Saturday, May 23, 2015

Senate approves 'fast track' trade bill, measure goes to House


In a victory for President Barack Obama, the Senate passed bipartisan legislation Friday night to strengthen the administration's hand in global trade talks, clearing the way for a highly unpredictable summer showdown in the House.
The vote was 62-37 on the bill, which would let Obama complete trade deals that Congress could approve or reject, but not change. A total of 48 Republicans supported the bill, but only 14 the Senate's 44 Democrats backed a president of their own party on legislation near the top of his second-term agenda.
A separate measure to prevent parts of the anti-terror Patriot Act from lapsing, and a bill to prevent a cutoff in federal highway funding also awaited action by lawmakers who covetously eyed a weeklong vacation — set to begin whenever the work was done.
Senate passage of the trade bill capped two weeks of tense votes and near-death experiences for legislation the administration hopes will help complete an agreement with Japan and 10 other countries in the Pacific region.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Obama's indispensable ally in passing the bill, said it would create "new opportunities for bigger paychecks, better jobs, and a stronger economy.
"The tools it contains will allow us to knock down unfair foreign trade barriers that discriminate against American workers and products stamped "Made in the USA," he said.
The House is expected to debate the issue as early as next month.
There, Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, supports the bill. But dozens of majority Republicans currently oppose it, either out of ideological reasons or because they are loath to enhance Obama's authority, especially at their own expense.
And Obama's fellow Democrats show little inclination to support legislation that much of organized labor opposes.
In the run-up to a final Senate vote, Democratic supporters of the legislation were at pains to lay to rest concerns that the legislation, like previous trade bills, could be blamed for a steady loss of jobs.
"The Senate now has the opportunity to throw the 1990s NAFTA playbook into the dust bin of history," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. He referred to the North American Free Trade Agreement, passed two decades ago, and a symbol to this day, fairly or not, of the loss of unemployment to a country with lax worker safety laws and low wages.
Wyden and others said this law had far stronger protections built into it.
One final attempt to add another one failed narrowly, 51-48 a few hours before the bill cleared.
It came on a proposal, by Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, who supported the trade bill, and Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., who opposed it. They sought to made allegations of currency manipulation subject to the same "dispute settlement procedures" as other obligations under any trade deal.
Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew warned earlier that its approval could cause Obama to veto the legislation. The president has said it could cause the demise of the current round of talks with 11 other Pacific-area nations, and also could pose a threat to the monetary policy that is designed to help the U.S. economy run better.
Portman, who was U.S. trade representative under former President George W. Bush, scoffed at threats of a veto. "I don't think so," he said in remarks on the Senate floor. "I think he (Obama) understands the importance" of his ability to conclude trade deals without congressional changes.
An alternative proposal backed by the White House merely stressed the importance of U.S. negotiators seeking ways to end the practice of currency manipulation, which can lower the price of foreign-made goods and place American-made products at a competitive disadvantage. It cleared on a vote of 70-29.
To mollify Democrats, the bill also included $1.8 billion in retraining funds for American workers who lose their jobs as a result of exports. Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said the program duplicated other federal efforts, but his attempt to strip out the funds was defeated, 53-35.
The political alignment on the Patriot Act legislation was different, with the administration and McConnell on different sides.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest prodded the Senate to accept a House-passed bill renewing anti-terrorism programs due to expire June 1. He said that to do otherwise would put at risk "the ability of our national security professionals to keep us safe."
But the House bill included a provision to eliminate the National Security Agency's ability to collect mass telephone records of Americans. Instead, the material would remain with phone companies, with government searches of the information allowed by court order on a case-by-case basis.
"The untried — and as of yet, nonexistent — bulk-collection system envisioned under that bill would be slower and more cumbersome than the one that currently helps keep us safe," McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor. At worst, he added, "it might not work at all."
The highway bill was the least controversial of the three on the Senate's pre-vacation agenda, but only because lawmakers agreed in advance on a two-month extension of the current law. The House and Senate will need to return to the issue this summer.
Lawmakers whose time generally is scheduled far in advance adjusted as best they could as the Senate struggled with work put off until the last minute.
"It's not the weather, it's the Senate that's the problem," said Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., hoping to make it home by Saturday night for a turn as pianist with the Memphis Symphony Orchestra.

Senate blocks House bill on NSA surveillance, 2-month extension


The Republican-led Senate blocked a House-passed bill and several short-term extensions of the USA Patriot Act early Saturday.
The big stumbling block was a House-passed measure to end the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of domestic phone records. Instead, the records would remain with telephone companies subject to a case-by-case review.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell favored retaining the program, but fellow Kentuckian and Republican presidential contender Rand Paul blocked any extension no matter how brief past the midnight May 31 expiration.
"This week, I stood on the floor for roughly 11 hours in defense of the Fourth Amendment and successfully blocked the renewal of the Patriot Act,” Paul said in a statement.
“We should never give up our rights for a false sense of security. This is only the beginning-- the first step of many.  I will continue to do all I can until this illegal government spying program is put to an end, once and for all."
McConnell announced early Saturday that the Senate would begin a week-long Memorial Day break and return Sunday, May 31, just hours before the programs lapse.
The Senate had been pressured by the White House to pass the House bill, which drew a large bipartisan vote last week and had the backing of GOP leaders, Democrats and the libertarian-leaning members.
However, the Senate blocked the bill by a vote of 57-42, just shy of the 60-vote threshold to move ahead.
The vote was followed by the rejected of a two-month extension to the existing programs. The vote went 54-45, short of the 60-vote threshold once again.
After the two votes, McConnell repeatedly asked for an even shorter renewal of current law ticking down days from June 8 to June 2. However, opponents of the post-Sept. 11 law objected every time.
Whatever the Senate approves, must be passed by the House, which had already left for Washington for the Memorial Day recess.
Officials say they will lose valuable surveillance tools if the Senate fails to go along with the house. But key GOP senators, including McConnell, disapprove of the House’s approach.
In the near term, the Justice Department has said the NSA would begin winding down its collection of domestic calling records this week if the Senate fails to act because the collection takes some time to halt.
At issue is a section of the Patriot Act, Section 215, used by the government to justify secretly collecting the "to and from" information about nearly every American landline telephone call. For technical and bureaucratic reasons, the program was not collecting a large chunk of mobile phone records, which made it less effective as few people continued to use landlines.
When former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed the program in 2013, many Americans were outraged that the agency had their calling records. President Obama ultimately announced a plan similar to the USA Freedom Act and asked Congress to pass it. He said the plan would preserve the NSA's ability to hunt for domestic connections to international plots without having an intelligence agency holding millions of Americans' private data.
Because the government had the extraordinary powers, Section 215 of the Patriot Act was designed to expire at midnight May 31, unless Congress renews it.
Under the USA Freedom Act, the government would transition over six months to a system under which it queries the phone companies with known terrorists' numbers to get back a list of numbers that had been in touch with a terrorist number.
But if Section 215 expires without replacement, the government would lack the blanket authority to conduct those searches. There would be legal methods to hunt for connections in U.S. phone records to terrorists, said current and former U.S. officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. But those methods would not be applicable in every case.
Far less attention has been paid to two other surveillance authorities that expire as well. One makes it easier for the FBI to track "lone wolf" terrorism suspects who have no connection to a foreign power, and another allows the government to eavesdrop on suspects who continuously discard their cellphones in an effort to avoid surveillance.

Islamic State group radio claims Saudi mosque suicide attack; promise more 'black days' for Shiites


The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing at a Shiite mosque in Saudi Arabia, warning that more "black days" loom ahead in a direct challenge to the rulers of the Sunni kingdom.
Friday's attack was the kingdom's deadliest militant assault since a 2004 Al Qaeda attack on foreign worker compounds, which sparked a massive Saudi security force crackdown.
However, this Islamic State attack in the village of al-Qudeeh in the eastern Qatif region targeted Shiites, whom ultraconservatives in Saudi Arabia regularly denounce as heretics.
The statement on the Islamic State group's al-Bayan radio station, read aloud Friday night and posted Saturday morning to militant websites associated with the extremists, identified the suicide bomber as a Saudi citizen with the nom de guerre Abu Amer al-Najdi. The station also identified the attack as being carried out by a new Islamic State branch in "Najd Province," referring to the historic region of the central Arabian Peninsula home to the Saudi capital, Riyadh.
The mosque attack killed at least 21 people and wounded 81, the official Saudi Press Agency reported.
The Islamic State group -- formerly Al Qaeda's branch in Iraq which broke away and overran much of that country and neighboring Syria -- has become notorious for its attacks on Shiites, including a deadly Shiite mosque bombing in the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, that killed more than 130 people. It was blamed for the killing of eight Shiites in a mosque shooting in eastern Saudi Arabia in November.
The al-Bayan message warned Shiites of coming "black days that will hurt you," pledging to expel all Shiites from the Arabian Peninsula.
The attack comes as Saudi Arabia is part of a U.S.-led coalition targeting the Islamic State group. In late April, Saudi officials arrested 93 people they said were involved in an Islamic State plot to attack the U.S. Embassy and other targets.
There already are heightened Sunni-Shiite tensions in the region as Saudi Arabia and Shiite power Iran back opposite sides in conflicts in Syria and Yemen.

Friday, May 22, 2015

Inevitability Cartoon


Officers indicted in death of Freddie Gray


All six officers charged in the police-custody death of Freddie Gray were indicted by a grand jury, a prosecutor said Thursday.
The indictments were very similar to the charges Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced about three weeks ago. The most serious charge for each officer, ranging from second-degree "depraved heart" murder to assault, still stood.
Gray suffered a critical spinal injury after police handcuffed, shackled and placed him head-first into a van, Mosby has said. His pleas for medical attention were repeatedly ignored, she said.
Mosby said prosecutors had presented evidence to the grand jury for the past two weeks. Some of the charges were changed based on new information, but she didn't say what that new information was. She also did not take questions.
"As is often the case, during an ongoing investigation, charges can and should be revised based upon the evidence," Mosby said.
In all, three of the officers had additional charges brought against them while three others had one less charge.
Gray was arrested April 12. He died in a hospital a week later and became a symbol of what protesters say was police brutality against blacks.
Two officers, Edward Nero and Garrett Miller, were indicted on second-degree assault, misconduct in office and reckless endangerment.
Caesar Goodson, who drove the transport van, faces manslaughter and second-degree "depraved heart" murder. Sgt. Alicia White, Lt. Brian Rice and officer William Porter are each charged with manslaughter, second-degree assault, misconduct in office and reckless endangerment.
Gray died on April 19, one week after he was critically injured, and his death inspired outrage among Baltimore residents that spawned protests that at least two points gave way to violence, looting and arson. In the wake of the riots, Democratic Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake implemented a curfew for all Baltimore residents, and Republican Gov. Larry Hogan declared a state of emergency.
Gray was arrested in the Sandtown-Winchester neighborhood of West Baltimore. According to court documents, Gray made eye contact with a police officer and took off running. He was apprehended two blocks away and arrested for possession of what Miller wrote in charging documents is illegal under a city ordinance.
Mosby said the arrest was unlawful because the knife is legal under state law.
None of the officers secured Gray's seatbelt in the van, a violation of police policy. Soon after he was placed in the van, Goodson stopped to secure him with leg irons because he had become "irate," police said.
After a ride that included several more stops, including one to pick up a second passenger, the van arrived at the Western District station house. By that time, Gray was non-responsive.

All for nothing? US vets who fought for Ramadi angry over fall to ISIS


Iraqi War veteran Sgt. Ben Rangel remembers fighting to secure the city of Ramadi when he first arrived in Iraq for a tour of duty in 2004. He also recalls the bloodshed.
Now, like other veterans who fought Iraqi insurgents for the capital city of Iraq's Anbar province, as well as the loved ones who died in fierce battles there, Rangel bristles at the sight of the ISIS flag-waving above the government complex. Many are wondering why their hard-fought gains were so easily surrendered when Iraqi forces, following the U.S. pullout, were unable to stand up to the black-clad terrorist army.
“It’s hard to watch and then be told that it’s all part of a successful plan.”
- Pete Hegseth,Concerned Veterans for America
“We lost a lot of men,” Rangel, a former infantryman with the 2nd battalion/5th Marines Fox Company, told FoxNews.com. “The fighting in Fallujah got a lot of attention in the news, but Ramadi was a very important city because of the supply route that ran through it to Baghdad.
“We were fighting non-stop for three months," he said. "Our mission was always to make sure that the supply route was secure.”
Ramadi, once a city of 750,000, lies some 70 miles west of Baghdad in the Sunni-majority province. During the Iraq War, which raged from 2003 to late 2011, nearly 5,000 coalition forces were killed and more than 32,000 wounded. Some of the war's fiercest fighting occurred in Anbar province, including in Falluja and Ramadi.
Rangel’s battalion lost 23 men during the fighting, and the veteran lost a close friend when that man's unit struck an IED along "Route Michigan," the military's name for the supply road that leads from Baghdad into Syria, passing through Fallujah and Ramadi.
“I never got to see him again,” the Marine recalled.
Despite the hardships and loss of men, over the next few years, Ramadi was eventually secured.
“All that fighting had paid off,” Rangel said, adding that the city was completely out of the clutches of the insurgency when he went back with his unit in 2007, a year after the infamous Battle of Ramadi in 2006, to train Iraqi police forces.
Nearly a decade after Rangel and others fought to free Ramadi, the city is poised to become a bloody battleground yet again. Iraqi troops, driven out by a much smaller ISIS army over the weekend, are poised to mount a counter-offensive, aided by a coalition of Shia Muslim fighters. But the failure by Iraqi forces to hold the city has already led to a humanitarian crisis, as an estimated 25,000 Iraqi refugees have fled for safety, most of them heading along Route Michigan for Baghdad.
“It’s gut-wrenching and disgusting to me that we choose to stand by and do nothing,” Debbie Lee, whose son Marc Alan Lee was the first Navy SEAL to be killed in the Operation Iraqi Freedom while fighting insurgents in Ramadi, told FoxNews.com. “Our troops are more than capable to secure that city and they are just not given the ability.
“It’s because they [Washington] refuse to send troops that we are seeing this insurgence,” she added.
The U.S. has been coordinating airstrikes since last August, pounding ISIS positions in both Iraq and Syria. But the Obama administration has said it does not want troops back on the ground in Iraq, and has said it is up to the Iraqis to defend their land from the terrorist army. Weapons the U.S. gave to the Iraqis, including tanks, have fallen into the hands of ISIS when the Iraqi forces fled, first in Mosul last year and now, most recently, in Ramadi.
Sgt. Rangel, whose unit helped train Iraqi forces in 2007, said he never had a lot of confidence in them,.
"At one point we had to take over for the Iraqi police because many of them were helping insurgents,” he said. “It was very difficult to know who the enemy was. One minute, they [insurgents] would be in civilian clothes, the next they were picking up rifles and attacking us.
A senior military official confirmed to Fox News Channel on Wednesday that the Obama administration is looking into arming Sunni tribes to help national forces and Shia militia retake Ramadi. However, public comments from another Pentagon official suggest that not much more assistance will be provided.
“We are confident that we have the right strategy at this time,” U.S. Central Command spokesman, Col. Patrick Ryder, U.S. Air Force said Wednesday. “Momentum will continue to be on our side.”
Pete Hegseth, CEO of Concerned Veterans for America and a Fox News contributor, said veterans who fought and bled to free Ramadi from insurgents a decade ago have little reason for confidence in the current effort.
“It’s hard to watch and then be told that it’s all part of a successful plan,” Hegseth said. “Ramadi was a model success story and we continue to see all of the gains we made there be somewhat reversed.
"It’s a slap in the faces of families of soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice,” he added.

US warns China not to challenge military flights over South China Sea


The U.S. warned China Thursday against confronting U.S. aerial patrols over the South China Sea days after a verbal dispute between a Chinese military dispatcher and a U.S. Navy surveillance aircraft. 
The Los Angeles Times reported that the Navy released two videos and an audio recording of the confrontation, which took place on Wednesday when the Chinese dispatcher demanded eight times that the Navy P8-A Poseidon leave the area as it flew over Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratly Island chain, where China has conducted extensive reclamation work.
"Foreign military aircraft, this is Chinese navy. You are approaching our military alert zone. Leave immediately," the dispatcher said on the recording. After the American crew responded that it was flying over international waters, the Chinese dispatcher responded "This is the Chinese navy ... You go!"
The incident was the latest example of friction between Washington and Beijing, with China seeking to assert its expansive claims to the South China Sea and the U.S. pushing back and attempting  to demonstrate that China's massive land reclamation does not give it territorial rights.
Daniel Russel, the top U.S. diplomat for East Asia, said the flight of a U.S. reconnaissance plane in international airspace over the South China Sea was a regular and appropriate occurrence. He said the U.S. will seek to preserve the ability of not just the United States but all countries to exercise their rights to freedom of navigation and overflight.
"Nobody in their right mind is going to try to stop the U.S. Navy from operating. That would not be a good step. But it's not enough that a U.S. military plane can overfly international waters, even if there is a challenge or a hail and query" from the Chinese military, he said.
"We believe that every country and all civilian actors also should have unfettered access to international waters and international airspace," he said.
Speaking at a regular daily briefing Thursday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei reiterated Beijing's insistence on its indisputable sovereignty over the islands it has created by piling sand on top of atolls and reefs.
While saying he had no information about the reported exchange, Hong said China was "entitled to the surveillance over related airspace and sea areas so as to maintain national security and avoid any maritime accidents.
"We hope relevant countries respect China's sovereignty over the South China Sea, abandon actions that may intensify controversies and play a constructive role for regional peace and stability," Hong told reporters.
China claims virtually the entire South China Sea as its own, along with its scattered island groups. The area that is home to some of the world's busiest commercial shipping routes is also claimed in part or in whole by the Philippines, Taiwan, Brunei, Malaysia and Vietnam.
The U.S. and most of the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) want a halt to the projects, which they suspect are aimed at building islands and other land features over which China can claim sovereignty and base military assets.
The U.S. says it takes no position on the sovereignty claims but insists they must be negotiated. Washington also says ensuring maritime safety and access is a U.S. national security priority.
China is also at odds with Japan over ownership of a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that are controlled by Tokyo but also claimed by Beijing, leading to increased activity by Chinese planes and ships in the area, which lies between Taiwan and Okinawa.
Both sides have accused the other of operating dangerously, prompting fears of an incident such as the 2001 collision between a Chinese fighter jet and a U.S. surveillance plane in which the Chinese pilot was killed and the American crew detained on China's Hainan island.
Also Thursday, the Chinese air force announced its latest offshore training exercises in the western Pacific as part of efforts to boost its combat preparedness.
People's Liberation Army Air Force spokesman Shen Jinke said the exercises were held in international airspace but gave no specifics. In its report on the drills, state broadcaster CCTV showed a video of Xian H-6 twin-engine bombers, a Chinese version of Russia's Tupelov Tu-16, in flight and landing at an air base, although it wasn't clear when the video was shot.

Clinton Foundation reveals up to $26.4M in previously undisclosed payments


The Clinton Foundation acknowledged Thursday that it had received millions of dollars in payments that had not previously been disclosed under a 2008 ethics agreement with the Obama administration. 
The Washington Post, citing foundation officials, reported that the payments were categorized internally as "revenue" instead of donations, which exempted the organization from including them in its public list of contributions.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the frontrunner for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, has faced questions about whether the foundation fully complied with the agreement it made with the Obama administration when Clinton was nominated to be America's top diplomat. Questions have also been raised about whether the foundation's lengthy list of donors tied to foreign governments presented a conflict of interest for Clinton while she was Secretary of State or whether such conflicts might arise should she become president.
According to the Post, the previously undisclosed money was paid in the form of speaking fees for Hillary and former President Bill Clinton, as well as their daughter Chelsea. The foundation does not say how much the Clintons were paid for each speech, only giving a range. The total amount in new payments is between $12 million and $26.4 million.
According to new information released by the foundation, the Clintons have made a total of 97 speeches to benefit the foundation since 2002. Those speeches have been sponsored by a number of institutions, including colleges and universities, corporations, and at least one foreign government, Thailand.
The Post reports that the organizations that paid to hear Hillary Clinton speak to them include large financial institutions Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase. Another organization, founded by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim, paid between $250,000 and $500,000 to hear the former Secretary of State. In all, 15 speeches by Hillary Clinton were newly disclosed by the foundation, which did not provide any dates for the events.
Former President Bill Clinton gave 73 of the 97 newly disclosed speeches, including the speech paid for by Thailand's Energy Ministry, which contributed between $250,000 and $500,000.  Other organizations addressed by Bill Clinton include the U.S. Islamic World Forum (between $250,000 and $500,000 contributed), a South Korean energy and chemical company ( between $500,00 and $1 million), the China Real Estate Development Corp., and the Qatar First Investment Bank (both paying between $250,000 and $500,000).

CartoonsDemsRinos