Conservative Blogger
Monday, December 5, 2016
Federal judge rules Michigan recount to start at noon Monday
 |
| Trump supporters file lawsuits to stop recounts |
In his ruling Sunday night, Judge Mark Goldsmith rejected an effort by state officials to delay the hand-counting of about 4.8 million ballots.
Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein argued that a law requiring a break of at least two business days is unconstitutional. Goldsmith found that Stein had "shown the likelihood of irreparable harm" if the count was delayed even by two days and rejected the state's arguments about the cost to taxpayers.
Republican Donald Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, or two-tenths of a percentage point, in Michigan. Stein received about 1 percent of the vote.
Republican Attorney General Bill Schuette, the Trump campaign and super PACs have filed separate lawsuits asking state courts to prevent the recount, arguing that Stein, as the fourth-place finisher, is not "aggrieved" because she has no chance of winning in a recount.
Elections officials in the three states, all narrowly won by Trump, have expressed confidence in their results. Even if all three recounts happen, none were expected to give Clinton enough votes to emerge as the winner.
Ryan blasts decision to block Dakota Access pipeline route
House Speaker Paul Ryan called the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ decision Sunday to deny a government permit for the Dakota Access oil pipeline in southern North Dakota “big government decision-making at its worst.”
Ryan, R-Wis., tweeted out his displeasure hours after the decision was made. He added that he looks "forward to putting this anti-energy presidency behind us."
The decision handed a victory to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and its supporters, who argued the project would threaten the tribe’s water source and cultural sites.
Ryan comments echoed the sentiments echoed by other North Dakota leaders. Gov. Jack Dalrymple called it a “serious mistake” that prolongs the dangerous situation” of having several hundred protesters who are camped out on federal land during the bitter winter season. U.S. Rep. Kevin Cramer said it's a "very chilling signal" for the future of infrastructure in the United States.
The company building the pipeline, Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners, slammed President Obama’s administration in a statement, calling the move political.
The company said the decision was "just the latest in a series of overt and transparent political actions by an administration which has abandoned the rule of law in favor of currying favor with a narrow and extreme political constituency." The company reiterated its plan to complete construction of the pipeline without rerouting around Lake Oahe.
The four-state, $3.8 billion project is largely complete except for the now-blocked segment underneath Lake Oahe, a Missouri River reservoir. Assistant Secretary for Civil Works Jo-Ellen Darcy said in a news release that her decision was based on the need to "explore alternate routes" for the pipeline's crossing. Her full decision doesn't rule out that it could cross under the reservoir or north of Bismarck.
"Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it's clear that there's more work to do," Darcy said. "The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline crossing."
The news was met by cheers and chants of “mni wichoni” – “water is life” in Lakota Sioux. Some in the crowd banged rums. Miles Allard, a member of the Standing Rock Sioux, said he was pleased but remained cautious, saying, "We don't know what Trump is going to do."
"The whole world is watching," Allard added. "I'm telling all our people to stand up and not to leave until this is over."
"The safety of everyone in the area - law enforcement officers, residents and protesters alike - continues to be our foremost concern," she added.
Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier, whose department has done much of the policing for the protests, said that "local law enforcement does not have an opinion" on the easement and that his department will continue to "enforce the law."
U.S. Secretary for the Interior Sally Jewell said in a statement that the Corps' "thoughtful approach ... ensures that there will be an in-depth evaluation of alternative routes for the pipeline and a closer look at potential impacts."
Earlier Sunday, an organizer with Veterans Stand for Standing Rock said tribal elders had asked the military veterans not to have confrontations with law enforcement officials, adding the group is there to help out those who've dug in against the project.
About 250 veterans gathered about a mile from the main camp for a meeting with organizer Wes Clark Jr., the son of former Democratic presidential candidate Gen. Wesley Clark. The group had said about 2,000 veterans were coming, but it wasn't clear how many actually arrived.
"We have been asked by the elders not to do direct action," Wes Clark Jr. said. He added that the National Guard and law enforcement have armored vehicles and are armed, warning: "If we come forward, they will attack us."
Instead, he told the veterans, "If you see someone who needs help, help them out."
Authorities moved a blockade from the north end of the Backwater Bridge with the conditions that protesters stay south of it and come there only if there is a prearranged meeting. Authorities also asked protesters not to remove barriers on the bridge, which they have said was damaged in the late October conflict that led to several people being hurt, including a serious arm injury.
"That heavy presence is gone now and I really hope in this de-escalation they'll see that, and in good faith . the leadership in those camps will start squashing the violent factions," Cass County Sheriff Paul Laney said in a statement, reiterating that any violation will "will result in their arrest."
After Carrier deal, Trump vows tax of 35 percent for US business going overseas
President-elect
Donald Trump said Sunday that he’ll slap a 35 percent tax on U.S.
companies that move jobs or operations to other countries -- days after
announcing a controversial deal with Carrier to keep roughly 1,100
manufacturing jobs in the United States.
Trump, a prolific tweeter with about 15 million followers, needed six posts, each limited to 140 characters, to get out his message.
“The U.S. is going to substantially reduce taxes and regulations on businesses,” Trump tweeted. “But any business that leaves our country for another country, fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S. without retribution or consequence, is WRONG!
“There will be a tax on our soon to be strong border of 35% for these companies ... Please be forewarned prior to making a very expensive mistake! THE UNITED STATES IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS.”
The string of tweets follow Trump’s announcement last week that he had reached a deal with the Carrier furnace and air-conditioning manufacturer to keep the jobs in Indiana, instead of moving them to Mexico where labor costs are significantly less expensive.
Trump made vowing to keep Carrier in the country and returning other good-paying manufacturing jobs to the economically challenged Midwest a major part of his successful presidential campaign.
But the Carrier deal -- which purportedly includes $6 million in tax incentives and $1 million in job-training grants over 10 years -- has been criticized by liberals and conservatives alike.
Among them are self-described socialist and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and 2008 GOP vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin, who suggest the deal was an example of “crony capitalism.”
Vice President-elect Mike Pence, who remains governor of Indiana until next month, defended Trump’s effort on Carrier on NBC’s “Meet the Press."
“We were heartbroken when we heard Carrier was pulling up stakes,” said Pence, who acknowledges he couldn’t broker the deal. “The only reason Carrier is staying in the United States is because Donald Trump was elected president.”
Trump, a prolific tweeter with about 15 million followers, needed six posts, each limited to 140 characters, to get out his message.
“The U.S. is going to substantially reduce taxes and regulations on businesses,” Trump tweeted. “But any business that leaves our country for another country, fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S. without retribution or consequence, is WRONG!
“There will be a tax on our soon to be strong border of 35% for these companies ... Please be forewarned prior to making a very expensive mistake! THE UNITED STATES IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS.”
The string of tweets follow Trump’s announcement last week that he had reached a deal with the Carrier furnace and air-conditioning manufacturer to keep the jobs in Indiana, instead of moving them to Mexico where labor costs are significantly less expensive.
Trump made vowing to keep Carrier in the country and returning other good-paying manufacturing jobs to the economically challenged Midwest a major part of his successful presidential campaign.
But the Carrier deal -- which purportedly includes $6 million in tax incentives and $1 million in job-training grants over 10 years -- has been criticized by liberals and conservatives alike.
Among them are self-described socialist and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and 2008 GOP vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin, who suggest the deal was an example of “crony capitalism.”
Vice President-elect Mike Pence, who remains governor of Indiana until next month, defended Trump’s effort on Carrier on NBC’s “Meet the Press."
“We were heartbroken when we heard Carrier was pulling up stakes,” said Pence, who acknowledges he couldn’t broker the deal. “The only reason Carrier is staying in the United States is because Donald Trump was elected president.”
Trump remains on defensive after call with Taiwan president
President-elect Donald Trump defended his call to the Taiwanese president in a series of tweets Sunday, a breach of diplomatic protocol as the U.S. shifted recognition from Taiwan to China nearly 40 years ago.
"Did China ask us if it was OK to carry out a number of actions such as build up disputed islands in the South China Sea or take economic measures hurtful to the United States," Trump tweeted.
Taiwan President Tsai Ing-Wen called Trump Friday to congratulate him on the election in a call set up by an American third party. Taiwan's official Central News Agency, citing anonymous sources on Saturday, said that Edwin Feulner, founder of the Washington-based Heritage Foundation, was a "crucial figure" in setting up communication channels between the sides.
The call seemingly irked China, prompting Beijing to send a complaint to the U.S. government. Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Saturday that the contact was "just a small trick by Taiwan" that he believed would not change U.S. policy toward China, according to Hong Kong's Phoenix TV.
"The one-China policy is the cornerstone of the healthy development of China-U.S. relations and we hope this political foundation will not be interfered with or damaged," Wang was quoted as saying. Chinese officials said they lodged a complaint with the U.S. and reiterated a commitment to seeking "reunification" with the island, which they consider a renegade province.
Trump’s top aides defended the call earlier Sunday.
Senior adviser KellyAnne Conway said on “Fox News Sunday” that it was “just a phone call.”
“President-elect Trump is not out there making policy or policy prescriptions,” she added.
Vice President-elect Mike Pence told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the call shouldn’t necessarily be considered a shift in U.S. policy. He shrugged off the attention to the incident as media hype.
"It was a courtesy call," Pence added.
Over the decades, the status of Taiwan has been one of the most sensitive issues in U.S.-China relations. China regards Taiwan as part of its territory to be retaken by force, if necessary, if it seeks independence. It would regard any recognition of a Taiwanese leader as a head of state as unacceptable.
Taiwan split from the Chinese mainland in 1949. The U.S. policy acknowledges the Chinese view over sovereignty, but considers Taiwan's status as unsettled.
Ned Price, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, said Trump's conversation does not signal any change to long-standing U.S. policy on cross-strait issues. Yet the phone conversation prompted mixed reactions.
Taiwanese newspapers ran banner headlines Sunday about the call, and two noted on their front pages Sunday that Trump referred to Tsai as "the president of Taiwan," a formulation that would be a huge shift in American policy and infuriate China.
The Taiwanese presidential office said Trump and Tsai discussed issues affecting Asia and the future of U.S. relations with Taiwan. Tsai also told Trump that she hoped the U.S. would support Taiwan in its participation in international affairs, the office said, in an apparent reference to China's efforts to isolate Taiwan from global institutions such as the United Nations.
Taiwan's presidential office spokesman, Alex Huang, said separately that Taiwan's relations with China and "healthy" Taiwan-U.S. relations can proceed in parallel. "There is no conflict" in that, he said.
China's foreign ministry said Beijing lodged "solemn representations" with the U.S. over the call.
"It must be pointed out that there is only one China in the world and Taiwan is an inseparable part of Chinese territory," Geng Shuang, a ministry spokesman, said in a statement. "The government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate government representing China."
Sunday, December 4, 2016
Billionaire Bashing: Media suggest Trump's wealthy picks will screw the rest of us
 |
| Kurtz: Press dumps on Trump and his gazillionaires |
Donald Trump’s Cabinet is shaping up to be really, seriously, fabulously rich.
And that’s news.
But is it bad news?
Is it some kind of class-warfare plot by America’s first billionaire president?
Should the media automatically assume that these super-wealthy folks are on a mission to screw the middle class?
We’re starting to see such criticism bubble up from journalists and pundits who are presumably in far lower income brackets than the new Treasury secretary, former Goldman Sachs and hedge fund guy Steve Mnuchin; or the new Commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross (estimated wealth $2.5 billion), or the new Education secretary, Betsy DeVos, whose family co-founded Amway (estimated family wealth $5.1 billion).
Now it’s perfectly fair to look at their records, including past controversies in the business world. And it’s equally fair to say that Trump made Goldman Sachs a symbol of a rigged system—remember his focus on Hillary Clinton’s big-money speeches to the investment bank?—and is now tapping more than his share of Goldman people.
But the idea that this will be an administration of the rich, by the rich and for the rich?
Was that true of FDR or JFK, both of whom were born into elite families of great means? Obviously not.
The Washington Post starts out by questioning the team’s lack of government credentials:
“Many of the Trump appointees were born wealthy, attended elite schools and went on to amass even larger fortunes as adults. As a group, they have much more experience funding political candidates than they do running government agencies.”
Then comes the zinger:
“Their collective wealth in many ways defies Trump’s populist campaign promises.”
A University of Virginia faculty member is paraphrased as saying Trump and his lieutenants “won’t be able to draw on the same sort of life struggles that President Obama did, in crafting policy to lift poor and middle-class Americans.”
So rich Americans need not apply, because, in this teacher’s word, they would lack “empathy”?
A political scientist at Duke says that “when you put a bunch of millionaires in charge, you can expect public policy that helps millionaires at the expense of everybody else.” And Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, not surprisingly, says Trump will have “a billionaire and millionaire cabinet, with a billionaire agenda… to hurt the middle class.”
So is the reverse true? Was Bill Clinton, because he grew up with modest means in small-town Arkansas, out to soak the rich?
These questions don’t seem to come up in Democratic administrations. Obama’s Commerce secretary, Penny Pritzker, happens to have an estimated net worth of $2.5 billion.
But it’s becoming a hot media issue. Politico on “Trump’s Team of Gazillionaires”:
“Donald Trump campaigned as a champion of the ‘forgotten man’ and won the White House on the strength of his support among the white working class.
“So far, he’s stacking his administration with masters of the universe.”
Liberal columnist Paul Waldman:
“Donald Trump has named Steve Mnuchin — a Goldman Sachs alum and hedge fund manager — to be his secretary of the Treasury, in keeping with his repeated promise to take on Wall Street and the powers-that-be on behalf of the little guy.
“So can we stop pretending that Trump's campaign ‘populism’ was anything other than just one more con?”
For what it’s worth, Mnuchin told CNBC that there will be “no absolute tax cut for the upper class”—meaning any reductions would be offset by cutting deductions—and there will be a “middle-income tax cut.”
Now if the new administration does push a tax cut tilted toward the wealthy, is too cozy with Wall Street and slashes programs for the poor, the press should be all over that.
But right now, some of the coverage seems built on the assumption that anyone who’s rich is mainly interested in raiding the Treasury to help themselves and their well-heeled friends.
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.
And that’s news.
But is it bad news?
Is it some kind of class-warfare plot by America’s first billionaire president?
Should the media automatically assume that these super-wealthy folks are on a mission to screw the middle class?
We’re starting to see such criticism bubble up from journalists and pundits who are presumably in far lower income brackets than the new Treasury secretary, former Goldman Sachs and hedge fund guy Steve Mnuchin; or the new Commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross (estimated wealth $2.5 billion), or the new Education secretary, Betsy DeVos, whose family co-founded Amway (estimated family wealth $5.1 billion).
Now it’s perfectly fair to look at their records, including past controversies in the business world. And it’s equally fair to say that Trump made Goldman Sachs a symbol of a rigged system—remember his focus on Hillary Clinton’s big-money speeches to the investment bank?—and is now tapping more than his share of Goldman people.
But the idea that this will be an administration of the rich, by the rich and for the rich?
Was that true of FDR or JFK, both of whom were born into elite families of great means? Obviously not.
The Washington Post starts out by questioning the team’s lack of government credentials:
“Many of the Trump appointees were born wealthy, attended elite schools and went on to amass even larger fortunes as adults. As a group, they have much more experience funding political candidates than they do running government agencies.”
Then comes the zinger:
“Their collective wealth in many ways defies Trump’s populist campaign promises.”
A University of Virginia faculty member is paraphrased as saying Trump and his lieutenants “won’t be able to draw on the same sort of life struggles that President Obama did, in crafting policy to lift poor and middle-class Americans.”
So rich Americans need not apply, because, in this teacher’s word, they would lack “empathy”?
A political scientist at Duke says that “when you put a bunch of millionaires in charge, you can expect public policy that helps millionaires at the expense of everybody else.” And Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, not surprisingly, says Trump will have “a billionaire and millionaire cabinet, with a billionaire agenda… to hurt the middle class.”
So is the reverse true? Was Bill Clinton, because he grew up with modest means in small-town Arkansas, out to soak the rich?
These questions don’t seem to come up in Democratic administrations. Obama’s Commerce secretary, Penny Pritzker, happens to have an estimated net worth of $2.5 billion.
But it’s becoming a hot media issue. Politico on “Trump’s Team of Gazillionaires”:
“Donald Trump campaigned as a champion of the ‘forgotten man’ and won the White House on the strength of his support among the white working class.
“So far, he’s stacking his administration with masters of the universe.”
Liberal columnist Paul Waldman:
“Donald Trump has named Steve Mnuchin — a Goldman Sachs alum and hedge fund manager — to be his secretary of the Treasury, in keeping with his repeated promise to take on Wall Street and the powers-that-be on behalf of the little guy.
“So can we stop pretending that Trump's campaign ‘populism’ was anything other than just one more con?”
For what it’s worth, Mnuchin told CNBC that there will be “no absolute tax cut for the upper class”—meaning any reductions would be offset by cutting deductions—and there will be a “middle-income tax cut.”
Now if the new administration does push a tax cut tilted toward the wealthy, is too cozy with Wall Street and slashes programs for the poor, the press should be all over that.
But right now, some of the coverage seems built on the assumption that anyone who’s rich is mainly interested in raiding the Treasury to help themselves and their well-heeled friends.
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.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter says US, partners need to stay in Iraq after ISIS defeat
 |
| Defense Secretary Ash Carter on strategy to defeat ISIS |
Carter said the U.S. and its coalition partners must not stop after completing the current campaign to expel ISIS from Iraq's second largest city of Mosul.
He said the militants are on a path to lasting defeat.
"But there will still be much more to do after that to make sure that, once defeated, ISIL stays defeated," he said, using an alternative acronym for ISIS. "We'll need to continue to counter foreign fighters trying to escape and ISIL's attempts to relocate or reinvent itself. To do so, not only the United States but our coalition must endure and remain engaged militarily."
Related stories...
Carter did not say how long this continued U.S. military presence might be necessary or how many troops would be required. At any rate, those decisions are likely to fall to the Trump administration after it takes office in January.
While describing recent Pentagon actions to put a stranglehold on ISIS worldwide, Carter said the Obama administration has directed the secretive Joint Special Operations Command to prioritize destroying the militant group's ability to conduct attacks in the West.
Carter said that in his final weeks in office, he is focused on ensuring a smooth transition to his successor.
Earlier this week, President-elect Donald Trump announced that he intends to nominate retired Marine Gen. James Mattis to be his defense secretary.
Carter congratulated Mattis on Saturday, who is a former commander of U.S. Central Command overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"I've worked with Jim for many years, he's a friend, and I hold him in the highest regard," Carter said. He made no mention of the aspect of the Mattis selection that has drawn the most attention: the fact that his nomination will require legislation by Congress to exempt Mattis from a legal prohibition on a retired military officer serving as secretary of defense before he has been out of uniform for a minimum of seven years. Mattis retired in 2013.
Carter made his remarks at the Reagan National Defense Forum at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
