Source: Christie expected to announce 2016 campaign Tuesday

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is expected to announce his 2016 presidential bid next Tuesday, a Republican source tells Fox News. 
The source with knowledge of Christie's plans said the governor plans to announce in New Jersey. 
He would become the 14th Republican to enter the race for the party's presidential nomination. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal was the latest to join the field this week. 
Christie considered a bid in 2012, but ultimately decided against running. 
Since then, he's dealt with political fallout from the controversy in his state over aides accused of limiting access to a key bridge between New Jersey and New York in an act of political retribution against a Democratic mayor. 
Christie has denied any involvement, and no evidence has emerged showing he was part of the plot. 
As he tries to emerge from that controversy, Christie also has to contend with a full field of fellow governors, senators and other prominent GOP figures. 
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (who has not yet announced) have been in the top tier of most national polls, while retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson and real estate magnate Donald Trump have also registered strong numbers.

ObamaCare battle not over, despite court ruling

President Obama declared Thursday that "the Affordable Care Act is here to stay," after winning yet another round in the Supreme Court. 
But the battle's not over -- a host of legal and political challenges remain, and if anything, Republicans say they are more emboldened than ever to repeal the law. 
"ObamaCare is fundamentally broken, increasing health care costs for millions of Americans. Today's ruling doesn't change that fact," House Speaker John Boehner charged in a statement Thursday, vowing to continue efforts on Capitol Hill to "repeal the law and replace it with patient-centered solutions." 
The 6-3 decision upheld insurance subsidies nationwide, rejecting claims that residents in states that did not set up their own exchanges were ineligible for the credits. The decision was the second major court victory for the Obama administration on the president's signature health care law. 
But several court cases are still wending their way through the system, including a challenge by House Republicans over the estimated $175 billion the administration is paying health insurance companies to reimburse them for covering poor people and cases over whether the law is forcing religious organizations to pay for employee contraceptives. 
Further, Republicans are weighing a repeal strategy that could lead to a veto showdown with the president before the end of the year. That's not to mention what might happen if a Republican wins the White House in 2016, with a GOP majority on the Hill.    
While Obama pressed Thursday for Washington to move on, the law's harshest critics made clear they have no plans to do so. 
"It's a terrible [court] decision and to see the court sort of invent more ways to save the law time  -- and again, it's frustrating -- but it reaffirms the point that that Congress is going to have to be the ones to get rid of it," said Dan Holler, spokesman for the conservative Heritage Action. 
The biggest fight may come on Capitol Hill, as Republican opponents consider using a filibuster-proof process called "budget reconciliation" to push a measure through the Senate and, with the help of the GOP majority in the House, get a repeal bill before the president. 
Using this tactic is not unprecedented. When Democrats did not have the typically required 60 votes to pass ObamaCare in 2009, they used "reconciliation," which only requires a 51-vote majority, to pass parts of it through the Senate. The option of using the same process to get rid of the law, with only a simple majority, has been a topic of conversation among opponents ever since. 
"That is our preferred approach," said Holler. "[The repeal] could really begin in earnest. If Speaker Boehner and [Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell wanted to start the process today, they could if they wanted to," he told FoxNews.com. "There are multiple steps here but they could start right now if they wanted." 
It's not yet clear that is the way the two Republican leaders want to proceed. According to a Washington Times report Thursday afternoon, Boehner has not decided that reconciliation is the way to go, even though he has expressed interest in repealing the law. "There's been no decision about what to use reconciliation for," he said, according to the article. 
But this tactic, if used, could set up a direct clash with the president, for the first time putting a repeal bill on Obama's desk and forcing him to veto it. 
It would also serve as an election year "test" for congressional Republicans, as well as presidential candidates, to see how serious they are about repealing. Holler said this would be a "test run for the Congress to show that they can put a repeal bill on the president's desk." 
But supporters of the health care law say the effort would be a waste of time, given that Congress almost certainly would fail to get the necessary two-thirds majority to override a veto. 
"It's not going to happen," said Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democratic Network. "I don't know why Congress would waste their time to do something they know will be vetoed." 
He said the argument for repeal is getting more difficult for Republicans the longer the law is in place, and it appears to be working in its goal to provide affordable health care to more Americans. He said there is "no compelling policy reason to repeal or public opinion reason to do it. I can't believe that heading into a presidential election, Republicans would want to be on record as having stripped tens of millions of people of their health care." 
A recent Congressional Budget Office report also predicted that repealing the law could add billions to the budget deficit. 
Republicans might be able to use "reconciliation" because they have tied the ObamaCare issue to their budget proposal, a necessary step to employ the controversial tactic. However, they still might be blocked from doing so due to parliamentary rules that limit how broadly the tool can be used. Among them is a requirement that any proposal not increase the deficit. 
Holler said it's too early to know. "Some folks say you cannot use it to repeal the law in its entirety, others believe you can," he said, noting that he believes "a committed majority" can push its way through. 
But Democratic leaders had a resounding message for Republicans after Thursday's decision: Let it go. 
"With today's decision, the Affordable Care Act survived the latest Republican attempt to take away health care from working families," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a statement. "To my Republican colleagues, I say respectfully: stop banging your heads against the wall trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It's time to move on."

US intel chief calls Iran the leading terror sponsor, as nuke talks enter final phase

The nation’s top intelligence official labeled Iran the leading state sponsor of terrorism and called the regime -- and its proxy Hezbollah -- the single most important factors keeping Syrian dictator Bashar Assad in power, according to a letter obtained by Fox News.
The warning comes as Obama administration officials enter the final phase of nuclear negotiation with Tehran. But despite the diplomatic track, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper assailed the country’s role in destabilizing the region in the letter to Republican senators.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE LETTER
"Iran remains the foremost state sponsor of terrorism and is increasing its ability to influence regional crises and conduct terrorism," Clapper wrote in the June 3 letter. "This has been the consistent view of the IC [intelligence community] for more than three decades."
On its role propping up Assad, accused of using chemical weapons on his own people, Clapper stated that, "Iran and Hizballah's efforts in Syria have been instrumental in preventing the collapse of the Assad regime, which they view as critical to maintaining their 'axis of resistance' against Israel and the West." 
Clapper was blunt in the letter to senators, after some lawmakers earlier questioned why Iran and Hezbollah were not listed in the “terrorism subsection” of the 2015 Worldwide Threat Assessment; both had been listed in previous years’ assessments. 
In the three-page letter, Clapper warned, without qualification, that Iranian-backed militias taking on the Islamic State in Iraq are the same groups who are a danger. "These militias have also threatened to conduct terrorist attacks against US interests in response to US involvement in Iraq."
Clapper said the threat report was an overview of global threats, and not a “comprehensive listing of every threat facing the United States.” The DNI added, "A specific reference to the terrorist threat from Iran and Hizballah -- which was not included in any of the drafts of the testimony -- would have been appropriate ... but the lack of its inclusion is in no way a change in the IC's assessment."
On Thursday, the Obama administration also labeled Iran and Cuba as serial human rights abusers in a State Department report.
Clapper said Thursday that the U.S. has eyes wide open in its talks with Iran. “We are not in the trust business at all,” Clapper said.
But critics say the administration is ignoring these issues while pursuing a nuclear deal. "Our administration is not going to do anything to upset the ability to complete a nuclear deal," Republican Rep. Mike Pompeo, who sits on the House intelligence committee, recently told Fox News. "So, as the Iranians expand, as they exert greater control in Iraq, this administration has chosen to at least turn the other way and allow the Iranian expansion, on the hope that they can get this deal across the finish line in the next 30 days."

Erase all History Cartoon

Obama scolds heckler at gay pride reception, saying 'You're in my house'

WASHINGTON –  President Barack Obama took on a heckler head-on at a gay pride month reception at the White House Wednesday, scolding the protester for being disrespectful in "my house."
The heckler had interrupted Obama's remarks by protesting the detention and deportation of gay, lesbian and transgender immigrants.
The president responded, "Hold on a second." When the heckler persisted, Obama, flashing an exasperated look, countered, "OK, you know what?" Wagging his finger and shaking his head, Obama said, "No, no, no, no, no," repeating the word more than a dozen times.
As the heckler continued to talk over him, Obama took it up a notch.
"Hey. Listen. You're in my house," he said to laughter and woos from the crowd. "You know what? It's not respectful when you get invited to somebody. You're not going to get a good response from me by interrupting me like this. I'm sorry. I'm sorry ... Shame on you, you shouldn't be doing this."
In his remarks, Obama said that regardless of how the Supreme Court rules in an upcoming decision on gay marriage, there has been an undeniable shift in attitudes across the country. He said he's closely watching the decisions the high court will announce in the coming days, which include a case that could affirm the right of gay couples nationwide to marry.
The president singled out discrimination facing transgender Americans as an area where more progress needs to be made.

Debate over rebel flag widens to include all symbols of Confederacy

The debate over the rebel flag that began anew after last week's church shootings in Charleston, S.C., has morphed into a full-blown Confederate controversy.
While Stars and Bars have long been associated by many with slavery, the latest campaign to remove Confederate emblems has extended beyond the flag to statues, memorials, parks and even school mascots. Never has the debate over what symbolizes heritage and what stands for hate covered so much ground, as efforts to strip icons that have been part of the visual and cultural landscape of the South for decades are afoot at national, state and local levels.
In one Arkansas town, the school board voted unanimously Tuesday to ban the song "Dixie" for the next school year and phase out “Rebel,” the school’s mascot.
“It came to our attention that the public has been pretty upset about the Confederate flag, which has already been removed, the rebel mascot [and] the playing of the ‘Dixie,’” Fort Smith, Ark., school board member Susan McFerran told reporters after the board voted for the changes.

“They are part of our history and not all of our history is dandelions and butterflies.”
- Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C.

In Maryland, Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamentz is pushing a plan that would change the name of Baltimore's Robert E. Lee Park. A spokesman for Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake told The Associated Press she supports the name change and is willing to work with the county to find an appropriate alternative.
Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers in Tennessee have called for a bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Confederate general and early Ku Klux Klan leader, to be removed from an alcove outside the Senate chambers. The bust, with the words “Confederate States Army” engraved on it, has been at the state Capitol for decades.
A group of Kentucky officials, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, want to kick a statute of Confederate leader Jefferson Davis out of the state Capitol rotunda, and activists in Minnesota have demanded a lake named after John C. Calhoun, a senator and vice president from South Carolina who supported slavery, be re-christened.

Related Image

Expand / Contract

There's a new move to change the name of Baltimore's Robert E. Lee Park, named for the legendary Confederate general.

The battle flag of the Confederacy, long seen waving above state capitols, from front porches of homes and on memorabilia and garments throughout the South, was the first casualty of the movement fueled by church shooting suspect Dylann Roof's embrace of it and white supremacy. Photos of Roof posing with the flag litter a website which he is believed to have created to house his hateful manifesto against African-Americans.
National retailers Amazon.com, Walmart, Sears and Etsy this week all announced plans to remove merchandise depicting the Confederate battle flag.
South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley called for lawmakers to remove the flag from public grounds, and in Alabama, Gov. Robert Bentley unilaterally ordered the immediate removal Wednesday of four different Confederate banners, including the battle flag, from an 88-foot-tall memorial that stands at the state Capitol entrance nearest to the governor’s office.

Related Image

Expand / Contract

Some are calling for statues like the one of Jefferson Davis, (l.), in Kentucky's state capitol, and Robert E. Lee, (r.), in Washington, to come down.

Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan opposes the use of the Confederate flag on the state's license plates, according to a spokeswoman for the Republican, and is in talks with the state's department of motor vehicles and attorney general to address the issue.
At the federal level, though, there’s now talk of whether Congress should remove statues with ties to the Confederacy from the U.S. Capitol. Among those are statues of Joe Wheeler of Alabama, who is wearing a Confederate military uniform with “CSA” emblazoned on his belt buckle. Another is of South Carolina leader Wade Hampton, leader of the Confederacy and Ku Klux Klan supporter.
But some are concerned that the snowballing effort to rid the nation of Confederate symbolism is a historical whitewash.
“They are part of our history and not all of our history is dandelions and butterflies,” Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., told Fox News. “A knee-jerk reaction is not helpful.”
He later asked, “Where does it stop? Especially if you start letting people define our history.”

Related Image

Expand / Contract

June 23, 2015: Confederate flag themed stickers are displayed at Arkansas Flag and Banner in Little Rock, Ark.

While some, like Mulvaney, have questioned whether the push to purge could wind up erasing an important part of America’s past, University of Alabama history professor Joshua Rothman, believes the distinction lies not in learning about the Confederacy but in how people choose to honor it.
“I don’t think there is a reasonable position anyone could take that says that the history of the Confederacy shouldn’t be talked about in a university or school or museum,” he told FoxNews.com, adding that the problem lies in celebrating the Confederacy, especially using taxpayer money.

 

 

 

 

 

Clinton aide worked on UAE project while at State Department

Hillary Clinton’s top aide Cheryl Mills held several outside roles, including a board position with a UAE-funded university in Abu Dhabi, while working as chief of staff and counselor at the State Department, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.
After joining the State Department in the beginning of 2009, Mills continued to serve as general counsel for New York University for several months. She also sat on the board of the “NYU in Abu Dhabi Corporation,” the fundraising arm for the university’s UAE satellite campus. The school is bankrolled by the Abu Dhabi government and has been criticized by NYU professors and human rights activists for alleged labor abuses.
Mills resigned both positions in May 2009, according to a university spokesperson. Although she did not receive a direct salary from the Abu Dhabi board, she collected $198,000 over four months from NYU.
While the State Department told the Free Beacon that Mills did not start working as Clinton’s chief of staff until May 24, 2009, internal agency documents indicate she began months earlier.
Mills is identified as Clinton’s chief of staff in several U.S. diplomatic cables prior to May 2009. One confidential dispatch published by Wikileaks described a Feb. 5, 2009 meeting in Washington between Haitian President Rene Preval and Secretary Clinton.
“On the U.S. side, U.S. Ambassador to Haiti Janet Sanderson … Special Advisor Vicki Huddleston, and Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills joined the Secretary,” said the cable, which was sent from Hillary Clinton’s office to the U.S. embassy in Port au Prince on Feb. 11, 2009.

White House reportedly hid extent of Office of Personnel Management hack

The Obama administration reportedly concealed the true amount of information compromised by a cyberattack on the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for several days after the initial disclosure of the hack, according to a published report.
The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that the day after the White House admitted that hackers had breached personnel files, OPM publicly denied that the security clearance forms had been compromised despite receiving information to the contrary from the FBI. The administration did not say that security clearance forms had likely been accessed by the intruders until more than a week had passed.
A OPM spokeswoman denied the claims, telling the Journal the agency had been "completely consistent" in its reporting of the data breach.
The Journal, citing U.S. officials, reported that lengthy period between disclosures was the result of a decision taken by both White House and OPM officials to report the cyberattack as two separate breaches, one of the personnel files and one of the security clearance forms. That meant that rather than saying the hack may have compromised the information of approximately 18 million people, including some who have never worked for the government, OPM initially said that only about four million people were affected.
By contrast, the paper reports, FBI officials who had to speak to lawmakers about the incident, including director James Comey, defined the theft as the result of one breach.
On Wednesday, House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz asked whether the true number of people affected could be as high as 32 million, and called for OPM Director Katherine Archuleta to step down.

More on this...

• Chaffetz: Data breach scares the living daylights out of me

"I think you are part of the problem," Chaffetz told Archuleta during a hearing. "That hurricane has come and blown this building down, and I don't want to hear about putting boards up on windows (now). It's time for you to go."
In her testimony, Archuleta said the estimate of 18 million people affected "refers to a preliminary, unverified and approximate number of unique Social Security numbers in the background investigations data ... It is a number I am not comfortable with."
However, the Journal reports that  in a private briefing with lawmakers Tuesday, a senior FBI official interjected and told Archuleta the number was based on OPM's own data.
Investigators believe that China was behind the cyberattack, which was discovered in April. If the security clearance forms were compromised, information about espionage operations could be exposed. Beijing has strongly denied any role in the hack.