trump administration for halting an additional $930 million pledged for the project, calling the move illegal and wasteful.
However, President Trump disagrees and has demanded the state to repay $2.5 billion dollars.

Trump calls Apple CEO Tim Cook ‘Tim Apple’ at White House meeting, social media erupts

President Donald Trump talks to Apple Inc. CEO Tim Cook during the American Workforce Policy Advisory Board's first meeting in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, March 6, 2019. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

President Trump suffered a slip of the tongue Wednesday when he called Apple CEO Tim Cook “Tim Apple” during a meeting at the White House.
Cook sat next to Trump during the American Workforce Policy Advisory Board meeting in the State Dining Room, where officials discussed the importance of technology in education. Trump praised the CEO for his “big investment” in the U.S., but when it came time to thank Cook by name, not even a conspicuously placed name tag could help.
“People like Tim, you’re expanding all over and doing things that I really wanted you to do right from the beginning. I used to say, ‘Tim, you gotta start doing it here,’ and you really have you’ve really put a big investment in our country. We really appreciate it very much, Tim Apple,” Trump said.
It didn’t take long for Trump’s flub to go viral on social media.
The president’s previous public name mix-ups included mistakenly calling Lockheed Martin's CEO Marillyn Hewson "Marillyn Lockheed," according to USA Today.

Investigative avalanche: Are House Democrats overplaying their hand?

Now that Hillary’s not getting in the race—she was never running, despite hints from her keep-hope-alive surrogates—the spotlight has fallen squarely on the House Democrats.
And at the moment they’re defining themselves as the party of investigation.
They have other problems, to be sure, from allowing their most left-wing members to give them a socialist image to struggling with a resolution condemning anti-Semitism after slurs by one of their freshmen.
But what will dominate the headlines in the coming weeks and months is their wide-ranging demands for information from 81 Trump World targets. These include current and former administration officials, family members, and people in his private businesses and foundations.
This kitchen-sink approach, in my view, is a tactical error by the Democrats that plays into President Trump’s hands.
Had Jerry Nadler, the House Judiciary chairman who ordered the requests, spaced them out over a period of time, it wouldn’t have looked like he wanted to spend the next two years tying the president in legal knots—at least not for awhile.
Instead, he’s given the president a fat target to charge that he and other committee heads “have gone stone cold CRAZY. 81 letter[s] sent to innocent people to harass them.”
Trump said the blizzard of requests were “a disgrace to our country,” and his son Eric Trump said “we’re going to fight the hell out of it” in an interview with Fox News radio. “And we’ll fight where we need and we’ll cooperate where we need, but the desperation shows.”
I’ve been covering these battles since the Reagan administration. Congress demands documents or testimony, usually from an administration controlled by the other party, and the White House delays, refuses or invokes executive privilege.
Then the Hill has to decide whether to pass a contempt-of-Congress citation and ask a court to enforce it.
Congressional Republicans demanded tens of thousands of pages from the Obama administration, got cooperation on some of the requests and resistance on others. And how many hearings did the GOP Congress hold on Benghazi?
But the road map is clear. Trump will resist many of the requests, claim presidential harassment, and force House Democrats to take the next step—especially on his tax returns. The battles will stretch on endlessly and most people will tune out, writing the whole thing off as politics as usual.
Putting the hypocrisy aside, Congress has a responsibility to conduct oversight of the executive branch. But if the House Democrats overreach, and don’t pass any bipartisan legislation (assuming the Republicans would play ball), it becomes easier for Trump to paint them as overzealous partisans.
Here’s a look at how two of the major papers handled the initial announcement.
The New York Times said the “flurry of demands…detailed the breadth and ambition of a new investigation into possible obstruction of justice, corruption and abuse of power by President Trump and his administration.”
The paper said Nadler had “opened perhaps the most perilous front to date for Mr. Trump — an inquiry that takes aim at the heart of his norm-bending presidency and could conceivably form the basis of a future impeachment proceeding.”
It was not until the 15th paragraph that Sarah Huckabee Sanders was quoted as calling the probe a “disgraceful and abusive…fishing expedition.”
The Washington Post said the “far-reaching” request “cast a spotlight on the ambitious strategy of the committee with the authority to impeach a president.”
The request was “broad” rather than “targeted,” and “the extensive scope could bolster claims by Trump and Republicans that congressional Democrats are seeking to undermine the president and cripple his 2020 reelection effort rather than conduct a disciplined, fact-finding inquiry.”
As part of the more balanced piece, Sanders was quoted in the sixth paragraph.
With Bob Mueller’s probe all but finished, the Democrats want to keep the investigative machinery humming. But are they likely to find more than Mueller, who has far greater resources?
It’s a long-range battle that may play out in all three branches, but ultimately will be decided in the court of public opinion.

Rank-and-file Dems revolt against Pelosi over resolution to condemn anti-Semitism

This is what the Democrats have elected to the American Government.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is "taken aback" by the growing dissent and anger among rank-and-file Democrats over a possible resolution to formally condemn anti-Semitism, a Democratic source told Fox News on Wednesday -- highlighting Pelosi's tenuous grip on control over the House and underscoring the growing power of the party's nascent far-left progressive wing.
Pelosi even reportedly walked out of a meeting Wednesday with Democrat House members, setting down her microphone and telling attendees, “Well if you're not going to listen to me, I’m done talking."
The stalled resolution originated after freshman Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, for at least the second time in recent months, ignited an uproar for echoing tropes critics have deemed anti-Semitic. In February, she suggested on Twitter that supporters of Israel have been bought. The congresswoman then accused American supporters of Israel of pushing people to have “allegiance to a foreign country.”
Omar -- who also tweeted in 2012 that "Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel" -- refused to address questions on Wednesday about accusations that she’s anti-Semitic.
Meanwhile, debate over how to address her latest remarks has overtaken House Democrats in recent days.
A frustrated senior House Democratic aide told Fox News on Tuesday: "Here we are again, fighting with ourselves. I've spent another week dealing with this and not on policy."
ON THE STREETS IN OMAR'S DISTRICT: SOMALI GANGS, LITTLE COMMUNICATING WITH COPS
A vote on the resolution, which was originally planned for earlier this week, did not appear on the House's official docket for Thursday.
President Trump, turning to Twitter on Wednesday, highlighted Democrats' troubles getting the resolution passed. He wrote that their failure to "take a stronger stand" against anti-Semitism was "shameful."
Fox News has been told that the Democratic caucus is trying to get the language of the proposed anti-Semitism language “right," and that there is concern about mentioning Omar by name -- a non-starter for many members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
Two knowledgable sources said such a scenario could increase security threats against Omar, who is a Muslim.
Republicans did not specifically name Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, in a bipartisan disapproval measure that followed comments that seemingly defended white nationalism earlier this year. But GOP leaders stripped King of his committee assignments as punishment -- while Omar remains on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Democrats say they have no plans to oust her.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., departs after talking with reporters during her weekly news conference on Capitol Hill on Feb. 7. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

By the same token, Fox is told Democrats are also concerned about making “a martyr” out of Omar if they don’t address some of her controversial comments.

"I've spent another week dealing with this and not on policy."
— Frustrated House Democratic aide

Pelosi, for her part, was stunned by criticism among some Democratic members who complained they weren’t informed in detail about the resolution; freshman Rep. Jahana Hayes, D-Conn., for example, asserted the Democratic leadership team failed in its duty to inform members about the resolution's details.
But senior leadership sources scofffed at that assertion, saying Pelosi spoke with multiple lawmakers all weekend long about the measure.
Fox News was also told one senior House Democratic lawmaker expressed concern about the influence pro-Israel interest groups have over the Democratic caucus, prompting debate about a resolution to condemn anti-Semitism in the first place. Their complaints came in contrast to the push by a trio of Jewish lawmakers who have pushed hardest for the resolution: House Ethics Committee Chairman Ted Deutch, D-Fla., House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., and House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey, D-N.Y.
One senior House Democrat even suggested the rift in the caucus was emblematic of age-old tensions between Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md.
“He’s more AIPAC,” said the Democrat. “She’s more J Street. The caucus is more J Street these days.” That’s a reference to two major, pro-Israel lobbying organizations in Washington.
The apparent tension comes as freshman Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib -- who herself has been accused of recent anti-Semitic comments -- also clashed with party leadership on Wednesday, after joining protesters to say she'd introduce a resolution this month urging the Judiciary Committee to move forward with impeachment proceedings against President Trump. Pelosi has consistently resisted calls to impeach Trump, saying such an effort would be premature.
A senior House Democratic leadership aide, however, disputed the divide between Pelosi and Hoyer.
Lawmakers are also buzzing about if they should even address the comments by Omar at all. There’s a concern about precedent.
“Should the House condemn [House Minority Leader] Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., for what he said about George Soros?” asked one lawmaker who requested to not be identified. In 2018, McCarthy tweeted: “We cannot allow Soros, Steyer and Bloomberg to BUY this election! Get out and vote Republican November 6th. #MAGA." (Soros, Steyer and Bloomberg all are of Jewish heritage.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib joined protesters with CREDO Action and By the People, a new advocacy group pushing for the impeachment of President Trump. Together they urged members of Congress to begin impeachment proceedings. (Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib)

McCarthy has since deleted the tweet.
One source questioned if House Democrats ever attempted to rebuke former Rep. Cynthia McKinney, D-Ga., who was known for questioning if President George W. Bush knew of the 9/11 attacks ahead of time. She also questioned U.S. support for Israel and demanded a more balanced approach when dealing with the Palestinians.
The prolonged delay in passing an anti-Semitism resolution -- which threatens to become a public-relations headache for Democrats with each passing day -- spilled over into the 2020 presidential race as well on Wednesday, as White House contender Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish, defended Omar in a statement.
“Anti-Semitism is a hateful and dangerous ideology which must be vigorously opposed in the United States and around the world," Sanders wrote. "We must not, however, equate anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of the right-wing, Netanyahu government in Israel. Rather, we must develop an even-handed Middle East policy which brings Israelis and Palestinians together for a lasting peace. What I fear is going on in the House now is an effort to target Congresswoman Omar as a way of stifling that debate. That's wrong.”
Added Elizabeth Warren: "Branding criticism of Israel as automatically anti-Semitic has had a chilling effect on our public discourse and makes it harder to achieve a peaceful solution between Israelis and Palestinians."
Fox News' Chad Pergram and Alex Pappas contributed to this report.

Democrat Collusion Cartoons

Trump alleges 'presidential harassment' as Dems launch probes -- and voters may agree: Guy Benson

As House Democrats expand their investigations into President Trump, there may be an opposite effect among undecided voters, Townhall.com politics editor Guy Benson suggested Tuesday.
This week, the House Judiciary Committee sent letters to 81 Trump associates and entities in search of documents for various investigations. Trump has repeatedly slammed the “stone cold crazy” Democrats and deemed their recent expansion as “presidential harassment.”
During Tuesday's "Special Report" All-Star panel, Benson -- along with Federalist senior editor Mollie Hemingway and Reuters White House correspondent Jeff Mason -- weighed in on the potential political consequences Democrats might face if their wave of investigations into the president backfires.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FULL SHOW
Benson noted the Democrats’ sudden ”moving on” from the Mueller probe amid shifting expectations that the report will be a “dud.” He then credited former Obama adviser David Axelrod, who tweeted that Democrats “run the risk” of irritating the public with their various investigations.
“Some unaffiliated people and undecided voters might come around to the ‘harassment, witch hunt’ mentality,” Benson told the panel.
Hemingway expressed a similar sentiment, insisting that Trump's “presidential harassment’ claim will work in his favor because the investigations into Trump’s business “fits that narrative” of congressional overreach rather than “legitimate oversight.”
Meanwhile, Mason recalled Trump’s rhetoric after the midterms, when he proposed that he and Democrats work together -- or else very little legislation will get done.

Trump fulfills terminally ill man's dying wish with phone call

In this undated selfie provided by Bridgette Hoskie, her brother Jay Barrett and herself pose for the photo. Barrett, a terminally ill Connecticut man who's a big supporter of President Donald Trump, is getting a bucket list wish fulfilled, with help from his Democratic sister. (Bridgette Hoskie via AP)

President Trump and Eric Trump fulfilled a terminally ill Connecticut man's dying wish with a phone call on Tuesday evening -- and all it took was a little help from the man's sister, an elected Democrat.
44-year-old Jay Barrett, of West Haven, who has cystic fibrosis, left a hospital to begin palliative care at his sister's home last weekend and asked for some sort of contact with the president before he dies.
His sister, West Haven City Councilwoman Bridgette Hoskie, who describes herself as "100 percent Democrat," went on social media to help make it happen. Friends and other supporters sent emails to the White House and its online petition system.
The efforts paid off Tuesday night when Barrett received a surprise call from Trump. According to Barrett, Hoskie handed him a phone and he heard an understated greeting: “I’m the secretary for the president of the United States. Do you have time to talk to him?”
Barrett was ecstatic.
"Alright Jay, you look handsome to me. I just saw a picture of you.” Trump began, in a video of the call posted to YouTube.
Barrett responded: "Oh, you're giving me kind honors. I look like sh--." That prompted Trump to laugh and ask, "How are you doing? How is it going Jay? ... You’re a champ. You’re fighting it right?”
"That’s what the Irish do -- right?” Barrett answered.
"Yeah that’s what the Irish do -- you better believe it," Trump said.
"Mr. President, through thick and thin, you know there's been a lot of thicks, and there's been a lot of thins, I support you," Barrett told the president.
“I wish you could come to a rally. I wish you could come," Trump said. "I know you like that stuff and I wish you could. ... It sounds like you have a great sister, Jay.”
Trump promised Jay that when he has a rally nearby, he'll "be sitting front, row center.” Trump added, "I know where you live" and that he was very familiar with the area.

"You're my kind of man, Jay. ... I'm very proud of you."
— President Trump

Barrett told Trump he's planned on coming down to Washington, D.C. “between now and my expiration date.”
"You're my kind of man, Jay. ... I'm very proud of you," Trump said. "I'll talk to you again, Jay, OK? You keep that fight going. We both fight."
Barrett told the New Haven Register that he also received calls from Eric Trump and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regional chief Lynne Patton on Monday.
Eric Trump "told me they're pulling for me and praying," Barrett said.
Patton, who is from New Haven, said she's coming to Connecticut on Saturday to give Barrett a signed gift from the president. She also reached out to the Trump family after a Register story about Barrett's wish was posted online.
Barrett, who for most of his life considered himself an independent, said he'd voted for President Barack Obama in 2008 but didn't like many of his policies, including the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare.
Barrett said he came to realize he was a Republican and fell in love with Trump's style at the launch of his campaign, and later, because of his policies.
His original goal was to get to Washington to meet the president in person and shake his hand, but he said he's grateful for anything.
Even though he's supposed to have only six months to live, Barrett said he intends to be around to vote in 2020.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Ocasio-Cortez says she was not invited to Bernie Sanders’ kickoff rally

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said in a weekend interview that she did not attend the kickoff rally for Bernie Sanders' second presidential campaign.
The freshman lawmaker sat down with NY1’s Errol Louis, host of “Inside City Hall,” for a Sunday interview that aired Tuesday night.
When asked whether she attended Sanders’ rally in Brooklyn on Saturday, she said: “I did not. Yesterday was my day to take care of myself.”
“I assume he asked you to be there,” Louis responded.
“Um, he, he didn’t, actually,” Ocasio-Cortez responded. “I think that, we’ve been, uh, so we’ve been in active conversation, I’ve been speaking with him and several other of the 2020 (presidential) candidates.”
She went on to say that endorsing a candidate “very early in this race” prevents the Democratic Party from having conversations on issues like income inequality, criminal justice, immigration, and the environment.
She later conceded that she will eventually endorse a candidate before the New York Democratic primary.
The interview comes amid a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission this week that Ocasio-Cortez violated campaign finance law by being part of an "off-the-books operation" to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on candidates last year. She denied the allegations on Tuesday.
Fox News' Alex Pappas contributed to this report.