Presumptuous Politics

Friday, June 3, 2016

Watchdog blasts bureaucrats for blocking ICE agents from San Bernardino terror suspect

A federal report released Thursday details a shocking turf battle that broke out when immigration officials blocked law enforcement agents from interviewing a person of interest in the San Bernardino terror attack last December.
Just one day after a radical Muslim couple opened fire on office workers at a Christmas party, the FBI asked Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain the man later determined to have supplied guns used in the attack.
When Homeland Security Investigations agents went to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office where Enrique Marquez and his wife were being interviewed, they were turned away, according to the report.
“Here, the agents were justifiably concerned that Marquez and Chernykh may pose a threat to the occupants and visitors of the USCIS facility,” the report by the Department of Homeland Security's inspector general states. “Less than 24 hours before, individuals associated with the couple had committed an atrocity on an unthinkable scale against unarmed innocents; at the time of HSI's visit to USCIS, Marquez and Chernykh’s intentions were unknown.
Homeland Security Investigations is part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which, like U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, is part of DHS.
The audit confirmed a March report by FoxNews.com and provided new details of the turf battle a day after Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik murdered 14 people in the Southern California community.
The Inspector General's Office conducted 23 interviews and a review of email, text, and phone records from the agencies, confirmed the stunning breakdown in cooperation that first caught the attention of Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., in March.
"Today's report confirms whistleblower complaints I received about a dangerous lack of coordination between ICE and the USCIS,” Johnson said Thursday. “The refusal to allow armed ICE agents into a USCIS facility to detain a suspected terrorist could have had tragic consequences.”
When five agents went to the USCIS building dressed in tactical gear to detain the couple, the report said they were confined to the lobby for up to 20 minutes, and then waited another 10 minutes to meet with the USCIS field office director. The agents told the field director they were looking for Marquez, “because he was connected to the shootings and there was concern that he could be in the building,” but the field office director told agents they could not “arrest, detain, or interview anyone in the building based on USCIS policy.”
The agents also were denied a file on Marquez’s wife as well as known addresses or any other information that could lead to their apprehension, according to the report. The HSI agents waited outside for an hour before being given clearance from Washington DC to return to the USCIS offices where they were allowed to hand copy the file.
The contract security personnel at the USCIS facility should have immediately permitted entry to the HSI agents once they identified themselves – the report said - adding USCIS had no authority to restrict their access.
“The USCIS Field Director’s behavior was not only outrageous and reprehensible, but in violation of federal law and policy that ensure any law enforcement agency the ability to make arrests or conduct interviews in government facilities,” said Jessica Vaughan serves as Director of Policy Studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington, DC-based research institute. “These ICE agents are from the very same agency she works for – they are her homeland security colleagues.”
“A delay such as the one that occurred here could have disastrous consequences under different circumstances,” the report added.
Department of Homeland Security spokesman Neema Hakim said since this clash in December, changes have been made.
“ICE and USCIS have since improved their protocols for facility access and information sharing in circumstances with potential national security or public safety implications, in order to avoid any such delays in the future,” Department of Homeland Security spokesman Neema Hakim said in a statement to FoxNews.com.
USCIS agents were investigating Marquez for marriage fraud, stemming from his 2014 union with Chernykh, a Russian national married to Farook’s brother. Marquez, who is now in jail and awaiting trial this summer, is accused of supplying the guns as well as marriage fraud.
Both Farook and Malik were killed by law enforcement after their morning attack.
Marquez is already in jail and awaiting trial for conspiring with one of the San Bernardino attackers, Syed Rizwan Farook, in terror plots that never materialized.
Federal court documents obtained by FoxNews.com tied to Marquez’s case show both he and Farook abruptly halted plans for a dual terror attack in 2012. In that assault, Marquez and Farook allegedly planned to use pipe bombs and two AR-15 rifles “to maximize the number of casualties” at Riverside City College, a nearby institution they attended, and on state Route 91, a busy freeway with few exits where motorists are frequently stuck in heavy gridlock.
Marquez is also accused of supplying weapons to Farook and Malik before the Dec. 2 attack that also left 22 injured and is accused of making false statements in connection with his weapons purchases used in the San Bernardino shooting.
Marquez has pleaded not guilty to the charges filed against him. If convicted of all counts, Marquez faces up to 50 years in prison.

Obsession? Why media are feeding the public's hunger for Trump tales

It hit me while reading the collected letters of Donald J. Trump:
Is there any aspect of this guy’s life we won’t explore?
Or put another way: Is there any limit to the journalistic and public fascination with his life?
As a media critic, I regularly analyze whether news organizations are sufficiently vetting Trump, fact-checking Trump, being too hard or too soft on Trump. And these important questions are tied to the fact that the billionaire is a magnet for ratings and clicks.
But there’s something happening that stretches beyond the usual digging into a candidate’s fitness to be president, a process being conducted on steroids because, despite his fame, Trump is a newcomer to electoral politics.
There is a seemingly insatiable curiosity about his larger-than-life persona and what he is really like. This is true among those who think he would be a great president and those who think he would be a disaster as president. Whether it’s his celebrity, his wealth, his businesses, his kids, his escapades with women, a year’s worth of campaign scrutiny hasn’t diminished the appetite to know more about The Donald.
Now Hillary Clinton has also led a colorful life. She’s been first lady, senator, secretary of State. She’s survived many brushes with scandal and her husband’s affairs. Bits of shorthand—cattle futures, pink press conference, vast right-wing conspiracy, Monica, email, Benghazi—conjure up controversial chapters of her life.
But Hillary has been a public figure for 25 years, the subject of countless articles and segments and books. She is also a more private person. So we already think we know what she’s about, or have concluded that we can’t get much deeper.
Yesterday’s New York Times story found a tender note that Trump once wrote to his wife Ivana: “I adore and love my little darling. I truly believe that you are the greatest.”
And there was this praise for a piece about Poland by the late Times editor Abe Rosenthal: “It is moving; it is sad; it is hopeful (?); it is devastating. It truly captured the strength, the will and the soul of the Polish people.”
In between were notes of gushing praise to Rudy Giuliani (“the greatest mayor that the city’s ever had”) and a scrawled rebuke to a new critic, basketball legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: “Now I know why the press always treated you so badly — they couldn’t stand you. The fact is that you don’t have a clue about life and what has to be done to make America great again!”
Looking back, we have waded through a veritable tsunami of pieces about Trump that transcend specific controversies over, say, the allegations against Trump University or his 3,500 lawsuits, according to USA Today. I can recall pieces on Trump’s golf game (and whether he cheats); his jet; his many estates (Forbes, complete with pictures); his wife Melania and a long-lost brother; his rating of women he would bed, with Howard Stern; his former butler, later found to have racist views; his relationship with Megyn Kelly; his beauty pageants, and whether he once posed as his own fictional spokesman.
Here’s some of what came up in a quick Google News search:
CBS: “Mark Cuban Questions Whether Donald Trump is a Billionaire”
New York Daily News: “‘I don't want to sound too much like a chauvinist,’ the 2016 presidential candidate said in a newly resurfaced 1994 ABC interview, before finishing his chauvinistic rant. ‘But when I come home and dinner's not ready, I go through the roof.’”
CNN on “Donald Trump’s Obsession with Himself”:
“The presumptive Republican presidential nominee is aiming to make the entire 2016 campaign about himself.”
And this from a BBC correspondent complaining about the media’s “cravenness”:
“For all the abuse, for all the belittlement, we as reporters show no sign of ending our relationship addiction with Donald Trump.”
Ah, the mental health explanation. But is it just journalists who are addicted, or all of America?
This intense curiosity about Trump World, fueled by the media, could ultimately persuade a majority of voters that he’s not presidential material. But if politics is increasingly becoming entertainment, I suspect many others want to find out what would happen if this reality-show star relocates to the White House.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

San Jose protesters attack Trump supporters with punches, eggs

A group of protesters attacked Donald Trump supporters who were leaving the candidate's rally in San Jose on Thursday night. A dozen or more people were punched, at least one person was pelted with an egg and Trump hats grabbed from supporters were set on fire on the ground.
Police stood their ground at first but after about 90 minutes moved into the remaining crowd to break it up and make arrests. At least four people were taken into custody, though police didn't release total arrest figures Thursday night. One officer was assaulted, police Sgt. Enrique Garcia said.
There were no immediate reports of injuries and no major property damage, police said.
The crowd, which had numbered over 300 just after the rally, had thinned significantly but those that remained, filling about a city block near the San Jose Convention Center, were rowdy and angry.
Some banged on the cars of Trump supporters as they left the rally and chased after those on foot to frighten them.
Police were keeping their distance from the crowd as the scuffles played out, but keeping them from getting any closer to the convention center.
"Our police officers have done an extremely courageous and professional job so far," San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo told The Associated Press by phone. "We're all still holding our breath to see the outcome of this dangerous and explosive situation."
The mayor, a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter, criticized Trump for coming to cities and igniting problems that local police departments had to deal with.
"At some point Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign," Liccardo said.
The presumptive GOP nominee spoke for about 50 minutes at the rally, sniping at Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and calling her speech on foreign policy earlier in the day "pathetic" and "sad to watch."
Protesters before the speech included Adam Rivas, a 22-year-old community college student who was born and raised in San Jose, was holding a spray-painted sign that read "Dump Trump."
Rivas said he was particularly disturbed by Trump's remarks about Mexicans.
"For any one Mexican here he bashes, there are about 20 Mexicans out there who are hard-working and just doing their job," he said.
Trump supporter Debbie Tracey, a U.S. Navy veteran from San Jose, she came to hear Trump speak, she left his rally with two hats a T-shirt and a handful of signs that said "Veterans for Trump."
Passing in front of a wall of protesters, many chanting in Spanish, she said she supported Trump's call for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
"I'll go help build the wall because if you are going to come to this country, land of opportunity, you should be here legally," she said.

Thursday, June 2, 2016

Clinton launches foreign policy broadside against Trump

Hillary Clinton turned what was billed as a major foreign policy speech Thursday into a blistering broadside against Donald Trump – at one point calling him “temperamentally unfit” — while the presumptive Republican presidential nominee used Twitter to provide his own mocking counter-attack, saying, “She doesn’t even look presidential!”
Warning that electing the presumptive Republican presidential nominee would be a “historic mistake,” Clinton painted November’s election as a choice between fear and confidence.
“It’s a choice between a fearful America that is less secure and less engaged with the world and a strong, confident America that leads to keep our country safe and our economy growing,” Clinton said.
In sharpening her attacks on Trump, Clinton also was moving to put the still-ongoing Democratic primary battle behind her. Rival Bernie Sanders, while far behind in delegates, is still vowing to take his challenge to the convention as the candidates prepare for the last major day of primary voting on Tuesday.
In her address, Clinton repeatedly tore into Trump on his foreign policy pronouncements.
“Donald Trump’s ideas are not just different, they’re dangerously incoherent,” Clinton said. “They’re not even ideas, just a series of bizarre rants, personal feuds and outright lies.”
Trump was unimpressed by the address, tweeting as Clinton was speaking that she looked unpresidential and was bad at reading from a teleprompter.
Ahead of the speech, he said that as secretary of state, Clinton "has made so many mistakes - and I mean real monsters!"
In the address, Clinton cited her role in the Iranian nuclear deal, presenting it as one of the successes of the Obama administration, and saying the world is safer than before the agreement.
“We did it without firing a shot, dropping a bomb or putting a single American soldier in harm’s way,” she said.
The former secretary of state noted that Trump had said he would have walked away from the deal, and mocked how his experience as a business mogul might translate as commander-in-chief.
“There’s no risk people losing their lives if you blow up a golf course deal,” she said. “It doesn’t work like that in world affairs.”
Clinton pointedly warned that Trump might lead the country into war "just because somebody got under his very thin skin."
Clinton argued Trump’s foreign policy would isolate the U.S. and that countries like Russia would be celebrating. On the subject of Russia, she noted positive comments the billionaire had made about strongmen such as Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“I will leave it to the psychiatrists to explain his affection for tyrants, I just wonder how anyone could be so wrong about who America’s real friends are,” she said.

Paul Ryan says he'll vote for Trump

House Speaker Paul Ryan said Thursday he would vote for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, an announcement his office said amounts to an endorsement.
Ryan, R-Wis., made the announcement in a column for the Janesville Gazette, the speaker’s hometown paper, and also tweeted out his voting preference.
Ryan's support for Trump ends any speculation about whether or not Ryan would back the likely Republican nominee. Ryan had held off issuing a formal endorsement or saying he would vote for the business magnate even after Trump had appeared to gain the number of delegates needed to win the Republican nomination and all of his primary opponents had suspended their campaigns.
Though Ryan on Thursday seemed to stop short of the long-awaited endorsement, his office clarified that he was in fact getting behind Trump.
"We're not playing word games, feel free to call it an endorsement," Ryan's chief communications adviser Brendan Buck tweeted.
Ryan wrote that conversations he had with Trump on various issues – including whether a President Trump would help enact the House GOP agenda – helped seal his support.
“Through these conversations, I feel confident he would help us turn the ideas in this agenda into laws to help improve people’s lives,” Ryan wrote. “That’s why I’ll be voting for him this fall.”
The Wisconsin representative acknowledged that he and Trump have been at odds in the past.
“It’s no secret that he and I have our differences,” Ryan wrote. “I won’t pretend otherwise. And when I feel the need to, I’ll continue to speak my mind. But the reality is, on the issues that make up our agenda, we have more common ground than disagreement."
Ryan had criticized Trump during the campaign on a range of statements made by the New York billionaire, including a proposed ban on Muslims entering the U.S. The two men held a private summit in May in Washington but Ryan stopped short of backing Trump after the face-to-face meeting.
But Ryan's support for Trump was inevitable, Fox News was told weeks ago. The news comes as Ryan begins rolling out a series of six policy initiatives during the next several weeks -- none of which are expected to be considered in the current Congress.
Ryan made his announcement just as likely Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton was about to deliver a much-hyped foreign policy speech. But Buck said the timing was merely happenstance.
"And no, while a fun coincidence, it wasn't timed to a Hillary Clinton speech," Buck tweeted. "Believe it or not, we don't follow her sched that closely."
An aide to Ryan tweeted that a video would be forthcoming of Ryan talking about his support for Trump.

Mexican Cadillac Cartoons

State Department admits briefing footage on Iran deal intentionally deleted

The State Department, in a stunning admission, acknowledged Wednesday that an official intentionally deleted several minutes of video footage from a 2013 press briefing, where a top spokeswoman seemed to acknowledge misleading the press over the Iran nuclear deal.
“There was a deliberate request [to delete the footage] – this wasn’t a technical glitch,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said Wednesday, in admitting that an unidentified official had a video editor “excise” the segment.
The State Department had faced questions earlier this year over the block of missing tape from a December 2013 briefing. At that briefing, then-spokeswoman Jen Psaki was asked by Fox News’ James Rosen about an earlier claim that no direct, secret talks were underway between the U.S. and Iran – when, in fact, they were.
Psaki at the time seemed to admit the discrepancy, saying: “There are times where diplomacy needs privacy in order to progress. This is a good example of that.”
However, Fox News later discovered the Psaki exchange was missing from the department’s official website and its YouTube channel. Eight minutes from the briefing, including the comments on the Iran deal, were edited out and replaced with a white-flash effect.
Officials initially suggested a "glitch" occurred.
But on Wednesday, current State Department spokesman Kirby said someone had censored the video intentionally. He said he couldn't find out who was responsible, but described such action as unacceptable.
While saying there were “no rules [or] regulations in place that prohibited” this at the time, Kirby said: "Deliberately removing a portion of the video was not and is not in keeping with the State Department's commitment to transparency and public accountability.”
Kirby said he learned that on the same day of the 2013 briefing, a video editor received a call from a State Department public affairs official who made "a specific request ... to excise that portion of the briefing."
Kirby says he has since ordered the original video restored on all platforms and asked the State Department's legal adviser to examine the matter. He said no further investigation will be made, primarily because no rules were in place against such actions.
Kirby said he has ordered new rules created to prevent a recurrence.
In a statement issued late Wednesday aftrnoon, Psaki, now White House Communications Director, said, "I had no knowledge of nor would I have approved of any form of editing or cutting my briefing transcript on any subject while at the State Department."
The Psaki footage took on new significance last month on the heels of a New York Times Magazine profile of Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, who boasted of creating an “echo chamber” to sell the Iran deal.
Rhodes later claimed they did not mislead the public and “confirmed publicly” there were “discreet channels of communication established with Iran in 2012.”
Yet in a February 2013 briefing, then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland claimed there were no secret, direct talks with Iran at the time. It was Psaki’s explanation of that briefing, months later in December, that was later scrubbed from the footage archives.

Trump on PGA tour moving from Doral to Mexico: 'Hope they have kidnapping insurance'

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump makes an appearance prior to the start of play during the final round of the World Golf Championships-Cadillac Championship at Trump National Doral Blue Monster Course on March 6, 2016 in Doral, Florida.

Earl “Butch” Buchholz tournament chairman(DUMB ASS)

The PGA plans to move a long-standing golf tournament from Donald Trump’s Doral, Florida course to one in Mexico City – sparking rumors that the organization is looking for either more money or less Trump for their event.
The tournament chairman of the former Cadillac Championship, one of the four World Golf Championships that attract the best players in the world, said the PGA Tour has informed him the event is leaving next year for Mexico City.
The move comes after Cadillac pulled out as a sponsor and the PGA decided to explore other options for the event in the wake of his controversial comments on Muslim immigrants. Outgoing World Golf Championship-Cadillac Championship chairman Butch Buchholz said it was a coincidence that the changes happened after Trump’s comments.
“Cadillac was going to leave,” Buchholz said. “It had nothing to do with Trump. They said they’re changing their whole marketing strategy. The tour had almost a year to find a replacement.”
Trump said Tuesday night in a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity that he had just heard the PGA Tour was taking the tournament out of the Miami area.
"They're moving it to Mexico City, which, by the way, I hope they have kidnapping insurance," the presumptive Republican nominee added.
Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez said that the move comes down purely to money. He said after scouting other golf courses in the Miami area, the PGA gave him an ultimatum late Friday night: either secure $6 million for the yearly golf tournament or it will be moved to Mexico. With the holiday weekend coming up, Gimenez said the PGA’s deal amounted to an exit announcement.
"It's a question of money," Gimenez said, according to the Miami Herald. "Cadillac was going to spend a certain amount. The people in Mexico are going to spend a certain amount. The gap, I guess, is $6 million."
Despite Gimenez’s assurances that the move to Mexico was about the money, there is still speculation that Trump’s rhetoric on the campaign trail is the main reason for the PGA moving the tournament to Mexico.
Gimenez also told the Herald about an earlier effort by the PGA to move the tournament out of Trump's Doral resort to Key Biscayne after Trump’s comments last summer about immigrants and Mexico.
Gimenez himself returned a $15,000 donation from Trump to his mayoral reelection bid and the Miami-Dade commissioners passed a resolution that condemned the presumptive Republican nominee.
"There was a time when Donald Trump was kind of toxic, and maybe toxic to the PGA. They thought they may have difficulty in getting sponsors," Gimenez said. "At the time, they thought Cadillac was going to pull out. By moving the venue, they thought it would be easier to get sponsors and raise more money."
PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem was traveling and was expected to discuss the change Wednesday afternoon.
Trump criticized the tour in a statement Wednesday, calling it a "sad day for Miami, the United States and the game of golf" to leave Doral after 54 years and go to Mexico.
"No different than Nabisco, Carrier and so many other American companies, the PGA Tour has put profit ahead of thousands of American jobs, millions of dollars in revenue for local communities and charities and the enjoyment of hundreds of thousands of fans who make the tournament an annual tradition," Trump said. "This decision only further embodies the very reason I am running for president of the United States."
After Trump's comments about Mexico last year, golf quickly distanced itself from him, though not entirely.
The PGA of America canceled its Grand Slam of Golf that was scheduled for Trump's course in Los Angeles last fall, and golf organizations stood behind a statement that said Trump's comments were not consistent with golf's commitment to be diverse and welcoming.
But the U.S. Women's Open and the Senior PGA Championship next year are still scheduled for Trump properties, as is the 2022 PGA Championship.
Doral has been the longest-running PGA Tour event in Florida, dating to 1962. The Cadillac Championship had been at Doral since 2007 was one of the WGCs that originally moved around the world. It was played in Spain, Ireland and England until 2007, when all the WGCs moved to America. Now there is one in Shanghai.
Doral had been a regular PGA Tour event before that.
The PGA Tour already has one tournament in Mexico in the fall, the OHL Classic at Mayakoba, held at a beach resort south of Cancun.
The tour has had problems in Mexico City in the past. When a PGA Tour Champions event was held there in 2003, six players were robbed at gunpoint in a restaurant, and thieves got away with expensive watches. No one was hurt.

In the battle against 'sleazy' media, why Trump keeps lapping Hillary

Kurtz: Two candidates who detest the press

After Donald Trump had himself a fine time ripping the sleazy media, Hillary Clinton did a Trump-like thing: she called into two cable news shows.
She was asked about Trump….but didn’t make much news. And therein lies the heart of the problem for a news business that is supposed to be dedicated to fairness.
One candidate is openly hostile to the press but does all kinds of interviews—television, radio, newspapers, magazines, websites—day after day. The other candidate is privately hostile to the press but also very selective in doing interviews—and hasn’t held a news conference in months.
Of course there’s an imbalance in the coverage, and it’s about more than ratings—though attracting more eyeballs and clicks is clearly a factor.
The New York Times, in a piece on this very subject, offered an example:
“Last week, none of the three major cable news networks — CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC — carried Mrs. Clinton’s speech to a workers’ union in Las Vegas, where she debuted sharp new attack lines against Mr. Trump.
“Instead, each chose to broadcast a live feed of an empty podium in North Dakota, on a stage where Mr. Trump was about to speak.”
So “AWAITING TRUMP PRESSER” is deemed more newsworthy than the presumptive Democratic nominee actually speaking. And that does not speak well of the media.
Clinton tried copying a Trump tactic by calling into shows on CNN and MSNBC that afternoon. “It took a reporter to shame him into actually making his contribution and getting the money to veterans,” she told Jake Tapper.
But that meant she was in reactive mode, rather than generating headlines on her own.
Clinton’s spokesman, Brian Fallon, told the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent that “the judge of whether we’re able to build a positive narrative around her is not whether we are getting 10 hours to his eight during cable day programming. We can do that on a state-specific level, where local coverage departs from what may be the feel of the campaign if you’re only watching cable networks. Also, we can build a positive narrative about her based on her standing up and condemning the very things that he is saying and doing that are commanding all that media attention…There’s a conventional wisdom settling in that visibility on daytime cable equates with him having political strength.”
Well, maybe. But so far Trump is sucking up most of the oxygen, even while ripping those who provide it as sleazebags.
There is another thread here that goes beyond Trump having endless at-bats while Clinton mainly sends in surrogates from the dugout. The Donald, when he engages in verbal fisticuffs, seems to be enjoying himself, while Hillary seems like she’s enduring an unpleasant ritual.
In New York magazine, liberal writer Rebecca Traister sees “a pervasive defensiveness that gets in the way of her projecting authenticity, an intense desire for privacy that keeps voters from feeling as if they know her — especially problematic in an era in which social media makes personal connection with voters more important than ever. Clinton’s wariness about letting the world in is in part her personality and in part born of experience. A lifetime spent in the searing spotlight has taught her that exposure too often equals evisceration…
“If Clinton suffers from a kind of political PTSD that makes her overly cautious and scripted and closed-off, then its primary trigger is the press corps that trails her everywhere she goes. Clinton hates the press. A band of young reporters follows her, thanklessly, from event to event, and she gives them almost nothing. Unlike other candidates, she does not ride on the same plane with them (though this may change once the general election starts and the traveling group gets bigger). Every once in a while she has an off-the-record drink with them, but without the frequency or fluidity of her husband, whose off-the-record conversations with the press were legendarily candid.”
Clinton hates the press. So says a sympathetic writer. So, of course, does Trump, which may speak volumes about my profession but also about this era of hyperpartisanship.
And yet voters tend to prefer candidates who come off as happy warriors. On that score, Trump’s overt hostility is playing better—and is more entertaining—than Hillary’s covert hostility.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

Clinton IT aide Pagliano to plead Fifth in email case

Bryan Pagliano

The man who set up Hillary Clinton’s private email server will assert his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and refuse to answer questions over an open records lawsuit, according to court documents obtained Wednesday by Fox News.
Bryan Pagliano declined to answer questions from watchdog group Judicial Watch during his deposition scheduled for Monday, according to his lawyers.
His lawyers also asked a federal judge to block Judicial Watch from recording his deposition, writing that a written transcription should be instead be enough.
"Given the constitutional implications, the absence of any proper purpose for video recording the deposition, and the considerable risk of abuse, the Court should preclude Judicial Watch, Inc. (“Judicial Watch”) from creating an audiovisual recording of Mr. Pagliano’s deposition," they wrote.
His lawyers added that videotaped depositions "pose a serious danger to deponents invoking the Fifth Amendment."
Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before helping install the so-called “homebrew” server system in her Chappaqua, N.Y. home, cut an immunity deal last fall with the Justice Department amid the FBI probe. He was recently described to Fox News by an intelligence source as a “devastating witness.”
In the fall, Pagliano told at least three congressional committees in the fall that he will invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying against Clinton. He was asked to testify about the serve by the House Select Committee on Benghazi, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Homeland Security Committee.
The Washington Post reported in September 2015 that Pagliano had been subpoenaed by the Benghazi committee Aug. 11 and committee chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C. had ordered that he appear for questioning Sept. 10. Gowdy also demanded that Pagliano provide documents related to all servers or computer systems controlled or owned by Clinton between 2009 and 2013.
The Post reported in August 2015 that Pagliano had worked as an IT director on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, and was asked to oversee the installation of Clinton’s server to handle her correspondence while secretary of state. He was paid by a political action committee tied to Clinton until April 2009, when he was hired by the State Department as an IT specialist.
According to the paper, Pagliano left government service in February 2013 and now works for a technology contractor that provides some services for the State Department.
Lawyers for senior Clinton aide Cheryl Mills, during a nearly five-hour deposition last week in Washington, repeatedly objected to questions about Pagliano’s role in setting up the former secretary of state’s private server.
According to a transcript of the deposition with Judicial Watch released on Tuesday, Mills attorney Beth Wilkinson – as well as Obama administration lawyers – objected to the line of questioning about Pagliano, who has emerged as a central figure in the FBI's ongoing criminal probe of Clinton's email practices.
Clinton, the Democratic presidential frontrunner, has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing related to her private server.

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Politically Correct Cartoons

Do Louisiana lawmakers really think the Declaration of Independence is racist and sexist?

Days before the 1983 gubernatorial election in Louisiana, Democrat Edwin Edwards infamously declared that “the only way I can lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy.”
Edwards was elected governor that year – demonstrating the low bar Democrats must hurdle to hold public office in the Bayou State.
Click here to join Todd’s American Dispatch: a must-read for conservatives.
Edwards may have been a scoundrel (not to mention a convicted felon) but at least he didn’t slander our Founding Fathers or the Declaration of Independence.
Rep. Barbara Norton managed to do both during a bizarre May 25^th rant on the floor of the Chambre des Représentants de Louisiane as they say in Cajun Country.
“All men are not created equal,” the Gentle Lady from Shreveport ranted. “We’re teaching them a lie.”
Rep. Norton was fired up hotter than a bottle of Tabasco from Avery Island.
Lawmakers had been asked to consider a bill authored by Republican Rep. Valarie Hodges that would have required children in grades four, five and six to recite portions of the Declaration of Independence.
“I want students to understand that the Declaration of Independence is the cornerstone of our republic – and what gives us liberty,” Rep. Hodges told me. “I want them to not just memorize it – but to understand what that document did – it changed the course of history.”
Click here to get Todd’s most recent book – a guide to restoring traditional American values.
A noble cause indeed – to teach young Americans that they live in a most exceptional nation.
“It’s important that we fight for these values,” she told me. “The future of our republic depends on the next generation – whether or not they are prepared for citizenship.”
And as my Fox News colleague Jesse Watters demonstrates on a weekly basis in his “Watter’s World” segment – our public school system is doing a subpar job of teaching kids what it means to be an American.
“The Left is pushing against this very hard – trying to rewrite history,” she said. “Instead of believing that America is an exceptional nation – there are some radicals who want to rewrite history and teach our children the opposite of what is truth.”
And that brings me back to Rep. Norton – railing on about the Declaration of Independence.
“We’re teaching them a lie,” she declared.
“When I think back in 1776 July 4^th – African Americans were slaves and for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration – I think it’s a little bit unfair to us to ask those children to recite something that is not true,” she said.
House Speaker Pro Tem Walt Leger III (another Democrat) took issue with the “All men are created equal” portion – and said it needed to be taught with historical context.
“Men and women were not seen as equals at that time nor were blacks considered to be men that were equal to others,” he said during a committee hearing.
Rep. Hodges was dumbfounded by the hostility.
“I feel sadness that that level of hatred was displayed against the Founding Fathers and the documents that give us the ability as women and black people and Caucasians to run for office,” she said. “The lack of understanding to me is saddening and frightening.”
Hodges ended up pulling her bill – under pressure from lawmakers and a mountain of amendments.
Democrats don’t believe we should teach young Americans that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. And they sure don’t want them to pursue happiness.
That, boys and girls, is what we call a self-evident truth.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

DOJ fights federal judge's order for lawyers to attend ethics training

The Justice Department moved Tuesday to fight a federal judge’s order that its lawyers undergo mandatory ethics training, digging in after the DOJ was accused of misleading the courts over President Obama's immigration executive actions.
In filings Tuesday, the department said the order would "far exceed the bounds of appropriate remedies" and would cost the department millions.
U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, of Texas, had issued the order earlier this month, after alleging DOJ attorneys misled him about the implementation of Obama’s executive orders on illegal immigrants.
Attorneys had told Hanen that a key component – an expansion of a 2012 program to protect illegal immigrants from deportation if they were brought to the U.S. as children – hadn’t been implemented. But officials later revealed they had given more than 108,000 people three-year reprieves from deportation under the expanded rules, as well as work permits.
Hanen blocked Obama's actions and the case is now before the Supreme Court.
Hanen’s scathing order filed on May 19 accused the DOJ of a “calculated plan of unethical conduct.” He ordered that all DOJ lawyers attend a yearly ethics course. He also ordered the department to turn over the names of those who received the reprieves.
"Such conduct is certainly not worthy of any department whose name includes the word 'Justice,'" Hanen said.
The Department of Justice responded in the court filing Tuesday, saying that it "emphatically" disagrees with the judge’s ruling, claiming that none of its lawyers intended to deceive. The filing requests Hanen’s order be put on hold so federal lawyers can review.
In Tuesday’s filing, the DOJ estimated that the ethics training mandated would cost upwards of $7.8 million.
"The sanctions ordered by the Court far exceed the bounds of appropriate remedies for what this Court concluded were intentional misrepresentations, a conclusion that was reached without proper procedural protections and that lacks sufficient evidentiary support," lawyers for the department said.
“Compounding matters, the sanctions imposed by this Court exceed the scope of its authority and unjustifiably impose irreparable injury on the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and thousands of innocent third parties,” the filing said.
The department also argued the order to turn over the list of those who were given reprieves would undermine trust in the Department of Homeland Security’s ability to maintain the confidentiality of personal information, which it said was vital to its mission.
“The Department emphatically disagrees with the sanctions orders and will seek review of this matter in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals," a Department of Justice spokesman said in a statement.

Lawyers for Clinton aide block questioning on IT specialist who set up server

What are they trying to hide?

Lawyers for senior Hillary Clinton aide Cheryl Mills, during a nearly five-hour deposition last week in Washington, repeatedly objected to questions about IT specialist Bryan Pagliano’s role in setting up the former secretary of state’s private server.
According to a transcript of the deposition with watchdog group Judicial Watch released on Tuesday, Mills attorney Beth Wilkinson – as well as Obama administration lawyers – objected to the line of questioning about Pagliano, who has emerged as a central figure in the FBI's ongoing criminal probe of Clinton's email practices.
“I'm going to instruct her not to answer. It's a legal question,” Wilkinson responded, when asked by Judicial Watch whether Pagliano was an “agent of the Clintons” when the server was set up.
This was a pattern repeated throughout the deposition by the seven lawyers for Mills -- including four attorneys representing the State and Justice departments, as well as her personal representatives.
Asked direct questions about when Mills spoke with Pagliano, Mills' lawyer also objected.
In other exchanges relating to the server's set-up, Mills said she did not know how to answer either.
"I don't know how to answer your question because I don't know the time period,” Mills said, when asked when she spoke with Pagliano. She did clarify that she met him in 2008 during Clinton's first presidential campaign. Mills served as Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department and her counsel.
Pagliano, a former State Department employee, cut an immunity deal last fall with the Justice Department amid the FBI probe. He was recently described to Fox News by an intelligence source as a "devastating witness."
Mills had recently gone to court to make sure that recordings of this past Friday’s deposition were not released. The request was granted by the court, though Judicial Watch was still able to release the transcript.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Fox News on Tuesday that they have “more information than we did before the deposition despite difficult questioning.”
He added, “Mills’ attorneys directed her not to discuss conversations with Pagliano.”
Mills also testified under oath that the server existed before Clinton became secretary of state in 2009.
“President Clinton had established a server for the purposes of his own staff office, and … her email was subsequently put on that,” Mills said, adding that she learned about the server’s origin after the fact.

Getting 'nervous'? Clinton plans California campaign spree as Sanders eyes upset

Hillary Clinton is packing her campaign schedule with new stops across California ahead of next week’s delegate-rich primary, in an apparent bid to forestall a Bernie Sanders win as her rival climbs in the polls and barnstorms the state in pursuit of a dramatic upset.
The campaign hastily scrapped a planned New Jersey stop later in the week, and instead announced the Democratic presidential front-runner will camp out in California from Thursday through Monday, right up until the June 7 primary.
In a boost ahead of her West Coast swing, Clinton also snagged the endorsement Tuesday of California Gov. Jerry Brown, who in an “open letter” said Clinton represents “the only path forward to win the presidency and stop the dangerous candidacy of Donald Trump.”
He wrote, “Hillary Clinton has convincingly made the case that she knows how to get things done and has the tenacity and skill to advance the Democratic agenda.”
The developments come amid signs that the campaign-finale contest could be close. A recent poll, by the Public Policy Institute of California, showed Clinton’s lead in the state narrowing from double digits to just 2 points. Sanders, meanwhile, has been crisscrossing California for days and on Monday boldly predicted a victory in the Golden State, where 475 pledged delegates are at stake.
“She’s getting very nervous lately,” Sanders claimed of Clinton.
Clinton does not have to be nervous about whether she’ll effectively secure the nomination by June 7 – she’s just 71 delegates shy of the 2,383 needed to clinch, and is assured of crossing that threshold by next Tuesday night. Six states, including California and New Jersey, are voting on Tuesday, the last major primary election day.
But she wants to avoid a high-profile loss in the Democratic stronghold, at a time when she's trying to unify the party. A Sanders upset victory could energize the Vermont senator’s vows to take his fight all the way to the convention.
Speaking Monday in Oakland, Calif., Sanders insisted the race will not be over next Tuesday. He again vowed to keep working to persuade so-called superdelegates – party insiders and officials free to support any candidate – to cross over to his side in the weeks ahead. (While Clinton is sure to exceed the 2,383-delegate threshold on Tuesday, Sanders' campaign for weeks has questioned whether her superdelegate support should count toward that tally.)
On Tuesday, Sanders was continuing his extended swing through California with stops in Emeryville, Santa Cruz and Monterey.
Clinton has not revealed exact details on where she’ll be campaigning when she travels from New Jersey to California later in the week.
Her attention to New Jersey in recent days may reflect the campaign’s back-up plan in case California is tight. Clinton aides recently told Fox News they're hoping for an overwhelming win in New Jersey‎ on June 7, which could possibly seal the nomination for Clinton before the polls even close in California.
"If things go our way in New Jersey," one senior Clinton official said, "we could wrap up the nomination and the rest of the country will already be asleep before the results are even final in California."
Sanders aides told Fox News they plan to spend most of their time in California in the lead-up to Tuesday and feel they are closing strong in the nation's most populous state.
"We feel it's an important state," Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs told Fox News. "And we plan to campaign hard there and turn these huge crowds and momentum into a big win."

List of veterans groups receiving Trump fundraiser donations

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on Tuesday released a list of veterans groups that received money from a fundraiser the billionaire held in late January.
The groups and the amount given to each are as follows, according to a list from the Trump campaign:
22Kill -- $200,000
Achilles International Inc. -- $200,000
American Hero Adventures -- $100,000
Americans for Equal Living -- $100,000
America's Vetdogs - The Veterans K9 Corps Inc. -- $75,000
AMVETS -- $75,000
Armed Services YMCA of the USA -- $75,000
Bob Woodruff Family Foundation Inc. -- $75,000
Central Iowa Shelter and Services -- $100,000
Connected Warriors Inc. -- $75,000
Disabled American Veterans Charitable Service Trust -- $115,000
Fisher House Foundation -- $115,000
Folds of Honor Foundation -- $200,000
Foundation for American Veterans -- $75,000
Freedom Alliance -- $75,000
Green Beret Foundation -- $350,000
Hire Heroes USA -- $75,000
Homes for Our Troops -- $50,000
Honoring America's Warriors -- $100,000
Hope for the Warriors -- $65,000
Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund -- $175,000
K9s for Warriors -- $50,000
Liberty House -- $100,000
Marine Corps- Law Enforcement Foundation -- $1,100,000
Navy Seal Foundation -- $465,000
Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society -- $75,000
New Englands Wounded Veterans Inc. -- $75,000
Operation Homefront -- $65,000
Partners for Patriots -- $100,000
Project for Patriots -- $100,000 (pending)
Puppy Jake Foundation -- $100,000
Racing for Heroes Inc. -- $200,000
Support Siouxland Soldiers -- $100,000
Task Force Dagger Foundation -- $50,000
The Mission Continues -- $75,000
The National Military Family Association Inc. -- $75,000
Veterans Airlift Command -- $100,000
Veterans Count 25,000 Veterans-In-Command Inc. -- $150,000
Vietnam Veterans Workshop Inc. -- $75,000
Warriors for Freedom Foundation -- $50,000
Total: $5,600,000